flaneur

peteo said:

flaneur said:

Apple is doing glasses. Let everybody else make boxes for your face, isolating you from the world. Apple is going to make something that connects you to the world.

Eye tracking will close the loop between you, exactly what you look at, and the computational network. Everything in the environment can be labeled.

It could even let you isolate a word in a text, or a letter in a word. Three-dimensional text — a completely different way to read.

Apple is not the only one doing glasses. You might have heard of magic leap?

Yes, we’ve been hearing about Magic Leap for years now, almost as long as we’ve been hearing about Apple’s wearable display patents. And there are and will be many more working on glasses, since it’s a kind of Manifest Destiny for the personal computer/electronics industry.

beowulfschmidt said:

flaneur said:

Apple is doing glasses. Let everybody else make boxes for your face, isolating you from the world. Apple is going to make something that connects you to the world.

Eye tracking will close the loop between you, exactly what you look at, and the computational network. Everything in the environment can be labeled.

It could even let you isolate a word in a text, or a letter in a word. Three-dimensional text — a completely different way to read.

Perhaps you didn't intend it that way, but your "let everybody else..." comment appears somewhat derogatory to me, as if dismissing or discarding everyone else's efforts and accomplishments.  There's nothing inherently absolutely wrong with isolating one from the world.  There's nothing inherently absolutely better with connecting one to the world.  They each have their place, they each have their uses.  Each is better for some users and use cases than the other.  The fact that Apple chooses to focus on AR/MR does not mean that those who are focusing on VR are less.

Yeah, sorry, there is a huge, serious, valuable effort going into VR, but I can’t help noticing that it’s being driven by gaming, which is probably why Apple is not so interested in pursuing this end of the wearable display business. And Apple’s lack of interest in gaming is also why they are generally behind in high-end graphics processing.

The issue of connecting to the real world is a big philosophical one — and getting bigger right now as a social issue. Tim Cook has made the distinction between VR and AR on this basis, and I had been feeling the same way when he said it. I’m an old fashioned guy, maybe more so than Tim Cook, interested in extending our vision of the real world.

palegolas said:

Firing IR into the eyes sounds a bit scary. But perhaps there is a safe level which the eyes can withstand without taking any damage over time. It just sounds a bit scary..

The Magic Leap headset pictured in the article is the only headset so far that I've seen that actually looks like something you might wanna use for an extended period of time. Not in the streets, I think.. but for creative production. Looks pretty cool and comfy.

To take AR to the streets though.. such a huge undertaking.. Such a massive amount of technology going into something so light weight, unintrusive, and low powered.. 

I wouldn’t think IR would be a problem, since it’s lower energy than visible light, which our eyes handle just fine, except on the higher end of the spectrum, where UV is thought to contribute to cataracts over time.

One hopes for the best for Magic Leap, but as you say it’s a huge undertaking to come up with something designed for the streets. 

Apple is doing glasses. Let everybody else make boxes for your face, isolating you from the world. Apple is going to make something that connects you to the world.

Eye tracking will close the loop between you, exactly what you look at, and the computational network. Everything in the environment can be labeled.

It could even let you isolate a word in a text, or a letter in a word. Three-dimensional text — a completely different way to read.

anton zuykov said:

analogjack said:

Apple only barely gave the Apple Watch enough variety and that was for a product that is mostly hidden. To think that a set of smart glasses, (a far more personal item), could ever be anything more than a nerdy gadget is ludicrous.

It will be just as prevalent in 10-15 years just as the iPhone or Apple Watch now.. The tech isn't there... yet. When Apple gets a working model to the market, that convinces the rest that it is doable, that is when we will see the revolution( just like it was with the iPhone).

Yes, but a few years sooner than 10-15, hopefully.

bitmod said:

macxpress said:

What number is considered a success versus a failure? Not every Apple product is going to sell tens of millions. I think Apple has its own sales goals internally and THEY will determine whether or not HomePod is a success of a failure. Also, when Apple enters a new space, it doesn't always take off right away, just like with Apple Watch and look where Apple Watch is now? iPhone was pretty much the same way. 

Reaffirming the old tech adage - Never buy rev1 anything. 

That depends, ese. While you were waiting for the second iPad, I got a full year of the most amazing browsing experience available at that time. 

The AirPods I got on day one are still a daily joy to use. 

This here HomePod I’m using is the most incredible little source of great sound I have ever had the daily pleasure to live with for a lousy 350 bucks. Even with its connection idiosyncrasies. And don’t really care at all about talking to a machine unless I’m driving, so Siri can just take her time.

I am looking foward to another one for stereo when that happens, but this one is still great right now.

It’s a great speaker, unlike anything that ever existed before for its size and price. Playing my own choices of music through it is enough for me.

For what it does to the Bach cello suites alone it’s worth buying.