6 ms·

LMAO right? These are literally shitty-looking sunglasses with a ten second loop camera on them that's only usable with Snapchat. These will be handed out at fa

LMAO right? These are literally shitty-looking sunglasses with a ten second loop camera on them that's only usable with Snapchat. These will be handed out at fancy NYC/LA/SF parties where people will play with them for a minute or so before putting them back down and going on their phones.

flycaliguy 10y ago
Ever use the first iPhone? It could barely make PHONE calls. It was a terrible phone.
- yolesaber 10y ago
  Are you seriously comparing a pair of shitty-looking sunglasses to the iPhone? These are sunglasses that take a ten second video that is tied to Snapchat. They cost 130 bucks and immediately signal that you are a techie douchebag because that's what people still associate video-taking glasses with. It is literally a novelty toy that is using a WSJ article (native content advertising) to make it seem like a revolutionary technology / something cool. No one is going to buy these.
  - flycaliguy 10y ago
    I was comparing the fact that Apple tossed out an unfinished, first iteration of a product that eventually became polished tech. I'm pointing out that the limitations on these glasses are along the same path. Seems like a bunch of people didn't catch my point, I'll try and be more clear in the future.
  - Kiro 10y ago
    What's with the hate? You realize there's a possibility you will stand corrected?
    - yolesaber 10y ago
      OH NO i'll be wrong on the internet
  - berberous 10y ago
    I spoke to a 25 year old girl this morning that is not a techie, but likes Snapchat, and she had already heard of the glasses and wanted a pair. Sample size of one, but I'm pretty confident that non-techies will buy them. The question is whether it can grow to anything bigger than instant film Polaroids, which people also buy and enjoy using at parties, etc.
    - Fricken 10y ago
      I think the glasses are stupid, but then again, I thought the whole idea behind snapchat was stupid to begin with, yet here we are. Obviously my finger is not on the pulse of today's youth. I don't think the kids today will be too inclined to shell out $130 for these gimmicky things, but my judgement on such matters is demonstrably terrible.
      - TAForObvReasons 10y ago
        Not a kid, but I absolutely love the idea of a camera at eye level that can capture what I'm seeing. Many times I've missed random animal sightings or funny moments because I didn't have a camera at the ready (and sometimes it takes a while to dig out the phone).
        malka 10y ago
        Same problem as Google glasses though, people dont like having a camera pointing at them when they talk to you.
        Apocryphon 10y ago
        The ten second limit could be helpful for social acceptance, plus these look more like Raybans and not the gargoyle glasses that Google Glass embodied.
        bfstein 10y ago
        If you check the website, you'll see they have lights built around the lens to "show friends your snapping." I imagine this was specifically built to assuage that concern.
  - slewis 10y ago
    The article says over and over again it's a toy. Young people, 14-25 are going to buy these and make them cool. Not the 35 year old engineers who bought Google Glass. Google has never made something cool. Snapchat was cool out of the gate.
    - yolesaber 10y ago
      The article also includes fluff about how the glasses captured the experience hiking like no other and assorted hype. >Young people, 14-25 are going to buy these and make them cool. No, they are not. These are going to come to nothing, maybe some more fluff pieces. If I'm wrong, be sure to leave a comment here in the future.
    - PascLeRasc 10y ago
      >Google has never made something cool. Gmail was pretty revolutionary when it came out, and nearly everyone in that 14-25 age group uses Chrome.
      - azakai 10y ago
        That's not the same as being cool. Yes, Chrome is extremely popular among that age group, but many popular things aren't cool. For example, the Big Bang Theory is something very popular but even the fans wouldn't say it's cool. In fact many things are cool in part because they are not overly popular, and often decrease in coolness as they become popular. Gmail and Chrome were indeed innovative once, and perhaps you could argue they were cool back then, but today they are just a commodity - people (especially in that age group) just take them for granted, "it's what we use." They aren't cool.
        dirkgently 10y ago
        Am I allowed to puke now?
  - throwaway76543 10y ago
    Everything you just said are things people said about every iteration in the tablet market. Including the iteration to the iphone. I'm not personally enamored with these glasses either, but let's be fair. Plenty of folks considered the iphone an expensive tool for douchebags at its release. This is true of nearly all new personal computing products and is not a distinguishing characteristic.
TAForObvReasons 10y ago
Try to understand the essence of the problem and the whole thing makes perfect sense. Problem: many spontaneous moments are missed because the phone is not immediately accessible. The phone is in the pocket and it takes seconds to dig out the phone and switch to the camera app, and by that time I missed the moment. Solution: put a camera at line of sight. Make it super simple to capture. When you phrase it as a camera you mount to your head, it sounds super creepy. The sunglass is a natural vehicle for the camera since most people have sunglasses and wear them when it is sunny outside. It allows for validation testing of the idea, and I wouldn't be surprised to see a prescription version if the demand is there.
- dingaling 10y ago
  > Solution: put a camera at line of sight. Make it super simple to capture. But these are sunglasses which are unlikely to be worn much indoors. So one might still have to fumble in a bag for the glasses, don them to put the camera in line of sight and then take a snap. What really irks me is the overloading of the term 'spectacles'. These are absolutely not spectacles as commonly understood: "lenses to help a person's sight". But henceforth, any time anyone wants to search for spectacles they'll have to include terms to exclude Snapchat's gadget. Surely they could have saved some of the money they spent on buying spectacles.com and invented a unique name. Snapticles? ( Google lists four hits for that word right now ).
  - richardboegli 10y ago
    "lenses to help a person's sight" But, if the lenses people see the world through is Snapchat then this makes perfect sense.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - phamilton 10y ago
    A Spectacle is also a performance or something worth watching. One could say many moments in our lives are spectacles that few people see, and recording those would help us share. It's really not a bad name.
x2f10 10y ago
Is keithwhor's comment not sarcastic? Read it again.

