this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2023
66 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

35104 readers
204 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 years ago

Apple users will want whatever apple tell them to want

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Yall remember google glasses? Seems like a decade ago.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yep. I remember their users being called 'glassholes' too.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

Apple Vision users new nik?: ISores

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago

There was a hilarious few week period in 2013 where I saw multiple people slam into the handrails and doors on muni busses in SF while glassed out. Also people yelling at them about not consenting to being recorded etc but that was much less amusing. Within a couple weeks you entirely stopped seeing them in public spaces.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago

I can't imagine walking around in public with something like this Apple headset on, let alone with the insane price tag... which means that people are definitely going to do it.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 years ago

Short answer : no.

Long answer : noooooooooooooooo.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

No for one simple reason: I have a wife. We like to experience content together (watching movies/TV, playing games). None of which I can do without not one but two of these things. No thanks.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's funny how obvious this point is and yet it seems to be getting kind of quietly ignored.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

I've heard a lot of pundits excitedly talking about using this headset to get rid of TVs in their house. I keep wondering how they think that'll go over with their families.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 years ago

For all the faults Google glass had, at least they were similar in size to regular glasses. I would only consider these things if they were as non-intrusive as possible, aka not ski goggles

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Headsets already feel outdated. They seem inconvenient, uncomfortable, and take you away from life instead of enhancing it. Whatever happened to google glass? I disliked that for many reasons but at least it wasn’t a headset.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Google happened to it. Right when some of us started doing practical things with it. Still haven't forgiven them for that.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Can't have a product potentially get past the early adopters phase can they.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I still don't think I should have told them I was working on a software prosthetic for it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Robert Scoble took a shower in one and the Google Glass image has yet to recover

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

Oh dear, I had forgotten about this...

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I hope this trend won't last. My smartphone consumption is too high already.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago

smartphone consumption

Smartphones Georg, who lives in cave & eats over 10,000 smartphones each day, is an outlier adn should not have been counted

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

It wouldn’t be bad if it were more of a computer replacement. Than a smart phone replacement. Today, I was extremely cramped with screen space and this headset would have been great! But I’ll just buy a bigger desk and a laptop stand for like 5% the cost.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 years ago

No. Absolutely not.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 years ago

I don't even want to wear clothes half the time never mind a giant computer that's tracking my eyeballs.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

No. The future of tech should be about getting more capabilities out of fewer (and/or less intrusive) screens. Would love to see more advances in e-ink displays and open-source, 'ambient' voice-controlled UIs.

[–] pax 8 points 2 years ago (10 children)

oh no. I hate voice controlled tech. it's off for me. I would not use that at all.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If the technology was to become widespread it would have to do better than "silly digital ski goggles" anyway. I wear glasses, I wouldn't mind slightly bulkier glasses if in exchange I can get a heads-up display telling me what the name of that person who's greeting me that I should totally know the name of but have forgotten right now.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago

I’m the other way on this one. The idea of having an always-on HUD, while convenient, seems far more dystopian than a nifty toy to watch immersive movies on and play interesting games on when I get home. I know it’s an unpopular opinion around here, but I for one am excited to see computing take on different HIDs. The thought of an infinitely large canvas to compute on appeals to me, while an always-with-me wearable does not.

I like having a disproportionately powerful computing device at home. When I’m out, I’ll bring my analogue watch and an outdated smartphone to text people and read articles. When I’m computing, I go all out. When I’m not, I’m not.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think the end goal would be AR/VR built into your glasses that are as light as current day glasses. We are probably a long time away from that, but I feel like most VR headsets right now are beta versions of this end goal.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago

No one talks about how bad it is to have tons of little LEDs in your eyes. My eyes are already messed up, and I can't use VR for more than an hour before I feel like I want to die. So it's a HARD pass from people like me. Talk to me once you put screens in the walls, not on them.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago

Every time I've tried one I end up feeling queasy, so I jolly well don't

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

That's why when Google revealed the Glasses I thought "that's it, that's the headwear device that will be the future, it's literally just glasses!".

Alas, I should have known back then there was one thing going against that device's survival odds: it was a project from project slayer, Google.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago

The Vision product is a more like a monitor than AR glasses you wear all day. It makes nods to the practicality of strapping a monitor to your face: you can unplug, slide the battery in your pocket, stand up and walk into a different room to get something without disengaging from the monitor. If someone wants to chat, you can fade in reality and let them see your eyes so that the two of you can more comfortably (we'll see about this!) exchange a few words.

Without things like that, strapping a monitor to your face to get great eye tracking, immersive photos/video, and the giant digital canvas for your application windows might prove too inconvenient. For example, needing to pull the goggles off to answer a quick question from someone else in the room could make the whole endeavor not worth the hassle in some settings. If those settings turn out to be popular (e.g. using this at work in an office), then Apple is one step ahead.

I think that AR glasses you wear when out and about will be a different product. Admittedly, the photography aspect of Vision is a tentative move in this direction. I think it's being positioned more as a thing where you'd pull it out to capture a particular scene, then put it away again, rather than something you'd wear for an entire outing (the battery life largely precludes such a use, after all). I don't think it's a great fit for this now as it seems like it'd require the equivalent of a camera bag to bring with you, but undoubtedly some people will capture some amazing images.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago

Honestly, yeah, looking forward to when my budget lets me get the SimulaVR headset. Do I want something with a fraction of the software or apps as my laptop. No, that would be a huge step backwards. Do I want to have to buy software and jump through 15 hoops to modify anything? no.

So unfortunately Apple's ISore and Facebook's head-mounted surveillance device aren't for me, but a full Linux machine with x86 with infinite displays and full body interactions, for sure.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago

If they can invent a lightweight vr headset, that doesn't make me feel ill or sweat to high heavens then i'd be 100% onboard with it.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I really don’t. I wear glasses and I can’t imagine a system where it’s comfortable to wear both. If my glasses could be replaced by “smart” glasses, then I’d give it a go, but not if they are going to basically be a headset that looks like glasses.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

I heard on TechLinked that they charge you more if you wear glasses for your prescription to be in the lenses or something.

[–] pax 4 points 2 years ago

if this headset will help you find objects in real life, yeah. I am blind, so this tech, if accessible enough, could revolutionize how I recognize and interact with people.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The Apple headset does look a lot more lightweight and comfortable than most of what we have today - but even then, I just don't see it.

Even if they got it down to the weight and bulk of actual ski goggles, that wouldn't actually be comfortable for long sessions compared to sitting at a computer or watching TV (or even using a smart phone)

And ultimately you have to ask what the actual benefit is. The VR/AR industry seems (baffingly) to be moving away from games and towards social/business use cases (the Apple headset baffingly seems to be mosty selling itself as a laptop replacement). Everything we saw them doing with the Apple headset in the demo would be more comfortable and easier to do via more traditional mediums.

And don't even get me started on Meta who wants us to start working and shopping in VR...

VR has amazing potential for games, but it seems like just when we started to realize that potential with HL:A, the industry just gave up on it. Now-a-days, all the new titles are arcade games optimized for the quest, and hardware developers seem hell-bent on selling these headsets for everything except games.

I could see wanting something like what the Google Glass was supposed to be as a "wear everywhere" headset, but even then it'd be a niche thing for tech enthusiasts

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I've tried VR (PlayStation) and found the experience interesting but the novelty wore off pretty quick. I can't imagine using it for long than an hour at a time. Like the 'metaverse' and 3DTV the whole thing seems like a gimmick.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I love how everybody's shitting on it now, but I bet you that this started a bunch of copycats that'll offer it at 1500 or more. Everyone laughed at "phones without jacks" and now even FairPhone released a model without jacks. FairPhone basically said: yeah, let's go with a trend to add more e-waste and say we're for the planet.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Fwiw I still buy phones based on the headphone jack

I'm a tech hipster and direct audio is flat out, tight, my humans

Although I'm perfectly willing to admit cordless is better for most people's use cases and I do own a pair of wireless headphones for that reason

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

the fact that it'll have hundreds of copycats doesn't make it less silly

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

Our nephew sleeps wearing them

load more comments
view more: next ›