Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Snapchat Announces 'Spectacles,' $130 Sunglasses That Record 10 Seconds of Video at a Time
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
i'm surprised more people don't 'get' this product. this isn't a particularly hard thing to develop since it's not trying to be discreet. it's a marketing gimmick to expand the base of snapchat users. These things will be given out like candy to all the instagram/snapchat wh*res
To say social media is "useless" is extremely ignorant. Just because you don't like it or are too jaded to understand it doesn't mean it should be avoided like a plague by others.
Like everything else in the world, some people find it useful and others don't. There are plenty of things that aren't useful to me, yet I can still see their value and importance.
A lot of people use social media for "useless" reasons, but there are a lot of useful things that come from it.
The way this has been reported makes Evan Spiegel sound like a maniac with delusions of grandeur.
"Snapchat has also changed its company name to Snap, Inc as it has expanded its portfolio past its Snapchat app, similar to how Apple changed its name from Apple Computer". - I'm Just like Apple.
"Spiegel thinks of the newly-dubbed Snap, Inc as a camera company rather than a social media company..." No. As good or successful as Snapchat is, it's a social media app that works via networks enabled by sticking the thing on a smartphone. When Apple said/implied "we're not just a computer company anymore" (paraphrasing here, not a direct quote) there was substance behind it. Will Spiegel's "toy" (his words) and "because it's fun" project be seen as the next iPod?
"He studied the early histories of Kodak and Polaroid and how they pitched portable cameras to the public" - What? From 1888?! When, y'know photography was exactly the same as it is in 2016?
I suspect that he's been reported out of context by the WSJ, but if he's really pushing this back story, it's a bit of a laugh.
Had he suggested that pushing a gimmick as far as it could go was his motivation, then I could understand Spectacle, but currently the whole thing reeks of disingenuous smarm.
Kids will love it.
[doublepost=1474795851][/doublepost]
Your scenario doesn't work, at least on a emotionally connected level.
"Why are you wearing those, darling?
"So I can remember/file this moment (to be accessed) forever, of course"
"Darling why are you wearing those?"
"In case I need to remember what you look like without your clothes on for, y'know, later on when I'm on my own"
"Oh, that's OK"
"Show me that time when I watched that guy punch in his (secret Number) for his bank/safe/whatever"
Humans have no need to record memories in such a way, and besides, there can't be a time when everybody equally has to wear such a device, unless of course they are forced to from birth, but that doesn't sound very nice.
What about censorship? Privacy? What about that time when you watched someone else's wife walking out of Macy's?
What about the time when someone else is watching your kids without you knowing about it?
Let's say that with technology in it's current state, we already have problems with privacy and security, but we also have a moral choice about those things too. What we decide to record, view, share, publish, is driven by a human need to be a better (or worse) human. Self censorship is more powerful for the individual, and culturally, than an encrypted AI led algorithm that will store your every waking hour and interaction.
People need to learn to reconnect with each other in more visceral ways rather than living inside technology based interactions. Oh yes, with VR and physical feedback built into interfaces like phones and whatever else, the technology is already there to help you believe that you're physically interacting with your wife/husband/partner/pet, but given the actual reality of the situation I'd rather have a real cuddle with my wife than a pretend one.
And the rest of that story is, and will always remain, private.
Just showed this article to a friend of mine who owns a club that plays a lot of house music. He having his bouncers not allow them in the club.
[doublepost=1474798199][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1474798199][/doublepost]
The latest birth control device.
Yeeaaah this technology will be in Contact lenses, not glasses. Google is already working on it.
A company that generates less than $2 Million in revenue a year and just had it's core functionality duplicated by the iMessage store.
Yes, but if you were wearing those things the first time your beautiful wife-to-be saw you, would she still fall for you?
More likely, all you'd record is a video of a beautiful girl exiting Macy's, looking aghast at you and then hurrying off in the opposite direction never to be seen again.
Best "augmented reality" glasses since Google Glass.
1) They are light weight
2) They are social
Two important factors, but they also need to look good and this is not the case. The camera could be made smaller, like ordinary spy glasses. We also need feedback in the viewing area, so you don't need to use your phone anyway.
That said, better than Meta, Hololens and Magic Leap.
1) They are light weight
2) They are social
Two important factors, but they also need to look good and this is not the case. The camera could be made smaller, like ordinary spy glasses. We also need feedback in the viewing area, so you don't need to use your phone anyway.
That said, better than Meta, Hololens and Magic Leap.
No different. A bad idea is a bad idea.Wonder what the comments would be if this was from......? Mmmmmmm
You mean something like the Narrative clip camera? It has the same basic intent as what you suggest although in a different form factor.
http://getnarrative.com/
[doublepost=1474820652][/doublepost]
I hate it when I forget my monthly dues and my prescription glasses stop working. Especially bad when I'm driving.
10 sec video is alot these daysOnly records 10 seconds of video with each tap - what a giant pain.
If the camera in a smartphone can be as small as they are, how has nobody come up with glasses with a camera that small that look unidentifiable instead of being a giant eyesore?
If Apple Inc buys Snap Inc this could be called Snapple... until Snappl
It depends on the use.
It depends on the use.
Cigsm said: For publishing you don't need permission if it's in the public sphere
And the country.
And the country.
Apple's version will be to replace the eyeball with cybernetics. Not user-serviceable. Must go to an Apple Store for monthly maintenance.
[doublepost=1474832896][/doublepost]
Only records 10 seconds of video with each tap - what a giant pain.
If the camera in a smartphone can be as small as they are, how has nobody come up with glasses with a camera that small that look unidentifiable instead of being a giant eyesore?
There's a lot more to a camera than just the lens... until we have Apple's version, the "eye"Phone.