flycaliguy 10y ago

Ever use the first iPhone? It could barely make PHONE calls. It was a terrible phone.

yolesaber 10y ago
Are you seriously comparing a pair of shitty-looking sunglasses to the iPhone? These are sunglasses that take a ten second video that is tied to Snapchat. They cost 130 bucks and immediately signal that you are a techie douchebag because that's what people still associate video-taking glasses with. It is literally a novelty toy that is using a WSJ article (native content advertising) to make it seem like a revolutionary technology / something cool. No one is going to buy these.
- flycaliguy 10y ago
  I was comparing the fact that Apple tossed out an unfinished, first iteration of a product that eventually became polished tech. I'm pointing out that the limitations on these glasses are along the same path. Seems like a bunch of people didn't catch my point, I'll try and be more clear in the future.
- Kiro 10y ago
  What's with the hate? You realize there's a possibility you will stand corrected?
  - yolesaber 10y ago
    OH NO i'll be wrong on the internet
- berberous 10y ago
  I spoke to a 25 year old girl this morning that is not a techie, but likes Snapchat, and she had already heard of the glasses and wanted a pair. Sample size of one, but I'm pretty confident that non-techies will buy them. The question is whether it can grow to anything bigger than instant film Polaroids, which people also buy and enjoy using at parties, etc.
  - Fricken 10y ago
    I think the glasses are stupid, but then again, I thought the whole idea behind snapchat was stupid to begin with, yet here we are. Obviously my finger is not on the pulse of today's youth. I don't think the kids today will be too inclined to shell out $130 for these gimmicky things, but my judgement on such matters is demonstrably terrible.
    - TAForObvReasons 10y ago
      Not a kid, but I absolutely love the idea of a camera at eye level that can capture what I'm seeing. Many times I've missed random animal sightings or funny moments because I didn't have a camera at the ready (and sometimes it takes a while to dig out the phone).
      - malka 10y ago
        Same problem as Google glasses though, people dont like having a camera pointing at them when they talk to you.
        Apocryphon 10y ago
        The ten second limit could be helpful for social acceptance, plus these look more like Raybans and not the gargoyle glasses that Google Glass embodied.
        bfstein 10y ago
        If you check the website, you'll see they have lights built around the lens to "show friends your snapping." I imagine this was specifically built to assuage that concern.
- slewis 10y ago
  The article says over and over again it's a toy. Young people, 14-25 are going to buy these and make them cool. Not the 35 year old engineers who bought Google Glass. Google has never made something cool. Snapchat was cool out of the gate.
  - yolesaber 10y ago
    The article also includes fluff about how the glasses captured the experience hiking like no other and assorted hype. >Young people, 14-25 are going to buy these and make them cool. No, they are not. These are going to come to nothing, maybe some more fluff pieces. If I'm wrong, be sure to leave a comment here in the future.
  - PascLeRasc 10y ago
    >Google has never made something cool. Gmail was pretty revolutionary when it came out, and nearly everyone in that 14-25 age group uses Chrome.
    - azakai 10y ago
      That's not the same as being cool. Yes, Chrome is extremely popular among that age group, but many popular things aren't cool. For example, the Big Bang Theory is something very popular but even the fans wouldn't say it's cool. In fact many things are cool in part because they are not overly popular, and often decrease in coolness as they become popular. Gmail and Chrome were indeed innovative once, and perhaps you could argue they were cool back then, but today they are just a commodity - people (especially in that age group) just take them for granted, "it's what we use." They aren't cool.
      - dirkgently 10y ago
        Am I allowed to puke now?
- throwaway76543 10y ago
  Everything you just said are things people said about every iteration in the tablet market. Including the iteration to the iphone. I'm not personally enamored with these glasses either, but let's be fair. Plenty of folks considered the iphone an expensive tool for douchebags at its release. This is true of nearly all new personal computing products and is not a distinguishing characteristic.

TAForObvReasons 10y ago

Try to understand the essence of the problem and the whole thing makes perfect sense. Problem: many spontaneous moments are missed because the phone is not immediately accessible. The phone is in the pocket and it takes seconds to dig out the phone and switch to the camera app, and by that time I missed the moment. Solution: put a camera at line of sight. Make it super simple to capture. When you phrase it as a camera you mount to your head, it sounds super creepy. The sunglass is a natural vehicle for the camera since most people have sunglasses and wear them when it is sunny outside. It allows for validation testing of the idea, and I wouldn't be surprised to see a prescription version if the demand is there.

dingaling 10y ago
> Solution: put a camera at line of sight. Make it super simple to capture. But these are sunglasses which are unlikely to be worn much indoors. So one might still have to fumble in a bag for the glasses, don them to put the camera in line of sight and then take a snap. What really irks me is the overloading of the term 'spectacles'. These are absolutely not spectacles as commonly understood: "lenses to help a person's sight". But henceforth, any time anyone wants to search for spectacles they'll have to include terms to exclude Snapchat's gadget. Surely they could have saved some of the money they spent on buying spectacles.com and invented a unique name. Snapticles? ( Google lists four hits for that word right now ).
- richardboegli 10y ago
  "lenses to help a person's sight" But, if the lenses people see the world through is Snapchat then this makes perfect sense.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- phamilton 10y ago
  A Spectacle is also a performance or something worth watching. One could say many moments in our lives are spectacles that few people see, and recording those would help us share. It's really not a bad name.

x2f10 10y ago

Is keithwhor's comment not sarcastic? Read it again.