• kandoh@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 hours ago

    They would have to be so good to be what these guys want them to be and the technology is just not there yet.

    • PhAzE@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14 hours ago

      I mean, maybe of ots done well. I have the meta raybans and love them, mainly because I can listen to music as if I had earphones in, and talk on my phone with them, record, and take videos.

      If it had a UI to select options and could display info too, that would be pretty sick imo.

      • red_pigeon@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 hours ago

        I’m curious what drives you to record videos using the glass. As opposed to a phone/camera, the POV is very restricted as you cannot move vertically (unless kneel/crawl and look up/down ofc). So I’m sure it cannot be called a replacement to a traditional phone/camera.

        So what is your motivation to use it ?

        • PhAzE@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 hours ago

          Actually I never record videos and rarely take pictures with them. It’s the feature i use the least.

          I use them for music, phone calls, and AI requests (like having a Google home you can ask at any moment). Once and a while I’ll ask it to tell me what I’m looking at to listen to it describe something. That feature uses the camera to snap a shot of what your looking at.

          When I walk somewhere and need to use maps, it tells the directions to me as I walk which is pretty neat.

  • AnimalsDream@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    19 hours ago

    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.

  • pachrist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    22 hours ago

    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?

    • Suburbanl3g3nd@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      They’re not trying to solve the next ‘where you can compute’ problem. Smartphones can already be used anywhere. They’re solving the ‘when’ problem and there are lots of times that a phone can’t be used.

      Lots of people see the ‘when can I compute’ optimal solution to be anytime. Think of all the places people bring cameras. That’s where they’d love to have a computer. An HMD can do that if it gets small enough

  • 13igTyme@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 day ago

    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.

  • Sarmyth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    1 day ago

    I think the fundamental problem with the AR glasses is something that can’t be overcome.

    I think its easy to see the utility to owning a pair of glasses that look good and provide real time information as desired for what you are looking at or hearing.

    HOWEVER, I think very few people will want the product these co.panies will make. This will be a method to throw ads literally in front of your eyeballs. Enshitification is too big of a thing now and so any new product is tainted by the expectation it will rapidly turn to garbage at a high price to you.

    Also, while we may think we can be trusted, we dont trust anyone else having all that info, I dont like the obvious privacy implications that these can present. Filming with them is also terrifying.

    • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Yeah my best guess is that at most these will at best lead to homebrew and specialist uses. For example I have to wear glasses my astigmatism is rather severe so contacts don’t work, so if I could attach a small projector to my glasses and put my phones display onto it I would have so many uses.

    • Venus_Ziegenfalle@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      You might be giving people too much credit here because the same things could be said about a lot of products and services that have come out over the last 10 years

      • Sarmyth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        😆 And here I was think I wasn’t giving anyone any credit. I just proclaimed none of us could be trusted!

  • alehel@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    23 hours ago

    I don’t want ads thrown into my eyeballs. So that’s a big no from me.

    • sem
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      17 hours ago

      I agree with you fully. It’s a sad state that we can’t even imagine wearable glasses tech without invasive ads

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 day ago

      How is Quest a flop? Or are you talking about something else?

      Bot quest and ray band products are huge success dominating their respective markets.

      I really wish people were more serious about these markets so it can be done well from the get got rather than starting to be fixed and regulated 2 decades later.

      • Viper_NZ@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        Having borrowed a quest 3 last week I’ve almost pulled trigger on buying one.

        The only thing holding me back is… it’s Meta.

        • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 hours ago

          If you get one, buy Walkabout Mini Golf. I’ve spent so long playing that and hanging out in its worlds.

        • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          There’s a big piracy scene on Quest so if you really put in the effort you’re not giving these evil assholes much but generally I agree. There’s so much entertainment and things to do that I can really wait a bit longer as VR is not going away.

  • Imperor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    91
    ·
    2 days ago

    This AR obsession is utterly baffling to me. There are so few real applications and the hardware requirements are insane so it’s not something that will get widely adapted anyway. Sure in a decade or so it might have matured enough to have shed all these issues, but AR/VR feels like a really out of touch thing to prusue, especially if you look at the garbage ideas they have on how to use it - virtual meetings??

    I get movies and games on these, possibly even some recording and porn, but these are not their B2B wet dreams anyway.

      • Valmond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        Gotta need some insane resolution for that right? And 1000hz refresh to make things good I guess.

        I mean for text editing, coding etc.

        • turtlesareneat@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yep I’ve played with virtual monitors in VR space and I don’t even like watching movies on them, the loss in resolution and the way the dynamic aspect of it (using a moving screen to simulate a static screen) makes it a shitty solution. Eventually it’ll be good enough to watch TV in but I can’t imagine doing serious work in it.

