9to5mac.com
cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/44758716 > According to the latest edition of Mark Gurman’s Power On newsletter, Apple is still on track to launch the lower end Apple Vision headset as early as next year. He says it’ll cost around $2000. > > Apple debuted Apple Vision Pro earlier this year at $3499, but it seems the company is still quickly trying to figure out a successor. Some reports earlier this year suggested that Apple had halted Vision Pro development to focus on the cheaper headset, and that still seems to be the case – likely because Vision Pro’s premium price tag puts spatial computing out of reach for many. > > Gurman says that the lower-end headset will probably use an inferior processor and cheaper materials. Vision Pro is currently equipped with an M2 chip, so I could see Apple equipping an A series chipset on the cheaper headset, like the A18 Pro – which is about as fast as an M1. > As for materials, there’ll likely be more plastic involved, rather than fully being aluminum and glass. > > The report also says that the headset will likely drop the EyeSight feature introduced on Apple Vision Pro, which uses lenticular displays to pass through the users eyes to the outside of the headset, allowing people around them to still “see” their eyes. It was a little gimmicky in my opinion, but an interesting feature. However, it was costly to have another display on the outside, and that display will be gone on the cheaper headset. > > Apple reportedly expects the cheaper Apple Vision headset to sell twice as well as Apple Vision Pro, which isn’t saying much. Apple Vision Pro 2 is also on track for 2026 with a faster chipset.
IronSightOS
2w ago
•
100%
Sure, but when smartglasses become ubiquitous, it's much easier for bad actors to blend in and reduces the "barriers to entry". Furthermore, it makes it much easier for bad corporate actors to abuse this functionality.
IronSightOS
2w ago
•
100%
I know, but almost all AR offerings include cameras that are capable of the same thing.
IronSightOS
2w ago
•
100%
This creepiness is one reason why I'm sticking with the XReal Air 1. No cameras.
If AR glasses with cameras become popular, we're going to have to rethink how we design public restrooms.
www.theverge.com
cross-posted from: https://feddit.uk/post/18175359 > >Two Harvard students have created an eerie demo of how smart glasses can use facial recognition tech to instantly dox people’s identities, phone numbers, and addresses. The most unsettling part is the demo uses current, widely available technology like the Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses and public databases. > > >AnhPhu Nguyen, one of the two students, posted a video showcasing the tech in action that was then picked up by 404 Media. Dubbed I-XRAY, the tech works by using the Meta smart glasses’ ability to livestream video to Instagram. A computer program then monitors that stream and uses AI to identify faces. Those photos are then fed into public databases to find names, addresses, phone numbers, and even relatives. That information is then fed back through a phone app. > > >In the demo, you can see Nguyen and Caine Ardayfio, the other student behind the project, use the glasses to identify several classmates, their addresses, and names of relatives in real time. Perhaps more chilling, Nguyen and Ardayfio are also shown chatting up complete strangers on public transit, pretending as if they know them based on information gleaned from the tech...
IronSightOS
3w ago
•
100%
It's annoying, I agree. But it hasn't stopped the Quest headset from doing well. The Orion glasses aren't for sale though, so it's a moot point.
IronSightOS
3w ago
•
100%
I feel like Meta and Apple are stuck trying to give you a point and click desktop experience using a completely novel device.
https://www.theverge.com/24253908/meta-orion-ar-glasses-demo-mark-zuckerberg-interview
https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/09/17/1104025/snap-spectacles-ar-glasses/
IronSightOS
1mo ago
•
100%
Can’t say I’m a fan of the monthly fee.
Snap OS has an interesting interface where the palm of your hand brings up a menu. I don’t think it’s the most user-friendly approach though.
https://www.uploadvr.com/snap-spectacles-5-ar/
IronSightOS
1mo ago
•
100%
IronSightOS
1mo ago
•
100%
I hadn't heard of those games. Might be what I need to get in shape 😁
IronSightOS
1mo ago
•
100%
I guess $300 is justifiable if cycling is a hobby or athletic pursuit. Some people drop $200+ on a pair of simple Oakleys.
IronSightOS
1mo ago
•
100%
Love his channel, so many cool projects!
SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! [!augmented_reality@lemmy.world](https://lemmy.world/c/augmented_reality)
IronSightOS
1mo ago
•
100%
Maybe there's a way and I haven't figured it out :) Thank you for your encouraging words!!
