Do we have such a thread? I don't think so, but I really think we need one.

So here's the inaugural post. Sony's crappy glasses.

http://youtu.be/Bx7O_h09HKA

All aboard!

Green? Really?

"True augmented reality" = sticking a label in front of your face?

Lol!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Microsoft glasses might be bigger, but they look a lot cooler and they do more - and they are not designed for use out of doors by the average user.

These are uncooler than the Google Glass, big, ugly, the hockey puck doesn't do anything for it - and if they have the hockey puck for the battery and processing, why do the glasses need to be so big? Why can't they make them small and classy?

They look more like 3D glasses that have been repurposed.

Wow! Haters gonna hate...? C'mon guys, it is the developers edition... you know? For the people who are developing the concept?

What, these?
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense ... grams.html

If you regularly hang out in 1970s discos, then yes, they look cool.

None of these people have got it yet. If you wear glasses, you’ve already made a style choice, and a lot of factors come into play - your personal preferences, shape of your face, what your better half thinks, stuff like that. If you don’t wear glasses, the chances are that you have sunglasses. Again, you’ve got a massive choice, and, again, you’ve made decisions about what fits your face. The problem with both these two - Sony‘s and Microsoft’s offerings is that the styling has come from some bizarre notion that we’ll all be cool with this kind of styling, because SciFi cinema tells us that The Future looks like this.

Smart glasses need to be indistinguishable from normal glasses. You shouldn’t look like a reject from a William Gibson book, or part of an ELO tribute band. If you wear glasses, they should discreetly fix to existing frames.

I lol'd at the Sony video

The point being, you don't wear these in public, they are designed for working / relaxing, not walking around the neighbourhood.

I was expecting this thread to open with something much more failsome than the developer edition of a product that's no worse than Google Glass.

For a prototype it could be a lot worse.

Lots of Sony bashers round these parts.

If we're still talking about the Sony specs, the demo video suggests they very much do expect you to wear them in public. Admittedly in the footage there seem to be a lot less people around than you'd expect but that's pretty much what they were doing.

Microsoft's Hololens, in contrast, is definitely designed to be used in very specific contexts not as a general 'wear all day' tool. Which is why I think it has more chance of actually getting some traction than Google Glass or Sony's efforts.

I was talking about the Hololens.

Ability to ‘shoot yourself’ removed from Sony VR demo
http://www.gamesradar.com/ability-shoot ... y-vr-demo/

Why include it in the first place?

An interesting idea in a game though. Why remove this though when it's perfectly possible to kill yourself in a variety of other ways - driving a car fast into a building, for example?