5 ms·

I’m not sure why they didn’t include a photo of someone actually wearing them, so here’s one for you: https://www.engadget.com/vixion01-glasses-reduce-eyestrain

I’m not sure why they didn’t include a photo of someone actually wearing them, so here’s one for you: https://www.engadget.com/vixion01-glasses-reduce-eyestrain-by-doing-the-focusing-for-you-205106281.html https://www.engadget.com/vixion01-glasses-reduce-eyestrain-b...

v9v 2y ago
The battery life and IP rating are a bit disappointing. Having to charge your glasses ~twice a day sounds like a big ask.
- PromptCoding 2y ago
  [dead]
- xorcist 2y ago
  As long as the battery is fresh. Li-ion degrades pretty quickly. For most of the product's lifetime it's going to be more than that.
- makeitdouble 2y ago
  IP rating is IMHO critical. If people start relying on it to live their life, getting it killed by unpredicted rain or an accidental water splash will be quite a shock. Battery life could be worked around if they're really that much of an improvement in day to day use. Even buying two or three pairs to go through a full day could be a worthy tradeoff if they don't need to pair to anything. Cost could be an issue, but 2 or 3 of them would still be cheaper that many hearing aids for instance.
jeffnappi 2y ago
Very Geordi La Forge esque. Would be nice if this is more stylish and normalized by the time I need bifocals
- delichon 2y ago
  Good news, you tend to care less about stylish by the time you need bifocals. I have leveled up to the point at which I can wear bifocals and suspenders without giving any fucks. Probably because they no longer alter my probability of getting one.
  - ok_dad 2y ago
    Agree fully, as I put on the dorkiest headband in the world to capture sweat from my forehead as I work outside. It's not that we older folds don't care what people think, but more like we now realize that people rarely care or think about others who aren't close to them. Those few dozen people that see me in my dorky headband won't even remember my face in 15 seconds.
- card_zero 2y ago
  I looked at a few images, they look like a combination of: * Geordi's visor * A nose clip for swimming * Stick-on googly eyes The last design choice seems particularly bold. I guess they're less threatening that way? Or it just kind of happened for technical reasons.
- Izikiel43 2y ago
  Very stylish they are
supertofu 2y ago
I don't think "dorky" is the right word for these glasses. Anachronistic is better. And that can be a good thing or a bad thing depending on one's perspective.
- wormius 2y ago
  Others mentioned Geordie, but even going back (and obviously the "visor" was in the zeitgeist since at least the 70s with the android type bots drawn by futurists), my first thought was the Six Flags Great America type sunglasses that were cool as hell when my older sister came home with them. This is the closest I could find in search without trying too hard. But yeah, why can't these companies just design regular old glasses styles so people don't feel like a dolt and maybe would want to buy them. Instead everyone has to be made to look like a glasshole and all the entitlement that connotes in the mass mind. https://di2ponv0v5otw.cloudfront.net/posts/2018/03/20/5ab0dc4072ea880886eaaf99/m_5ab0dca036b9de5db0354356.jpg https://di2ponv0v5otw.cloudfront.net/posts/2018/03/20/5ab0dc...
  - fwipsy 2y ago
    They look like Google glasses because they have the same design constraints: small lens and needing to fit a lot of electronics in the frame. If they could make them look normal I think they obviously would.
lttlrck 2y ago
They don't look nearly as bad as the title suggests. Edit: "My eyesight was sharper than usual for both far and close distances (down to two inches)" blimey! I might be sold. I need read glasses for soldering and close work like that and it's a bit of a pain.
- throwanem 2y ago
  > They don't look nearly as bad as the title suggests. Come on, yeah they do. You don't have a car-style cellular antenna sticking up any more, the way you would in the 90s. But that, and incremental refinement in materials and profile, is really all the aesthetic difference from what you'd see back then. It doesn't do enough to help. Granted, you're not wrong about the potential benefits, although I think I'd need a lot of convincing that it's enough of a qualitative improvement to be worth the cost and complexity over fixed magnifiers. But I'd never consider these at all if you could see my electronics bench from the street.
  - bigstrat2003 2y ago
    > Come on, yeah they do. Not at all. I actually think they look kind of cool. I still would prefer very understated glasses, but these are way better than a lot of the awful frames you see people wearing sometimes.
    - throwanem 2y ago
      Those have at least the virtue of being on trend. It's not that these don't also make a fashion statement; it's that the content of the statement is "I decline to participate." Not that I'm judging; I'd hardly be one to, certainly not these days when the most elaborate style I bother going for is "artsy graying homosexual" and even that not with any real commitment, aside from the graying part, which isn't up to me. But I was a classic when I was young, and while no one ever particularly mentioned my glasses adding to my looks that I recall, I believe I now know a way I could've had people mentioning they took a lot away from them. Make of it what you find it to be worth.
- 2y ago
duxup 2y ago
I think they look pretty cool.
teddyh 2y ago
Articles only need click-bait titles, not pictures, in order to be profitable. Relevant and informative pictures are an unecessary expense. People don’t read articles to be informed, people read articles to feel smart. And to just feel smart, you don’t actually need a picture.
silisili 2y ago
It always amazes me eyewear entrants don't start with something tried, tested, and timeless like wayfarers or aviators. More room to work with and shove batteries evenly, too. Sure, offer this as an option for people who like it if you want, but the classics are still popular for a reason.
m3kw9 2y ago
Damn that’s bad

v9v 2y ago

The battery life and IP rating are a bit disappointing. Having to charge your glasses ~twice a day sounds like a big ask.

