Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Would You Wear Video Glasses?

CowboyNeal posted more than 8 years ago | from the future's-so-bright dept.

239

Roland Piquepaille writes "According to EE Times, an Israeli company has developed a personal video display device that looks like a simple pair of glasses. You can use these glasses with various sources, such as a portable media player or your cell phone. This technology promises to eliminate the dizziness phenomenon usually associated with this kind of display. And with these glasses weighing only about 40 grams, you'll feel that you're viewing a 40-inch screen from a distance of 7 feet." Video screens embedded into eyewear isn't that new, but the footprint of these is smaller than what I've seen before, making them cooler to wear on the subway.

cancel ×

239 comments

Wear them on the subway? (4, Funny)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276890)

Much better to wear them while you're driving. At least more exciting.

Re:Wear them on the subway? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15276917)

why funny? if they're still transparent, i think you could give the driver lots of useful information without him having to look away from the road :)
and it'll probably bee cheaper than embedding it into the window

Re:Wear them on the subway? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15277121)

Uh oh. The last thing we need is a HUD IRL. Someone'll inevitably confuse "mph" with "score".

Think of the possibilities! (5, Interesting)

Ruff_ilb (769396) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277167)

If this really were JUST like a simple pair of glasses, you could potentially do all sorts of things; coupled with a video scanning device, you could flip through a book, much faster than you could read it, and then google it from your glasses. Heck, you could get a HUD for real life, or zoom in on a far away object... especially with the shrinking size of high-resolution cameras, the possibilities seem almost endless.

I'm sure the military would be interested in some applications too.

I wore beer goggles on a date (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15276992)

That's how I met my wife.

Re:I wore beer goggles on a date (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15277177)

Yah, that's how I met your wiff too. Hope she's got those crabs cured.

Re:Wear them on the subway? (1)

Traiklin (901982) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277120)

sounds like that episode of The Critic, where Jay's father was playing Donkey Kong while driving.

Re:Wear them on the subway? (1)

Xymor (943922) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277248)

Ohh, that's what those windshields are for...

Another Roland plagiarism article (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15276907)


Why do we keep seeing these articles posted on the Ziff davis advertising application ? i wonder if the eetimes allow anyone to just take their text and images and plaster around them adverts without permission ?

perhaps i should just photocopy Ziff davis magazines and post those on the web with adverts, after all it works for Roland so why not anyone ?

perhaps we need a RIAA to represent websites and original authors to stop the plethora of copy&paste scammers out to deprive the original artists of their efforts

Re:Another Roland plagiarism article (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15277463)

Agreed. Is it really necessary for him to link to the original article, and then another site where he (Roland) rips off the original article in nearly the exact same way as the /. post?

space goggles? (1, Troll)

lawngnome (573912) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276914)

"looks like a simple pair of glasses." - No way these will make you look like a space dork! I'll wait for the cool looking version, thanks anyway.

Re:space goggles? (2, Insightful)

moro_666 (414422) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276996)

i agree, the pictures in article are in no way something that we can call normal glasses.

the man looks like a 5 feet superfly with enormous goggles.

but now imagine, going to bed with your wife when she is 50, then wearing the glasses and looking at some good old german 'romance' movie wouldn't be that bad at all ... at least none can complain about your `performance`, which otherwise would be disabled due to visual conflicts.

Re:space goggles? (1)

joshier (957448) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277148)

Oh boy, if we look into implementing such a feature, we could integrate this one [logitech.com] -- facial tracking recondition, and turn your 45 year old floppy wife into a 25 year old super model, perhaps even britney spears!.. no wait, that's a dirty fat whore.. but you get the picture.

Re:space goggles? (1)

Venim (846130) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277110)

hah exactly what i was thinking. these things look absolutely horrible and no one in their right mind would wear them in public

Re:space goggles? (1)

Solra Bizna (716281) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277369)

I must be in my left mind. I think they're awesome.

-:sigma.SB

I'd use them (2, Interesting)

slusich (684826) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276929)

I'd use them, but only in certain places.
Certainly never on a subway or any other public place where you should be alert to your surroundings. They'd be ideal for taking on a trip to use on a plane or in a hotel room.

Re:I'd use them (3, Funny)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277107)

Also, ideal for eating dinner at a Japanese restaurant, once the rice comes down a bit.

