Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
AI

Do People Actually Want Smart Glasses Now? (cnn.com) 110

Posted by EditorDavid from the I'll-be-seeing-you dept.
It's the technology "Google tried (and failed at) more than a decade ago," writes CNN. (And Meta and Amazon have also previously tried releasing glasses with cameras, speakers and voice assistants.)

Yet this week Snap announced that "it's building AI-equipped eyewear to be released in 2026."

Why the "renewed buzz"? CNN sees two factors:

- Smartphones "are no longer exciting enough to entice users to upgrade often."
- "A desire to capitalize on AI by building new hardware around it." Advancements in AI could make them far more useful than the first time around. Emerging AI models can process images, video and speech simultaneously, answer complicated requests and respond conversationally... And market research indicates the interest will be there this time. The smart glasses market is estimated to grow from 3.3 million units shipped in 2024 to nearly 13 million by 2026, according to ABI Research. The International Data Corporation projects the market for smart glasses like those made by Meta will grow from 8.8 in 2025 to nearly 14 million in 2026....

Apple is also said to be working on smart glasses to be released next year that would compete directly with Meta's, according to Bloomberg. Amazon's head of devices and services Panos Panay also didn't rule out the possibility of camera-equipped Alexa glasses similar to those offered by Meta in a February CNN interview. "But I think you can imagine, there's going to be a whole slew of AI devices that are coming," he said in February."
More than two million Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses have been sold since their launch in 2023, the article points out. But besides privacy concerns, "Perhaps the biggest challenge will be convincing consumers that they need yet another tech device in their life, particularly those who don't need prescription glasses. The products need to be worth wearing on people's faces all day."

But still, "Many in the industry believe that the smartphone will eventually be replaced by glasses or something similar to it," says Jitesh Ubrani, a research manager covering wearable devices for market research firm IDC.

"It's not going to happen today. It's going to happen many years from now, and all these companies want to make sure that they're not going to miss out on that change."

Do People Actually Want Smart Glasses Now? More | Reply

Do People Actually Want Smart Glasses Now?

Comments Filter:

  • ARRRGH (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I need to consume electronic products! Where are the new electronic products???

  • They don't really cater for the most obvious demo (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Ecuador ( 740021 ) on Sunday June 15, 2025 @07:52AM (#65450513) Homepage

    They don't really cater for the most obvious demographic. Yeah, I would not want to carry an extra tech device, but I am already wearing glasses anyway, I'd actually love it if they could do one more useful thing apart from correcting my vision. But they have a quite limited prescription range, if you are hyperopic like me, you are most likely over their +4 limit (especially if you have any astigmatism at all). If you are strong myopic or mid-myopic with some astigmatism you are SOL as well. And it's not really a technical limitation, I pay extra for the high refraction index lenses anyway and they come out thin enough to easily fit frames that are in the Ray Ban Meta style. Not sure if it's a stereotype either, but most of my geek friends who are the most "gadget friendly" people tend to wear strong prescriptions too...

    • I'd be happy if someone could just keep my glasses from fogging up.

      • Oh, that's easy! First, get your glasses very clean. Next, rub just a little solid soap on each side of both lenses, polish it in and say goodbye to fogged up lenses until it wears off. Liquid soap will work too, but it's more work and messier.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by xevioso ( 598654 )

      I am reading that 64% of adult Americans wear prescription glasses. And yet they are catering to the 1/3rd that do not.
      This is dumb. Instead of coming up with new glasses, why not come up with clip-ons that can attach to existing glasses, like the clip-on sun-glasses I wear all the time. That way you can take them off and put them in a pocket or purse when you don't need them. Have they not tried this yet? For the 64% who wear glasses?

      • For one, the clip-ons would have to have all the compute and battery sitting on the front of your face, which would be uncomfortable. You need the arms to hold some of the magic sand.

        I guess you could make a weird clip-on with ballast in the back, but I can easily see why they wouldn't. It's also another thing that can go wrong (alignment with existing lenses).

      • Think of it like healthcare. They don't care about solving people's problems - those problems are one of the drivers to purchase things - removing this driver is counterproductive - if your product claims to address problem P, that last thing you want to do is solve P - ideally you will appear to solve P but actually create future instances of P - it's about profit and in this case seeing everything in the world which may be monetised.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      I'd prefer to get lens replacement surgery to fix my eyes, but at the moment I'm not sure it's good enough. Similar issues to laser surgery, halos and high cost, plus if things go wrong you are really screwed.

