Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple's Internal Survey About Smart Glasses Hints at Future Product Plans

sunny5 said:
At least phone is not blocking the vision while AR glasses do. A huge difference.
Click to expand...
Except that - as others have pointed out - we are not talking about AR glasses.

Camera glasses would allow the user to keeps hands-free and not have eyes focusing on a phone, hence allowing the user to maintain situational awareness and full use of their hands. All kinds of professions would love to use these if they had iPhone-Pro level of camera quality. I would preorder a pair immediately. E.g. years ago dermatologists were already documenting skin anomalies using even the lame cameras in old iPads. Or a dentist. Or...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: paradox00
desslr said:
No need to waste time and money on focus groups as I can tell you right now:

NO mass market.
Product will die faster than the useless Vision Pro.

You’re welcome.
Click to expand...
If there's mass market appeal for Meta's smart glasses, then there will be interest for Apple's... as long as it's priced correctly. That's one of several issues with the Vision Pro.


Ray-Ban Meta glasses continue to be a bigger hit sooner than we expected, thanks in part to AI. Demand is still outpacing our ability to build them, but I'm hopeful that we'll be able to meet that demand soon. EssilorLuxottica has been a great partner to work with on this, and we are excited to team up with them to build future generations of AI glasses as we continue to build our long-term partnership
 
  • Like
Reactions: rymc02
sunny5 said:
At least phone is not blocking the vision while AR glasses do. A huge difference.
Click to expand...
A phone is a solid object, it absolutely blocks vision. Glasses, i.e. transparent glass, simply will not block vision as much unless there's a way to make them fully opaque. Even the types of AR glasses that work by firing lasers into your eyes to project images don't block out your view like a 16 Pro Max will.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Allen_Wentz and sunny5
magicschoolbus said:
Imagine how far ahead Google would be if they didn’t kill Google glass.
Click to expand...
Probably not very far TBH. That style of wearable seems to hit all the product areas that Google struggles with. They were definitely ahead of their time, but I don't think they would ever be the ones to nail this sort of device.
 
boss.king said:
A phone is a solid object, it absolutely blocks vision. Glasses, i.e. transparent glass, simply will not block vision as much unless there's a way to make them fully opaque. Even the types of AR glasses that work by firing lasers into your eyes to project images don't block out your view like a 16 Pro Max will.
Click to expand...
How do you even block the view with a phone? Besides, you are only proving my point as using a device in front of eye is dangerous.
 
sunny5 said:
How do you even block the view with a phone?
Click to expand...
You hold the phone up to your face and lean in. I don't know about you but I can't see through solid objects. Next time you're out and about in a busy place, look at the crowd. I guarantee you'll see people lost in their phone, completely oblivious what's happening around them.

sunny5 said:
Besides, you are only proving my point as using a device in front of eye is dangerous.
Click to expand...
I didn't say it's not dangerous, I said these glasses would likely be a lot less dangerous than what people currently do because they would obstruct your view to a lesser degree.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: subjonas, Allen_Wentz, surfbutler and 1 other person
As long as really miniaturized technology in 4K or at least FHD can't beam onto spectacle lenses, it's all just clunky toys. The technology is still too clunky and too power-hungry. To solve this problem, it will certainly take another 10 years and several generations of batteries.
 
boss.king said:
You hold the phone up to your face and lean in. I don't know about you but I can't see through solid objects. Next time you're out and about in a busy place, look at the crowd. I guarantee you'll see people lost in their phone, completely oblivious what's happening around them.


