>"Curious to hear what you thought the blockers were?"
1. Resolution is hopelessly too low for working with text
2. Ergonomics too awkward to wear for 8 hours at a time.
3. Total lack of multi-plane focus, no ability to sense depth beyond a few meters
These are strictly true for every HMD available, having owned and worked with them all extensively since DK2. I wish it wasn't true either, but it's just where we're at. One big thing that has been solved is tracking though. It's easy to forget what a quantum leap Lighthouse was in consumer grade tracking technology. Having sub-millimeter precise tracking and pose estimation was a huge part of getting VR to an MVP. That gives me hope the other problems can be solved, but there's a long way to go with the need for things like integrated eye tracking, foveated rendering, and full vision FOV being table stakes for a real consumer product.
All these things are solvable, and there are consumer hmds coming that will solve some of them. Resolution upgrades are happening, ergonomics will improve. One problem with getting these features fast tracked in an HMD is the industry focus on gaming and media and keeping costs low for consumers. A high price enterprise focused HMD with all of the features you mentioned might work with the right software and clients.
No, it's definitely the hardware. Hardware makers like to tout that VR is waiting for its "killer app." What's really missing still is the "killer hardware." They're all still devkits (speaking as someone who owns one of each of the top headsets), it's just that when FB bought Oculus, suddenly there was a mad rush to plop the "consumer-ready" label on them. But we're not there yet, which can be evidenced by the re-orgs at Oculus.
You can't make Angry Birds or w/e on the VR equivalent of a Blackberry. No one's made the iPhone yet.
Yeah resolution could be better but it's far from being a deal breaker for viz, modelling etc.
Curious to hear what you thought the blockers were?