Do People Actually Want Smart Glasses Now? (cnn.com)
- Reference: 0178048925
- News link: https://slashdot.org/story/25/06/14/1648202/do-people-actually-want-smart-glasses-now
- Source link: https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/14/tech/google-meta-snap-smart-glasses-ai
Yet this week Snap [2]announced that "it's building AI-equipped eyewear to be released in 2026."
Why the "renewed buzz"? CNN sees two factors:
- Smartphones "are no longer exciting enough to entice users to upgrade often."
- "A desire to capitalize on AI by building new hardware around it."
> Advancements in AI could make them far more useful than the first time around. Emerging AI models can process images, video and speech simultaneously, answer complicated requests and respond conversationally... And market research indicates the interest will be there this time. The smart glasses market is estimated to grow from 3.3 million units shipped in 2024 to nearly 13 million by 2026, according to ABI Research. The International Data Corporation projects the market for smart glasses like those made by Meta will grow from 8.8 in 2025 to nearly 14 million in 2026....
>
> Apple is also said to be working on smart glasses to be released next year that would compete directly with Meta's, according to [3]Bloomberg . Amazon's head of devices and services Panos Panay also didn't rule out the possibility of camera-equipped Alexa glasses similar to those offered by Meta in a February [4]CNN interview . "But I think you can imagine, there's going to be a whole slew of AI devices that are coming," he said in February."
More than two million Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses have been sold since their launch in 2023, the article points out. But besides privacy concerns, "Perhaps the biggest challenge will be convincing consumers that they need yet another tech device in their life, particularly those who don't need prescription glasses. The products need to be worth wearing on people's faces all day."
But still, "Many in the industry believe that the smartphone will eventually be replaced by glasses or something similar to it," says Jitesh Ubrani, a research manager covering wearable devices for market research firm IDC.
"It's not going to happen today. It's going to happen many years from now, and all these companies want to make sure that they're not going to miss out on that change."
[1] https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/14/tech/google-meta-snap-smart-glasses-ai
[2] https://newsroom.snap.com/launch-specs-2026?lang=en-US
[3] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-05-22/apple-plans-glasses-for-2026-as-part-of-ai-push-nixes-watch-with-camera
[4] https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/27/tech/amazon-ai-devices
Can they translate? (Score:2)
I'd buy a pair of AI glasses if they could translate (subtitle) speech in real-time. Really handy when travelling.
Google Translate camera mode would be useful too.
Re: Can they translate? (Score:5, Insightful)
For those of us with vision problems, glasses that read aloud could be of value. And for those of us that are geriatrics, explanations of emojis could help. One of the best example uses I ever saw scanned titles on a bookshelf and displayed them horizontally. An AI summary or analysis of that could be interesting too.
Re:Can they translate? (Score:4, Insightful)
Based on the performance of MS Teams to transcribe my work meetings (which aren't in English), I'd say the technology isn't ready. In particular if you deal with real people from the streets who won't pay attention to speak slowly, articulate clearly, and use the more official dialect that the AI system have been trained with.
Re: Can they translate? (Score:1)
Try fireflies.ai. it's pretty good and better than Teams AI.
You invite a fireflies agent to a meeting. At the end it will summarize the salient points from any shared presentation/docs and who said what etc.
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed, showing the class and level of the person talking would be nice too.:-)
Re: (Score:2)
I know a student who brings them into tests.
Go Read "Rainbow's End" by Vernor Vinge (Score:5, Insightful)
Then tell me that smart glasses are not the future, because they sure as fuck are.
The tech has come a long way in 10 years, and it has a long way to go. All thee companies are trying because there's a lot of money to be made by the right product at the right time. What that product will be and when it will be delivered are huge questions, though. I'm not thinking it's going to truly happen in the next 10 years. Probably the next 20 after that.
Ad (Score:2)
Do you really want ads in front of your eyes all day every day? We all mostly spend too much time staring at electronic devices as it is. I want to be able to see where I am going, not constantly be distracted by stuff I really do not need to know.
