Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Microsoft Displays Input Devices Patents Technology

Microsoft Granted Patent For Augmented Reality Glasses 89

another random user writes with an excerpt from the BBC about Microsoft's vision for augmented reality glasses: "A patent granted to the U.S. tech firm describes how the eyewear could be used to bring up statistics over a wearer's view of a baseball game or details of characters in a play. The newly-released document was filed in May 2011 and is highly detailed. ... Although some have questioned how many people would want to wear such devices, a recent report by Juniper Research indicated that the market for smart glasses and other next-generation wearable tech could be worth $1.5bn by 2014 and would multiply over following years." Noticeable differences from Google's version: two lenses, a wrist computer, and wires.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Granted Patent For Augmented Reality Glasses

Comments Filter:
  • Patent nonsense (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Seeteufel ( 1736784 ) on Friday November 23, 2012 @11:27AM (#42074047) Homepage
    I am with Richard Stallman and the FFII [ffii.org]: Stop all the nonsensical software patent granting. All of them are a disgrace to professionals in the field, a hostile takeover from laywers and patent parasites.
    • Absolutely! This is getting beyond a joke - pretty soon we'll have patent lawyers scouring the SciFi back catalogue and patenting everything in there, since most of what we see coming to market now, or "real soon now" has already been imagined and sometimes described in great detail.

      *rushes off to patent phasers, transporters, replicants and geosync orbits*

    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Hentes ( 2461350 )

      This is a piece of hardware, and a specific implementation of it. This is exactly what patents are for.

      • All the functionality is software.
      • Re:Patent nonsense (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Iamthecheese ( 1264298 ) on Friday November 23, 2012 @12:32PM (#42074501)
        Actually patents are for non-obvious specific implementations of hardware. This isn't.
      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Obviously you and the people who modded you insightful didn't even bother to read the the first sentence of the abstract of the patent. This is NOT a piece of hardware, rather it is "A system and method to present a user wearing a head mounted display with supplemental information when viewing a live event". The head mounted display is already assumed in this patent - this patent is just talking about presenting live statistics/info about the event in a manner that doesn't obstruct the viewing of said event

  • Seriously.

    Unless it's indistinguishable from normal glasses, which it won't be, there's no market here outside of some very specific and special industries.

    Why can't we have kick ass VR glasses, like Carmack is working on, instead?

    Cool, yes. Is my mom going to want a pair? Probably not.

    I cite the entire contact lenses industry as evidence.


    • by GameboyRMH ( 1153867 ) <gameboyrmh@NoSpam.gmail.com> on Friday November 23, 2012 @11:49AM (#42074201) Journal

      Why can't they be indistinguishable from normal glasses? Google's prototypes are pretty close to normal glasses already:

      http://blog.sitestogo.biz/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/google-glasses.jpg [sitestogo.biz]

      You think that thick part can't be integrated into the frame and the screen can't be part of the main lens?

      • by xtal ( 49134 )

        Yes, I do think it can't be integrated. Barring a star-trek advance in battery technology, or a wire running down your back, or a microwave battery power transmitter you carry. Those all scream cool.

        These things are so dorky it hurts, and don't offer any serious advantage over a smartphone, that everyone already has anyway.

        • And yet in 20 years we've gone from dead-nuts-basic cell phones the size of a house brick (with batteries bigger than today's phones) to having far superior phones built into computer watches that cost about the same as a comparable standalone device. Yet a modest size decrease in these glasses is impossible?

          I could see all the electronics being built into the front of the glasses frame and the batteries being in the arms, even using today's battery tech. They might look a bit like hipster glasses but they

    • Well... I already use an unconventional eyeglass (one-piece impact-resistant polycarbonate) and I do not give a damn what others think when I'm using it. I really would like to use one that also had a real, functional HUD :-)
    • by Sloppy ( 14984 )

      It seems reasonable at first to predict that people won't tolerate their own glasses looking unusual. But I think the same way you predict that, can also be used to predict that nobody will ever walk about with bluetooth crap sticking out of their ears. Yet, there the gargoyles are.

      This guy [alibi.com] was the future but this guy [wikimedia.org] wasn't? Are you sure you have the fashion expertise to really distinguish between the two? (I'll be the first to admit that I don't have that expertise either...)

    • VR glasses? Like these?

      http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=Virtual+Digital+Video+Glasses&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3AVirtual+Digital+Video+Glasses [amazon.com]

      Play whatever you want, all these are missing is sensors to determine orientation / movement (same sensors inside almost every smart phone).

  • You'll appreciate the cool blue tint of the screens of death.

    • Well the jokes just write themselves, don't they?

      First to mind is that all they absolutely must make BSOD blue a chroma key for transparency so that when it crashes, you don't.

      Alternately, they function as peril-sensitive sunglasses. When windows crashes, you can no longer see your wrist-mounted computer.

  • More than a fad...more than cool and better than Rx; Cx glasses are disruptive game changers. They stand on the shoulders of the PC, Internet, SQL, 802.11xx and HUD at the corner of Fashion and Future hawking the promise of all knowing all seeing Superman intelligence. What kid isn't gonna want to be like that when he grows up? LOL

  • by Anonymous Coward

    I work in the area, and:

    Displaying some tables or gauges on your glasses is not augmented reality.
    Filming stuff with them and displaying it somewhere else (a la Google Glasses), also is not even remotely augmented reality.

    Actual augmented reality integrates. Actual augmented reality is stuff that fits itself into reality, and augments it.

    Actual augmented reality would be when you walk through your city, and there’s a pillar there that isn't really there, and you can walk up to it, and trigger a switch

  • I've been using AR glasses with my smart phone for YEARS. [vuzix.com]
    It's often times faster to overlay the 3D noise source map (gathered from sensors in the field) over the readily available physical model -- Depth culling to remove obscured sources in real time (industrial noise abatement). Sometimes it's faster if the CAD files can be imported easily, to just do it digitally, even so, I can just turn off the cameras. I rarely used my phone when doing this sort of work, but I have done so. I've used it experimen

  • This is probably going to sound like a "get off my lawn" kind of post, but "augmented reality" bothers me. I go to baseball games and plays as an ESCAPE from reality. I don't want it "augmented" by screeds of information. I just want to enjoy the experience. Don't get me wrong, I think there are uses for augmented reality, but does life suck so bad for people that they cannot simply live it and enjoy it without cluttering it up?

  • The Personal System glasses from "Norbert and the System", a short story by Timons Esaias from 1993, may anticipate some of the features of this system. I haven't read the patent, but the overlay of contextual social information sounds a lot like what the original poster describes.

    (Here's a link: http://www.sfcenter.ku.edu/Sci-Tech-Society/Esaias-Norbert.pdf [ku.edu])

    • Rainbows End, by Vernor Vinge, has a good layout of future direction of this.

      The glasses understand the entire reality around you, and can erase objecs and replace them. People thus put on virtual costumes, or put them on other people. People also have huge battles using virtual weapons.

      Also, people "tag" places, ala Google Earth, and wherever you go you can "see" tag indicators. Some places have spam cluttering things up.

  • There is so much of this in the movies and in sci-fi that we've all see our futures with such a device, ever since our childhoods we have seen this. I don't see how this could fail the "obviousness" test. How much more proof does one need to show how broken the patent system is?

Receiving a million dollars tax free will make you feel better than being flat broke and having a stomach ache. -- Dolph Sharp, "I'm O.K., You're Not So Hot"