Still no SDK though, what’s the point of smart glasses that only do what Meta lets them?
I’m personally more excited about the Mentra Live glasses, which are fully programmable with AugmentOS.
dkobia · 41s ago
This. The meta glasses have so much potential and it is absolutely frustrating as a developer to have no way to make use of it.
divan · 2m ago
Weird take: my biggest annoyance with Meta glasses after 1+ year of almost daily usage is that there is no way to switch from Meta AI to any other voice AI.
sleepyguy · 1h ago
My elderly mother-in-law is slowly going blind. She relies on Meta glasses to read print on everything — from the back of a can to the mail. She also uses them to help locate items around the house, whether it’s something on the counter or in the living room.
I’ve tried the glasses myself, and I’m convinced that wearable eyewear like this will eventually replace the mobile phone. With ongoing advances in miniaturization, it’s only a matter of time before AR and AV are fully integrated into everyday wearables.
gwbas1c · 50m ago
> and I’m convinced that wearable eyewear like this will eventually replace the mobile phone
Once there is an actual usable in-glasses screen, I will agree.
A few years ago I tried someone's smartglasses with a screen. It basically had similar functionality to my first Fitbit: it would show texts, notifications, caller ID.
I really want one of those and went looking, but couldn't find it.
SoftTalker · 37m ago
I don't think so. You still would have to wear glasses, which is annoying.
cshimmin · 36m ago
some of us have to wear glasses anyway :/
eloisant · 28m ago
Then they'll have to find a way to separate the "smart" frame from the prescription lenses, so you can change the glasses when your sight changes without having to buy smart frame each time - or the other way around, upgrade your frames without having to buy prescriptions lenses again.
sleepyguy · 17m ago
Lensology, you tell them the frames, and upload your prescription, and they send you the lenses to pop in. It's called reglazing, and millions of people do it all the time.
Ray Ban does it for their Meta glasses, but Lensology can handle stronger prescription lenses.
dmarcos · 28m ago
And contact lenses and lasik are popular because many don’t want to wear glasses. I see head mounted displays useful in constrained scenarios (e.g construction site and tasks where you already wear safety glasses and need free hands). I have a harder time seeing a world where people ditch phones and start voluntarily wearing glasses which is often uncomfortable and inconvenient. Just finished 5 miles run on treadmill, went to sauna and did bouldering. There’s no room for glasses but can occasionally check my phone.
mollerhoj · 9m ago
i dont think youre very representative of the general population
ian-g · 48m ago
I’m very glad your mother in law has use for them.
With that said, I don’t think these can replace phones until they’re quite a lot smaller and lighter. And to make it worse, you’d need at least two pairs - regular and sun. Possibly three if you’re someone who regularly uses safety glasses.
nhecker · 29m ago
Photochromatic coatings -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photochromic_lens -- have existed for a while and are sold on safety glasses, at least according to a cursory look at a large online retailer's site.
That said, I'm not sure I'd want smart glasses. Being stuck on a computer for work, I try to take some time every day to be completely free of digital things. It's hard enough to do that with a smart phone in my pocket vying for my attention. I imagine it would be only harder with smart glasses over my eyeballs.
wiether · 26m ago
So how do you prevent Meta from gathering secrets displayed for even a tenth of a second on an employee' screen?
You'll have to ask security to check everyone's glasses now?
wwweston · 12m ago
Meta isn’t the last company I’d trust with a wearable always on video input (among other data no doubt), but they’re in the bracket.
Bender · 16m ago
This is just my opinion but these look even worse that the 1940's+ military issued BC/BCG glasses. BC as in birth control. [1] At least it will be easy to spot the glassholes [2] for now at least.
Looks cool but I just hate the heaviness and feel of wearing acetate. If they ever make titanium smartglasses I'll be all over them.
kube-system · 2h ago
Titanium is about 3-4x the density, they're normally light only because less material can be used... which is probably problematic when used as an enclosure for electronics.
syntaxing · 2h ago
Titanium for electronics isn’t much of a problem (look at Apple Watch and a bunch of Apple product). The issue is that it’s a considerably more expensive material (every cents count when you scale to consumer electronics) and a bit harder to work with.
kube-system · 1h ago
We were talking about weight -- you don't hang those devices on your face.
Titanium glasses are lightweight because a very minimal amount of material is used. This is possible for regular glasses because you can make them with a ~1mm cross-section. When you want to put electronics inside of them, you need much more material.
LtdJorge · 43m ago
Does sheet titanium not exist? I know it’s a tough metal, I don’t know if it would be feasible to make it out of folded sheet titanium.