Re: (Score:2)
You'll still be able to see where you're going but the glasses will beautify the scenery, showing homeless people as nice potted plants, pee-stains of walls as art, graffiti becomes commissioned murals, overflowing bins appear as quirky street installations, boarded-up windows turn into chic cafés, broken pavements get overlaid with cobblestone charm, potholes become koi ponds, traffic cones morph into abstract sculptures, smoggy skies are replaced with sunsets, police tape becomes festive bunting, and
Re: Ad (Score:3)
I guess that would be useful if I plan on visiting Detroit 30 years ago.
Um (Score:5, Insightful)
> - Smartphones "are no longer exciting enough to entice users to upgrade often."
> - "A desire to capitalize on AI by building new hardware around it."
That explains why people want to sell them. Not why I should want to buy them.
Re: Um (Score:2)
Exactly. Even if a technology might have a shot at being desirable, I often see seller interests trample the value and then the seller surprised that the customers didn't go for it after they did absolutely nothing to cater to the user base.
One company I worked at had this persistent issue and a strong warning sign was that they just absolutely worshipped the fictional Henry Ford quote about customers just wanting faster horses and the inventor knowing better than the customer about what the customer should
This shit again? (Score:4, Insightful)
Enough people have come out with very valid reasons why this can end up with legal problems for the wearer that haven't gone away. Remembering the Glasshole days, you can record as you wish in public, but if you record on private property without permission, you'll likely get charged with trespassing.
An example is at gyms, where there is a new "thing" of some women wearing very revealing clothing, recording themselves doing "exercising, many of which consist of her pointing her vulva or buttocks towards the camera, and if a guy even glances at her or looks in her direction, she's hit gold by having not only a thirst trap for TikTok, but she can play the always strange combo victim/desirability validation. We'll just have to disregard that she is staring at men to figure out who she is the victim of. A lot of gyms have banned the practice now, mainly because a lot of men have stopped going, and started working out at home in order to avoid the harassment. And gyms need the money - the majority of their customers who happen to be men, not thirst trappers. Do your legging covered kegals at home sister!
Point is, that gym is on private property. And thirst trappers are just a passive aggressive form of bully. And no doubt they will try to incorporate this into their BS.
Same with bars, and restaurants. Sometimes this can result in putting the glasshole rev2 person in danger too. Sometimes business is conducted, sometimes affairs are conducted. Sometimes people who are being recorded might have a violent reaction to someone surveilling them.
And most of the time, we just don't want to be recorded in those places. If the wife and I go out to dinner, and we talk about our day, sometimes things are said that we don't want posted online. Innocent enough stuff "Oh, that godamn Bob was up to his same crap today, he's incompetent." Normal conversations, and some glasshouse rev2 weaponizing them.
Re: (Score:2)
Constant recording is different from constant local processing. We have social and legal rules surrounding cell phones. We will have them surrounding smart glasses and other smartwear.
I'm glad I'm not in this weird world you live in.
Re: (Score:2)
> Constant recording is different from constant local processing. We have social and legal rules surrounding cell phones. We will have them surrounding smart glasses and other smartwear.
> I'm glad I'm not in this weird world you live in.
My point is that if I catch you recording on my property without my permission, you will be visited by officer friendly for trespassing.
That's just the nice outcome. there are groups that often meeting in little restaurants to discuss plans, some oof which may be illegal. If they catch you recording them, you would probably wish officer friendly was there.
Your need to post videos on TikTok does not supered my right to not show up there when it is on my property.
We know where some of those places a
Re: (Score:2)
People record in restaurants all the damn time. What kind of places do you go to where someone pulls their phone out and immediately gets assaulted? You need to be obviously focused on others or particularly obnoxious about it to cause a scene.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't go to a gym or restaurant where a parked Tesla can film you and read your lips then. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
> Don't go to a gym or restaurant where a parked Tesla can film you and read your lips then. :-)
Unless I give consent, that is breaking the law. Is that such a difficult thing to understand?
[1]https://recordinglaw.com/party... [recordinglaw.com] Yeah, it varies by state, but it seems some folks have no respect.
