Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 16 submissions in the queue.
posted by janrinok on Tuesday October 04 2016, @03:15PM   Printer-friendly
from the tumbling-prices dept.

The headset, which the company will reveal tomorrow morning [Tuesday] in San Francisco, will likely cost $79, Variety reported Monday. The headset will be manufactured by HTC, the same company rumored to be making the Pixel and Pixel XL, a pair of phones Google is also expected to unveil Tuesday, according to Variety.

The new headset underscores the tech community's growing interest in virtual reality, which promises to transport goggle-wearing users to a computer-generated 3D environment. Alphabet, Google's parent company, is said to be investing big money on content for the platform, much of it going toward development of video games and apps, licensing sports leagues and shooting 360-degree videos.

Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Tuesday October 04 2016, @04:37PM

    by LoRdTAW (3755) on Tuesday October 04 2016, @04:37PM (#410063) Journal

    Google glass was supposed to be that but as usual, Google lost interest in that project.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 04 2016, @04:55PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 04 2016, @04:55PM (#410076)

    No. Google Glass wasn't supposed to be anything like that.

    It didn't have a generic interface that one could connect to an arbitrary wearable solution.

    It had that really stupid camera add-on.

    It had its own display logic trying to act like a smartphone screen.

    It had that stupid voice recognition thing.

    It was a platform, not a display. It was bound to Android, used a lousy display resolution, incorporated irrelevances such as Bluetooth, gyroscope, accelerometer.

    If they had just stuck to a simple, straightforward HDMI cable going down to a belt mounted or pocket mounted wearable device, they would have been golden. But no ...