FTFA:

Mirage claims its NanoPrism technology will alter the rice/performance of personal displays while solving the problems plaguing traditional personal displays, which include unacceptably large weight and form factor.

Re:I'd use them (1)

dugjohnson (920519) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277235)

I've been wanting a pair (or more) of these for years, but the resolution has sucked. I can see it for watching movies at home that I want to see, but my wife doesn't (and vice versa). Also for a sales presentation/demo 4 or 5 of these on everyone rather than trying to clear the break room for a projector (I present in small to medium size doctor's offices) would be much better.

Smaller? How about improved resolution. (3, Insightful)

ergo98 (9391) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276931)

I remember seeing glasses video displays this small a decade ago. Of course the problem with them then, and even now, was resolution: The resolution was so terrible that it has limited uses, seriously degrading even the already low quality of television.

Re:Smaller? How about improved resolution. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15277166)

40" at 7' is how you try to make 320x240 sound good.

to answer the articles question .... would I wear (0)

3seas (184403) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276936)

...and the answer is NO!

I already wear glasses and for this sort of thing I'll wait for the contact lenses version and lasik sergery versions to better fu& up my ability to see what is real.

That way its more life like....

Skip the spam (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15276939)


http://www.mirageinnovations.com/ [mirageinnovations.com]

Much better version here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15277245)

Skip the Flash (1)

HazE_nMe (793041) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277274)

I actually preferred to read info from the pages linked in the summary because I didn't have to wait for all the content to slide into place.

Reading into it (1)

kmahan (80459) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277276)

When I first saw the link I read it as "Migraine Innovations".

And yes, I suffer from migraines so that might have something to do with it.

Strangely appropriate dyslexia moment (1)

Weaselmancer (533834) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277425)

Maybe it's because I haven't had my coffee yet, but when I first looked at it - I could have sworn the website you linked was http://www.migraneinnovations.com/ [migraneinnovations.com]

Only if it has games and porn... (5, Funny)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276940)

no technology can survive without games and porn.

There's yet another unanswered question... (1)

Pichu0102 (916292) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276973)

...Does it run Linux?

Re:Only if it has games and porn... (1)

Teun (17872) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277329)

Absolutely!

And now the Dutch military has very recently banned the showing of porn this is the ideal tool for lonely soldiers and sailors.

Re:Only if it has games and porn... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15277338)

Sure, but it'll come in stages.

Stage 1) The practical justification for the technology. Attach a sensor so the glasses can be aware of what you're looking at and display vital information about what you're looking at.

Stage 2) The cute entertainment for the technology. Not only does it display vital information, it also adds funny captions depending on who or what you're looking at or add cartoons.

Stage 3) The risque entertainment for the technology. The captions become sexy and suggestive when looking at women.

Stage 4) The soft porn for the technology. The glasses use extrapolation to show you how the woman you're looking at would look naked as they move in front of you. People buying the glasses would never admit to buying it for the soft porn and claim it's for entertainment or practical use.

Stage 5) The soft porn for the technology. The glasses gather all the soft porn images and uses them to extrapolate sex scenes.

Anyone willing to place bets on this *not* happening?

Re:Only if it has games and porn... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15277407)

Why, you could get the best of two worlds! Simply watch the WOW "Internet for porn" video [google.com] on your favorite iPod video or the like, and voila!

Gimme one! (1)

acid06 (917409) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276942)

I *definately* want one of those!
I've always dreamed about having my own personal HUD. I've always drooled at that old Augmented Reality Quake [unisa.edu.au] thingy.

Re:Gimme one! (-1, Redundant)

cciRRus (889392) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277165)

I *definately* want one of those!
I didn't want to bring this up but you have actually emphasized a mispelt word... I had to. The proper spelling is "definitely".

Mind the Gap (3, Insightful)

datafr0g (831498) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276949)

making them cooler to wear on the subway.

Because it's cool to wear shades underground.

:-)

Re:Mind the Gap (1)

moranar (632206) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276969)

It's nerds we're talking about. What's this "sunlight" you were thinking of? If light was the only excuse to wear shades, nobody here would buy them.

Yes, this is a joke.

I will only do it until I need glasses... (3, Insightful)

bananahead (829691) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276958)

I worry about the long term effects on the eyes. You are constantly focusing on sonething only an inch or less from your eye, and the eye strain might have a negative effect over time. Remembering Steve Martin's movie 'The Jerk' where a device designed to keep your glasses from slipping down your nose eventually made everyone on the planet cross-eyed, I would use this but definitely limit my time.

