• Lung@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    95
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Man wears largest sunglasses, thinks you may want to crush your ears for 2100 also

  • Miller@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    Look how out of touch we are with ordinary people but it’s ok because you have also never heard of us.

  • MrJameGumb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    1 month ago

    I don’t even get why companies are still pushing smart glasses. There’s no legitimate use for them on the consumer market. There’s already legislation being put into place to restrict what they can do because people immediately started using them for criminal activity. They’re just an obnoxious annoyance to everyone who isn’t wearing them 99% of the time.

    • Chronographs@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’d be interested in them for like hud reasons but I wouldn’t want a camera or mic in them which is what they seem to think people want.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        It requires a camera to do any remotely useful HUD stuff. If you want automatic translation, or in-world displays, it needs to see the world.

        • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Smartwatches don’t have cameras for the most part, smartglasses don’t need them either. Also a camera isn’t required for audio translation.

          • Cethin@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            I meant text translation obviously. You don’t need glasses for audio.

            And yeah, smartwatches don’t have cameras. They aren’t doing anything that needs them. AR, by definition, requires it to know about its environment. It needs a camera at minimum. You could have just smart glasses that can display texts or something, but AR needs cameras.

              • Cethin@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                Sure. I don’t want that though. Whatever benefit smart glasses could provide can also be provided by just a phone. If you want slightly faster access, a smart watch works too, with slightly less ability for input. Smart glasses, with no camera, can only display this same information, but it’s right in your face. Also, without cameras, the only input it could have is on the side of your head, which seems horrible.

                AR has some utility I would like. Am I a fan of them putting cameras everywhere? No, so I probably wouldn’t buy a pair of AR glasses (and would discourage it of others too). Do I see the functionality? Sure, which I don’t see for smart glasses.

        • BremboTheFourth@piefed.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          In my fantasyland you would pair them with another device, like a phone, and it would do all the work. The glasses would basically be nothing more than a receiver and a display

          • Grimy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Yes, well that’s a fantasy when it comes to AR. It’s augmented reality, it needs to see the reality to augment it, else it’s just a static screen in front of your face. It isn’t anything new or interesting if you don’t have the camera in the front.

      • zarathustrad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 month ago

        Just a wireless HUD, with eye tracking, and agnostic to connected tech. (Camera is needed for this, but needs a manual kill switch on the device)

        That is all that is needed from the glasses.

        Wearable tech is going to need to be modular, replaceable, and reparable…

        All things big tech companies hate right now.

    • Grimy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      There was barely a legitimate use for smart phones at the time either. Times are changing and they are betting on smart glasses being the next big thing. I tend to agree with them to an extent but the current implementation leaves to be desired. There are still clearly some large hurdles.

  • ToiletFlushShowerScream@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 month ago

    Whoa! They look like a very long line of obviously bad decisions. Unwearable. Not even ironically ugly. Like a CEO designed it himself surrounded by a vacuum of yes men.

        • Buffalox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I’m pretty sure the stainless steel and bullet proof body should withstand driving off a cliff.
          I actually encourage Cybertruck owners to try it, it’s super fun. 🤣

  • Bubs@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 month ago

    Copy of the article since the site requires you to disable your ad blocker (reader mode worked at least)

    Snap’s long-awaited AR glasses, Specs, didn’t have the best debut.

    The company’s stock hasn’t been on the healthiest trajectory lately. It’s dropped 30% over the past year. Following Specs’ launch, it sank more than 5% — falling from $5.86 a share on Tuesday to a low of $4.83 on Wednesday morning. As of this writing, the stock still hasn’t recovered the position it held prior to the announcement.

    The big concern surrounding Snap’s new smart glasses — which the company has been working on for over a decade — is the cost: The company maintains they will retail at nearly $2,200 apiece.

    It’s worthy of note that Snap’s core user demographic — teenagers — are not typically equipped with that kind of pocket change, leading onlookers to question the profitability path for the new product.

    Snap’s CEO, Evan Spiegel, did an interview with CNBC on Tuesday (during which he sported the new glasses) and, when questioned about the hefty price, responded: “The most important way to think of Specs is as a computer, and so they’re comparably priced to other high-end computers or high-end laptops.”

    Spiegel further justified the cost by saying that Specs occupies a unique space in the AR market between glasses like Meta’s Ray-Bans — which cost a lot less but provide significantly less compute power — and bulkier headsets like the Apple Vision Pro, which are powerful but very expensive.

    Spiegel said his product was both “highly wearable but also incredibly capable for immersive computing.”

  • brap@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 month ago

    They look fucking stupid. It looks like when my toddler wears my sunnies, but even worse.

  • paraphrand@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 month ago

    Getting over the aesthetics hurdle is going to be so difficult for AR glasses.

    Everyone keeps saying VR isn’t what people want, they want AR glasses.

    But then the first AR glasses are not exceptionally thin and small. So it’s revealed that people were saying they actually wanted something seemingly impossible instead.

    I have faith that the industry could get to “small enough” eventually. But I don’t know if the market will give them the runway they need to get there. Anyone paying attention knows what they are showing is a major improvement on previous AR devices in size and weight. But your average person looks at it and laughs at how big it is.

    I wonder if the industry has the fortitude to keep pressing forward. Because if AR glasses did work as people dream they can, in the form factor they expect, then everyone will want them. Even if we have to set up strict laws around them.

  • Zahille7@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    I remember when Snapchat first tried to make glasses that would’ve been tied to Snapchat - and not much else.

    From what I remember, they looked utterly ridiculous: bright yellow thick frames, almost circular lenses and a big camera right between them that could take pictures and automatically add them to your snap story.

    It didn’t gain the traction I think they were wanting at the time.

  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Considering how cool 😎 they look, $2200 is a steal!
    Now you are not wearing the glasses, the glasses are wearing you. 🤣🤣🤣

  • cmc@lemmy.zerolabs.sh
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    $2200 for glasses is insane regardless of what they can do. That’s more than a powerful computer.