4 ms·
Glass was not AR. It was a tiny screen you had to shift your focus to. I should change my usernames to glasswasnotar because I feel like I am always saying tha
by dwighttk 5y ago
Glass was not AR. It was a tiny screen you had to shift your focus to.
I should change my usernames to glasswasnotar because I feel like I am always saying that when people talk about glass and ar
- zucked 5y agoHow is a tiny screen overlaid in an accessible field of vision, not totally obscuring your perception of reality, NOT "augmenting reality"? I agree it barely meets the threshold, but I don't write it off as not AR full stop.
- a4isms 5y agoAR is colloquially understood to mean overlaying your field of vision with graphics that interact with reality in your field of vision. By way of a real-world example, military pilots have heads-up displays that overlay IDs of aircraft on the aircraft as they appear to the pilot. That's AR. My volvo has a heads-up display that show me my speed, the current speed limit, warnings, lane guidance... But none of that points to anything in my field of vision. Not AR. Mercedes also have heads-up displays, and while I don't own one, I saw a demonstration where when you are using adaptive cruise control, it highlights the car it is following. That's AR. The above is my lay understanding. If you buy this distinction between "heads up display" as a general term, and "AR" as a specific use of a heads up display, then Glass was not AR. It was just a heads-up display.
- dwighttk 5y agoGlass had no overlay. You don’t see reality and the screen at the same time. It is reality or the screen. (Just like a phone that isn’t running an AR app) Looking at the screen does obscure your perception of reality because your eye has to change focus. The little prism was transparent but it may as well have been translucent because you couldn’t focus on the screen and the world at the same time.
- jayd16 5y agoIt wasn't an overlay and wasn't powerful enough to do much with the camera in any realtime way. It was closer to a low powered smart watch that's mostly always in view.
- dwighttk 5y agoThis is a better description than I’ve been using… since it was so underpowered it was more like a smartwatch than a phone. But it wasn’t even mostly always in view… when you weren’t focused on it I guess it could kinda flash and make you focus on it, but it had no overlay ability.
- dougmwne 5y agoI disagree. It was and is an AR product. Re-watch this early promo video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErpNpR3XYUw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErpNpR3XYUw There are several clear AR features displayed. There's a location based notification about the subway service upon getting close to the entrance. There's overlaid compass based walking directions. There's GPS based location identification and check-in. AR is more than just computer vision driven overlays. Though that tech wasn't available to be put in a HMD at the time, these GPS driven features absolutely were AR features and the original Glass should rightfully be considered the first AR consumer product. Furthermore, the product still exists as the Enterprise Edition 2 and this current version supports computer vison and object identification applications, further strengthening its AR use cases.
- dwighttk 5y agoSure if the experience of using it had been anything like that video it would have been AR, but it was not like that. I’m sure they wanted AR glasses but instead they built a tiny screen you could look at when you weren’t looking at what was around you… kinda like a phone that you didn’t have to hold.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]