IronSightOS
1mo ago
•
100%
I have the XReal Air 1 and XReal Beam accessory. I can't speak to the newest devices they have released.
For watching movies (e.g. Netflix, Prime, YouTube) and playing videogames, these glasses are exceptional as they act as a giant screen floating in front of you. If you have a Steam Deck, it's plug and play. If you have a Switch or PS/Xbox, you'll need the Beam accessory. Watching movies or playing games while lying down facing the ceiling is something to experience 😋
They can also be used as an extended display for your computer for productivity, though results are mixed.
XReal isn't directly compatible with all phones/devices, so you may need the Beam to use an incompatible device. If you use Beam, you can also pin/anchor the display to reality which works surprisingly well.
You can also use the glasses as a screen for Samsung Dex (turns your Samsung phone into a laptop with a virtual screen). If you set Dex's wallpaper to black, you start to feel like Iron Man.
XReal isn't intended to be worn throughout your day as a daily driver. I'm using it in a way it wasn't designed for. I'm designing apps for some future "perfect AR device" and XReal seems to be a good test bed due to its features and active community.
So for media consumption and gaming, I recommend it. For productivity, your mileage may vary. For grocery shopping, use at your own risk :)
IronSightOS
1mo ago
•
100%
Amazing! Would pair nicely with xreal glasses as a virtual monitor, assuming it's got USB-C with DisplayPort. I've heard of people using a mini PC like that.
IronSightOS
1mo ago
•
100%
When I made this post 😁 but it's a guess based on my experience. I don't know if there's a way to see stats of when most people are on Lemmy.
I feel to maximize growth: * Post daily at a time when most people are on Lemmy. * Always try to include an interesting picture with the post. If you're sharing a URL, sometimes a thumbnail doesn't show or is uninteresting. In these cases, find a better picture and use that and move the URL to the body of the post. * Shamelessly plug the community every chance you get. Speaking of which, [!augmented_reality@lemmy.world](https://lemmy.world/c/augmented_reality)
This is admittedly a regurgitated press release 😮💨
en.m.wikipedia.org
An EyeTap is a concept for a wearable computing device that is worn in front of the eye that acts as a camera to record the scene available to the eye as well as a display to superimpose computer-generated imagery on the original scene available to the eye.
https://www.reuters.com/technology/snap-focus-growing-ads-business-augmented-reality-amid-poor-stock-performance-2024-09-03/
IronSightOS
2mo ago
•
100%
Fair point, but if this was done using smart glasses it would make for an interesting experience, imo.
https://nwasianweekly.com/2024/08/augmented-reality-marriage-melding-theater-passion-and-high-tech/
https://www.henryford.com/news/2024/08/henry-ford-completes-first-spinal-surgery-using-augmented-reality
IronSightOS
2mo ago
•
100%
Looks like the grandaddy of this:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/virtual-and-augmented-reality-can-temporarily-change-the-way-people-perceive-distances-finds-study/ar-AA1pJmPe
[!augmented_reality@lemmy.world](https://lemmy.world/c/augmented_reality) https://lemmy.world/c/augmented_reality
Frame from Brilliant Labs https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iNFG6FIDCKQ * 20 degree FOV color OLED display * low power camera * mic * accelerometer/compass * 6-7 hours battery with “normal” use * Software is open source allowing users to tinker with the device and extend its capabilities * Costs $350   Features are pretty limited at the moment. Mainly revolves around leveraging a large language model via voice or the camera to answer questions or translate. I suppose their hope is other developers will extend its capabilities since it's open source. Ray-Ban Meta glasses don't have a display, but are still far more capable than this device, in my opinion. At least the price is reasonable compared to the G1 or RayNeo X2. What do you all think?
The "Sword of Damocles", made in 1968, was the first AR head mounted display. Below is a picture from the user's perspective. The display was see-through letting you see the room around you. In this case it is displaying a digital cube pinned to a position in reality. 
Demo found on YT: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KaC-UiOqi8g These are somewhat inconspicuous AR glasses packed with features. But with a steep price tag of $850, it's hard to imagine them going mainstream. After watching the demo, I'm excited by their capabilities, especially with side loaded apps. I'm underwhelmed by the interface’s ease of use and the FOV. At the end of the day, your smartphone can do everything this device can. The value is the convenience of not pulling out your phone. Is that convenience worth $850?