Re:I will only do it until I need glasses... (5, Insightful)

vialation (885786) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277021)

The projection onto the lens will be at a focal length that is much longer than an inch. So just because you are looking at something an inch away, you're not focusing at an inch. Very much like if you get close to a mirror, and look at the objects that are behind you in the mirror. The image is a few inches away, but the objects are that few inches away plus the distance between the mirror and the objects. It's perfectly safe.

Re:I will only do it until I need glasses... (1, Troll)

MustardMan (52102) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277140)

Not to be a physics nazi, but the 'image' is not at the surface of the mirror, it's actually a virtual image that lies behind the mirror. The correct way to say it would be "the surface is a few inches away, but the image is a few inches away plus the distance between the mirror and the objects".

Don't feel bad - when I was an undergrad I walked out on a physics recitation because the TA fucked up the difference between real and virtual images too, and I was so disgusted I left ;)

Re:I will only do it until I need glasses... (1)

ScottyH (791307) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277157)

I did that once when a TA mixed up the difference between "++i" and "i++". Never went back either.

Re:I will only do it until I need glasses... (1)

marcosdumay (620877) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277281)

"It's perfectly safe."

On the "as bad as television" sense of safe. But not worse.

Re:I will only do it until I need glasses... (1)

lbmouse (473316) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277327)

"It's perfectly safe"

That's what the makers of the Optigrab [allwatchers.com] thought too.

Re:I will only do it until I need glasses... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15277023)

Don't be silly. It's not even possible to focus on something that is one inch from your eye without optics which make it appear to be farther away. Typical HUDs show the image as if it were a few meters from the eye.

Re:I will only do it until I need glasses... (1)

Zzootnik (179922) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277103)

Actually, I seem to remember some research about how that exact type of thing is GOOD for the eyes. At least as good as exercising any other muscle. If you're repeatedly refocusing your eyeball to the near and far extent of ranges, you'd likely get pretty beefy eyebell muscles. Hmmmm... OKay- after a bit of googling, it looks like the jury is still out on whether its actually helpful or not... [allaboutvision.com] Interesting premise, though.

Re:I will only do it until I need glasses... (1)

Echnin (607099) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277270)

Shi gata ga nai...

Is that a clever pun or a stupid misspelling? Argh! I don't get it.

The glassed need two things (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15276959)

1. As mentioned by others much higher resolution.

2. Sensors to detect where I'm viewing. Whether my focus is on the screen an inch away from my eye, or if I'm trying to look out past the screen. If I'm trying to look out past the screen, the video should shut off immediately (or at least become translucent).

Seeing is believing... (1)

D4C5CE (578304) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276961)

I might buy it (in both senses of the word) as soon as I've experienced a working prototype making all these promises come true right before my very eyes.

If it does work as advertised, its potential is huge e.g. for hands-free PDAs in all sorts of repair and construction jobs as well as military applications.

Re:Seeing is believing... (1)

Oligonicella (659917) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277055)

Yeah, I really need to be working up on roof joists and have a friggin' display that won't turn off.

Re:Seeing is believing... (1)

D4C5CE (578304) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277160)

working up on roof joists and have a friggin' display that won't turn off
Who told you so? Pilots with a HUD do not usually fly blindfolded either...;-/

Re:Seeing is believing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15277326)

Have you thought about how truly this applies to this situation?

Seeing is believing + Video glasses => Suspension of disbelief.

Dangerous, I say, very dangerous!

The captcha word is "suicide"... why is it that everytime the captcha (the word you have to type to prove you are human) has something to do with what I'll say? Have I become this predictable?

Oh, no! Is the captcha word "suicide" because of this last comment? :-/

Subways, seats, & stalls (1)

maggard (5579) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276966)

The LAST thing I want to do on the subway is put on some overpriced eyewear and NOT see what my fellow passengers are doing!

Look, there are times & place video is appropriate & useful and times it is not. I'd love to be able to lean back in a comfortable seat and watch something, put my body in a position that is not looking-at-the-screen-on-the-wall/desk/stand. Heck give me a small wireless keyboard and I'll geek from the backyard hammock on a nice day. Airline seat? ANYTHING to avoid the salesdroid on one side, have-you-found-jaysus nutter on the other, and the screaming baby behind.

