Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Social Networks

Snap's First Consumer AI Glasses Are Coming This Fall For $2,195 (theverge.com) 39

Posted by BeauHD from the bold-moves dept.
Snap is launching its first consumer augmented-reality glasses this fall for $2,195. "You can preorder a pair of Specs now at specs.com with a $200 refundable deposit, and Snap says they're expected to ship 'this fall' in the US, UK, and France," reports The Verge. From the report: This is a big moment for Snap: The company made a big entry into smart glasses with its original Spectacles in 2016, and the company has been toiling away on nonpublic AR versions of Spectacles over the past few years. CEO Evan Spiegel promised the company would launch consumer AR glasses in 2026 and even turned its smart glasses team into a separate business. The company says that Specs are "fully standalone, with no puck and no tether." (Which is perhaps a jab at Apple's Vision Pro, which is tethered to a separate battery pack.) They'll be offered in two sizes, a 47mm model weighing 132g and a 52mm model weighing 136g, and will have removable inserts that Snap says will support "a wide range of prescriptions."

You probably won't mistake Specs, with their wide, bold frames, for any of Meta's smart glasses -- Snap clearly picked a design that it wants to stand out. (They're not my style -- I don't think I can pull off the "snow goggles, but fashionable" look -- though maybe Jony Ive might like them.) They have visible light and infrared cameras, and while the Specs are recording, a little LED bar will glow in the middle of the glasses. Both of the lenses will be able to show you content, and Snap says that its display system is powered by a "proprietary liquid crystal on silicon technology" that offers a 51-degree field of view and can show 16 million colors. The lenses can also go from clear to tinted in 10 seconds, Snap says.

The Specs have two Snapdragon processors onboard, and while Snap isn't specifying exactly which ones they are, the company says that one is focused on "computer vision" while the other is focused on running AR Lenses. "Together, they enable fast hand tracking, low latency, and responsive interactions that help digital content feel anchored in the real world," Snap says. You can also expect up to four hours of battery life on a charge, which Snap says accounts for things like "audio and video playback, AI assistance, Bluetooth notifications, and more." The Specs come with a charging case that Snap says will offer four more charges for a total of 20 hours of battery.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Snap's First Consumer AI Glasses Are Coming This Fall For $2,195 More

Snap's First Consumer AI Glasses Are Coming This Fall For $2,195

Comments Filter:
  • If you want to do this, make a device that can snap onto basically eyeglass frame.

    • Those are orders of magnitude uglier than I expected. Who the fuck signed off on that design?

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward
        This would have been wedgie material when I was in HS.

    • If you're a conventionally attractive person, you wouldn't be caught dead with these massive, chunky frames sitting on your face, unless it becomes a status symbol for your conspicuous consumption. The reason you're conventionally attractive is because you know how to groom and dress yourself, and to not buy shit like this.

      If you're not a conventionally attractive person but somehow can afford to spend the money on these, believe me when I say that if you wear these, everyone within a 100-yard radius can s

      • Yes, wierprints. We here at slashdot have the pulse on fashion in a way that most ordinary citizens do not. Your commentary is quite obvious to us, the arbiters of high fashion.

    • If they were brown instead of black, I'd suggest they look like the standard issue "birth control" eyeglasses the US Military issues.

    • Are these the glasses the Visitors wore in V: The Miniseries?

      Definitely not something a human would wear.

      Do any adults actually use Snap? I thought it was just kids. Kids who have a few grand laying around these days?

      Maybe they'll pair with an absurd Commodore flip phone.

      On the other hand we may be seeing Malicious Compliance from Snap workers. If so, well played.

      Or there are no workers and some LLM is running the whole thing.

      So many possible ways this went horribly wrong.

  • Can we use these glasses, or are they just as worthless as Google's and Meta's, where they choose everything for you, and you'll likely get a DMCA complaint if you try to use them for your own purposes?

    If not, then $21.95 is about as much as these people should be charging for the product, which is obviously intended to get its revenue through proprietary software/services sales.

