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

Snap Launches $2,195 'Specs' Augmented Reality Glasses

fatTribble said:
Totally agree. I think the technology looks impressive, but I can’t imagine hanging out with a friend who is wearing these. When someone is ignoring me by looking at their phone I can at least see that.

Personally no matter how great the tech, I don’t think I could do that level of immersion in public.
Click to expand...
I was more just talking about the privacy implications of wearable cameras in public. Screen immersion is a bit of a different matter--more just about etiquette. I share your feelings, but I do think it's people's right to be rudely inattentive if they choose (just like I think it's people's right to walk around in public amongst other people without a decent likelihood of individuals inconspicuously recording them--whether on accident or on purpose).
 
  • Like
Reactions: fatTribble
The level of fashion that AR glasses have to reach is far higher than smartwatches had to reach. Nobody wants ugly thick glasses on their face 😂
 
He said it’s like using an 11 inch screen from 1 foot away. This is… not a selling point. A 27” screen from 1 foot away is not ‘immersive’.
 
jmh600cbr said:
this is a step in the right direction, if Apple isn't this far along we have serious concerns and they should buy someone like this. My guess is Apple is much further along.
Click to expand...
Just realized this is snap as in Snapchat. What a massive fail.
 
The way these companies make products is disappointing, but they probably do it that way so nobody can copy them like they could if they made $200 glasses. Well, you don't you make an ear piece with a camera array and it talks to your phone to do what the AR glasses would do but with your phone. You can't expect people to just jump in feet first into AR glasses without giving them a cheap competing reason as to why they need a camera recording what they see. And you certainly do not need expensive glasses to do that. You need software that makes it compelling, relying on the wow of seeing graphics in your face is far from it.
 
kingtj1971 said:
I'm reading all these really negative comments just based on the looks of the glasses. But I'm just sitting here, amazed that they're up to 4 hours of claimed battery life with the whole unit contained inside the frames of the glasses themselves! To me, this is serious progress.

I mean, if these really work as claimed? Apple and others should be concerned. They're nowhere near this close to this type of product. The people who'd buy and wear a pair of these probably don't intersect with people concerned mostly with looks/fashion either. They sure look far more comfortable to wear than Vision Pro goggles.
Click to expand...
1) vision pro quality is so much superior that comparing this glasses to it doesn't really help
2) if glasses are fugly, no people will buy them, so in the end no matter how good the tech is, it's not gonna sell.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lilkwarrior and fatTribble
I wonder if they have a non-poser edition. It looks like they brought in Kanye and David Hasselhoff as creative directors.
 
Vaporwsre until they are shipping. Stuff like “plastic titanium” is a stupid term for the scientifically illiterate. Stuff like that just pisses me off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eddie Beeps
Brother Cavil said:
I've never watched a Snap presentation. What a snooze, but the product is actually quite cool. Sure, they look clunky, but so does the original Mac Portable. The price is high, but far more reasonable than Vision Pro. Specs are a far more useful product in everyday life too, so I'd say they're a pretty decent value all things considered. Vision Pro was a product for the fans, a misguided flex. Specs are actually an early adopter product.

If Snap, a much smaller company with far fewer resources, can deliver a product this impressive, why is Apple nowhere to be seen? I also wonder what Apple will bring to the table. Jobs returning to Apple with all the vastly superior NeXT software tech really catapulted Apple ahead by 20 years. For a long time it seemed like Apple was so far ahead that no one would ever catch them...but competitors have now closed the gap. When Apple decides to enter this market, the ecosystem will be their greatest asset, not the user experience.
Click to expand...
The Vision Pro actually shipped and you can buy them now so better than this.
 
It says snap does this mean Snapchat??

racerhomie said:
That frame is too damn thick. Looks good on a model
Click to expand...

Crazy part is I heard the old school thick rims look best on models only because most of them have super high cheek bones that take away from the thickness of the frames…when I see ppl with low flat cheek bones I’m like damn, fashion insiders are right it doesn’t look as good on them, it actually look ridiculous…now on this particular model her cheek bones aren’t high but aren’t too low either…what I’m trying to say is I think these frames are half way decent considering how much tech should be packed inside

but of course Apple ecosystem and privacy will leave the competition in the dust.
 
  • Like
Reactions: racerhomie
The first page of replies focused on the fashion being the fail and while that may be true, it is exactly what I have been saying on other forums about these glasses; they are not there yet.

1. $2200USD. It truly rubs against the outcries over the M5 AVP.

2: these actually are worth comparing to head mounted displays because they are not like the display-less XR that Apple is currently working on. The mass adoption models likely are going to be very light weight and light “information providers” (and ruthless data farming IRL people trackers) and not media devices. This makes them closer to head mounted displays.

3. These $2200USD content consumption glasses will not be used outside and I just don’t get what the millions in funding truly expect? If the Vision Pro was lighter I wouldn’t be having an active lifestyle with them on because it is difficult to have an ideal experience just being in chill mode. I am picky when it comes to slight visual issues or bluring and light bleed and cannot imagine how these glasses provide even 50% of the immersion of a head mounted display.

4. Let’s not fool ourselves, these running dual SoCs are for a content rich media consumption experience. This is not to be for people living life at the bars and festivals.

5. That battery life….sounds similar to the M5 VP 4 hours mixed use Vs 3.5ish. Won’t even last a night out.

6. It is a red headed step child. Plain and simple. Trying to deliver the “fantasy” of what the Vision Pro experience was expected to give to those who wanted “lighter and cheaper.” But the fantasy experience always omits the problems with using an entirely different frame in sun glasses style. How stable can glasses be when dual knit bands still have their own issues? These merely take the Viture and Xreal concepts and just put it on steroids. Apple and others are working on a totally different glasses type based on life navigation “information enhancements” (for the user or the company?) because the tech isn’t there for what these represent. When the Vision Pro can do what it does right now in a $499.99 comfy pair of glasses, the end stage of human agency will officially kick off.

Sorry for the rant but these will without question offer a less enjoyable and less functional use case in almost every way to the best head mounted devices.
 
Functionality looks decent “kids version of visionOS”. That is actually encouraging.

If they could cut volume and weight down by 70%, this could be a technical milestone. Would still not still a popular device due to prohibitive price.

At the current weight and volume, there will be almost no customers.
 
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