Do they have any audio and how is it done? I get it that most likely they need the GPU for some of the features but in consumer you really need to reduce weight as much as possible so would be better if the glasses would be just a wireless peripheral. Glasses do have much more potential than watches ,the fundamental reason being screen size. Watches even with flexible displays won't really allow big screens, our sleeves would get in the way.and the sleeve being the screen is too far away and not perfect. Would be nice if the glass could be turned opaque on demand for a better video and gaming experience and that should be easy enough. There is also a huge power consumption upside if glasses like this or at first like Oculus replace TVs. There is a huge TV instal base and many are old and consume a lot while a phone screen like Oculus would be likely to use is under 1W , not sure how much those small LCoS consume, don't even know who makes the ones used here but i'm guessing Himax or Omnivision. Do wish you had more pics to better understand where the displays are and how big the image is.
"However, it could be that I'm biased though, as I've worn glasses all my life."
Wholeheartedly agree here. I've also worn glasses my entire life, and the idea of augmenting the usefulness of something I no longer notice on my face is a no-brainer for me, if the technology is small and powerful enough to be useful and not obnoxious. However, I've spoken with friends in the tech industry who have almost nothing but disdain for AR glasses of any kind. Oddly, though, they are still open to the idea of a smartwatch... The conclusion I've come to is that AR glasses have a real market, but mostly for those that wear glasses for vision-related reasons or wear safety glasses/goggles constantly (read: construction workers, etc.). Smart watches... I'm still not sold on.
I feel the same way as a glasses-wearer myself; AR glasses seem like they would be nearly the perfect wearable (contacts?). Watches, on the other hand, seem almost pointless; most people carry a cell phone that is only two seconds away from a glance.
"What this really means is that developers no longer need to worry about coming up with their own system of aligning content from a VR headset to the real world, as this platform makes it a relatively simple process. "
I'll believe THAT when I see it. Monoscopic markerless SLAM that 'just works' with no need for developers to worry about loss of track events, tracking slew due to moving environments, occlusions, etc?
Looks like a relatively standard semi-transparent-microdisplay HMD powered by an on-board ARM rather than a tethered mini-PC. It'll make a nice HUD, but I think it will be severely underimpressive for AR.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
5 Comments
Back to Article
WatcherCK - Thursday, September 18, 2014 - link
augments reality and removes eye brows!jjj - Thursday, September 18, 2014 - link
Do they have any audio and how is it done?I get it that most likely they need the GPU for some of the features but in consumer you really need to reduce weight as much as possible so would be better if the glasses would be just a wireless peripheral.
Glasses do have much more potential than watches ,the fundamental reason being screen size.
Watches even with flexible displays won't really allow big screens, our sleeves would get in the way.and the sleeve being the screen is too far away and not perfect.
Would be nice if the glass could be turned opaque on demand for a better video and gaming experience and that should be easy enough.
There is also a huge power consumption upside if glasses like this or at first like Oculus replace TVs. There is a huge TV instal base and many are old and consume a lot while a phone screen like Oculus would be likely to use is under 1W , not sure how much those small LCoS consume, don't even know who makes the ones used here but i'm guessing Himax or Omnivision.
Do wish you had more pics to better understand where the displays are and how big the image is.
ChefJeff789 - Thursday, September 18, 2014 - link
"However, it could be that I'm biased though, as I've worn glasses all my life."Wholeheartedly agree here. I've also worn glasses my entire life, and the idea of augmenting the usefulness of something I no longer notice on my face is a no-brainer for me, if the technology is small and powerful enough to be useful and not obnoxious. However, I've spoken with friends in the tech industry who have almost nothing but disdain for AR glasses of any kind. Oddly, though, they are still open to the idea of a smartwatch... The conclusion I've come to is that AR glasses have a real market, but mostly for those that wear glasses for vision-related reasons or wear safety glasses/goggles constantly (read: construction workers, etc.). Smart watches... I'm still not sold on.
feeblegoat - Saturday, September 20, 2014 - link
I feel the same way as a glasses-wearer myself; AR glasses seem like they would be nearly the perfect wearable (contacts?). Watches, on the other hand, seem almost pointless; most people carry a cell phone that is only two seconds away from a glance.edzieba - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link
"What this really means is that developers no longer need to worry about coming up with their own system of aligning content from a VR headset to the real world, as this platform makes it a relatively simple process. "I'll believe THAT when I see it. Monoscopic markerless SLAM that 'just works' with no need for developers to worry about loss of track events, tracking slew due to moving environments, occlusions, etc?
Looks like a relatively standard semi-transparent-microdisplay HMD powered by an on-board ARM rather than a tethered mini-PC. It'll make a nice HUD, but I think it will be severely underimpressive for AR.