this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2025
-82 points (14.7% liked)
Technology
75704 readers
4505 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's not clear to me whether-or-not the display is fundamentally different from past versions, but if not, it's a relatively-low-resolution display on one eye (600x600). That's not really something you'd use as a general monitor replacement.
The problem is really that what they have to do is come up with software that makes the user want to glance at something frequently (or maybe unobtrusively) enough that they don't want to have their phone out.
A phone has a generally-more-capable input system, more battery, a display that is for most-purposes superior, and doesn't require being on your face all the time you use it.
I'm not saying that there aren't applications. But to me, most applications look like smartwatch things, and smartwatches haven't really taken the world by storm. Just not enough benefit to having a second computing device strapped onto you when you're already carrying a phone.
Say someone messages multiple people a lot and can't afford to have sound playing and they need to be moving around, so can't have their phone on a desk in front of them with the display visible or something, so that they can get a visual indicator of an incoming message and who it's from. That could provide some utility, but I think that for the vast majority of people, it's just not enough of a use case to warrant wearing the thing if you've already got a smartphone.
My guess is that the reason that you'd use something like this specific product, which has a camera on the thing and limited (compared to, say, XREAL's options) display capabilities, so isn't really geared up for AR applications where you're overlaying data all over everything you see, is to try to pull up a small amount of information about whoever you're looking at, like doing facial recognition to remember (avoid a bit of social awkwardness) or obtain someone's name. Maybe there are people for whom that's worthwhile, but the market just seems pretty limited to me for that.
I think that maybe there's a world where we want to have more battery power and/or compute capability with us than an all-in-one smartphone will handle, and so we separate display and input devices and have some sort of wireless commmunication between them. This product has already been split into two components, a wristband and glasses. In theory, you could have a belt-mounted, purse-contained, or backpack-contained computer with a separate display and input device, which could provide for more-capable systems without needing to be holding a heavy system up. I'm willing to believe that the "multi-component wearable computer" could be a thing. We're already there to a limited degree with Bluetooth headsets/earpieces. But I don't really think that we're at that world more-broadly.
For any product, I just have to ask
what's the benefit it provides me with? What is the use case? Who wants to use it?
If you get one, it's $800. It provides you with a different input mechanism than a smartphone, which might be useful for certain applications, though I think is less-generally useful. It provides you with a (low-resolution, monocular, unless this generation has changed) HUD that's always visible, which a user may be able to check more-discretely than a smartphone. It has a camera always out. For it to make sense as a product, I think that there has to be some pretty clear, compelling application that leverages those characteristics.
Tldr: it’s shit.
I dunno, if all the glasses did was quickly find out the name and short bio of the person I am talking to and display it visible to only me, then that does sound like a big market. I could see demand from managers in big firms, polititians and activists, all customer oriented roles, and meee because I keep forgetting :3
I mean, I'm listing it because I believe that it's something that has some value that could be done with the information. But it's a "are the benefits worth the costs" thing? let's say that you need to pay $800 and wear a specific set of glasses everywhere. Gotta maintain a charge on them. And while they're maybe discrete compared to a smartphone, I assume that people in a role where they're prominent (diplomacy, business deal-cutting, etc) probably know what they look like and do, so I imagine that any relationship-building that might come from showing that you can remember someone's name and personal details ("how are Margaret and the kids?") would likely be somewhat undermined if they know that you're walking around with the equivalent of your Rolodex in front of your eyeballs. Plus, some people might not like others running around with recording gear (especially in some of the roles listed).
I'm sure that there are a nonzero number of people who would wear them, but I'm hesitant to believe that as they exist today, they'd be a major success.
I think that some of the people who are building some of these things grew up with Snow Crash and it was an influence on them. Google went out and made Google Earth; Snow Crash had a piece of software called Earth that did more-or-less the same thing (albeit with more layers and data sources than Google Earth does today). Snow Crash had the Metaverse with VR goggles and such; Zuckerberg very badly wanted to make it real, and made a VR world and VR hardware and called it the Metaverse. Snow Crash predicts people wearing augmented reality gear, but also talks about some of the social issues inherent with doing so; it didn't expect everyone to start running around with them:
I think that Stephenson probably did a reasonable job there of highlighting some of the likely social issues that come with having wearable computers with always-active sensors running.
Yes, true, but imagine future versions of this looking more like normal glasses, and displaying information like all the managers people report to, items on the todo list concerning them, etc. Or it displays what the customer ordered, what his bill is, etc. All things you could do with your phone on a one on one basis, but with glasses you could look across the room and get the information of the specific people in that corner without having to stop and looking all of them up.
Perhaps the wow factor for knowing the first name of your business customer or voter will be greatly lessened, but referencing personal things still makes an impression, even when your memory of it has been externalised to the database in your note app.
And concerning the creepy aspect: its what our world is converging to. I feel creeped out every time I spot a surveilience camera, or every time I walk by someone making a tiktok or instagram reel or whatever. Every time someone walks by with a phone out they could be recording.
But most people dont care. All the articles about how creepy wearables with integrated cameras are is only because its still new and rare.
But yes, I agree. The current glasses are solutions looking for problems, with barely functioning features, a horrible price point and lots of drawbacks. The stuff ive described above can be done with the technology, but right now all they do is make photos, record video, and gimmick features like "AI powered" note taking and giving you poor map directions.