I would say have a "cache level" like combination: * very low/few computation done at the glasses level * medium computation done at the brick unit level * hard/intensive computation done in the cloud.
Wireless microphones are not a good comparison because they are probably analog, but even if they are digital a few dozen milliseconds of delay is going to be imperceptible for audio in a way that video is not.
I agree. The obvious choice is to offload to our insanely powerful phones. Unfortunately WiFi is too disruptive on mobile OSs and raw Bluetooth is.. well does that even need an explanation? Apple are probably the only ones who could deliver a seamless high bandwidth link and decent pairing, atm. But they spent their prototype-billions on a headset instead.
On the other hand though.. do we really need to run multiple cameras and a realtime image processing pipeline to say that the cacao on your countertop is, in fact, cacao? These AR “experiences” make cool demos, but once the novelty wears off, nobody wants to play planetarium or anatomy class for hours a day.
Note that without the whole AR part of it, there’s still some really cool hardware for all kinds of purposes. That can be really handy when you want or need both hands free. For instance POV video for say sports, HUD and voice interface for eg cycling, maybe watching videos while working, anything requiring gloves (cold, wet hands, gardening) todo-list in the corner of eye when shopping, etc etc. You could reduce form factor and increase battery time significantly, even if you keep accelerometer, gyro, projector, light sensor, cameras etc. But for some reason, utility is not even a priority with these companies.
The problem is that by doing so we make glasses secondary, auxiliary devices. You wouldn't leave your house without your phone, but if you forget your tethered glasses, well, no big deal.
The only way we move past phone as personal computing form factor is making alternatives standalone devices. If you could do everything you do on your phone, but on glasses, you might drop the phone habit. If you can't drop the phone habit, and there are only so many things you can take with you when you leave your house, AR glasses will always be an afterthought.
Actually it is a little bit annoying, people might actually get away with wearing these things, which means Facebook spyware might be entering everyday life. I’m glad I’m too old for parties.
We ruined the world with iPhone addiction and instagram now let’s put the final nail in and get these monkeysheep to strap the phone on their face
I've been reading about AR for years and I still have no idea how, if at all, I would use it. Never really come across a use case that's compelling for me. Getting WhatsApp messages without taking my phone out of my pocket feels like the opposite to the direction I'd like to move in.
The second, yeah, maybe, if it was done incredibly well. but marginal benefit over an iPad or similar.
I do: to display a moving map from Google Maps while cycling. It'd be incredibly handy for navigation in a city. Everyone these days uses a navigation app in their car to navigate (esp. to unfamiliar destinations), but how do you do that on a bicycle? You can get one of those phone mounts for your handlebars, but it's really clunky, and difficult (or impossible) to see in bright sunlight. Plus, in my experience, phones tended to fall out of them, as it was hard to find a mount that would fit a modern-size (read: large) phone; they seem to all be designed with 2010-model phones in mind.
But it doesn't solve the visibility problem: good luck seeing your screen in direct sunlight. And also the problem where you have to look down at your handlebards, refocus your eyes for close-up vision (this is really bad if you're over ~40 due to presbyopia), and try to make out the info on the screen, and not get hit by a car or run into a pedestrian or other road hazard. If you're navigating inside a dense city, this sounds positively dangerous. AR glasses would fix all of this.
Looking down is definitely an issue, but not for simply following a route. In fact, for turn by turn nav, I prefer audio. And no, I'm not interested in your opinions about the safety of that :)
AR glasses might work better, but they'd introduce other issues, like conflicting with sunglasses and helmet. Plus a huge expense. I suspect for me even if I owned such a thing I would rarely use it for this case.
Well ideally, the AR glasses would double as sunglasses (perhaps photochromic so you can use them at night too). And if they had the same size frames as regular sunglasses (and not these huge clunky ones seen on the prototype), then they wouldn't interfere with your helmet any more than regular sunglasses.