PromptCoding 2y ago
[dead]
xorcist 2y ago
As long as the battery is fresh. Li-ion degrades pretty quickly. For most of the product's lifetime it's going to be more than that.
makeitdouble 2y ago
IP rating is IMHO critical. If people start relying on it to live their life, getting it killed by unpredicted rain or an accidental water splash will be quite a shock. Battery life could be worked around if they're really that much of an improvement in day to day use. Even buying two or three pairs to go through a full day could be a worthy tradeoff if they don't need to pair to anything. Cost could be an issue, but 2 or 3 of them would still be cheaper that many hearing aids for instance.

jeffnappi 2y ago

Very Geordi La Forge esque. Would be nice if this is more stylish and normalized by the time I need bifocals

delichon 2y ago
Good news, you tend to care less about stylish by the time you need bifocals. I have leveled up to the point at which I can wear bifocals and suspenders without giving any fucks. Probably because they no longer alter my probability of getting one.
- ok_dad 2y ago
  Agree fully, as I put on the dorkiest headband in the world to capture sweat from my forehead as I work outside. It's not that we older folds don't care what people think, but more like we now realize that people rarely care or think about others who aren't close to them. Those few dozen people that see me in my dorky headband won't even remember my face in 15 seconds.
card_zero 2y ago
I looked at a few images, they look like a combination of: * Geordi's visor * A nose clip for swimming * Stick-on googly eyes The last design choice seems particularly bold. I guess they're less threatening that way? Or it just kind of happened for technical reasons.
Izikiel43 2y ago
Very stylish they are

supertofu 2y ago

I don't think "dorky" is the right word for these glasses. Anachronistic is better. And that can be a good thing or a bad thing depending on one's perspective.

wormius 2y ago
Others mentioned Geordie, but even going back (and obviously the "visor" was in the zeitgeist since at least the 70s with the android type bots drawn by futurists), my first thought was the Six Flags Great America type sunglasses that were cool as hell when my older sister came home with them. This is the closest I could find in search without trying too hard. But yeah, why can't these companies just design regular old glasses styles so people don't feel like a dolt and maybe would want to buy them. Instead everyone has to be made to look like a glasshole and all the entitlement that connotes in the mass mind. https://di2ponv0v5otw.cloudfront.net/posts/2018/03/20/5ab0dc4072ea880886eaaf99/m_5ab0dca036b9de5db0354356.jpg https://di2ponv0v5otw.cloudfront.net/posts/2018/03/20/5ab0dc...
- fwipsy 2y ago
  They look like Google glasses because they have the same design constraints: small lens and needing to fit a lot of electronics in the frame. If they could make them look normal I think they obviously would.

lttlrck 2y ago

They don't look nearly as bad as the title suggests. Edit: "My eyesight was sharper than usual for both far and close distances (down to two inches)" blimey! I might be sold. I need read glasses for soldering and close work like that and it's a bit of a pain.

throwanem 2y ago
> They don't look nearly as bad as the title suggests. Come on, yeah they do. You don't have a car-style cellular antenna sticking up any more, the way you would in the 90s. But that, and incremental refinement in materials and profile, is really all the aesthetic difference from what you'd see back then. It doesn't do enough to help. Granted, you're not wrong about the potential benefits, although I think I'd need a lot of convincing that it's enough of a qualitative improvement to be worth the cost and complexity over fixed magnifiers. But I'd never consider these at all if you could see my electronics bench from the street.
- bigstrat2003 2y ago
  > Come on, yeah they do. Not at all. I actually think they look kind of cool. I still would prefer very understated glasses, but these are way better than a lot of the awful frames you see people wearing sometimes.
  - throwanem 2y ago
    Those have at least the virtue of being on trend. It's not that these don't also make a fashion statement; it's that the content of the statement is "I decline to participate." Not that I'm judging; I'd hardly be one to, certainly not these days when the most elaborate style I bother going for is "artsy graying homosexual" and even that not with any real commitment, aside from the graying part, which isn't up to me. But I was a classic when I was young, and while no one ever particularly mentioned my glasses adding to my looks that I recall, I believe I now know a way I could've had people mentioning they took a lot away from them. Make of it what you find it to be worth.
2y ago

duxup 2y ago

I think they look pretty cool.

teddyh 2y ago

Articles only need click-bait titles, not pictures, in order to be profitable. Relevant and informative pictures are an unecessary expense. People don’t read articles to be informed, people read articles to feel smart. And to just feel smart, you don’t actually need a picture.

silisili 2y ago

It always amazes me eyewear entrants don't start with something tried, tested, and timeless like wayfarers or aviators. More room to work with and shove batteries evenly, too. Sure, offer this as an option for people who like it if you want, but the classics are still popular for a reason.

m3kw9 2y ago

Damn that’s bad