I didn't say it's not dangerous, I said these glasses would likely be a lot less dangerous than what people currently do because they would obstruct your view to a lesser degree.
Click to expand...
Who even put their phone like that. Already being pointless. You are also not considering the distortion, FOV, graphics, and more. Clearly, you never used AR glasses after all.
 
sunny5 said:
Who even put their phone like that.
Click to expand...
People. Human beings. They're outside right now, you can go look at them.

sunny5 said:
Already being pointless. You are also not considering the distortion, FOV, graphics, and more. Clearly, you never used AR glasses after all.
Click to expand...
All the things you're talking about apply to VR, like the Vision Pro and Meta Quest, not AR. AR glasses (and lets be clear, this article doesn't even mention visuals, it specifically talks about being like Meta's Rayban glasses) do not have these issues because you are by definition looking at the real world. If you think these are dangerous, we better ban all types of glasses, including sunglasses, because that's the level of distortion you're getting worked up over.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: surfbutler and sunny5
boss.king said:
People. Human beings. They're outside right now, you can go look at them.


All the things you're talking about apply to VR, like the Vision Pro and Meta Quest, not AR. AR glasses (and lets be clear, this article doesn't even mention visuals, it specifically talks about being like Meta's Rayban glasses) do not have these issues because you are by definition looking at the real world. If you think these are dangerous, we better ban all types of glasses, including sunglasses, because that's the level of distortion you're getting worked up over.
Click to expand...
False, AVP is a great example of AR which against your statement. You are looking at the world PLUS AR features which can block and distort your vision. Not only that, the see through's FOV is much narrow. More importantly, you can put your phone away or check the environment right away but AR glasses cant do that. And the article DID mention about AR glasses.

Comparing this to iPhone is a joke after all.
 
sunny5 said:
False, AVP is a great example of AR which against your statement. You are looking at the world PLUS AR features which can block and distort your vision. Not only that, the see through's FOV is much narrow. Comparing this to iPhone is a joke after all.
Click to expand...
The Vision Pro is VR doing its very best to simulate AR, no matter what Apple tells you. Your distortion and blocked vision complaints are with VR technology.
 
  • Like
Reactions: surfbutler
bushman4 said:
Unfortunately Apple has fallen years behind in its development of products. This is evident in its foldable iPhone, Apple glasses etc
Hopefully Apple make up the time that it’s lost
Click to expand...
Difference between Apple and other companies, is that other companies will settle for having a crease in the middle of their foldable products. Apple won't.
 
Yes, Apple, YES! Lead the way in following others! Patent infringement is the sincerest form of flattery! Vision and invention are so yesterday and consumer SOOOOooo much time. Let’s get a great pair of Clark Kent glasses out there so that Apple can be king of the nerds! I LOVE it and am fully, completely, totally, entirely, and in all other ways excited about this new idea!
 
desslr said:
No need to waste time and money on focus groups as I can tell you right now:

NO mass market.
Product will die faster than the useless Vision Pro.

You’re welcome.
Click to expand...
You sound like Steve Balmer.
It’s first gen. Of course it’s pricy but that doesn’t mean the product/category will fail. Technology evolves and some eventually will replace desktops, laptops and smartphones. Technology evolves and Apples versions are in a better position to turn that wheel with time.
 
hieranonymous said:
Apple should already have had something like this in the pipeline—something that could have been a natural extension of the AirPods line. I own a pair of the Meta Ray-Bans and they're a legitimately nice piece of technology: normal-looking, low learning curve, not clunky at all. I'm a bit shocked they're a Meta product given how unobtrusive they are.

A surprising number of non-techie people I know also own pairs and genuinely like them. The audio quality is good, the cameras are okay, and you can disable the AI nonsense.
Click to expand...
Meta caught Apple with its pants down dreaming about spatial computing and showed em what it is all about and how its done.



IMG_0965.jpeg
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Scottsoapbox, arkitect, hieranonymous and 1 other person
bushman4 said:
Unfortunately Apple has fallen years behind in its development of products. This is evident in its foldable iPhone, Apple glasses etc
Hopefully Apple make up the time that it’s lost
Click to expand...
Agreed but for that you need a doer not a manager … Tim is responsible for the mess … No foldable . No Mac Touch . No car . No … no no … enough!
 
***Warning*** The material you see in front of you is copyrighted please don't infringe on my rights!
Please don't record, copy, or post my likeness or similarity or you may face fines or penalties.

My new daily driver shirt! Terrible to be Me!

I know other countries are already under surveillance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back