This idea that you have the right to do anything you wish, anywhere you wish is the same mentality that caused bars and restraints to ban families with children. Many of these families have no respect for anyone else, their little preciouses run around, screaming and yelling and annoying the hell out of other p
[1] https://recordinglaw.com/party-two-party-consent-states/pennsylvania-recording-laws/
Some people always wanted them (Score:5, Interesting)
Some of us have always wanted smart glasses. But we also want them to not be crap. I have pretty limited requirements for the graphics capabilities, but it does include overlay. But they also need to be in basically the same form factor as ordinary glasses, and they have to not be under the control of someone who's going to piss me off all the time showing me a lot of sponsored fuckery, and any processing has to be done on a device on my person and not someone else's computer. And I really don't want to be around other people who are streaming video to teh cloud 24/7, either.
What we're going to get will be very different from that description for the foreseeable future.
Re: Some people always wanted them (Score:2)
Makes sense to me. I think you hit some very good points. You're describing a usable product.
I can't help but think that the only one of those points that will really happen though, based on the current state of the technology world , will be intrusive advertising, and by induction, surveillance.
I think you have described what open source glasses would do.
Haha... "open source glasses"
Even better: I couldn't do my homework because my glasses wouldn't boot. All I got was the Blue Lens of Death.
The answer is no. (Score:4, Interesting)
Two factors come into play.
1. Casual engagement.
2. Overloaded human inputs.
Casual engagement is simple. Illustrated with a phone perfectly. We often stop pull out our phone and egage with it for seconds then put it away. We get what we want then disengage. This is down physically. Glasses to date do not have this, AR VR are all fairly persistent. An acceptable physical queue has not yet been found. TV and Movies claim it a tap to the side of the head.
Overloading our sensor inputs with overlays etc. simply do not work. When we layer on more inputs out attention drifts and it causes issues. This is the precise reason why laws around the world have been put in place around distracted driving. It's why people are making billions with cameras that detect drivers who use their phones.
Additionally VR requires dedicated space and time isolated from other to operate. So it's not going to be a simple glasses interface. It's going to be a immersive visional device. So not glasses.
AR is overloading, it's also still laggy. It's a nightmare of distraction. AR might see some adoption. But not for some time yet. The tech is still probably 2 decades away. It will likely also be limited to dedicated spaces or functions where it can add value.
Also both AR and VR have a limited number of people that can actually use it. A sizeable portion of the population can not adjust to the "lag" and it causes illness. So this limits it's ubiqutiousness something phones do not suffer from.
So no glasses are not going to suddenly be the thing to have. They will fail yet again.
What will finally make it happen. Well actually it's probably real holograms. And we are decades if not centuries away from that tech. As a hologram will take the place of real world objects. something that will not overload our brain inputs. Something that will not induce latency induced nausea.
The thing is a lot of the use case for AR / VR around human productivity etc. are mute. robotics and AI will assume those functions far faster than AR / VR will. AR / VR will be limited to experience roles rather than productivity roles.
Not to mention the abuses of business smashing interfaces with opportunities to advertise. This will almost complete obliterate any value from the interface making it more annoyance than assistance/entertainment.
So no I don't think AR/ VR glasses will be a thing.
What is the user interface? (Score:3)
"Many in the industry believe that the smartphone will eventually be replaced by glasses or something similar to it,"
How do you control it? Blink twice?
I've never been near smart glasses so this is a real question.
Re: (Score:2)
Taps, gestures or speech. So it would depend on what you want to do. Gestures are going to be the most comprehensive, as it allows "real" interaction with the objects overlayed on the scene. That's what's typically used in VR. It will look strange to passers by, but I'm sure people will get used to it like they got used to other peculiarities of public gadget interaction. Voice is already available for gadget control. Tapping the glasses is good for quick and simple interactions like pausing video or respon
Re: What is the user interface? (Score:3)
I see. So you could have a virtual interface, that is projected/overlayed on your field of vision, then you could tap virtual buttons or scroll by waving your arm or wiggling a finger. Suddenly, that sounds usable.
Now people won't only be talking loudly as they walk down the street, they will also be waving their arms around. Makes sense :-) can't wait!
Re: (Score:2)
I think eye tracking will be needed to make any of this work in any way that is really acceptable to the vast majority of end users - look up at a menu bar, it highlights the "tabs" you are looking at, look for a second or two and it selects that drop-down, you scroll down with your eyes and make a selection the same way. Good for answering or rejecting an incoming call, opening a book or video app, etc.. Wireless connection to a keyboard and mouse would further extend its capabilities.
