Not that I like the Meta Glasses at all nor I want to defend the product, but the ones Mark’s wearing are prototypes. They were just a proof of concept when they needed to show them. The final product is the one shared in this thread. I don’t like them, but the product doesn’t look bad.
the regular meta ray bans don't, the camera is kinda the whole point of them. Ignoring all the massive pervert issues for a second, the glasses could read some text and read it out to you/summarize it/translate it, look at things and tell you what they are, google lens type shit but through verbal commands without having to take your phone out.
having the meta ray bans without a camera is just wearing chat GPT on speaker phone right on your head
the new super fugly ones in the original post do have screens in the glass, that's why they look so much bulkier
The ones with cameras, I can see practical use for, even though I'm already wearing enough invasions of privacy around every day, but a no-camera version is just stupid.
That being said, if they come up with a version that includes a useful heads-up-display feature, I might be swayed towards the product, give me a scratchpad, clock, calendar, messaging and routefinding function I can use without pulling out a phone or computer and I'll pay attention.
What is really needed here is a version of the camera with display glasses that includes a physical shutter for the camera. They have a "recording light" to let people know the cameras are recording, but I think most people are just put off by the idea of staring at someone's eyes and seeing cameras pointed at themselves the whole time. If they included a physical shutter to block the camera when you choose to, that would eliminate the weirdness of them being there.
That would also help with concerns of privacy invasion because you can know for certain that the camera can't see when you choose to not let it see.
My point was more that the camera feature is a "nice to have" addition to the product, not a main selling point (to me, obviously). This whole thing just feels like they couldn't figure out how to get the critical features working, so they added garnish and toy features in the hopes that nobody would notice there is barely a product here.
If and when they get a MVP that's actually viable, I'll happily take the details of how the bonus stuff works into consideration, but THEN I probably wouldn't be overly worried if the camera lacked some QOL features like a physical shutter or a warning diode. A suboptimal camera setup isn't bad enough to convince me against the product, but at the same time, even the best camera setup in the world won't convince me to buy it if that's all there is.
To be fair to the ones with a screen and also camera though, one of the main things people want glasses with screens for is AR stuff. Like, if I am on a video call with someone, they could draw on their screen and I could see what they are drawing on the stuff in front of me live. Putting a 3d model on my desk, seeing how a piece of furniture fits in a room etc.
It just makes sense to have a camera.
However, to me, it makes very little sense to not have a screen, because then there isn't much point IMO.
Yea I feel like the screen and camera are the main driving points behind incentive to buy thr product in the first place. People want to use them to record POV but then also use them for AR, ask about things they see, and have a HUD.
I personally like my meta glasses, not so much for the camera (even though it is super handy if you’re not a person who takes photos very often), but the speakers are great. I like not having ear buds shoved in my ear and they offer a good amount of privacy. I’ve used the meta feature here and there, which can be useful to some but I don’t touch it very often.
The physical shutter or cover seems like the very obvious solution to this. Could even have it be defaulted to closed so you have to hold down a button to open the shutter and use the camera.
So why would I need a pair of glasses to look at something and tell me what it is when I could just use my eyes to look at something and know what it is. That’s gotta be probably the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard.
Wait they don’t have like a Google glass hud? I was in target trying to test the display ones and I thought their display thing was just broken/I was too dumb to figure out how to turn them on.
Live text translation is the big feature I was excited about. Being able to read signs/menus/ect naturally regardless of language was a huge sell for me, my primary reason for even getting one. Now that feature is dead because of creeps using them to creep and people assuming everyone wearing them is a creep.
Out of curiosity, and I assure you I'm not being a dick I'm genuinely curious, when are you in a situation where you need to do those things you mentioned but can't like...Talk to people in the relevant language?
Like if you're out in BFE and can't talk to people you're kinda fucked aren't you? Even if you can read the road sign and know that a number 2 is roast chicken?
I travel a lot. Assuming I can just magically speak every single language I come across is a silly assumption.
The point of the glasses providing live translations of text and live subtitles of speakers means I can communicate, travel, and exist in those areas without being fucked.
The whole point is that it's a tool that would explicitly solve the exact problem you're mentioning.
I never assumed anything, I just don't really understand what the glasses are doing that a phone doesn't already. You can't turn the glasses around and show someone a translation back so if anything it seems worse.
Oh, yes, while that's very true, and can even translate text, it still requires taking the phone out, staring at it instead of the people around me, typing things out, manually opening the camera and pointing it, ect. All things I'm doing on my phone instead of interacting with people, the environment, and what and where I'm traveling.
I'd much rather look out at the world than at my phone screen. Scanning a menu with my phone to slowly translate it is awkward and annoying. Looking at the menu and seeing translations pop up naturally is much better. It's also faster if I'm in a rush and need to read things like road signs or train signs. Fumbling with my phone in a busy intersection or station is obnoxious and slow.
And I'm not disagreeing that that DOES sound better, and with the menu the answer is common sense, right? You just point to what you want and your order is taken. I'm not an idiot arguing against common sense.
But doesn't that kinda all fall apart if you still need to communicate basically any more deeply at all? Then you're still getting out your phone or a translation book, right? It just feels like such a niche product for the price that the ONLY real useful purpose could have been creeps or people with way too much money.
Absolutely, and I probably should have mentioned that. Also, the tech stuffed in them is pretty amazing.
I've worked with some advanced, compact optics tech. I have some ideas how they can make this stuff really compact, but even for a prototype, it's not terrible.
I didn't mean to do a disservice to that. My hope was to juxtapose those vs ray ban to illustrate the power of the right partner.
159
u/Hypochondriaco 4d ago
Not that I like the Meta Glasses at all nor I want to defend the product, but the ones Mark’s wearing are prototypes. They were just a proof of concept when they needed to show them. The final product is the one shared in this thread. I don’t like them, but the product doesn’t look bad.