Rumors have been floating around for years about Apple getting into the AR hardware game. Seems like they’re getting serious for a launch next year.
I always thought Google Glass was ahead of its time and that Google totally botched their early marketing. Instead of creepy Robert Scoble in a shower it should have been Chrissy Teagen and/or John Legend.
Of course the $2k price didn’t help.
I would like to have a better understanding of what it can do and how I will use it. The article didn’t tell me much.
I don’t think they will reach peak mass appeal until they attach the device directly to your eye.
It makes you see the world like Robocop, Terminator, Predator.
Not this shit again. As if what the world needs is more surveillance cameras and more people hopelessly distracted from walking/driving by Twitter.
Added bonus: now every time I give a test I have to check glasses, too.
And here I was, thinking that having a google translate overlay on my vision when walking around in a place where I didn’t know the language would be pretty cool.
My bad!
Edit : if there’s no camera, then there’s no overlay. So much for my one phantasy task.
There isn’t a camera.
If it’s AR, it has to have some kind of sensor to detect the environment to overlay information.
Huh, LIDAR. Interesting, but seems limiting. Marginally less invasive, though.
Honestly in a few decades I fully expect half the world to have a permanent implant that lets them scroll Twitter in their head and reports their every thought back to corporate headquarters. Nobody seems to care anymore.
There are limits, though. The original Google Glass failed. Snapchat tried to launch glasses with cameras on them that failed, too.
I think the current line is drawn at people wearing cameras on their face that can record everything all the time. That seems to be a bridge too far for social acceptance.
I guess the irony is that in many cities those same people are being constantly monitored and recorded by ubiquitous cameras on light poles and such anyway.
We know almost nothing about them at this point, but I would imagine these things will be more in line with the Apple Watch, you wouldn’t want to read Twitter, but for regular notifications they could be handy. Then add in AR, I guess it could be useful? I think it will neat, but probably has a long way to go.
Honestly the sense I got was that the problem wasn’t what the camera did, it was that it looked dorky. It’s possible I’ve grown cynical on this topic, though. :)
The best thing about Google Glass was the nickname people came up with for wearers – glassholes. It was downhill from there.
The article doesn’t talk about a camera. Why do you say there isn’t one?
It talks about how Apple might focus on LIDAR. Any discussion about cameras is purely speculation.
Fixed that for you.
LIDAR is unlikely to be very useful for anything without the accompanying image. Having LIDAR means you can go with a lower-res, mono image, but without an image of some sort any useful functionality the glasses could have is out.
There has been other articles about it. Couldn’t give you a link. That’s been the rumor as to why this will succeed where Google didn’t.
Edit: went through my feed, no idea where I read that, so maybe I am wrong? It’s all guesswork at this point.
Edit 2: It was Ars Technica.
$500 for the glasses, and them being prescription glasses too, helps. I still don’t really know what it does? Does it show you email and texts like your Apple Watch does?
Maybe it will bring back this guy:
Maybe he will jump out of my computer screen and run around on my actual desktop. I miss you, Bonzi!