• wwb4itcgas@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Anybody idiotic enough to buy those deserve precisely what they’re going to get.

  • tal@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    I don’t really understand the use case for this. It’s got no head-tracking, so no AR stuff. It’s got no display, so can’t even overlay non-AR stuff in your field of vision, which is the main reason that I’d be willing to stick an electronic device in front of my eyes. It’s not a value play, because it costs about as much as AR goggles.

    It gives you okay audio, a microphone, and not-so-impressive-compared-to-phone-cameras binocular video.

    Maybe if it constantly recorded video and you could just smack a button to save the last N minutes or something, I could sort of see that, if you assume that people don’t want to miss recording something critical, which they might with a smartphone – with this, if you saw it, you could save it. But they don’t permit for that, probably because the battery is too limited.

  • Alphane Moon@lemmy.worldOPM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Chris Cox, Meta’s chief product officer, said at a Morgan Stanley conference this week that Ray-Bans are “still in the zone of just getting to like, making sure this is available everywhere and everybody who wants it can get it … you’re starting to see a lot of love for the product.”

    Is there really “a lot of love” for this product? Meta Ray-Bans are non-existent where I live. I know they’ve sold several million units, but that’s not that much on a global scale.