Snap's New Spectacles Inch Closer To Compelling AR (theverge.com)
- Reference: 0175019613
- News link: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/24/09/17/232227/snaps-new-spectacles-inch-closer-to-compelling-ar
- Source link: https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/17/24245572/snap-spectacles-ar-developers-evan-spiegel
> Snap's fifth-generation Spectacles have a richer, more immersive display. Using them feels snappier. They weigh less than their predecessor and last longer on a charge. Those are exactly the kinds of upgrades you'd expect from a product line that's technically eight years old. But the market for Spectacles -- and AR glasses in general -- still feels as nascent as ever. Snap has an idea for what could change that: developers. These new Spectacles, announced Tuesday at Snap's annual Partner Summit in Los Angeles, aren't being sold. Instead, Snap is repeating its playbook for the last version of Spectacles in 2021 and [1]distributing them to the people who make AR lenses for Snapchat . This time around, though, there's an extra hurdle: you have to apply for access through Lens Studio, the company's desktop tool for creating AR software, and pay $1,188 to lease a pair for at least one year. (After a year, the subscription becomes $99 a month.)
>
> Yes, Snap is asking developers to pay $1,188 to build software for hardware with no user base. Even still, Snap CEO Evan Spiegel believes the interest will be there. "Our goal is really to empower and inspire the developer and AR enthusiast communities," he tells me. "This really is an invitation, and hopefully an inspiration, to create." [...] Ultimately, I'm skeptical of why developers will want to build software for Spectacles right now, given the lack of a market and the cost of getting access to a pair. Still, Spiegel believes enough of them are excited about the promise of AR glasses and that they'll want to help shape that future. "I think it's the same reason why developers were really excited with the early desktop computer or the reason why developers were really excited by the early smartphones," he says. "I think this is a group of visionary technologists who are really excited about what the future holds." Spiegel may be right. AR glasses may be the future, and Spectacles may be well-positioned to become the next major computing platform, even with competition heating up. But there's still a lot of progress that needs to happen for Snap's vision to become reality.
Road to VR has a [2]full list of specs embedded in their report. They also published a [3]reveal trailer on YouTube.
[1] https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/17/24245572/snap-spectacles-ar-developers-evan-spiegel
[2] https://www.roadtovr.com/snapchat-spectacles-24-ar-glasses-specs-price-release-date/
[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx0pfNTwjxk
Wow (Score:2)
I'm honestly really impressed by the video. Looks like it's a step away from being a commercially viable product.
Re: (Score:2)
> I'm honestly really impressed by the video. Looks like it's a step away from being a commercially viable product.
That said, there's (at least) one more step after that .
First, the product has to be good enough. Then it has to be stable enough. Too much of this IoT kind of bleeding-edge stuff is dropped within a couple years of release, replaced by the new shiny. Connected speakers. Garage door openers. Lights. All of those have had products killed by major manufacturers within a typical product's lifespan.
Well, that's not okay. We should stop buying this stuff until the server/cloud stuff is open sourced or
Re: (Score:2)
What light system?
I'm at least 50% through the advertised life of my bulbs and they still seem supported (Phillips hue).
Invitation (Score:3)
Hey dickhole, it's not an "invitation" if you're charging for a product! That's called a sales pitch.
Fifth time's a charm? (Score:3)
I'm sure they have made impressive hardware but at this point they may have burned a lot of customers/developers with previous generations that failed to live up to the hype. Basically, they may need to make something exceptional and inexpensive in order to get any real traction. $1200 is not what I call inexpensive. They would keep a lot more independent developers if they had any sort of hardware trade-in program but alas, they do not.
So probably not (Score:3)
Because I have heard this several times before. VR, AR have failed at least two times already in the past and they do not look like they are ready now.
Too many $$$ (Score:3)
If it cost the same or a little less than the Q3 and had some advantage like not looking like I'm going swimming, long battery life, etc then maybe. As it is, there's just no way - much like I won't buy a watch I have to charge, glasses that cost $1200 a year, look extra goofy, and need frequent charging are not happening for me, unless I can use it for work or something.
Naw dawg (Score:2)
I aint spending ~$1,200 for a piece of rapidly depreciating hardware in a LEASE that is only good for one year. This is the dumbest idea I've ever heard.
They are doing it wrong (Score:2)
"Yes, Snap is asking developers to pay $1,188 to build software for hardware with no user base." - You would think the company would be giving incentives to developers to build software for this new platform. No software no chance at a user base
Uh (Score:2)
No. If I wanted to look ridiculous there are other, better ways.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, there is always Magic Leap or Meta Goggles. I think they pulled Google Glass, though. It's amazing how many commercial failures try to replicate what [1](professor) Steve Mann [wikipedia.org] has been doing with freeware and hard work for decades.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Mann_(inventor)