Re: (Score:3)
Yep, good luck scrolling a website, downloading a PDF instruction manual, and zooming in on a section to see the wiring diagram - something I had to do yesterday on my phone. Even that was so painful compared to the PC screen that I went and used my desktop instead.
Plus people buy these phones with gigantic screens so they can play casual games on them. I'd love to see someone directing their army in Boom Beach or building a fort in some other game.
Re: (Score:2)
Policemen will wear them, showing Class and other details like a real world RPG.
Statute Familiarity: Quotes 4th Amendment, misapplies 90% of time"
"Aura: Sovereign Citizen – Claims jurisdiction immunity from Earth laws"
"Class: Jailhouse Lawyer – Filed 7 handwritten motions from cell"
"Perk: Legalese Spammer – Uses ‘Prima facie’ in every sentence"
"Status: Litigant-in-Person – Judge sighs audibly when name appears"
"Buff: Filed FOIA Request on Officer’s Badge Number
Re: (Score:2)
You'll get a tooth with a built-in trackball. :-)
Intended as a joke but I'm sure some bozos are working on one.
What problem do they solve? (Score:2)
How would they improve our quality of life?
Maybe to fix the shortcoming that there are times when we are not generating revenue from watching advertisements. In that case: fuck you!
Maybe to fix the shortcoming of us not being tracked, and our vision tracked, so that advertisements can be tuned to out personalities. In that case: fuck you!
Perhaps the problem of missing the opportunity of having twenty additional streaming services, directly to our glasses. In that case: fuck you!
Did I miss anything?
no (Score:5, Insightful)
> "Do People Actually Want Smart Glasses Now?"
I don't know about "people" but as for me, there are almost no reasons to want them and many reasons to not:
1) Additional weight. I worked hard to have the thinnest, lightest glasses. Even those cause issues with my nose and ears. I don't want something that weighs what, 2x? 3x? 5x?
2) Invading others privacy. I don't care how many times people say "no expectation of privacy in public." People are not going to deactivate or remove them every time they are in a meeting, a bathroom, a gym, a childcare setting, etc, etc, etc. And you can't count on them doing it automatically. Even outside of such places, people don't expect this type of continuous examination of their lives.
3) Invading MY privacy. Yeah, as if we believe those privacy statements/assertions by these companies. And those are only as good as them not being hacked or subpoenaed.
4) Rude. There is no way around this. Most users are already rude with their phones. This ups that game a hundred fold. Exactly where the term "glasshole" came from.
5) Fiddle. Another device to charge, link, configure, update, protect, lose, signal, etc. As if our lives are complicated enough.
6) Overload and distraction. Blah blah blah, this will make things easier. Or it will just overload us with even more constant barrage of information/stimulation. As if we need more machine engagement in our lives.
7) Safety. How many clueless phone users are already driving into others, walking in front of cars, bumping people over? Take that and amp it up, big time.
I am sure I could think of more. Of course there will be specific valid use-cases. But you have to take the much bad with the good.
I want smart contact lenses (Score:2)
Or at the very least smart glasses that autofocus.
Presbyopia is a bitch.
Re: (Score:3)
"Presbyopia is a bitch."
True. I have trifocals. It's especially true when you have to look at something close and up. An electrician I know had a pair of glasses with the close lens on top for just such routine for him events.
There is another problem the smart glasses bunch are overlooking. After someone pays for laser eye surgery to get rid of their glasses why would they want to put them right back on?
There is one possible market though. Many industrial jobs require the use of safety glasses or goggles. B
Re: (Score:2)
> "Presbyopia is a bitch."
You know what's much worse? Post-cataract surgery. Then you lose 100% of focus ability, instantly. And if you are unlucky, like I was, then they botch the lenses and now my two eyes aren't even the same. They were supposed to be both corrected for distance and astigmatism. I ended up with with perfect astigmatism correction, but one eye that does far intermediate, and one that does close intermediate. Neither can do far or close, nor agree for intermediate. So nothing is e
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like you got inferior lenses. I had the surgery and decided to spring for trifocal lenses (cost me an extra $5k). They have three focal lengths; long, intermediate, and close. Plus they corrected for astigmatism. Now I have sharp eyesight at all distances.