But on the subway? No. Driving? No. While 'speed walking' the neighborhood? No (my iPod-anesthetized neighbors blissfully unaware of the activity around them are already bad enough!)

Anyway, any bets how long 'till we hear the sounds of Battlestar Galactica from the adjoining stall as a co-worker takes a suspiciously long bathroom break?

Re:Subways, seats, & stalls (1)

_Hellfire_ (170113) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277004)

Anyway, any bets how long 'till we hear the sounds of Battlestar Galactica from the adjoining stall as a co-worker takes a suspiciously long bathroom break?

Is that what the kids are calling it these days?

Odd choice of logo design (1)

Doubting Maxwell (962422) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276967)

Mirage Innovations logo looks rather like the one on my Sony Walkman, turned upside down.

Wonder how long until they're sued? :)

Re:Odd choice of logo design (1)

Attaturk (695988) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277035)

Mirage Innovations logo looks rather like the one on my Sony Walkman, turned upside down.
Wonder how long until they're sued?
:)

http://www.sony.jp/CorporateCruise/Press/200005/00 -0515B/logo1.gif [www.sony.jp]

http://www.tmura.org/images/donor_logos/mirage_log o.jpg [tmura.org]

Thought I'd look it up since I had no idea what the Walkman logo was like. You're not wrong. That is pretty cheeky.

And how long until the IOC sues Sony? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277295)

The Walkman logo itself looks like what you get when you fill in the circles of the International Olympic Committee [olympic.org] logo.

Reason not to wear them - Muggings! (2, Insightful)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276974)

From the TFA these glasses are being touted as a portable multimedia experience. With the (lack of) details on the websites it appears that wearing then will significantly fill out the users field of vision (which you would hope for in order to get the best viewing). So we have:

1) Expensie tech (As in a couple of hundred)
2) Not physically large
3) Highly visible to everyone else that you are using it
4) Blocks out significant part of your own visual field (and also audio)
5) Designed to be used outside of your own home (as otherwise why use it)

In a private situation (or on a plane) these glasses would be OK, but wear them on the subway, or sit in the park and you might as well put up a banner that says "Mug me!!"

But a solution would be to put a web cam on top of the glasses, and feed it back into the system as a "picture in picture" so you can keep track of the outside world while you gasp at the unblelievable plot quality of m:i:III :D

Re:Reason not to wear them - Muggings! (1)

Dorothy 86 (677356) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277367)

There was a guy who did just that in Serial Experiments: Lain.

I GIS'd for a picture of him, but to no avail.

what if you need glasses to see close up ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15276983)

As we age our eyes loose the ability to focus at short distances, thus the need for reading glasses. Would someone who needs glasses to read be able to use a display that is only an inch or so from his eyballs ?

Re:what if you need glasses to see close up ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15277175)

Most everyday displays are "animated paper" but they don't have to be. A mirror for example produces images that appear farther than the mirror plane. If you emit light in a special way you can achieve anything.

Wonnie (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15276986)

Wonnie you dickhead, why not simply paste the link to Mirage Innovations since you've basically just regurgitated their press release?

No (1)

Have Blue (616) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276989)

I don't want to shut out my view of the outside world entirely. Using headphones is bad enough, but not being able to see is too much.

Also, they look incredibly dorky.

HD version of this would be nice. (4, Interesting)

emj (15659) | more than 8 years ago | (#15276991)

This is clearly a step forward and will lower the cost of wearable screens, we can just hope it's not as much vaporware as it sounds. I also have some issues with the whole wearable screen tech business: Every "videoglasses" producer has always promised 40" TV, for as long as these have been sold, but usually the let down is quality. You know a laptop 12" screen can also seem to be 40" as long as you have it close enough, and a laptop screen has better resolution.

I've used the Sony version that you plugged into a TV, and that version was very low res, about 400px in height. I'm not sure you can make "affordable" wearable displays with any good resolution. Even though Mirage, the makers of this device, are using a single OLED/LCD it still going to cost a lot to produce enough pixels to satisfy the eye.

And I can't figure out how my glasses are going to fit in there.

Re:HD version of this would be nice. (2, Insightful)

ansible (9585) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277079)

Yeah.

I saw a couple manufacturers of video glasses at CES. One set wouldn't fit over my glasses at all. The other set was supposed to fit, but didn't. I seem to have a head on the larger end of the spectrum, but still.