Edit: Just checked, it does exist.
kube-system · 13m ago
The weight is the issue. The guy above said he doesn't like the weight of acetate glasses. Acetate frames for traditional glasses are 10-20 grams. Titanium frames for traditional glasses are 5-10 grams.
Between the weight of material and the electronics, I don't really see anything approaching the feel that someone that discerning would want.
isatty · 47m ago
Why? If 1mm cross section titanium is just as or stronger why does it need to be thicker? For anchors?
kube-system · 46m ago
Because the electronics used in smart glasses go inside of the frames. It's not a structural problem, it's a packaging problem.
diggan · 1h ago
Although parent asking for titanium for the feeling, so maybe something in-between would be fine? Lightweight material inside and structurally, but titanium or something else as the "skin".
LtdJorge · 46m ago
Even if it’s an order of magnitude more expensive, they would make money on the glasses. Oakley (and every brand controlled by the Luxotica monopoly) glasses have extreme margins. On the order of, could be sold for under $20 making a profit but are sold for $300+. I don’t think the titanium work and the electronics can offset that.
woleium · 1h ago
The material is not the majority of the expense. The cost comes from the difficulty encountered when working the metal using standard tooling. It is difficult to work, low tolerance and high failure rates made it impractical prior to modern (very expensive) machines.
LorenDB · 2h ago
Come on, why would you make smart glasses with a clear shell and then hide the electronics behind an inner shielding layer? I want all the circuits on display.
duped · 57m ago
Light can affect the operation of many electronics, it's just easier to not worry about it and enclose the entire thing. Some models of RPI had this problem.
sodokuwizard · 2h ago
ah yes to satisfy that world famous market of giga electronics nerds in oakleys
longtimelistnr · 2h ago
Well i know this is sarcastic but have you seen the preferred design language of the Oakley founder? Exposed circuitry is righttt up his alley.
luxuryballs · 1h ago
it sounds like he got in trouble for exposing his circuitry in public
luxuryballs · 1h ago
I was looking at the Ray-Ban version of these for a few minutes before I realized there’s no HUD… I wouldn’t even consider a dev kit for one of these unless I had some kind of ability to add a dragon ball scouter widget to show the power level on the lens…
excalibur · 48m ago
If that's what you want, you can find some pretty good deals on Google Glass on ebay.
Workaccount2 · 1h ago
A side note, but it is very unfortunate luck that the pendulum of fashionable eye-wear has swung back towards 80's/90's style thin frame/no frame glasses.
You really need young people to carry tech like this, and needing them to wear millennial fashion from 10 years ago so camera and compute fit will just make it that much harder.
No comments yet
amazingamazing · 1h ago
won't buy these, or any others smart glasses until there's a way to replace the battery. I'm annoy'd enough that it's difficult to do with bluetooth headphones... with my quest 3 at least there's an option to plug it into an external battery, given the traditional use cases.
No comments yet
make3 · 38m ago
I don't think we should normalize pointing cameras at people's faces all the time. I hate these things.
No comments yet
tomhow · 54m ago
Stub for oftopicness
DHPersonal · 1h ago
The difference between the stylish product shot and the goofy candid is stunning. The glasses look ridiculous on Zuckerberg.
badlucklottery · 1h ago
I think part of the issue is that Zuckerberg is a smaller dude and they're pretty big sunglasses so he has a bit of that "Look! I'm wearing dad's glasses!" thing going on.
gardenhedge · 1h ago
So that's half of men and most women ruled out?
ChrisMarshallNY · 51m ago
Big glasses are actually quite popular with women.
Heavy frames and large lenses tend to compensate for larger noses, and other facial issues (although they won't come out and say that). Clear glasses can really focus on the eyes.
I know a couple of women that have made large, heavy-rimmed glasses into a real fashion statement.
jebarker · 1h ago
Ridiculous seems strong. They’re not my style but I see people making far more surprising fashion choices everyday
Usually I prefer second-hand sources over press-releases, as press-releses tend to be a bit too much navel-gazing and pats on the back.
demosthanos · 1h ago
In general I agree, but The Verge in particular tends to just say exactly what the press release says with less detail. If we're going to do a non-press-release source it should be because they're offering context and information that the company would not willingly choose to provide themselves.
diggan · 1h ago
Yeah, also agree with you in general, if it's the same, doesn't really matter :)
But at least the last paragraph seems to be adding something, although the rest of the article is indeed just a re-hash of the press-release.
> Meta recently signed a multi-year deal with EssilorLuxottica, the parent company behind Ray-Ban, Oakley, and other eyewear brands. The Meta Ray-Bans have sold over two million pairs to date, and EssilorLuxottica recently disclosed that it plans to sell 10 million smart glasses with Meta annually by 2026. “This is our first step into the performance category,” Alex Himel, Meta’s head of wearables, tells me. “There’s more to come.”