They are similar to Fresnel lenses and there is some halo effect with bright lights at night. A little annoying at times but the advantages far outweigh it.
I am waiting for the eyephone (Score:3)
[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJyMEkb_8to
Let me supplement or ditch my GoPro (Score:2)
I would love a pair of athletic sunglasses with a good action camera ability to add to my bike rides. If they do it right, they could put GoPro out of business.
I don't give a shit about the game play/AR aspects. Just let me see through, maybe with some heads-up Strava or RideWithGPS navigation. That's all I need.
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect you've seen exactly zero of those videos, the question is why would that be a reason not to want a camera?
They wanted them 10 years ago too (Score:2)
Glass glassed what was left of Google's reputation and an entire market for a decade because they didn't have a recording indicator. Quite impressive just how massive of a fuckup that was.
A solution in search of a problem... (Score:2)
When they become truly useful at a reasonable price then people will buy them, but what problem do I have that they can solve?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm wondering that too. It seems like they would be very situation-specific.
I can imagine they would be helpful if you are repairing something and get a labelled schematic overlay and highlighted items. If you are walking through an unfamiliar place you could get a navigation overlay. You might get a nametag hovering over the people in your vicinity. And then there's the body camera aspect, similar to a dashcam in a car.
augmentation (Score:2)
Let's not think of it as smart glasses, it will be an augmentation device and they will come in a variety of forms. Glasses are annoying to wear, particularly if you don't already wear them, but the visual interface is a big plus. Maybe at some point there will be ultra-lightweight and small devices that beam to your retina, or smart contacts. The camera and the audio interface will be in an earbud.
There's going to be a threshold where the price of the device, the ease of use, and the everyday benefits will
What about just regular display unit glasses? (Score:1)
I don't care about cameras, AI, AR or VR. The product I'm waiting for is opaque portable display, so I can work or code while traveling via plane, bus or train. Today's phones can be used as development devices, running Linux, terminals, X windows, whole dev stacks. I can connect wireless mouse, folding keyboard already. Can somebody just build wearable light display glasses for long time coding sessions? It would be nice to ditch PC monitor taking up space on my desk. Laptop devices could be redesigned w
I can imagine that... (Score:2)
...they might either be useful or awful
They could be useful for providing subtitles to those with hearing problems or for translating language
They could be useful for providing help or recording interesting observations
Here's one example. I am working on repairing a machine and I encounter a part I don't understand. If the glasses could scan the part, look it up and display a description of its function, it would be helpful. If it was broken, the glasses could offer prices and availability of replacements
Th
They don't really cater for the most obvious demo (Score:4, Interesting)
They don't really cater for the most obvious demographic. Yeah, I would not want to carry an extra tech device, but I am already wearing glasses anyway, I'd actually love it if they could do one more useful thing apart from correcting my vision. But they have a quite limited prescription range, if you are hyperopic like me, you are most likely over their +4 limit (especially if you have any astigmatism at all). If you are strong myopic or mid-myopic with some astigmatism you are SOL as well. And it's not really a technical limitation, I pay extra for the high refraction index lenses anyway and they come out thin enough to easily fit frames that are in the Ray Ban Meta style. Not sure if it's a stereotype either, but most of my geek friends who are the most "gadget friendly" people tend to wear strong prescriptions too...
Re: (Score:1)
Simple fact: Meta is an antisemitic Nazi trash company. They banned many people for posting links to the HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL DAY TRUST and have refused to reverse that blindingly antisemitic decision.
Nobody in their right mind would EVER want Zuck's Nazi Shitbag Company to have the kind of access to their life that "AI Glasses" feeding their entire life into a server would provide.
Re: (Score:1)
I'd be happy if someone could just keep my glasses from fogging up.
Re: (Score:2)
I am reading that 64% of adult Americans wear prescription glasses. And yet they are catering to the 1/3rd that do not.
This is dumb. Instead of coming up with new glasses, why not come up with clip-ons that can attach to existing glasses, like the clip-on sun-glasses I wear all the time. That way you can take them off and put them in a pocket or purse when you don't need them. Have they not tried this yet? For the 64% who wear glasses?