It's going to be interesting to see this compete with the Meta VR glasses. They are essentially identical for productivity except the Aura has physical light pass through while the VR glasses use external cameras to provide pass through. The Meta VR glasses will have better resolution I think, but then the Aura has access to the whole Android ecosystem - so that means real implementations of Microsoft Word etc.
But the real choice is the unfortunate one of who is least likely to abandon the whole thing when it doesn't take off and leave you with an un/poorly supported device. Both companies have terrible track records on this.
> The Meta VR glasses will have better resolution I think, but then the Aura has access to the whole Android ecosystem - so that means real implementations of Microsoft Word etc.
Those aren't mutually exclusive though. Horizon OS is based on AOSP, and the more applications cross over into big screens on Android, the more Horizon gains the ability to leverage them too. Whether they actually show up in Facebook's store is a separate question, but I also have no idea how common the use of SideQuest is, just that the store is somewhat of an artificial limitation. (Google Play, on the other hand...)
> But the real choice is the unfortunate one of who is least likely to abandon the whole thing when it doesn't take off and leave you with an un/poorly supported device. Both companies have terrible track records on this.
Agreed. I would never buy a device like this from Facebook, and while glasses as a display are super useful, I don't necessarily see the need for a dedicated compute device for them when this experience could just as easily be powered by a phone. (I could maybe see replacing a phone with this, but more for particular minimalist crowds and not as a mass-market sell.)
If you're interested in running full Linux Desktop apps instead of Android apps, Simula is getting closer to releasing VR/AR compatible compute packs with laptop competitive specs: https://simulavr.com/blog/compute-pack-progress/
I actually don't see any reason why I would use this instead of my Xreal Air (released like 3 years ago) + Samsung Dex. The phone is a perfect "compute puck" for wired AR glasses and Google even makes them, so why the heck are they selling separate compute pucks with these glasses and making them unaffordable?? Just make some pixel glasses that run android xr on the pixel phone instead
Hmm, fair point, I suppose I just don't use the hand tracking stuff very often since it's just not very productive (I use portable mouse & keyboard even on my Samsung headset that supports hand tracking).
But even given that the glasses have to support hand tracking and 6DOF, I think they can probably build the sensors into the glasses but compute them with the phone. Or maybe calculating hand tracking would drain the battery of a Pixel too fast or something. Not sure.
This is cool. Its part of an ideal version of my home setup. But god the marketing feels so off, its like its made by people who have never used a monitor or done work on a computer. The marketing makes it out to be a phone screen for your face which is such a sad vision for genuinely cool technology. Also horrible demonstration of AI do these people even use AI?
The part where he asked AI to organise his windows was almost as painful as the part where he was in a generic chase sequence of a Ubisoft slop game and asked whats the best way to catch the assassin.
I have the XREAL One Pro. It is polarized which makes it always dimmer, especially indoors, and they sort of PWM from the polarized state to a 99% black out with a button interface. When it's really bright outside and you have the display on, you can see barely where your next step is and not much else.
Their AURAs are probably the same in this specific capability, it looks like the same thing I have in my hands, apart from the extra cameras and a different set of buttons.
The projection lenses look the same too, which means there's no periphery at all. That makes the sort of "screens hovering around you" in the advertising not all that representative of the experience. You see what's in front of you and might barely contain the one screen that you're looking at.
If you just want a "dumb" pair of wired display glasses, they have a $300 version (xbx a01+) that has no brick, no Android and no AI, it operates as a plain DP Alt Mode USB-C connection. They're like a modern version of the old Sony HMZ-T3, but with the size/weight/style of normal sunglasses.
I like mine, they are more usable as a work monitor than I thought they would be (I'm used to blurry VR sets but these are sharp except for the extreme edges). The FOV is not quite as wide as the new XR ones but I'm ok with that... I don't use them for any immersive effect.
even the $650 One Pros have most of the QoL features here, like the hardware IPR adjustments and an optional 6DoF camera
the only things that make the Aura tempting are the 70deg FoV (which like you say isn't a feature everyone wants or needs) and the 1000 lumen brightness. neither justifies burning extra money on the useless puck, even if Google is subsidizing it.
if the Aura was available at $700-$800 puckless they'd be a genuine upgrade over the One Pro.
It's going to be interesting to see this compete with the Meta VR glasses. They are essentially identical for productivity except the Aura has physical light pass through while the VR glasses use external cameras to provide pass through. The Meta VR glasses will have better resolution I think, but then the Aura has access to the whole Android ecosystem - so that means real implementations of Microsoft Word etc.
But the real choice is the unfortunate one of who is least likely to abandon the whole thing when it doesn't take off and leave you with an un/poorly supported device. Both companies have terrible track records on this.
> The Meta VR glasses will have better resolution I think, but then the Aura has access to the whole Android ecosystem - so that means real implementations of Microsoft Word etc.