      So failing that, I'd like smart glasses, but...

      - Similar weight and comfort to normal light weight glasses.
      - At least a solid day's battery life, and I mean a long day of heavy use.
      - Actually useful stuff, not toy apps or just showing notifications. Navigation, translation, video recording.

      I don't thin

  • I'd buy a pair of AI glasses if they could translate (subtitle) speech in real-time. Really handy when travelling.

    Google Translate camera mode would be useful too.

  • Go Read "Rainbow's End" by Vernor Vinge (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheMiddleRoad ( 1153113 ) on Sunday June 15, 2025 @08:11AM (#65450545)

    Then tell me that smart glasses are not the future, because they sure as fuck are.

    The tech has come a long way in 10 years, and it has a long way to go. All thee companies are trying because there's a lot of money to be made by the right product at the right time. What that product will be and when it will be delivered are huge questions, though. I'm not thinking it's going to truly happen in the next 10 years. Probably the next 20 after that.

  • Ad (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Retired Chemist ( 5039029 ) on Sunday June 15, 2025 @08:14AM (#65450551)
    Do you really want ads in front of your eyes all day every day? We all mostly spend too much time staring at electronic devices as it is. I want to be able to see where I am going, not constantly be distracted by stuff I really do not need to know.

    • You'll still be able to see where you're going but the glasses will beautify the scenery, showing homeless people as nice potted plants, pee-stains of walls as art, graffiti becomes commissioned murals, overflowing bins appear as quirky street installations, boarded-up windows turn into chic cafés, broken pavements get overlaid with cobblestone charm, potholes become koi ponds, traffic cones morph into abstract sculptures, smoggy skies are replaced with sunsets, police tape becomes festive bunting, and

    • RealView (tm - the ability to see the world without augmentation) will be available on the premier plan.

  • Um (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cascadingstylesheet ( 140919 ) on Sunday June 15, 2025 @08:16AM (#65450555) Journal

    - Smartphones "are no longer exciting enough to entice users to upgrade often."
    - "A desire to capitalize on AI by building new hardware around it."

    That explains why people want to sell them. Not why I should want to buy them.

    • Re: Um (Score:2)

      by Junta ( 36770 )

      Exactly. Even if a technology might have a shot at being desirable, I often see seller interests trample the value and then the seller surprised that the customers didn't go for it after they did absolutely nothing to cater to the user base.

      One company I worked at had this persistent issue and a strong warning sign was that they just absolutely worshipped the fictional Henry Ford quote about customers just wanting faster horses and the inventor knowing better than the customer about what the customer should

  • This shit again? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 ) on Sunday June 15, 2025 @08:22AM (#65450573)
    Enough people have come out with very valid reasons why this can end up with legal problems for the wearer that haven't gone away. Remembering the Glasshole days, you can record as you wish in public, but if you record on private property without permission, you'll likely get charged with trespassing.

    An example is at gyms, where there is a new "thing" of some women wearing very revealing clothing, recording themselves doing "exercising, many of which consist of her pointing her vulva or buttocks towards the camera, and if a guy even glances at her or looks in her direction, she's hit gold by having not only a thirst trap for TikTok, but she can play the always strange combo victim/desirability validation. We'll just have to disregard that she is staring at men to figure out who she is the victim of. A lot of gyms have banned the practice now, mainly because a lot of men have stopped going, and started working out at home in order to avoid the harassment. And gyms need the money - the majority of their customers who happen to be men, not thirst trappers. Do your legging covered kegals at home sister!

    Point is, that gym is on private property. And thirst trappers are just a passive aggressive form of bully. And no doubt they will try to incorporate this into their BS.

    Same with bars, and restaurants. Sometimes this can result in putting the glasshole rev2 person in danger too. Sometimes business is conducted, sometimes affairs are conducted. Sometimes people who are being recorded might have a violent reaction to someone surveilling them.

    And most of the time, we just don't want to be recorded in those places. If the wife and I go out to dinner, and we talk about our day, sometimes things are said that we don't want posted online. Innocent enough stuff "Oh, that godamn Bob was up to his same crap today, he's incompetent." Normal conversations, and some glasshouse rev2 weaponizing them.

