Well, lets say it like this. I was really curious once they announced that. The problem is indeed that any useful 3d scanner is out of range for hobby usuage (< below 2000$). So I was really excited. Then I saw the first presentations, knowing this was not useful at all as it is.
In parallel I bought some Intel RealSense cameras. That was disappointing at well, but one thing it maked me clear is the fact, that its not an hardware limitation in first place. Its rather a software limitation. Some research applications where able to already do some of these things I was mentioning quite well. And yes, you can already use that for creating a very rough shape reference.
Of course you have to measure things manually and refit the scan to it. But its already a hugh gain for something which has to fit to something more complex, more “free form”.
I mean its not that a lidar system is inaccurate, its just the lack of density.
Furthermore, its not about getting a perfect scan, its about making good enough for hobby usage. I’m sure there is potential to it. I mean I would pay 200 $ for such an software. Doesn’t have to be an app and definitly its not McNeels domain. I’m just saying there is potential to it. And thinking of Flappy Bird or other none sense stuff, the success of an app is not predicatable at all, and its definitly not connected to its usefulness