And the kicker... IIRC both devices had QVGA resolution. Rather useless for hacking, and not really that good for TV anymore either.

If any manufacturers are listening... I want a set that has large image size, and high resolution. 1280x1024 is barely acceptable, and 1920x1280 would be good. Then you can watch HD, and have enough real estate for a bunch of terminal windows. And yeah, that would be expensive, but surely not nearly as expensive as a 50 inch physical display using LCD, plasma, OLED, or whatever.

Re:HD version of this would be nice. (2, Funny)

Txiasaeia (581598) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277116)

"If any manufacturers are listening... I want a set that has large image size, and high resolution. 1280x1024 is barely acceptable, and 1920x1280 would be good. Then you can watch HD, and have enough real estate for a bunch of terminal windows. And yeah, that would be expensive, but surely not nearly as expensive as a 50 inch physical display using LCD, plasma, OLED, or whatever."

Don't you think that, if it was technologically possible, it would have been done already, and tiny school children in Korea would be mailing in cereal box UPCs for them as a prize?

driving down the road.. (1)

darth_linux (778182) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277001)

talking on on my phone... watching Shrek 2.... drink... something.... and shaving... while turned around and yelling at the kids

How long til.. (1)

Conspiracy_Of_Doves (236787) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277003)

How long until we can have nanites that attach themselves to the individual rods and cones of our retinas and cause the nerves to fire or not.

Re:How long til.. (1)

slack-fu (940017) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277036)

Can i find those on Ebay?

Can you DIGG it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15277017)

This is hilarious, a posting by Roland, with the headline word for word like the article on digg.com.

Why are all the stories on slashdot things that were on digg.com two days ago?

Re:Can you DIGG it? (1)

Oligonicella (659917) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277082)

Perhaps this explains the rabid anti-copyright attitude of /.? Cant' write on their own?

Ah hah (1)

IlliniECE (970260) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277019)

Now *that's* what I really call "Intellivision".

Yet another step towards... (1)

RM6f9 (825298) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277038)

assimilation! Given the wrist-band key-pads, blue-tooth headsets, I-pod ear-buds, then add these glasses to get one step closer to being Borg - granted, the concept has loads of different potentials once they get the resolution up and hands-free clearing/trans-lucing worked out, but until then, no, I won't own a pair - when they do, it'll give another dimension to the term "reading glasses"...

I Can Hardly Wait ... (4, Insightful)

richg74 (650636) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277052)

Gee, this is really great -- but forget the subway. I'm a cyclist, and I have a "collection" of cool things I've seen people do to take their minds off the boredom of driving, including:
  • Shaving or putting on makeup
  • Reading the paper
  • Using a laptop placed in the passenger seat
  • Turning around to smack the kid in the back seat
But my personal favorite is the guy I saw playing the trumpet.

I can hardly wait to enjoy dodging the guy who's using these to watch, say, the fighter chase inside the Death Star from Star Wars.

Re:I Can Hardly Wait ... (1)

PiercedSoul (619437) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277309)

I was riding my bike through Princeton, NJ, once, and I saw a woman eating soup, from a bowl, while driving...oh, and on Nassau Street I ran over a squirrel, maybe he was wearing video glasses.......

Re:I Can Hardly Wait ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15277481)

Gee, this is really great -- but forget the subway. I'm a cyclist, and I have a "collection" of cool things I've seen people do to take their minds off the boredom of driving, including:

        * Shaving or putting on makeup
        * Reading the paper
        * Using a laptop placed in the passenger seat
        * Turning around to smack the kid in the back seat


Okay, not sure whether you're unfamiliar with the concept of "the subway" or are just a bit slow on the uptake, but passengers on the subway typically do not drive the train.

Maybe ... (1, Interesting)

Hektor_Troy (262592) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277054)

Depends on a few things ...

First of all - they're hideous. Few types of (sun)glasses look good on people (depends on the facial shape amongst other things), so a one design fits all is out the window if you expect people to use them in public.

If I can get some that fit outside my own glasses, that'd be nice. Even better if you could adjust each screen to somehow present an image that apears sharp to whatever's wrong with your eyes. Not sure you can do that though ... present an image that looks blurry to regular vision, but sharp to someone not wearing their glasses that is.