    • Constant recording is different from constant local processing. We have social and legal rules surrounding cell phones. We will have them surrounding smart glasses and other smartwear.

      I'm glad I'm not in this weird world you live in.

      • Constant recording is different from constant local processing. We have social and legal rules surrounding cell phones. We will have them surrounding smart glasses and other smartwear.

        I'm glad I'm not in this weird world you live in.

        My point is that if I catch you recording on my property without my permission, you will be visited by officer friendly for trespassing.

        That's just the nice outcome. there are groups that often meeting in little restaurants to discuss plans, some oof which may be illegal. If they catch you recording them, you would probably wish officer friendly was there.

        Your need to post videos on TikTok does not supered my right to not show up there when it is on my property.

        We know where some of those places a

        • People record in restaurants all the damn time. What kind of places do you go to where someone pulls their phone out and immediately gets assaulted? You need to be obviously focused on others or particularly obnoxious about it to cause a scene.
          • He's probably fun at parties too /s

          • I'm guessing he lives between Little Italy, Little Russia, and Little Ireland. He's got every old school mob restaurant nearby.

          • People record in restaurants all the damn time. What kind of places do you go to where someone pulls their phone out and immediately gets assaulted? You need to be obviously focused on others or particularly obnoxious about it to cause a scene.

            Of course they do. If someone is having a party or similar event, everyone expects it to be recorded.

            I fear you are confusing a normal event with what is essentially a surveillance tool that is really designed to record without anyone knowing.

            And you can claim that I'm full of it, but you might find out differently at some point. Perhaps you don't remember when people wh thought5 like you were banned from recording in restaurants with Google glasses? https://uproxx.com/technology/... [uproxx.com]. https://www.da [dailymail.co.uk]

    • Don't go to a gym or restaurant where a parked Tesla can film you and read your lips then. :-)

      • Don't go to a gym or restaurant where a parked Tesla can film you and read your lips then. :-)

        Unless I give consent, that is breaking the law. Is that such a difficult thing to understand?

        https://recordinglaw.com/party... [recordinglaw.com] Yeah, it varies by state, but it seems some folks have no respect.

        This idea that you have the right to do anything you wish, anywhere you wish is the same mentality that caused bars and restraints to ban families with children. Many of these families have no respect for anyone else, their little preciouses run around, screaming and yelling and annoying the hell out of other p

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by HiThere ( 15173 )

          I accept that it is breaking the law. That doesn't mean any official is going to enforce that law. There are lots of laws that are frequently broken in obvious ways, and are enforced only when it is a convenient excuse.

          • I accept that it is breaking the law. That doesn't mean any official is going to enforce that law. There are lots of laws that are frequently broken in obvious ways, and are enforced only when it is a convenient excuse.

            Oh, if I call a Leo, he is going to enforce the law.

    • You're in the US, which is somewhat lax regarding privacy. In Europe, even recording people in *public* is illegal.

      What bugs me at least as much is: how are you supposed to tell the glasses what to do? Is everybody supposed to wander around, talking to the air? Seriously? Much more likely, the glasses will be managed by a phone app, so they will more likely become an appendage of the phone.

  • Some people always wanted them (Score:5, Interesting)

    by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Sunday June 15, 2025 @08:24AM (#65450581) Homepage Journal

    Some of us have always wanted smart glasses. But we also want them to not be crap. I have pretty limited requirements for the graphics capabilities, but it does include overlay. But they also need to be in basically the same form factor as ordinary glasses, and they have to not be under the control of someone who's going to piss me off all the time showing me a lot of sponsored fuckery, and any processing has to be done on a device on my person and not someone else's computer. And I really don't want to be around other people who are streaming video to teh cloud 24/7, either.

    What we're going to get will be very different from that description for the foreseeable future.

    • Makes sense to me. I think you hit some very good points. You're describing a usable product.

      I can't help but think that the only one of those points that will really happen though, based on the current state of the technology world , will be intrusive advertising, and by induction, surveillance. <sigh>

      I think you have described what open source glasses would do.

      Haha... "open source glasses"

      Even better: I couldn't do my homework because my glasses wouldn't boot. All I got was the Blue Lens of Death.

