The era of the google glasses is long gone and apparently some pretty fun tech is on the market now.Have you tried one of the flagship brands/models, and how good was it actually?I would gladly replace my entire screen setup if it works as well as it's advertised as.
Why can we do gay shit like this but not robot eyes?
>>107499266It's just a small screen in glasses, nothing revolutionary.I wish it worked well so I could use it to watch movies everywhere, including in bed or outside.
>>107499140>>107499266I tried the xreals before the most recent ones that came out. They didn't have the chip that, I believe, balances out motion.What I can say is that these *are* the future of displays, but the technology isn't there yet. It's going to be a few iterations before we can put on glasses and have displays that are equivalent to what we can set up cheaply now with hardware monitors.The biggest thing is that you don't realize how much compensation your eyes are doing to balance what you're seeing every day. Every little bit of motion shaking your virtual display is 100x more prominent when you're wearing these.With some stablization (maybe that chip they put in the new ones helps) and a way to balance battery life with data throughput these will be what people use in some way soon.
I've been using the xreal one pretty regularly for a few months now. For videos, it works pretty amazingly. For gaming, it works well enough. For productivity... I'm not gonna replace my monitor any time soon, but its still far and away the best option for when I'm out of the house/office.The tech is at a nice sweet spot at this point now that the 3-dof processing is done in the glasses. Needing a huge ass brick with you for it before was way too cumbersome.
>>107499390Can you use it for a long time without issue?