  • from the comments (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    "You too can look like a NASA engineer from 1963."

    "This literally looks like the picture of the nerd with glasses emoji"

  • These will be a huge indicator of the market and consumer confidence.

    If these sell, at this absurd price, then we will know that consumer confidence is way too high(and stupid) and that we are at peak and destined to crash.

    If these are flatly refused as stupid and priced at an insane price-to-value ratio, then we can hope for some economic continuation.

    $1,000+ phones are stupid. $2,200 glasses are orders of magnitude beyond stupid.

    • Other way round. Consumer spending is way down indicating that their financial assets are exhausted. Now they have nothing left to loose. Does not bode well

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Zak3056 ( 69287 )

      Meh. Give me real AR glasses that let me display the stuff I want as an overlay on top of what I'm actually seeing, and I think $2k would almost certainly be worth it. I'm willing to bet the linked product isn't that, though.

    • It would depend on the functionality.

      Example, if these things can do real-time translation and "closed captioning" I'd bet they would sell like crazy. But they probably are nowhere near that functional.

    • These won't prove anything because they're ugly.

      That's what we call a confounding factor

  • I remember getting an e-mail for purchasing Google Glass. They were pretty expensive ($1k or $2k NZDI think?). Glad I didn't get them since they were killed off and were paperweights within a few years. There are some videos of people who have gotten some more life out of them, but all the original apps and services for it are gone.

    • Glass was cool. I have one, I like it, and nothing I've tried since has felt nearly as futuristic OR usable. The battery life was too short.
      Somebody developed an AI app for them so you can use the camera and screen for slop. Blows my mind how usable they still are!

  • This garbage product is the reason my employer sold the specs.com domain for a quick buck?!!! Wow.

  • ..are usually the same suspects.

    they'll be a hit with the freckled-unkempt-hair-hawaiian-shirt-boardshort-wearing-clubgoer-with-drink-in-hand-talking-to-girls-with-big-arm-movements but they won't make it deep enough into mainstream adoption and garner snap a profit.  they lost all their innovation when they weren't able to move away from their "iconic" platform limitations and beat instagram at their own game.

  • Just use apt.

  • Those things look like the military glasses issued to new Marine recruits in boot camp back in the 80s, affectionately known as BCDs (Birth Control Devices).

  • Aside from being gratuitously ugly, perhaps they should have gone with the puck. I mean, they only last for an alleged four hours at a time. So, you'd need two pair if you wanted to wear them all day?

    What do these weird toys do that would justify that kind of expense?

  • I've heard a lot of people say good stuff about the RayNeo Air 4 Pro AR Glasses ... which cost a fraction of this: $300.

    I understand that these have more "bells and whistles" ... but if you ignore those bells and whistles, I'm very curious how the core experience (comfort, readable screen, battery, etc.) compares between these two.

    In short, I suspect the $300 glasses that focus on just being a monitor will be a better overall experience than this $2+k monstrosity because of all those bells and whistles ...

  • When you really want to show off your bad taste, but your budget says "no" to spending $70k on a Cybertruck.

  • Ogre has something to say!

    NERRRRRRRRRRDS!

  • Wants his eyeglasses back.

  • Radar O'Reilly radioed in... (Score:3)

    by Archfeld ( 6757 ) <treboreel@live.com> on Tuesday June 16, 2026 @07:55PM (#66196380) Journal

    Radar O'Reilly radioed in...He wants his Korean era military issue glasses back. He left them on your mom's nightstand.

  • is the ability to learn from and not repeat the mistakes of others.

    See Apple Vision Pro ( and it's laughable price tag )
    https://www.apple.com/apple-vi... [apple.com]

    Or the silly wearable AI button thing
    https://gizmodo.com/ai-gadgets... [gizmodo.com]

    I have a prediction that these glasses will fare little better.

Slashdot Top Deals

If you have a procedure with 10 parameters, you probably missed some.

Close