    • Some of us have always wanted smart glasses. But we also want them to not be crap. I have pretty limited requirements for the graphics capabilities, but it does include overlay. But they also need to be in basically the same form factor as ordinary glasses, and they have to not be under the control of someone who's going to piss me off all the time showing me a lot of sponsored fuckery, and any processing has to be done on a device on my person and not someone else's computer. And I really don't want to be around other people who are streaming video to teh cloud 24/7, either.

      What we're going to get will be very different from that description for the foreseeable future.

      Wait, YOU want control of the hardware that YOU bought and paid for? Google and Meta won't like that.

  • The answer is no. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by upuv ( 1201447 ) on Sunday June 15, 2025 @08:25AM (#65450583) Journal

    Two factors come into play.

    1. Casual engagement.
    2. Overloaded human inputs.

    Casual engagement is simple. Illustrated with a phone perfectly. We often stop pull out our phone and egage with it for seconds then put it away. We get what we want then disengage. This is down physically. Glasses to date do not have this, AR VR are all fairly persistent. An acceptable physical queue has not yet been found. TV and Movies claim it a tap to the side of the head.

    Overloading our sensor inputs with overlays etc. simply do not work. When we layer on more inputs out attention drifts and it causes issues. This is the precise reason why laws around the world have been put in place around distracted driving. It's why people are making billions with cameras that detect drivers who use their phones.

    Additionally VR requires dedicated space and time isolated from other to operate. So it's not going to be a simple glasses interface. It's going to be a immersive visional device. So not glasses.

    AR is overloading, it's also still laggy. It's a nightmare of distraction. AR might see some adoption. But not for some time yet. The tech is still probably 2 decades away. It will likely also be limited to dedicated spaces or functions where it can add value.

    Also both AR and VR have a limited number of people that can actually use it. A sizeable portion of the population can not adjust to the "lag" and it causes illness. So this limits it's ubiqutiousness something phones do not suffer from.

    So no glasses are not going to suddenly be the thing to have. They will fail yet again.

    What will finally make it happen. Well actually it's probably real holograms. And we are decades if not centuries away from that tech. As a hologram will take the place of real world objects. something that will not overload our brain inputs. Something that will not induce latency induced nausea.

    The thing is a lot of the use case for AR / VR around human productivity etc. are mute. robotics and AI will assume those functions far faster than AR / VR will. AR / VR will be limited to experience roles rather than productivity roles.

    Not to mention the abuses of business smashing interfaces with opportunities to advertise. This will almost complete obliterate any value from the interface making it more annoyance than assistance/entertainment.

    So no I don't think AR/ VR glasses will be a thing.

  • What is the user interface? (Score:3)

    by Big Hairy Gorilla ( 9839972 ) on Sunday June 15, 2025 @08:27AM (#65450591)
    "Many in the industry believe that the smartphone will eventually be replaced by glasses or something similar to it,"

    How do you control it? Blink twice?

    I've never been near smart glasses so this is a real question.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ET3D ( 1169851 )

      Taps, gestures or speech. So it would depend on what you want to do. Gestures are going to be the most comprehensive, as it allows "real" interaction with the objects overlayed on the scene. That's what's typically used in VR. It will look strange to passers by, but I'm sure people will get used to it like they got used to other peculiarities of public gadget interaction. Voice is already available for gadget control. Tapping the glasses is good for quick and simple interactions like pausing video or respon

      • I see. So you could have a virtual interface, that is projected/overlayed on your field of vision, then you could tap virtual buttons or scroll by waving your arm or wiggling a finger. Suddenly, that sounds usable.

        Now people won't only be talking loudly as they walk down the street, they will also be waving their arms around. Makes sense :-) can't wait!

        • By the time we have the tech to do proper depth of field properly, eye tracking will probably be cheap, and you can do it with a gaze-and-squint interface.

          Can't be sure if I'm serious, or only squinting to select

      • I think eye tracking will be needed to make any of this work in any way that is really acceptable to the vast majority of end users - look up at a menu bar, it highlights the "tabs" you are looking at, look for a second or two and it selects that drop-down, you scroll down with your eyes and make a selection the same way. Good for answering or rejecting an incoming call, opening a book or video app, etc.. Wireless connection to a keyboard and mouse would further extend its capabilities.
    • Yep, good luck scrolling a website, downloading a PDF instruction manual, and zooming in on a section to see the wiring diagram - something I had to do yesterday on my phone. Even that was so painful compared to the PC screen that I went and used my desktop instead.

