This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
It's the smartwatch bullshit all over again.
1 in 10 have one
9 in 10 don't care and never did
Wdym lol smartwatches are everywhere now.
1 in 10 is still a lot of people. That's like every redhead you know territory.
I feel like it's a CEO's job to care about all aspects of the company he is supposed to lead.
Nope. Only profit.
Does anyone even want AR glasses? I don't.
yes, not from apple though. That's a guarantee they would be useless for a tinkerer
id get them if they were from framework or something and ran some open sourced AR software
I mean, maybe of ots done well. I have the meta raybans and love them, mainly because I can listen to music as if I had earphones in, and talk on my phone with them, record, and take videos.
If it had a UI to select options and could display info too, that would be pretty sick imo.
I'm curious what drives you to record videos using the glass. As opposed to a phone/camera, the POV is very restricted as you cannot move vertically (unless kneel/crawl and look up/down ofc). So I'm sure it cannot be called a replacement to a traditional phone/camera.
So what is your motivation to use it ?
Actually I never record videos and rarely take pictures with them. It's the feature i use the least.
I use them for music, phone calls, and AI requests (like having a Google home you can ask at any moment). Once and a while I'll ask it to tell me what I'm looking at to listen to it describe something. That feature uses the camera to snap a shot of what your looking at.
When I walk somewhere and need to use maps, it tells the directions to me as I walk which is pretty neat.
Came to ask the same thing. Who is demanding this?
I would love to have a good pair of ar glasses to play games on my Steam Deck with. Connect a controller, and not have to hold up the heavy Deck itself.
But given Apple's propensity for walled gardens and lock-in, and Meta putting manipulative spyware into everything they make, these hypothetical glasses won't be coming from either of those companies.
I've got prosaspoagnosia, I just want them to display little name tags under the faces of people that I know.
Look into Xreal glasses.
I think this is a case where the imagination is much, much better than the reality.
For the mobilization of technology, miniaturization has had a lot of benefits, not just in the technology, but in the accessibility. Having a desktop computer instead of a mainframe was huge. It brought the computer to the home. Laptops becoming viable was huge again. It untethered the computer from the wall. For most of the planet, we're still in the midst of the massive leap that is smart phones. It put a computer in the pocket of billions of people.
Beating that is hard. Smart phones are the most accessible, most powerful devices most end users have ever used. We take that for granted, and we take the time it took to get there for granted. It took 25 years of desktops to get real, decent laptops (personally, I'd say mid 90s). It took 25 of laptops to get real, decent smartphones (again personally, I'd say ~2010ish).
Like it or not, we have another decade to go probably before the technology is there for the next evolution in personal computing. But the problem we have really is that there's not another leap as far as accessibility is concerned. Smart phones work places where laptops can't. Laptops work places where desktops can't. Desktops work places where mainframes can't. Smart phones can work anywhere. Taking the computer from the datacenter, to the home, to your backpack, to your pocket is huge. Is the next step from the pocket to your wrist? To your face? Is it worth it? Is it really that much better?
They're not trying to solve the next 'where you can compute' problem. Smartphones can already be used anywhere. They're solving the 'when' problem and there are lots of times that a phone can't be used.
Lots of people see the 'when can I compute' optimal solution to be anytime. Think of all the places people bring cameras. That's where they'd love to have a computer. An HMD can do that if it gets small enough
I don't want ads thrown into my eyeballs. So that's a big no from me.
I agree with you fully. It's a sad state that we can't even imagine wearable glasses tech without invasive ads
I'd be a little more enthused if both companies main goal from this wasn't to make us work while wearing them.
They would have to be so good to be what these guys want them to be and the technology is just not there yet.
This AR obsession is utterly baffling to me. There are so few real applications and the hardware requirements are insane so it's not something that will get widely adapted anyway. Sure in a decade or so it might have matured enough to have shed all these issues, but AR/VR feels like a really out of touch thing to prusue, especially if you look at the garbage ideas they have on how to use it - virtual meetings??
I get movies and games on these, possibly even some recording and porn, but these are not their B2B wet dreams anyway.