>In fact, for turn by turn nav, I prefer audio. And no, I'm not interested in your opinions about the safety of that :)
Well I'm going to give it to you anyway :-) I've tried audio for turn-by-turn nav, and it really sucks. Not because of safety, but just because it doesn't work well. It's hard to hear if it's noisy, it doesn't tell which road to turn on correctly, etc. I guess if you're in some rural area and there's only one turn visible in the next kilometer, it's fine, but I live in Tokyo and roads here are tiny (1 car wide at best in many places) and close together, so when it says "turn right", that doesn't really tell me much. It also doesn't help much because nav usually wants to direct me on main roads instead of side roads, but side roads are much better for cycling: on main roads, you either ride with traffic and get hit by trucks, or you ride on the sidewalk and dodge pedestrians going in and out of storefronts (the latter is preferred by almost all cyclists here). But on the side roads, you can avoid most of this. The problem, however, is that many side roads don't go far before they're blocked by a park or a train line or something else. A moving map would show you the road layout so you can choose for yourself a convenient route, and also be able to make quick decisions for alternate routes in case you miss a turn or just want to ride a different way for some reason. On top of all that, the audio is just plain loud and annoying and rude to all the pedestrians nearby, and makes me feel embarrassed.
Peak Design has, in my opinion, a better solution than quadmount - it mounts securely (magnet + slot) and keeps the ability to wirelessly charge. Do have to use their case though, but it's a very attractive case. I use it in conjunction with the Trek BellBeats and I'm satisfied.
I would say the same about AR. I'm surprised by your comment. Lately I've been using it a lot when shopping for furnitures (to place the furniture in my space and see how it fits, amazon and a bunch of furniture places let you do that).
I hate owning too many socks so I would wear "long" socks with everything, including shorts. I would also tuck my trousers into my socks when cycling. This was considered a massive faux pas 10 years ago. Guess what the youth do today? Yep, long socks are in!
Uh?? Given the size of normal ties, their "use" as a protection for a shirt is dubious!
What does it say beyond, "This person doesn't pay attention to high fashion", and why does it feel like you're judging people for that? Who cares if people aren't into it? To my mind, your comment says a lot more about you than what ignorance to high fashion says about others.
And please, look at all of Meta's own comments on the size of this prototype - it's obvious that the size isn't because it's "in" in high fashion, but because that's the smallest they could reasonably get it.
Literally all I said was I thought they were large and goofy looking. I didn't say anything about people wearing, or not wearing them, or anything about whether they were fashionable or not. You've taken my post, read things I didn't say, made up stuff, and then judged me for it.
The point is, the size of new technology tend to shrink fast.
The original iPhone was one of the smallest iPhones ever made. It did nothing but get bigger over time. If you want to compare the modern smart phone to a Zack Morris phone, or the bag phones that came before it, that would be a better way to go if the argument is size reduction over time.
Something in the collective unconscious is screaming "put the biggest brick you can make in my hand and give me a main battle tank to go to TJ's." and industry is happy to oblige!
Maybe wearing a gigantic ugly thing on your face that beeps and has flashing lights isn't such a far step
Making them as small as they are is an incredible feat actually. They are better than Hololens in every respect and Hololens is absolutely massive in comparison. There are at least 5 cameras, two HD projectors, an IMU, microphones and speakers in this thing plus the chips and batteries to run them all continuously for two hours.
Meta's got the RayBans colab but they're gonna need the Prada colab if they want to sell at 5 kilobucks
Fast forward today and nearly every phone looks like a galaxy note. Turns out when the utility is there, people will adapt.
I still thing this is correct. "Features" like Reachability, and even Screen Time, are software solutions to hardware problems.
I don't think people would be as addicted to their smartphones if they stayed small. At that size, they were more of a tool, and a means to get something done when away from a proper computer. As the size increase, it became mobile-first, doom scrolling entered the picture, and people started asking if phones were bad of our mental health.
But even people I know with smaller hands generally prefer larger phones, probably for the same reason most PC computer users prefer larger monitors rather than the 14" monitors of yesteryear.
Someone needs a lesson about the uncanny valley. Short story: unless you are all the way at the top go down, not up. Lean into the goofiness that your limitations demand. Make a decent new thing, not a strange old thing.
Reminds me of the old 80's NHS glasses in the UK (which you could get for free if you couldn't afford otherwise).
Or for those of you old enough, Brains from the old Supermarionation versions of the Thunderbird show (https://i2-prod.walesonline.co.uk/incoming/article8451975.ec...)