      Plus people buy these phones with gigantic screens so they can play casual games on them. I'd love to see someone directing their army in Boom Beach or building a fort in some other game.

    • You'll get a tooth with a built-in trackball. :-)

      Intended as a joke but I'm sure some bozos are working on one.

  • What problem do they solve? (Score:3)

    by SciCom Luke ( 2739317 ) on Sunday June 15, 2025 @08:48AM (#65450621)
    How would they improve our quality of life?

    Maybe to fix the shortcoming that there are times when we are not generating revenue from watching advertisements. In that case: fuck you!
    Maybe to fix the shortcoming of us not being tracked, and our vision tracked, so that advertisements can be tuned to out personalities. In that case: fuck you!
    Perhaps the problem of missing the opportunity of having twenty additional streaming services, directly to our glasses. In that case: fuck you!

    Did I miss anything?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by HiThere ( 15173 )

      Well, they might let me remember people's names. There are probably other uses, but that's the one that occurs to me.

  • no (Score:5, Insightful)

    by markdavis ( 642305 ) on Sunday June 15, 2025 @08:52AM (#65450629)

    >"Do People Actually Want Smart Glasses Now?"

    I don't know about "people" but as for me, there are almost no reasons to want them and many reasons to not:

    1) Additional weight. I worked hard to have the thinnest, lightest glasses. Even those cause issues with my nose and ears. I don't want something that weighs what, 2x? 3x? 5x?

    2) Invading others privacy. I don't care how many times people say "no expectation of privacy in public." People are not going to deactivate or remove them every time they are in a meeting, a bathroom, a gym, a childcare setting, etc, etc, etc. And you can't count on them doing it automatically. Even outside of such places, people don't expect this type of continuous examination of their lives.

    3) Invading MY privacy. Yeah, as if we believe those privacy statements/assertions by these companies. And those are only as good as them not being hacked or subpoenaed.

    4) Rude. There is no way around this. Most users are already rude with their phones. This ups that game a hundred fold. Exactly where the term "glasshole" came from.

    5) Fiddle. Another device to charge, link, configure, update, protect, lose, signal, etc. As if our lives are complicated enough.

    6) Overload and distraction. Blah blah blah, this will make things easier. Or it will just overload us with even more constant barrage of information/stimulation. As if we need more machine engagement in our lives.

    7) Safety. How many clueless phone users are already driving into others, walking in front of cars, bumping people over? Take that and amp it up, big time.

    I am sure I could think of more. Of course there will be specific valid use-cases. But you have to take the much bad with the good.

    • I don't care how many times people say "no expectation of privacy in public."

      In Europe, at least, people absolutely *do* have an expectation of privacy in public. Recording someone without their permission is generally illegal. There are only a few exceptions, for example, crowds around a tourist attraction.

    • Somewhat valid points, but not every use-case is Glasshole. I mean, you don't need to wear it everywhere all the time and it doesn't need to be a smartphone replacement. For example, I only wear my Apple Watch to conferences. If they can do XR at the same weight as a smartglasses there are many great use cases (supposedly Meta has a 110 gram VR headset which is similar to the already existent Bigscreen Beyond headset).

      * Tourism/Sport activity
      * Conferences/seminars/workshops.
      * Movies
      * "How to" instructions.

  • Or at the very least smart glasses that autofocus.
    Presbyopia is a bitch.

    • "Presbyopia is a bitch."

      True. I have trifocals. It's especially true when you have to look at something close and up. An electrician I know had a pair of glasses with the close lens on top for just such routine for him events.

      There is another problem the smart glasses bunch are overlooking. After someone pays for laser eye surgery to get rid of their glasses why would they want to put them right back on?

      There is one possible market though. Many industrial jobs require the use of safety glasses or goggles. B

    • >"Presbyopia is a bitch."

      You know what's much worse? Post-cataract surgery. Then you lose 100% of focus ability, instantly. And if you are unlucky, like I was, then they botch the lenses and now my two eyes aren't even the same. They were supposed to be both corrected for distance and astigmatism. I ended up with with perfect astigmatism correction, but one eye that does far intermediate, and one that does close intermediate. Neither can do far or close, nor agree for intermediate. So nothing is e

      • It sounds like you got inferior lenses. I had the surgery and decided to spring for trifocal lenses (cost me an extra $5k). They have three focal lengths; long, intermediate, and close. Plus they corrected for astigmatism. Now I have sharp eyesight at all distances.