No comments yet
add-sub-mul-div · 1h ago
Right, journalism adds commentary and context. People may often think it's bad, or not like or agree with what they read, and conflate that with thinking journalism is bad or forgetting what it fundamentally is and why it's important that it exists. A straight up ad from Facebook would not be better than this.
deafpolygon · 54m ago
Whaaaat the heck is going on in the reflections on Mark Z’s glasses?
foxygen · 51m ago
His wife holding a phone?
newsclues · 1h ago
Oakley quality tanked since luxottica bought them.
Unfortunate.
No comments yet
demosthanos · 2h ago
Somehow we've actually managed to regress from 2013's Google Glass.
Always-on microphone and camera sold by one of the world's sketchiest privacy invaders? Check.
Display that actually takes advantage of the glasses form factor? Nope. Sounds like this could just as easily be the Humane pin.
awongh · 1h ago
Crazy how much more acceptable this is only 12 years later.
People were so angry in 2013.
toast0 · 1h ago
Google glass was a display that was up and to the right of where you want to be looking.
I don't know about everyone, but I found it pretty hard to use. Caveat, I didn't get them fit to me, I was supervising an intern working on a speculative Glass project, and they were fit to him.
AR would be neat, but voice interfaces are acheivable at an approachable cost. I'm not one to talk to a computer, and I wear prescription lenses, so these glasses don't appeal to me, but I can see there's a market there, not sure how big or if Meta can capture it.
demosthanos · 1h ago
Right, I'm not claiming Glass was good, but it at least attempted to use the glasses form factor for something.
georgeecollins · 1h ago
Well it shows you what was the real problem with glass, it looked dorky. I wish people cared about privacy but in general they don't.
kotaKat · 1h ago
It's one of those times you just want to "OK Glass" the person around you that says "Hey, Meta" with their privacy-invading cameras.
Handy-Man · 1h ago
It's not always on. How do you skeptics always manage to get things wrong to get your point across?
demosthanos · 1h ago
If you can ask "Hey Meta, ..." while holding a golf club and unable to touch a button (which the promo video [0] shows you can) then the mic is always on. It may not always be beaming data to Meta, but that's a matter of trust, which I don't have much of for Meta given their history.
The camera may or may not be always on, but it can be turned on by software activated by the always-on mic (again, demonstrated by the promo video), so it would be best to treat it as though it is.
The “Hey *” (Meta, Siri, Alexa) is typically handled by a simpler mechanism on a short buffer that triggers the proper recording and speech recognition workflow in order to save battery. But if you’re not going to trust the company, then the fact that it responds to Hey Meta shouldn’t make any difference because it could still be quietly recording. The fact that it responds to a wakeup prompt changes nothing.
demosthanos · 1m ago
I'm aware of the mechanism, but that mechanism relies on a mic that is always on.
I agree that the primary issue is that it's a software-controlled microphone with no off switch controlled by software written by Meta. I only emphasized the wake word listening in response to OP's claim that it's not always on when it must be.
meepmorp · 1h ago
how can it respond to voice prompts if it's not listening?
echoangle · 1h ago
The claim was always-on mic and camera. The mic might be always on, the camera doesn’t have to.
demosthanos · 1h ago
I responded to that above. If the mic is always on and controls the camera (both of which are demonstrated in the promo video), any reasonable approach to infosec needs to treat the camera as always on as well.
echoangle · 1h ago
Maybe, but that doesn’t mean that the camera is always on. It’s like saying a person holding an empty gun and a magazine is holding a loaded weapon because they can quickly reload it. It doesn’t really change the effect but it’s still an error.
demosthanos · 58m ago
Whether an empty gun and a magazine counts as a loaded gun varies state-by-state, so the distinction is not as clear-cut as you make it sound. New York State penal code defines a loaded gun as follows:
> 15. "Loaded firearm" means any firearm loaded with ammunition or any
firearm which is possessed by one who, at the same time, possesses a
quantity of ammunition which may be used to discharge such firearm.
So I guess I'm using the New York definition of an always-on camera.
and you trust meta with this? i don’t mean to be crass but that would be crazy.
they have proven over and over and over and over again they are absolutely not trustworthy.
at some point we have to come to grips with the fact that people like zuck, elon, andreeson, and other tech monarchs are openly hostile and despise us when we ask for anything remotely resembling transparency for their companies but repeatedly abuse us and openly scoff at our privacy.
the fact that we collectively don’t understand the repercussions of this really is a bad sign.
i very well may have misunderstood your meaning, tho. i hope so.
paxys · 58m ago
Why did Zuck think it was okay to post a photo of himself wearing them? Does he think his cool looks will drive sales? The little interest I had immediately disappeared after seeing it.
some_random · 51m ago
Do you typically make your tech choices based on who they have modeling them in ads?
