This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Google already made AR glasses and they failed. Not because the product was bad, but because AR is stupid and has such a niche case that it's practically worthless.
He’s f*** detached
I mean, AR is pretty awesome to be fair.
Never from big stock market corpos. Fuck their "vision".
Luigi :)
This is just another attempt to capture even more control over our attention - advertising everywhere. Of course Apple wants it
Classic Tim Apple.
I would love to have a good pair of ar glasses to play games on my Steam Deck with. Connect a controller, and not have to hold up the heavy Deck itself.
But given Apple's propensity for walled gardens and lock-in, and Meta putting manipulative spyware into everything they make, these hypothetical glasses won't be coming from either of those companies.
Honestly, this is probably the next game changing tech. There are lot of uses for AR. Size, style, and battery life are probably the biggest issues to overcome.
With the exception for extremely niche stuff like surgery (and they won't use off the shelf AR anyways) what's your usecases to bring AR to the masses?
Boring everyday stuff like reading notifications without pulling out your phone, watching videos on public transit, watching a tutorial while working on a project, reading a recipe while cooking, navigation, watching whatever people watch when they get high, text magnification for folks who need it…
without pulling out your phone, [doing phone stuff x10]
Ding ding ding.
Everyone is so focused on AR glasses having some killer use case that must justify it's existence. The use case is simply not pulling a phone out of your pocket; not waiting for face ID, tapping your way to the necessary app, and so on.
Removing these micro inconveniences has always been Apple's forte (even if a little stagnant in recent years), so it's no surprise that they will continue to pursue the same.
I think this is a case where the imagination is much, much better than the reality.
For the mobilization of technology, miniaturization has had a lot of benefits, not just in the technology, but in the accessibility. Having a desktop computer instead of a mainframe was huge. It brought the computer to the home. Laptops becoming viable was huge again. It untethered the computer from the wall. For most of the planet, we're still in the midst of the massive leap that is smart phones. It put a computer in the pocket of billions of people.
Beating that is hard. Smart phones are the most accessible, most powerful devices most end users have ever used. We take that for granted, and we take the time it took to get there for granted. It took 25 years of desktops to get real, decent laptops (personally, I'd say mid 90s). It took 25 of laptops to get real, decent smartphones (again personally, I'd say ~2010ish).
Like it or not, we have another decade to go probably before the technology is there for the next evolution in personal computing. But the problem we have really is that there's not another leap as far as accessibility is concerned. Smart phones work places where laptops can't. Laptops work places where desktops can't. Desktops work places where mainframes can't. Smart phones can work anywhere. Taking the computer from the datacenter, to the home, to your backpack, to your pocket is huge. Is the next step from the pocket to your wrist? To your face? Is it worth it? Is it really that much better?
A reality distortion field that seperates a person from the real world? What could go wrong?
It's about as dystopian as it gets.
You don't have to strap the internet to someone's face to distort their reality with it, as demonstrated by... Well, gestures broadly
I don't want ads thrown into my eyeballs. So that's a big no from me.
