With all the hype and interest in wearables these past few months, you’d think more companies would be looking to compete with Google’s Glass headset, but up until now that hasn’t really been the case. Sony teased an alternative to Google’s gear in the form of a SmartEyeglass prototype first shown off at CES 2014, which aims to be as versatile as Glass while bettering it in some respects as well. The rather awkward-looking SmartEyeglass is peppered with sensors – there’s an accelerometer, gyroscope, electronic compass, ambient light sensor, and a 3-megapixel camera – and comes with a wire connecting it to an external battery pack equipped with an extra touch sensor and microphone.
If Apple’s iPhone Mini won’t make you look enough like a dork, there’s always this thing.
Dear god, that’s hideous. What ever happened to “Sony Style”?
Lol, do you have an opinion on every subject??
Actually I haven’t commented on the last five stories published. Have a look at my comment history, that way you can see for yourself.
But even if I had, who cares besides you? It’s an open forum, the point is to comment.
seems they are generations behind Google. …wired micro- & battery-pack, lol. nice try to solve the power problem.
If they can get more than 40minutes of battery life that way, and avoid overheating on your temple, it is the right thing to do, and ahead of Google.
I would love to have proper dual glass smart-glasses, but they could save on the width on the classes and move more to the dongle.
Also, isn’t it an issue to actually get the dual vision to work? I remember reading that you need to track the eyes to make it adapt smoothly.
What gets me is I just bought a set of dark glasses for older people that wraps around the eyes to protect from UV.
You know the type I mean, they are big, not stylist and stand out in a crowd, yet the Sony glasses are uglier and dorky on a whole new level.
Who designed the looks of this thing thinking people would want to be seen in public wearing this?
As pointed out already, since it uses an external dongle the more functions moved to the dongle the better the glasses could be made to look.
I’m a practical person that doesn’t really care that much about looks. So when was scrolling trough these comments, a was thinking: what are they on about now, who cares what it looks like.
I took a sip of coffee and scrolled trough the article, on reaching the picture of the man wearing them I actually laughed my sip of coffee all over my nice keyboard. Which is sticky now… so thank you Sony.
And that is my point. I too rarely care about general looks and/appearance. I remember the time the girl I was with complained that I dressed like a nerd.
And I replied, “But I am a nerd!”.
And still I thought these glasses were dorky at a level that suggested the designer did not expect people to wear them in public.
There are tons of glasses with a heavier design that could have the hardware added to them that would end up with a better looking product.
“If Apple’s iPhone Mini won’t make you look enough like a dork, there’s always this thing.”
I find these comments irritating. Do people really care what others’ phones look like? Do people really care what others think of their phone? Why all the fear about what you or someone else looks like? Are you the person in school who points and laughs at the ‘dork’ wearing cheap shoes, or thick glasses, or holding a Spiderman lunchbox? I don’t get it. Why do you care?
Edited 2014-09-19 14:32 UTC
I guess you didn’t notice that was a link to the Apple Watch.
I certainly didn’t! It was the “dork” I was really talking about though, whether it was about a phone or a watch doesn’t really matter.
Edited 2014-09-19 14:44 UTC
If the iWatch makes one look like a dork, then I’m the king of dorks for sporting a Pebble. But the thing is, the iWatch at least does look pretty classy. The Pebble isn’t an eyesore; it’s not beautiful but it wasn’t meant to be.
These glasses from Sony, however, go so far against Sony’s normally stylish look, that I think this has to be a prototype and not the final product. I’d think Sony could easily come up with something nicer looking than Google Glass in this case.
The iWatch doesn’t make its wearer look like a dork. I’m with you in thinking that the design is rather classy… although I do think it is a bit too thick. With all that said, I think the watch is unnecessary is it still requires an iPhone to properly function.
Thom’s comment had absolutely nothing to do with the watch looking corky or not. Rather, it was his way of making a not so subtle jab at Apple in a way that still allows him to deny it.
There is a reason for that:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B759dzymyoc&t=0m53s
They should give up now before they invest even more money in this dead end game… too little too late.
It even makes google’s offering look cool!
… a HUD on some diving goggles to tell you that you are standing 5 metres in front of Brandenburger Tor, your not the kind of person to have freinds to enjoy a holiday in Berlin with, or socially outcast so that you don’t care about everyone laughing at you for looking like an idiot.
Would that be so bad? Tastes are subjective, so no matter what you do there’s most likely always someone who thinks you look like an idiot. Besides, I, at least, find it an enviable ability on people when they can simply ignore social trends and just go with what they themselves feel comfortable in. Is sheep-mentality really such a wonderful thing to aspire to in your mind? Does standing out from the crowd make you a worse person than one who totally blends in it?
I do agree that the glasses look quite ugly and, just guessing here, they probably aren’t all that comfortable either in the long run. I still wouldn’t go laughing at someone wearing them, I’d rather admire their balls; if they fill some need, including just the wish for entertainment, then I see no need to berate the wearer for it.
Apparently, it does. If you don’t like what I’m wearing, unless you’re paying my salary and I’m on company time, you have my permission to go get fucked.
IMO these are Developer Prototype and not the final product.
The basic problem is optics, or more correctly the materials they have to work with.
They should have gone full Geordi Laforge.
And that would still would look better, plus you would be the height of fashion at any Star Trek convention.
I think this is the best thing that ever happened to Glass, after that, it’ll look positively stylish and refined.
I’m guessing I’m the only one who thinks this is quite genius. The problem is that everyone is comparing it to the Apple Watch or Google Glass, which is probably a bad comparison.
Firstly, this is a first generation device and Sony has decided to experiment in the open, much like Occulus. AR isn’t going anywhere without the applications, and Sony knows a first-generation device will enable that.
Secondly, it’s a versatile processor and a low resolution, monochrome display with an external battery. I’m guessing this makes it light, high performance, last a long time, and most importantly, cheap. It’s also stereoscopic, which makes it 3D AR.
Thirdly, this generation is probably not meant to be your regular glasses. You put them on, do a thing, then take them off. If you were a surveyor, you might be able to wear them all day to make it convenient to do your job. It could give you map overlays, digital spirit levels, etc. This would make it a huge time saver for the trades.
You could wear it orienteering, you could wear it sewing or designing, you might even benefit from wearing it while using your computer.
The question then becomes, “Do you want to look like a dork but do your work in half the time” instead of “do you want to look like a dork and have a pair of glasses that do (???)”.
I’m not saying Sony’s going to succeed, and I’m not saying these glasses will necessarily have the kind of utility I’m hoping for. I’m also not sure if this is *actually* Sony’s plan. What I *am* saying is that this is the first wearable I can see as being useful, and real legit AR, contrasted with the compromised technology and use case shrugs of current wearables.