542354234235 · 34m ago
The entire history of advertising would indicate that a lot of people do make choices, especially fashion related, based on being modeled by beautiful famous people with established parasocial relationships with their audience.
spiderice · 7m ago
Whether or not we want to admit it, people definitely make tech choices based off how cool the people in the ads look. To deny that would be to deny the effectiveness of marketing.
I’m personally more excited about the Mentra Live glasses, which are fully programmable with AugmentOS.
I’ve tried the glasses myself, and I’m convinced that wearable eyewear like this will eventually replace the mobile phone. With ongoing advances in miniaturization, it’s only a matter of time before AR and AV are fully integrated into everyday wearables.
Once there is an actual usable in-glasses screen, I will agree.
A few years ago I tried someone's smartglasses with a screen. It basically had similar functionality to my first Fitbit: it would show texts, notifications, caller ID.
I really want one of those and went looking, but couldn't find it.
Ray Ban does it for their Meta glasses, but Lensology can handle stronger prescription lenses.
With that said, I don’t think these can replace phones until they’re quite a lot smaller and lighter. And to make it worse, you’d need at least two pairs - regular and sun. Possibly three if you’re someone who regularly uses safety glasses.
That said, I'm not sure I'd want smart glasses. Being stuck on a computer for work, I try to take some time every day to be completely free of digital things. It's hard enough to do that with a smart phone in my pocket vying for my attention. I imagine it would be only harder with smart glasses over my eyeballs.
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GI_glasses
[2] - https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=glassholes
No comments yet
Titanium glasses are lightweight because a very minimal amount of material is used. This is possible for regular glasses because you can make them with a ~1mm cross-section. When you want to put electronics inside of them, you need much more material.
Edit: Just checked, it does exist.
Between the weight of material and the electronics, I don't really see anything approaching the feel that someone that discerning would want.
You really need young people to carry tech like this, and needing them to wear millennial fashion from 10 years ago so camera and compute fit will just make it that much harder.
No comments yet
No comments yet
No comments yet
Heavy frames and large lenses tend to compensate for larger noses, and other facial issues (although they won't come out and say that). Clear glasses can really focus on the eyes.
I know a couple of women that have made large, heavy-rimmed glasses into a real fashion statement.
Not sure why theverge gets linked so much here.
But at least the last paragraph seems to be adding something, although the rest of the article is indeed just a re-hash of the press-release.
> Meta recently signed a multi-year deal with EssilorLuxottica, the parent company behind Ray-Ban, Oakley, and other eyewear brands. The Meta Ray-Bans have sold over two million pairs to date, and EssilorLuxottica recently disclosed that it plans to sell 10 million smart glasses with Meta annually by 2026. “This is our first step into the performance category,” Alex Himel, Meta’s head of wearables, tells me. “There’s more to come.”
No comments yet
Unfortunate.
No comments yet
Always-on microphone and camera sold by one of the world's sketchiest privacy invaders? Check.
Display that actually takes advantage of the glasses form factor? Nope. Sounds like this could just as easily be the Humane pin.
People were so angry in 2013.
I don't know about everyone, but I found it pretty hard to use. Caveat, I didn't get them fit to me, I was supervising an intern working on a speculative Glass project, and they were fit to him.
AR would be neat, but voice interfaces are acheivable at an approachable cost. I'm not one to talk to a computer, and I wear prescription lenses, so these glasses don't appeal to me, but I can see there's a market there, not sure how big or if Meta can capture it.
The camera may or may not be always on, but it can be turned on by software activated by the always-on mic (again, demonstrated by the promo video), so it would be best to treat it as though it is.
[0] https://about.fb.com/news/2025/06/introducing-oakley-meta-gl...
I agree that the primary issue is that it's a software-controlled microphone with no off switch controlled by software written by Meta. I only emphasized the wake word listening in response to OP's claim that it's not always on when it must be.
> 15. "Loaded firearm" means any firearm loaded with ammunition or any firearm which is possessed by one who, at the same time, possesses a quantity of ammunition which may be used to discharge such firearm.
So I guess I'm using the New York definition of an always-on camera.
https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/265.00
they have proven over and over and over and over again they are absolutely not trustworthy.
at some point we have to come to grips with the fact that people like zuck, elon, andreeson, and other tech monarchs are openly hostile and despise us when we ask for anything remotely resembling transparency for their companies but repeatedly abuse us and openly scoff at our privacy.
the fact that we collectively don’t understand the repercussions of this really is a bad sign.
i very well may have misunderstood your meaning, tho. i hope so.