[sbarre]

I'm not sure I'd call Google Glass "AR".

It's just a small screen in your vision, it doesn't analyze or enhance your existing viewpoint in any way (unless I am mistaken).

Cast AR is a better example:

http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/18/cast-ar-hands-on-with-jer...

[nsxwolf]

A smartphone is a better AR platform than Google Glass because you can hold it up directly in front of your field of vision and use AR apps.

Google Glass is wearable, but the display position is fixed relative to your head. You have to look up to see the screen, so unless you tilt your head down in some awkward manner to point to what you want the AR overlay on, it won't work. Not a very good AR experience.

[moocowduckquack]

AR is any augmentation of senses, so a wristwatch is AR for your sense of time for instance. Google glass doesn't do predator-vision, but it can augment stuff like memory or positional awareness.

[Aloisius]

AR integrates computer-generated sensory input realistically into reality.

A wristwatch and Google Glass are no more AR than a piece of paper with a map on it is.

[mistercow]

Google Glass could be called a kind of "proto-AR". It could certainly be a first (significant) step toward real AR.

[untog]

Not really. In terms of AR, Google Glass is doing absolutely nothing new, so it wouldn't be the first.

[mistercow]

Google is putting "screen that overlays with your vision constantly", as a real thing that you can actually have, further into the public consciousness than it has ever been before. They even have a real shot at making it popular.

Without that initial step, it's hard to see any practical path to AR actually becoming a reality.

[untog]

Without that initial step, it's hard to see any practical path to AR actually becoming a reality.

Only if you consider AR to be something that is 'always on'. There are a ton of applications that do not require that.

[lightbritefight]

Nothing new by default, but its opening up a lot of hardware potential. Its not just a screen and camera that's at eye level, its also setting new social norms that make that acceptable. Even now, Glass isn't far from Bluetooth levels of socially okay, which is say annoying to most but acceptable. Once it reaches that point, I expect AR to be a focal point of development. It only makes sense.

A simple street view overlay + wikipedia filter would be basic AR, and that doesn't seem difficult at all. Google could monetize with virtual window ads that businesses would buy for glass+streetview users.

[themstheones]

Your ad idea is stomach-turning. I see enough ads without having to subject myself to new streams of advertisement.

Conversely I'd happily install an app that put art over billboards. It would be nice to go to Times Square and feel like you're in the Louvre.

[mistercow]

>Conversely I'd happily install an app that put art over billboards. It would be nice to go to Times Square and feel like you're in the Louvre.

That's not going to happen for the foreseeable future. See http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/abrash/why-you-wont-see-hard-...

[krrrh]

For me it was worth reading the whole post to understand that your idea of "forseeable future", and Abrash's idea of "a while" are really different from mine:

> Eventually we’ll get to SF-quality hard AR, but it’ll take a while. I’d be surprised if it was sooner than five years, and it could easily be more than ten before it makes it into consumer products.

[adam-a]

Happily this app has already been made http://laughingsquid.com/augmented-reality-app-replaces-outd...

[untog]

A simple street view overlay + wikipedia filter would be basic AR, and that doesn't seem difficult at all.

It would be extremely difficult. It would use a lot of processing power to examine the camera input and attempt to extrapolate positioning for overlayed elements. I'm not sure Glass has that power.

[coldtea]

>It would use a lot of processing power to examine the camera input and attempt to extrapolate positioning for overlayed elements.

What camera input? Why go all in such a roundabout way, processing the image to determine the location?

What he proposes just needs the GPS/compass (if Google Glass has one, else it's trivial to add one). You get relevant wikipedia articles for your location (including the direction you're looking) using Glass's GPS, and the screen displays them.

[untog]

Nope. GPS isn't anywhere near accurate enough for that- believe me, I've tried. It's usually accurate to a few meters, which is fine for an overhead map, but would be horribly jarring when used for AR.

[sp332]

It's already being done. Nokia has a nice one, but they weren't the first: http://conversations.nokia.com/2012/11/13/livesight-immersiv...

[hahainternet]

The 'new' part of Google Glass is likely to be 'being on your face most of the day'.

[untog]

Sure. But that isn't really a significant development in AR technology. The Oculus Rift certainly won't be worn all the time.

[hahainternet]

I would argue that it is. I have AR apps on my phone which I never use because the startup requirements (pull phone out, turn on, unlock, start app, wait for GPS and fiddle about a bit with inaccurate accelerometer) are too high.

Reducing that requirement by having it on your face is a fantastic first step. We have no idea whether the next Glass iteration will be stereoscopic, or cover your field of vision or what. It's that market preparation I am excited to see.

[mistercow]

>The Oculus Rift certainly won't be worn all the time.

Of course not, but "always on" is not a very useful feature for VR. It's an incredibly useful feature for AR. Oculus Rift is not a good candidate in any way for an AR platform, since camera pass through to VR is not an acceptable replacement for seeing the world with your actual eyes.

[mistercow]

Exactly, and that's the reason it's a significant step.

[ripter]

Right now your phone is as much AR as the google glass. Now if Google starts letting us use the camera for face recognition we could see some proto AR stuff.

[JamesArgo]

As someone with terrible face recognition ability, I was really disappointed Google disallowed the feature. Such a device could vastly improve my life. I hope there's some open alternative to Google glass soon.