Google, on the other hand, already has "some hardware," says Diaz, "even if it's just beta-quality, ultra-expensive, and only does a tiny fraction of all the magical things the company initially told us it would do. iGlass is just at the patent stage, and there's no guarantee that it will ever be a widely available commercial product. One Apple watcher tells Forbes that Apple's "huge advantage" over Google in the headset realm would be its superior artificial intelligence and voice interface, Siri, which could be used to issue hands-free commands.Ī head-mounted, hands-free computer could have a number of useful applications in a range of industries, and could be appealing to the likes of surgeons, military personnel, firefighters, police offers, scientists, and engineers, says Salvadaor Rodriguez at the Los Angeles Times. That's unclear, but the interface would presumably resemble that of an iPhone. In theory, this type of all-encompassing viewfinder would help prevent motion sickness and "enable the specs to greatly fill the user's field of view and increase the quality of the image," says Jesus Diaz at Gizmodo. While Google Glass sits off to the side of one lens, Apple's dual projection displays would create "stereoscopic 3D images" to give the wearer a "comfortable, immersive viewing experience," says Christina Bonnington at Wired. The software isnt only compatible with other popular video software packages like Logitech Quickcam, IMage USB Webcam and others, but also with older programs that are compatible only with Windows. Yes, even yours, Vegeta Anyone can predict that the courts of the future would indeed be involved once more in this technological leap: A battle between Google Glasses and iGlasses, and any other future. iGlasses is a software program that gives you much more control over how your iSight webcam or camera works than ever before. Unlike Google's heads-up display (HUD) that presents information right in front of one eye, Apple's theoretical head-mounted display (HMD) would use small LCD projectors to beam computerized images onto a pair of lenses, which would be attached to a helmet, glasses, or some type of visor. Whereas Apple’s version is very broad and can certainly block and troll any other devices created in the future with wearable displays. What did Apple get approval for, exactly?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |