>Every important computing platform has been defined by what people built with it. The PC became meaningful because developers built software. The web became meaningful because developers built websites. Smartphones became meaningful because developers built apps. We believe augmented reality will be no different.
At a $2195 price point, it just won't be possible to have an ecosystem. All the other platforms mentioned were orders of magnitude cheaper. That being said, I do think AR has real utility, but the price discovery will take a while
I think they're chasing the wrong dream. Most of the use cases they're proposing won't suffer much from being attached to a battery/processing puck, and in some cases being attached to a laptop. e.g. I'm not watching a movie while walking down the sidewalk. It would be nice to just sit on a comfy sofa someplace my laptop isn't and watch a movie, but not pay-an-extra-$1800 nice. especially when there are similar devices available where you could buy the device and a dedicated laptop to power it for less.
Out of all the possible permutations of display/sensors/processing for AR, I would like to see eyewear with just a Bluetooth-like display and camera/mic. Let me use the phone or watch for all processing. Bonus points for eye tracking and body position sensors.
Off course, this would mean less lock-in for everybody and we can't have that.
AR has yet to produce any value for anybody. Google failed, Apple failed, Meta basically built a creeper spy cam. These may be the most advanced devices to date, but hardware hasn't been the limitation for a long time. There's just no application that's more useful than just looking at your phone.
I think the biggest constraint so far has been on the computer vision side.
With a better processor, the glasses should be able to run real time 6dof object tracking, lower latency hand tracking potentially with better occlusion, and ideally OS-level subtle intent recognition since current air pinch based UI interactions will not make it into mainstream.
I'm curious though as to whether they've expanded the ONNX model compatibility. In my experience with the '24 dev kit, this was a serious blocking point in doing any serious custom CV work.
They've also announced a C++ native dev kit, as until now you could only use JS and TS withno node libraries. I think this specific update might have an outsized downstream impact on the ecosystem.
I think they're all trying to be a phone replacement, when I need them to be a smart watch replacement. Give me smart glasses and a ring that controls them. Give me simple, watch like actions, notifications, but keep them out of view.
The way forward is minimalistic smart hardware, like Meta's Raybans, until battery, optics and compute allow us truly miniaturized AR heasets. For now the price is too high and the utility too narrow to matter.
>Every important computing platform has been defined by what people built with it. The PC became meaningful because developers built software. The web became meaningful because developers built websites. Smartphones became meaningful because developers built apps. We believe augmented reality will be no different.
At a $2195 price point, it just won't be possible to have an ecosystem. All the other platforms mentioned were orders of magnitude cheaper. That being said, I do think AR has real utility, but the price discovery will take a while
A few tech specs for those who don't want to read through the announcement:
* 51 degree field of view. Stated as being like you're working at a 24" monitor.
* 4 hours of mixed-use battery life with the case holding another 20 hours
* 132/136 grams depending on size
* Supports prescription lenses, easily interchangeable/swappable
Priced at $2195 w/ $200 deposit, arrival expected in Fall.
I think they're chasing the wrong dream. Most of the use cases they're proposing won't suffer much from being attached to a battery/processing puck, and in some cases being attached to a laptop. e.g. I'm not watching a movie while walking down the sidewalk. It would be nice to just sit on a comfy sofa someplace my laptop isn't and watch a movie, but not pay-an-extra-$1800 nice. especially when there are similar devices available where you could buy the device and a dedicated laptop to power it for less.
> Today, SPECS are available for pre-order at SPECS.COM for $2,195, with a $200 refundable deposit.
Dayum.
I do buy into the AR glasses future. They’re insanely cool tech. Meta makes a great one.
Out of all the possible permutations of display/sensors/processing for AR, I would like to see eyewear with just a Bluetooth-like display and camera/mic. Let me use the phone or watch for all processing. Bonus points for eye tracking and body position sensors.
Off course, this would mean less lock-in for everybody and we can't have that.
AR has yet to produce any value for anybody. Google failed, Apple failed, Meta basically built a creeper spy cam. These may be the most advanced devices to date, but hardware hasn't been the limitation for a long time. There's just no application that's more useful than just looking at your phone.
I think the biggest constraint so far has been on the computer vision side. With a better processor, the glasses should be able to run real time 6dof object tracking, lower latency hand tracking potentially with better occlusion, and ideally OS-level subtle intent recognition since current air pinch based UI interactions will not make it into mainstream. I'm curious though as to whether they've expanded the ONNX model compatibility. In my experience with the '24 dev kit, this was a serious blocking point in doing any serious custom CV work.
They've also announced a C++ native dev kit, as until now you could only use JS and TS withno node libraries. I think this specific update might have an outsized downstream impact on the ecosystem.
I think they're all trying to be a phone replacement, when I need them to be a smart watch replacement. Give me smart glasses and a ring that controls them. Give me simple, watch like actions, notifications, but keep them out of view.
Looks promising!
they are expensive enough that they might be useful
lol
Gotta love that no matter how much the hardware advances, the optimistic, advertised abilities of AR have significantly reduced over time.
4 hours of use. To what, do turn by turn navigation? Play that stupid game that's just an escape room but poorly implemented?
Is that really all you offer?
The way forward is minimalistic smart hardware, like Meta's Raybans, until battery, optics and compute allow us truly miniaturized AR heasets. For now the price is too high and the utility too narrow to matter.