40 grams is also a bit on the heavy side. My own glasses weigh 22 grams, and they can be a bit bothersome in the long run. Of course, these probably aren't meant to be worn 16 hours a day anyway, so maybe it's not a problem. Hard to say without trying.

Since they're obviously meant to improve your sense of "being there" in whatever you're watching (movie, tv, game), you'd think it'd be logical to use Dolby Surround head phones with them. However most ear covering headphones are uncomfortable to wear through a movie when you're wearing glasses, as the "legs" (no clue what they're actually called) tend to get mushed between the ear and the skull, which is rather annoying over the course of more than maybe 45 minutes in my case.

I suppose my answer to the question in the title is a big fat maybe

Re:Maybe ... (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277306)

They should include intra-aureal earphones with this, such as the these [shurestore.com] . I would think the adaptive optices to correct for vision might be a bit more cumbersome, but might be possible. My regular glasses are 16g, so 40g is indeed on the heavy side, but not outside the realm of usability.

You won't find me wearing them in public to pass the time though...they're still quite ugly. Then again, so are those huge bluetooth headsets that seem to be growing out of the ear of every real estate agent I know, but they wear them anyway.

Re:Maybe ... (1)

Eivind (15695) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277444)

No. You can't change the display on a screen in such a way that say shortsigthed persons will see it sharp. If that was possible there'd be such an adjustment in every tv and computer-monitor on the planet.

Nuts (1)

epp_b (944299) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277060)

People are going to think you're from the loonie bin when you're laughing out loud at the comedy show you're watching.

Re:Nuts (1)

kavau (554682) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277507)

Nah, people will get used to this. Just as they got used to people apparently having agitated conversations with themselves in public.

Israeli tech.. (0, Offtopic)

emj (15659) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277066)

Israel is really producing lots of tech, and some cool tech at that...
From slashdot:

Re:Israeli tech.. (0, Flamebait)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277102)

And if only they could learn to treat Palestinians with respect they might have more credibility as a nation

Re:Israeli tech.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15277128)

If only the palestinians weren't mindless savages, the rest of the durka durkas in the middle east.

Then they wouldn't get treated with utter contempt.

Re:Israeli tech.. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15277176)

why would you respect people that want to wipe out your entire race off the face of the earth?

Would I wear them? (1)

zakezuke (229119) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277074)

Hmmm.. 20 inch tube monitor or glasses that fit in a drawer when i'm done... hmmmmmm

More desktop space or a 20 inch tube monitor that takes up so much space I glued a shelf ontop of it.

The ability to wear glasses... lean back with my wireless keyboard and trackball, and get something done.

I gotta say... while I like my old sony 20se, it won't last forever... and LCD is pretty attractive, glasses are even more so.

they tried too hard.. (3, Interesting)

ZSpade (812879) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277075)

I think they tried too hard to make these look like regular sun glasses. I think they should add borders to the lenses, or something to proclaim that "No this guy isn't just wearing the most retarded sunglasses you've ever seen, but actually a nifty piece of technology."

They got the something light right, but until they can actually make these look like fashion wear, they shouldn't even try. It's like trying to make the ipod look like an earing. It would be big clunky, and ugly, but just trying to make the ipod look like an ipod has created a fashion trend in and of itself.

So far the only piece of wearable technology that can actually add cool points is something that's centuries old - The Wrist Watch [wikipedia.org]

Hell Yes! (1)

flandery (717054) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277080)

All I need are a couple more features:

Heads up display - Interact with the real world when needed and use when distractions won't be an issue. Think checking a map when stopped at a red light.
Virtual Interface - The device could project a virtual keyboard on to any surface (or in mid air?), allowing for user inuput in any location.

Sure these may take some time to implement, but in the mean time, I'd be happy be the dork wearing the current model.

40 Inches at Seven Feet? (3, Interesting)

setirw (854029) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277093)

If the size of perceivable objects diminishing with distance is an inverse square relationship (as it is with light intensity...)

Forty inches at seven feet is equivalent to approximately one inch (.81 inches, to be precise) at one foot, which isn't that big. It'll fill most of field of vision, though (hold a ruler one inch from your eye and compare).

Not inverse square. (3, Informative)

nonlnear (893672) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277169)

Just an inverse relationship. So many ways to explain it... so little time.

Converting (2, Interesting)

houghi (78078) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277101)

you'll feel that you're viewing a 40-inch screen from a distance of 7 feet.