          • Euphoma@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Quest 3 lens and displays actually are nice to look at, I coded for 5 hours in it the other day, and the only glaring flaw was the weight. My forehead hurt afterwards from the pressure, and I wasn’t even using stock strap. The stock strap on quest headsets is known to be terrible. Tbf I only have a 1080p monitor for comparison bur its nice.

          • Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            If you tried on anything lower than a Quest 3 with Virtual Desktop, you were right.

            Quest 3 was the first VR headset to make virtual screens worth it. The clarity of pancake lenses cannot be overstated. The Quest pro technically had them too, but it wasn’t quite good enough in some of the other aspects.

            A Quest 3 with Virtual Desktop has replaced my TV and monitor because it was an upgrade to both. Even if all I did was placed those screens statically exactly where they used to be in real life. But of course, they can be anywhere, any size. The screens are 4k 120hz, good enough for pretty much anything. Once you get to about 80 degrees field of view, every pixel of a 4k 60hz signal can be temporally represented. Your head micromoves enough that you aren’t missing any detail between each frame of the reference taking up two of the headsets frames. And when playing a game in actual 120 fps, you won’t notice that you aren’t seeing every single pixel directly physically represented every single frame, it looks good. Worth doing. 4k still looks much nicer than 1440p, which can be fully properly represented at that size and framerate.

            Using anything other than Virtual Desktop, there is no need to set a monitor any higher than 1080p since they can’t even draw that well enough to be properly represented. Virtual desktop is the only one that uses timewarp layers. If you were around for Carmack, you’ll know that was always his first advice to every piece of VR software he reviewed, “please use timewarp layers for anything you want to look clear face-on” it’s a huge difference.

            • turtlesareneat@discuss.online
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Interesting. Ok, I will give it another go at some point. I had an Oculus Rift and there was a ton of promise but the tech was just not ready.

              • Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                Oh yeah, for sure. The rift was great for it’s time, but it is straight up comparitively garbage compared to what is out now. Wireless is now even more stable than the rift was at tracking, and the screens are so high res and they can decode at such speed that a wireless feed is almost as low latency and is much higher fidelity than what the Rift could do. There are still wired headsets that would be more clear nowadays, but with Virtual Desktop, the downsides to streaming wirelessly are pretty minimal.

                Definitely get a demo of a Quest 3 if you can, or better. Though keep in mind the 3s isn’t better, despite being newer, it is “s” in the same sense that smart phones tend to use it, it’s a newer generation, but a cheaper lower end headset. A really good value. But it doesn’t have pancake lenses, the most important part of the Quest 3, and clearly most expensive part, lol.

                Wireless headsets can just be used anywhere, especially when you are in AR mode or playing something mixed reality. But they are still at their best when using your computer through them. Although, you don’t have to. Their standalone games are basically xbox 360/PS3 level graphics, not amazing, but not really a problem. Most of what graphics have advanced by since then is just less “faking” stuff to look almost exactly right anyway and more rendering it in insanely computationally demanding ways to make it look 10% more right.

                With Virtual Desktop, my computer is now in every room of my house, including the ones where I get to lay back in a recliner. And my computer is also at all my friends and family’s houses. And with cell-phone tethering, it can be on a bus, or a hotel room where I don’t want to use their wi-fi. Sometimes the cell connection is bad enough that I have to lower the resolution or framerate, but often times 4k 120hz is still viable on cell. Just has a bit more latency, so some game types are contraindicated. A 4k 120hz stream only needs about 25mbit to be clear enough to be worth using over a lower resolution or framerate. And cell latency can be as low as 5ms nowadays. 4g could only go as low as 200ms, 5g can theoretically go as low as 1ms, but obviously in practice that is almost impossible.

          • ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            I did have fun with the novelty of moving multiple screens around like Minority Report but it really is just a novelty at this point

        • Lv_InSaNe_vL@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          The resolution thing is actually almost solved IMO. I used my Quest 3 in AR mode almost every single day and the screens are perfectly fine for reading text or having a video on in the background.

          Yeah there’s still some screen door effect but it’s really only noticeable when I look for it, it disappears in normal use.

          And I genuinely can’t think of a reason you would need 1000hz displays. Human eyes start to get steady motion at like 50-60 and 90-150 is when the normal eye starts to hit the limit.

      • Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        It depends on what you mean by special software, but current VR headsets already do that out of the box, it’s just that their built-in multi monitor stuff is not amazing. Without any special software, you could have multiple apps open, and those apps could be any android app(including browsers or relatively bad desktop experiences like dex). The third party stuff you can download or buy is just way better. And it’s also way better when the multiple monitors are your computer’s monitors. Cuz then they have 50x the horsepower behind them. For current headsets, generally the best option is Virtual Desktop, if you don’t need more screens than can be handled by high quality timewarp layers. You can get clear 4k or 5740x1080, or anything smaller. With other multi desktop options, you can get more total screens, but there is no point to picking anything above 1080p since even that is already not rendered clearly.

        Solutions for current VR/MR/XR headsets will follow to VR/MR/XR glasses, since headsets and glasses are slowly meeting in the middle. Headsets will continue to shrink while packing in the same or more tech, and the glasses will slowly be able to handle more and more tech in their tiny frames.

        There will always be full size headsets, but they will essentially be the PC equivalent to the glasses being the smart phone equivalent. We will also likely still have PCs, but it’s concievable that a smartphone won’t be necessary for most people anymore. And even for the people that would still want a smartphone, a “processing puck” for the glasses would be the more likely solution. Give them pocket computer level power instead of smart watch level. So you can play good games on them, like 10-15 years ago-then pc game graphics.

    • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      This AR obsession is utterly baffling to me.

      • It’s a mobile phone you don’t need to hold.

      • It’s a mobile phone that never goes in your pocket.

      • It’s a mobile phone that is always on and has access to everything you see and hear.

      • BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        It’s a bummer than those sound like bad things simply because corporate abuse is always a forgone conclusion. If your data was truly private and always entirely under your control and ONLY your control, those would be really attractive features.

        • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Totally. I’d also love to train a LLM on my own personal data and preferences, but there is no way I’m trusting a corporation that information.

        • Walk_blesseD
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Some implementations also have the problem of constantly pointing cameras at non-consenting passers-by.

      • Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        Exactly, it’s literally just the next step more convenient than a smartphone. You know how many people have neck and back problems now from smartphones? Not having to look at your hands or even hold anything in your hands is going to be so much better. Not having to pull your phone out of your pocket for a map or a web search or a text or to translate stuff(visual or audio). Having both hands free while doing the things your current phone does, or new things a current phone can’t do.

        It’s going to be so much nicer, and sure, the first one is gonna be expensive and not perfect, but it only needs nerds to start with anyway. We’ll make sure it gets to a point where it doesn’t annoy normal people and offers real value. And while the most popular ones will inevitably be the ones made with walled gardens like apple and meta, there will be good ones too for us nerds to move to once we have finished beta testing the mass market ones for you guys.

        It’s the same as every tech product cycle. You know the main thing preventing wider adoption of VR/MR/XR right now? Headsets don’t look cool… so, once they are a pair of glasses, or sun glasses, the main barrier is gone. Can’t say people wouldn’t spend 500$ to 2000$ on something as un-necessary as a smartphone every couple of years. They very much do. And if you no longer need to buy or carry a smartphone, all of a sudden you got exactly that amount of money in your pocket.

    • RedditIsDeddit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      A Quest 3 isn’t “insane.” It does AR just fine for a few hundred bucks. There ARE real world applications and more coming all the time. The education and medical fields in particular can benefit greatly from such tech.

    • Communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      What should they be pursuing now? They have state of the art chips, tablets, phones, laptops and even all in one desktops, the only thing they don’t have are TV’s, at this point why not try to conquer the next frontier. even if it takes a decade?

    • suicidaleggroll@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      Sure in a decade or so it might have matured enough to have shed all these issues

      That’s the point. They want to set themselves up so that when the issues are shed and it becomes a realistic product, they’re already in a place where their product can be the one that takes over the market. If you wait until a product is viable before starting on development, you’re too late.

    • MDCCCLV@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s been over a decade since the oculus rift came out and there hasn’t been much improvement.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Maybe it’s as simple as the next big product. When smartphones were new, nobody foresaw just how huge they’d become. Nobody could have foreseen what a force they’d turn Apple into. But now improvements are simply iterative, the market is nearing saturation, there’s not much room left to expand what’s next?

      Maybe AR. It’s a really cool technology just now becoming practical to implement. Think of them as where smartphones were 15 years ago. Maybe they won’t go anywhere but imagine if they did! Imagine being the company most associated with the next hit tech product!

      Apple risks stagnating if they don’t find a next hit product

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Agree on all that. In addition, headsets would become so very unhealthy if they took off. Just imagine the addictiveness of phones combined with the sedentary qualities of TV, with both dialed up to 11. People’s vision would get all fucked up, and they would start dying on their couches plugged in. It’s simply not a vision for the future that has any legs.

        • scarabic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          18 hours ago

          Oh do you mean you’re using it for exercise somehow? Or are you making a masturbation joke?

          • RedditIsDeddit@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            14 hours ago

            many of the games have you moving quite a lot, you can do 10 rounds of boxing for example and I guarantee you most people are not going to be able to get through 10 rounds of boxing

      • MajorasMaskForever@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        19 hours ago

        It’s a still frame from Star Trek The Next Generation, episode The Game

        The plot is a wearable device that is an AR “glasses” game that as you play the game it “makes you feel good” gets used to take over the Enterprise so terrorists can hijack it.

        At the time I imagine it was intended to be part of anti-drug campaigns with the AR and companies curating what you see to distract from reality angle/sentiment being more relevant today