144
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Apr 2025
144 points (75.9% liked)
Technology
69351 readers
2580 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Right, I have a 1600p laptop screen as well and the resolution downgrade was noticeable. What you say about the projection makes sense, unfortunately I haven't seen any specs for the micro OLED displays they use, they only claim that the virtual screen has 1080p, which might be achievable if the displays DO in fact have a higher vertical resolution. It DOES appear that they've increased the size of the displays from 0.55" to 0.68" but there's no information on the native resolution that I can find.
If I saw these glasses in a store somewhere I'd probably try them out but they'd have to be VASTLY better than the ones I tried to convince me to buy them.
I think that some of the issue here is that the theoretical use case that these are designed around is not what the author is trying to use them for.
The author is looking for a monitor replacement.
These are augmented reality goggles. Like, the hardware is optimized to look at the world around yourself and then display useful information annotated over it, for which resolution is not critical. If we had data sources and software for that, that might be useful too, but right now, we don't really have that software library and data sources.
I think that Snow Crash did a good job of highlighting some of the neat potential of and yet also issues with AR:
Putting a rubber-band on brightness:
Highlighting hazards in low-light conditions using sensor fusion can be useful (current high-end US military NVGs do some of this):
Overlaying blueprint data can permit "seeing through walls":
A lot of the obvious stuff that one might display in AR goggles doesn't compete well with just showing reality in terms of usefuless:
Yes, and he's not wrong, as that appears to be the primary use case for these glasses. For full AR, you still need the Beam Pro, which costs half of the price of the glasses alone.
I do love Snow Crash (it was one of my favorite novels growing up), but I think Google Glass was probably much closer to that vision than these are. Personally, all I want is a big fucking screen fixed in space before me that doesn't make me dizzy when I look at it for more than 5 minutes, or wear out my neck muscles too much because the headset is too heavy.