40 inches is about 1 meter. 7 feet is just above 2 meters.
It does not talk about resolution. I have 2 x 1600x1200 20", so 40" would be 4 times as large. However when I stand 7 feet away, it looks about 4 times smaller, making it standard.

So I guess they are saying it looks like a normal screen. They could have also said that it looked like a movie screen screen where you sit in the back of the teater.

Oh and 40 grams is about 1.4 ounce.

Re:Converting (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15277232)

Well the '7 feet' is the distance at which your eye has to focus. It is a constant which depends on the optical properties of the glasses. So no, you cannot say that it is the same as being 1 inch away or a movie theater away. Those don't feel the same even if you match the angular size of the image.

Mugger Alert (1)

StarWreck (695075) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277108)

Great... something every mugger in the world will try to steal also helps to distract you so you don't notice the approaching mugger!

The new cheating (2, Funny)

iosmart (624285) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277129)

Kids would go crazy over this! Put on their "glasses" and cheat straight through the test.

Next stop wearable computers... (1)

charlie_vernacular (710651) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277155)

I know they already exist, but I'm thinking in terms of their being commonplace.

Main CPU box worn on the body, display spectacles, wireless keyboard and mouse (if desired) or wireless input tablet a la Wacom if preferred. Maybe a decent voice recognition system for dictation.

All doable now, of course, but how long before it costs less than a thousand pounds?

Convergence (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15277156)

Connect them to that remote controlled, turret mounted machine gun, coupled with the radar-based RPG "shield" and you'd have one sweet ride!

I love convergence of technologies!

Only at home... (2, Insightful)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277163)

Only at home behind closed and locked doors. And drawn curtains.

And even then, what would be the point? For the same money, I can buy a decent TV that 1) won't hurt my eyes, 2) friends can also enjoy, 3) doesn't requirement me to hide from the world because of how moronic I look.

Yes please (5, Insightful)

pesc (147035) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277190)

If this means...
  • The size of my laptop can be reduced to the size of the keyboard
  • The weight of my laptop can be reduced significantly
  • The battery time can be extended since the wearable display uses less power than the LCD backlight
  • The cost of the whole laptop can be cheaper since massproducing a micro-LCD device should be significantly cheaper than producing an 12 - 17 inch LCD.
  • I can get a laptop with a 30+ inch display in a format more compact than a 12 inch laptop.
... I can hardly wait! Bring it on!

And to those of you who wouldn't dare using it in public because of the fear being mugged: I hope the mass production of these devices would make them as common as the earplugs everyone is using with their MP3-players nowadays.

hell yeah!!! (1)

urbieta (212354) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277205)

Ill just wait for a low profile model so the subway muggers skip me thinking I am aware of their pressence and have a button or something that will allow me to toggle between the video and totally transparent view, or even better, they could integrate it with the video ipod and use the wheel for video dimming control to let me get on and off the subway safely without taking off the glasses; or even to move the screen under my main line of sight? :D

and that -mass production consumer affordable pricing remark is a must of course :) ...Ill pay no more than 30 bucks each!

stereo (1)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277307)

Most importantly, it gives you (possibilities of) stereo view. Never mind that glasses of less convenient form have been here for while...

No thanks. (4, Funny)

edunbar93 (141167) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277310)

I learned from personal experience a long, long time ago that big, weird-looking glasses make you look like a total dork.

Bad idea (1)

porkmusket (954006) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277376)

If the Oakley Thump [oakley.com] can make regular sunglasses look like a medical device for an unfortunate ear disease with the addition of earbuds and some flash memory, then we're a long ways off before somebody makes video glasses that don't look stupid. I mean, that shit still looks dumb in 2360 [geocities.com] (wow I didn't even know geocities was still around. gg yahoo) The video glasses could be very cool for things like integrated HUD overlays while driving, but that won't really be needed until we have flying cars. I'd rock these ugly-ass glasses while I cruised by in a flying car. Have we learned nothing from href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096874/">Back to the Future II? Man, if the government only stop suppressing all the free-energy technology...

Awesome! (1)

xxybermancer (972081) | more than 8 years ago | (#15277437)

I've been actually dilligently waiting for this kind of technology to come into the mainstream for good. I want to get rid of my giant monitor and equally large computer tower all in one hull. I'd replace the tower with probably a Damn Small Linux box and the monitor with a 'Personal Video Display.'

Its just like "Snow Crash!" YAY!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...