        They are similar to Fresnel lenses and there is some halo effect with bright lights at night. A little annoying at times but the advantages far outweigh it.

        • I did not get inferior lenses. They are premium with extended depth of field and astigmatism correction. The problem was they calculated the wrong powers, somehow. Or perhaps they moved. I don't know.

          I was not a candidate for multi-distance lenses. It was expected (by them and me) that my brain would not adjust to having multiple overlayed images at once, plus the additional halos and artifacts, and loss of night vision (they impart much less light due to the multiple focal points).

          Unfortunately, the o

          • Sorry to hear about that. Wrong powers sounds like a serious blunder on the part of someone. Or being rotated improperly when they were installed. I've heard that a second surgery is risky as you say.

            I've been very satisfied with my multi-focal lenses though. I don't see "multiple overlayed images at once" or artifacts, no problem there. My night vision doesn't appear to be affected either. I understand that multi-focal might not work well for everyone though, good luck with your vision.

  • I would love a pair of athletic sunglasses with a good action camera ability to add to my bike rides. If they do it right, they could put GoPro out of business.

    I don't give a shit about the game play/AR aspects. Just let me see through, maybe with some heads-up Strava or RideWithGPS navigation. That's all I need.

  • Glass glassed what was left of Google's reputation and an entire market for a decade because they didn't have a recording indicator. Quite impressive just how massive of a fuckup that was.

  • A link to CNN? How silly. At least link to a Youtube podcast or Substack essay.

    We have all seen behind the scenes at CNN, ABC, 60 Minutes and the rest and seen that these minds are, at best, average. Some decidedly below and shockingly few above.

    To stay on topic, I'll go further and say that these glasses will, in short order, be made mandatory.

    To drive a car manually you'll need them for a heads-up display. To work in an office you'll need them to document harassment claims for HR. If we were

  • When they become truly useful at a reasonable price then people will buy them, but what problem do I have that they can solve?

    • I'm wondering that too. It seems like they would be very situation-specific.

      I can imagine they would be helpful if you are repairing something and get a labelled schematic overlay and highlighted items. If you are walking through an unfamiliar place you could get a navigation overlay. You might get a nametag hovering over the people in your vicinity. And then there's the body camera aspect, similar to a dashcam in a car.

  • Let's not think of it as smart glasses, it will be an augmentation device and they will come in a variety of forms. Glasses are annoying to wear, particularly if you don't already wear them, but the visual interface is a big plus. Maybe at some point there will be ultra-lightweight and small devices that beam to your retina, or smart contacts. The camera and the audio interface will be in an earbud.

    There's going to be a threshold where the price of the device, the ease of use, and the everyday benefits will

  • I don't care about cameras, AI, AR or VR. The product I'm waiting for is opaque portable display, so I can work or code while traveling via plane, bus or train. Today's phones can be used as development devices, running Linux, terminals, X windows, whole dev stacks. I can connect wireless mouse, folding keyboard already. Can somebody just build wearable light display glasses for long time coding sessions? It would be nice to ditch PC monitor taking up space on my desk. Laptop devices could be redesigned w

  • ...they might either be useful or awful

    They could be useful for providing subtitles to those with hearing problems or for translating language
    They could be useful for providing help or recording interesting observations
    Here's one example. I am working on repairing a machine and I encounter a part I don't understand. If the glasses could scan the part, look it up and display a description of its function, it would be helpful. If it was broken, the glasses could offer prices and availability of replacements

    Th

    • When it is mature enough it can be very toxic to society; so I expect it to happen within a decade if there is no great depression. Meta will lead the way down to hell, again.

      Think of the smart watch - an extension of the phone so you can be more lazy, if you can be even more lazy than a smart watch people will go for it.

      Add AI so now you ID everybody you look at, you can AI summarize everybody you look at. Dismiss people and make judgements on their profile rather than just their appearance! Can women fin

  • I don't. I actually like to end the day with a walk and I leave my phone at home. It feels good u won't be possible pestered for about an hour. Then how most would be designed to continually try to get your attention, just no. I like apple carplay so I can listen to music and podcasts, and it limits notifications. Google maps became so annoying under carplay mode I removed it. It makes sense to get a notification in navigation mode for a turn, but it wanted to notify for things like I searched a fast
  • Back 100 years ago after WW1, manufacturers foresaw that each household in the Excited States would have the essentials. Marketing taught them to reposition their luxury items as 'essentials' through advertising. It's been working ever since.

    But now, people might be finally copping on that they have all the 'essential luxuries' they need. What a pity we've nearly destroyed the planet getting there.
  • IRL, they look like disposable, cheap PLASTIC 3D glasses. Garbage!

  • I don't see a lot of people wanting this. Consider the types of people.

    1. People who don't need glasses. They don't want to start. Glasses are inconvenient. They block your peripheral vision. They make you look dorky. If you try to get these people to start wearing smart glasses, you'll meet a lot of resistance.

    2. People who wear contacts. See above about looking dorky. These people need glasses, but they accept extra cost and inconvenience to make it look like they don't. They also won't be excite

  • No
  • There is a mountain of unrealized potential to this kind of thing. Show me which bolts to turn to replace a car part. Show me each step of my recipe, including how finely to chop the onions. Put an arrow on the floor to follow to the nearest exit. "Xray" glasses (purely for boring reasons of course). Highlight someone who is sneaking out of my store with something in his bag, interfacing with the security system. Circle his face when he comes in again. Put someone's name under her face. Auto-translate. High
    • Way back when I first learned of heads-up displays, I imagined that they could be useful in wiring harness and hydraulic installation and maintenance in close quarters in aircraft and ships. I might've been influenced at an early age, by crawling around inside the local playground F-86 engineless jet with its mysterious wires and tubes, and realizing that it was much more complicated than my plastic model kits.

  • Short answer? No.

    Slightly less short answer? VR/AR are never going to be a mainstream thing. Not ever. Yes there will be niches, even respectably large niches, where certain products will sell well but none of them will ever be in even one out of ten households.

  • A: Because tech companies need to sell you shit! BUY! BUY! BUY!

  • Can't see why people would want them

    What new software envisions things in a way that would make these popular?

    What's the killer eye app?

  • My son's coach has the Ray-Ban Meta glasses, and uses them to take pictures during competitions. He says, though it's the only reason he bought them, it keeps his hands free to use his walkie talkies to talk to the other coaches and refs, check his clipboard, and do hand signals. He keeps them in a mode that records everything, so when something cool happens, he says "Save that picture" and the last few seconds are stored away. He got some amazing pictures that would have been missed if he had to pull a cam

  • Can I use them as a computer monitor? Have them act like a head's up transparent display, record anything, work with or without my phone or computer nearby and respond accurately to voice prompts? No? Wake me when they do all of these things for less than $200.00.

  • This concept is an advertiser's dream, especially the prescription versions. Wearers can't remove the glasses if they want to be able to see. So of course, they're going to find ways to place ads on those screens.

    Lots of people might think they want smart glasses, but they certainly do NOT want the ads that will surely come with them.

  • No. (Score:2)

    by xtal ( 49134 )

    Nobody wants to wear shit on their face or have another device to charge.

    Money down the drain, but itâ(TM)ll be funny to watch again.

  • Smart glasses will become extremely popular once they figure out how to design a pair that doesn't make you look like a wannabe hipster tool.

  • Yes. I want everything I see to be visible to silicon valley creepers.

  • So here we go again.

    Smart glasses are back, and this time the threat isn’t just aesthetic or economic—it’s existential. Not for humanity, but for privacy.

    People are (rightly) concerned when they see a camera or microphone pointed at them—and are now (even more rightfully) worried they won’t be able to tell when their presence is being silently tokenized into the working memory of some random observer's LLM.

    But here’s the uncomfortable truth: when you talk to someone, you

  • Want smart glasses. But only for one reason - to assist with vision problems where traditional glasses are insufficient. I have a rare form of maculopathy that causes very poor low light vision, to the point i can't safely drive at night anymore. It also affects contrast. There are many color schemes used in print that I can't read anymore. If I look at my S24 ultra smartphone's camera app, the image shown on the screen corrects this problem, because it is brighter than what my eyes perceive in my surroundi

Slashdot Top Deals

FORTUNE'S FUN FACTS TO KNOW AND TELL: A guinea pig is not from Guinea but a rodent from South America.

Close