253
After unveiling ridiculously expensive AR glasses, Snap's stock takes a dive (techcrunch.com)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
68 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 23 points 4 months ago (11 children)

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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 18 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago* (3 children)

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

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Smartglasses don't need to be AR though, you could make one that is just a HUD that displays information

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months 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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    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

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 4 months 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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago* (1 child)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •