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

Apple's Smart Glasses With In-Lens Display May Feature Two Modes

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
69,596
40,768


Apple's second-generation smart glasses with an in-lens display may have two modes, depending on which device they are connected to.

Meta-Ray-Ban-Glasses.jpg
Meta Ray-Bans without an in-lens display​

In his Power On newsletter today, Bloomberg's Mark Gurman said he was told a future version of Apple's smart glasses may be able to run a full version of the visionOS operating system when they are paired with a Mac, and then switch to a more lightweight, mobile-friendly interface when they are paired with an iPhone.

Apple's smart glasses would compete with the Meta Ray-Bans, which are now available with an in-lens display (pricing starts at $799 in the United States). However, Gurman previously said Apple's first version of smart glasses will not offer an in-lens display.

Apple's first smart glasses will have speakers for music playback, cameras for photos and video, voice control, and potentially health features, according to Gurman.

He previously said Apple may announce the first-generation glasses as early as 2026, ahead of a 2027 launch.

​


Article Link: Apple's Smart Glasses With In-Lens Display May Feature Two Modes
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2025/10/12/apple-smart-glasses-two-modes/
Last edited:
Kind of shocked how is Apple behind in development. Where Meta needs separate control band, Apple could have already used massive user base of Apple Watch to develop more gestures. Considering how many people already wear dioptric glasses, this project makes much more sense to me than some VR headset.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gp313 and klowy79
This doesn't make any sense. If the first version will not offer an in-lens display, why would it need to run visionOS when paired with a Mac? Why the two modes?
 
  • Like
Reactions: originalsk
"Paired to a Mac" - so when you're at home near your Mac? What use case is that for? Watching movies? And an iPhone is not capable of providing that experience? I mean the same iPhone chip that supposedly goes into a low end Mac?
This does not make sense to me... but then again, this is Gorman ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: CasinoOwl, AdamHarbour and originalsk
So now they will have a display?

This aligns more with what I’ve said I think they should do: Be an accessory device to an iPhone on the go, and the Mac or iPad when plugged in at home. Wonder if they will develop a custom wireless interconnect using their N2 chip, to keep a fast connection that is relatively low in power usage.

Don’t need anything too crazy yet when on the go, but would love to be able to watch a movie when traveling even if I have to plug in, and have an extra virtual display for my Mac when traveling. Should be more like the Apple Watch was, relying on a connected device. Over time it can become more powerful and become more of a separate device.
 
tk421 said:
This doesn't make any sense. If the first version will not offer an in-lens display, why would it need to run visionOS when paired with a Mac? Why the two modes?
Click to expand...

The full quote from Gurman is more nuanced. He’s talking about the second version.

“The smart glasses are also likely to run the Vision Pro’s operating system, visionOS, so all the work on that software isn’t going to waste. A future device could operate the full version of the OS when it’s paired with a Mac, and then switch to a lighter, more mobile-friendly interface when it’s linked to an iPhone, I’m told.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: klasma and turbineseaplane
augmented reality content that enhance the iPhone apps, add new layer of experience, that's the killer feature. not a standalone device with all his complexity, updates and apps....
 
  • Like
Reactions: citysnaps
I'm not holding my breath. 2028 seems like the earliest. They are far behind on pretty much everything. Under Tim Cook Apple is a mess. Apple Car, a bust. Vision Pro, not a product but a proof of concept that you can buy. Mac Pro, missing in action. A pretty sad state of affairs IMHO.
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Haha
Reactions: nordic_forest, Pupi, ralph_sws and 4 others
Are they confused then why did they released the Vision Pro seems like they keep wasting resources at Apple let’s see how these compete against the meta ray bans in pricing and functionality
 
  • Like
Reactions: krspkbl
No display no buy. I am not using something that relies on Siri.

Needs to be controlled by eyes and gestures with in lens display.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tiger_Stud
Can't wait for the masses and (desperate for clicks and views) content creators to have the ability to take undercover, hands-free, high-resolution photos and videos of just about anyone (and anywhere) without their consent. Sure, people do that now with their smartphones, but this makes spying even easier, especially as technology advances and these glasses will just look like regular glasses with cameras you can't see from a short distance.

Considering what an unchecked social media and their trillion dollar company's algorithmic control did to the human mind and spirit over the last decade (plus), and where it took us, in addition to unregulated and rapidly growing AI, and on top of the continuation of out of control consolidation of corporate power and wealth, I can't wait see what Smart Glasses technology does to take us further down this spiral.

Now, get off my lawn!
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: cotyledon, filchermcurr, turbineseaplane and 3 others
To all the critical know-it-alls ITT, remember that you can't rush perfection. Apple's implementation of smart glasses will not only define the technology, it will replace normal spectacles. I am already saving up for 2037, Apple smart contacts.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: klasma and turbineseaplane
well…they certainly made the right choice focusing on these instead of VP lol. something something “too little too late,” whatever, they are notoriously late to categories and end up dominating culturally (i.e. everyone is quick to copy once they’ve gotten it right). we’ll see where this all is in, like, 3-5 years
 
  • Like
Reactions: CasinoOwl
This form factor requires _truly_ useable and useful AI to realize its full potential. And not just "80% is ok and I get 80% of the benefit", but "it's gotta be damn near 100% or it may as well be 0".

So, AAPL has to figure out Siri before any of this works, no matter how good the hardware. This may seem "obvious", but they have yet to be able to do it to even a baseline level and they're approaching Tesla-level incredulity/absurdity on promise-timeline-reality (no hate on AAPL or Tesla, I own tons of both products, but that also makes me acutely aware of their day to day shortcomings).
 
  • Love
Reactions: turbineseaplane
bmustaf said:
This may seem "obvious", but they have yet to be able to do it to even a baseline level and they're approaching Tesla-level incredulity/absurdity on promise-timeline-reality (no hate on AAPL or Tesla, I own tons of both products, but that also makes me acutely aware of their day to day shortcomings).
Click to expand...

An interesting comparison, and not a good look for Apple, I agree with you.

I'm definitely at the "stop talking about it and just show us" stage of Apple Intelligence and "better Siri".
They have lost all benefit of the doubt in this particular area.
 
  • Love
Reactions: bmustaf and smulji
Glasses ... but no visual input ??? People wear glasses to SEE something (better). I can't believe that Apple are even considering glasses without a visual image feed ... and to be effective it has to be in both eyes.

Apple need to look at innovative companies like XREAL, who are delivering now at relatively low prices.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cello666
PixelPanics said:
Two thoughts:
1- I'd rather Apple not release them if they dont have an in-glass display, just wait for when it's ready
2- The Mac pairing is cool but as a professional I would appreciate more a stripped down AVP that costs much less and is Mac-dependent.
Click to expand...

This ... to both points.

Whatever is "next" here needs to be designed to sell in quantity, right out of the gate.

Don't swing for the fences if "the fence" is 19,000 feet away.

Make this product be a single, double or triple.
Let's play some small ball here Apple.

Score some runs and stop going down swinging.
 
another useless product that isn't better than a smartphone. *Steve Jobs when talking about iPad being better at things
 
phenste said:
well…they certainly made the right choice focusing on these instead of VP lol. something something “too little too late,” whatever, they are notoriously late to categories and end up dominating culturally (i.e. everyone is quick to copy once they’ve gotten it right). we’ll see where this all is in, like, 3-5 years
Click to expand...
How do other companies 'copy' Apple? None do in my view, as they do not have the ecosystem and walled garden. It may look the same, and have the same power, but the competitors never have the OS / UX etc to compete.

I think this direction is excellent for Apple, if they can pull it off.
 
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