Those aren't mutually exclusive though. Horizon OS is based on AOSP, and the more applications cross over into big screens on Android, the more Horizon gains the ability to leverage them too. Whether they actually show up in Facebook's store is a separate question, but I also have no idea how common the use of SideQuest is, just that the store is somewhat of an artificial limitation. (Google Play, on the other hand...)
> But the real choice is the unfortunate one of who is least likely to abandon the whole thing when it doesn't take off and leave you with an un/poorly supported device. Both companies have terrible track records on this.
Agreed. I would never buy a device like this from Facebook, and while glasses as a display are super useful, I don't necessarily see the need for a dedicated compute device for them when this experience could just as easily be powered by a phone. (I could maybe see replacing a phone with this, but more for particular minimalist crowds and not as a mass-market sell.)
Meta will never be able to compete ecosystem wise with Apple or Google/Android
If you're interested in running full Linux Desktop apps instead of Android apps, Simula is getting closer to releasing VR/AR compatible compute packs with laptop competitive specs: https://simulavr.com/blog/compute-pack-progress/
I actually don't see any reason why I would use this instead of my Xreal Air (released like 3 years ago) + Samsung Dex. The phone is a perfect "compute puck" for wired AR glasses and Google even makes them, so why the heck are they selling separate compute pucks with these glasses and making them unaffordable?? Just make some pixel glasses that run android xr on the pixel phone instead
Those are 3DOF head tracking, right? This is inside-out tracked, 6DOF and hand tracking.
Hmm, fair point, I suppose I just don't use the hand tracking stuff very often since it's just not very productive (I use portable mouse & keyboard even on my Samsung headset that supports hand tracking).
But even given that the glasses have to support hand tracking and 6DOF, I think they can probably build the sensors into the glasses but compute them with the phone. Or maybe calculating hand tracking would drain the battery of a Pixel too fast or something. Not sure.
Still not enough FOV or pixels
Passthrough is lame compared to real AR
I think these are see through additive displays, not passthrough, no?
In my case I would need the puck if I'm out and about because my phone does not support DP Alt Mode.
They erecting a virtual world bubble to hide from us the devastation AI is going to wreck on the natural world around us.
> Real-time AI perception
Continuous AI dependence of a large fraction of society is coming fast. It needs a name. Cyborgism? Umbilicals?
We'll also need to coin some names for the symbiotes to call the resistors. Neoamish? Analogues?
The economic power difference between the two groups may justify calling them the Eloi and the Morlocks.
Gargoyle is traditional.
Clanker sores.
Uh, I think some good old fashioned ones could do the trick: “sheeple”, “dumbass”, etc.
This has me thinking of the Google Glass sitting on my shelf, dust well gathered. Never again.
And cardboard. And daydream.
This is cool. Its part of an ideal version of my home setup. But god the marketing feels so off, its like its made by people who have never used a monitor or done work on a computer. The marketing makes it out to be a phone screen for your face which is such a sad vision for genuinely cool technology. Also horrible demonstration of AI do these people even use AI?
The part where he asked AI to organise his windows was almost as painful as the part where he was in a generic chase sequence of a Ubisoft slop game and asked whats the best way to catch the assassin.
I wonder when it will join the graveyard?
Given the track record…. Maybe a year?
Is black transparent there? Are they dimmed? Or just additive?
I have the XREAL One Pro. It is polarized which makes it always dimmer, especially indoors, and they sort of PWM from the polarized state to a 99% black out with a button interface. When it's really bright outside and you have the display on, you can see barely where your next step is and not much else.
Their AURAs are probably the same in this specific capability, it looks like the same thing I have in my hands, apart from the extra cameras and a different set of buttons.
The projection lenses look the same too, which means there's no periphery at all. That makes the sort of "screens hovering around you" in the advertising not all that representative of the experience. You see what's in front of you and might barely contain the one screen that you're looking at.
wired, ok — but u still need to be behind a display? okay
$1099 is so nuts
If you just want a "dumb" pair of wired display glasses, they have a $300 version (xbx a01+) that has no brick, no Android and no AI, it operates as a plain DP Alt Mode USB-C connection. They're like a modern version of the old Sony HMZ-T3, but with the size/weight/style of normal sunglasses.
I like mine, they are more usable as a work monitor than I thought they would be (I'm used to blurry VR sets but these are sharp except for the extreme edges). The FOV is not quite as wide as the new XR ones but I'm ok with that... I don't use them for any immersive effect.
I have a similar "dumb" glasses, but the screen that is not fixed to environment is really annoying, always feel shaky
even the $650 One Pros have most of the QoL features here, like the hardware IPR adjustments and an optional 6DoF camera
the only things that make the Aura tempting are the 70deg FoV (which like you say isn't a feature everyone wants or needs) and the 1000 lumen brightness. neither justifies burning extra money on the useless puck, even if Google is subsidizing it.
if the Aura was available at $700-$800 puckless they'd be a genuine upgrade over the One Pro.