Co-founder and CTO of T5 here.

> 1) The cable is indeed too short.

Yup, fair enough. We designed the cable more around using the glasses with a mobile device, and then ended up focusing more on PC support on the software side. We have a longer cable in the works.

> And when I got mine, they didn't have Android support at all. You were expected to have a full PC for every user.

We now support plugging up to four glasses into one PC, and we have beta Android support available for devs to play with. Focusing on these was, to some degree, what delayed getting started on the longer cable, though now I wish I'd started pushing on the cable sooner. C'est la vie.

> 2) The display resolution is actually pretty low... making the images kind of blurry and pixelated

There's a few things that were probably contributing to this. For one, we've had some manufacturing issues where our projectors could become defocused during shipment or as the glasses warm up during use. We have a much better handle on this now, and if your projectors are blurry I'd encourage you to contact our customer support so we can repair or replace them.

A second issue was that our SDK shipped with some bad defaults initially that caused apps to render a larger FOV in order to cover some of the pincushion-distortion corners of our projectors at the expense of resolution in the center. This was my fault, and we've since changed the defaults. There's still more to be done in this area, with things like adaptive view frusta focusing on the gameboard.

Yet another issue, I think, was apps (including some of our demos) not applying antialiasing in the best way. There's a temptation these days to just turn on TAA at some default settings and call it a day. That works alright for high resolution rendering, but for our glasses we've found that good ol' fashion MSAA can make a big difference in how the images look.

All that's to say that I think we've improved on image sharpness in a number of ways, and we get pretty good looking images on our glasses these days. I guess I'm kind of biased, though :)

> 3) Their concept of placing the retroreflector pad on a table is just wrong.

I would say this depends a bit on the use case. We've had a lot of fun getting people around a table for stereo couch-competitive games, but I was also talking with someone yesterday about using our glasses for CAD design reviews where a vertical or tilted gameboard would probably make more sense. We've added support for custom gameboard orientations in recent drivers, mainly to get feedback from developers and adventurous users on it (it's a little user-unfriendly at the moment). It's not clear right now exactly what user-facing functionality we'll do for this, but it's something we've talked a lot about, and I appreciate the feedback.

> I could go on at length about how awful the controllers are. They may be the worst controllers I've ever used. I'll just leave it at that.

Oof :)

I'll say this... The controller design was basically taken as-is from the CastAR design, as we just didn't feel we had the time or resources to do much to its design. For a long time I was pretty down on the design, as tracking it with LEDs in a straight line is tricky since it's missing a visible degree of freedom (roll). Our initial tracking implementation left a lot to be desired, but we've since gotten full 6dof tracking to work surprisingly well. I'm actually kind of a convert when it comes to using what's effectively a barbeque lighter to interact with virtual objects. It keeps the controller from occluding a lot of the view while providing a nice physical reference for pointing or interacting with things.

As for the concept of turning the controller sideways to use as a traditional controller... I think it could still use some work.