Gizmodo 
Enter your username and password.
Tip your editors:
Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | | Twitter
Editor:
Jason Chen
| AIM | Twitter
Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
| Twitter
Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan
| AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci
| Twitter
Sean Fallon
| Twitter
Jack Loftus
| Twitter
John Herrman
| Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Kat Hannaford
| Twitter
Rosa Golijan
| Twitter
Chris Jacob
Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner
Interns:
Don Nguyen
Kyle VanHemert
Comment Account Questions:
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
09/15/09
HOW high resolution?
"428 x 240"
EDIT: apparently they're 640x480. it's still:
a bunch of horse shit.
i've mentioned it before, i've got prototype glasses by inviso (formerly siliscape) from 2001 running 800 x 600 that were set to retail for $250. in 2002. 1024x768 was a mere 6 months to a year of R&D away. you can guess why the money got pulled out. 2001. ahem. you can run Windows through them and not have any problems seeing what you're doing. colors are great, no flicker, great contrast.
so why? why, 8 years later, why the f*$% hasn't the technology been matched? what's the holdup?
09/15/09
Obviously it doesn't "project" anything and the display isn't "55-inch". I'm not sure why they can get away with saying that when what they mean is just that the display is equivalent in size or angular extent to a 55 inch display viewed at a distance of... what exactly? 55 inches at ten feet would not be very impressive.
09/15/09
09/15/09
55" at 10' is about 22 degrees of view. At 5' it would be 43 degrees of awesome, at 15' it would be 15 degrees of lame.
09/15/09
09/15/09
09/15/09
09/15/09
09/15/09
I'd be interested in something like this if they could get the resolution up to at least 720p, though.
09/15/09
09/15/09
09/15/09
09/15/09
07/27/09
I got them for watching iPod Touch videos, but the built in screen is infinitely superior.
For a HUD I'd want one of those direct retinal projectors, because a small lensed screen is really brutal to use in real life.
07/27/09
07/27/09
My experience is that putting off the shelf hardware together like this isn't impressive at all. What makes wearables interesting is the software. Otherwise it's another stupid Windows machine with a completely unreadable display.
07/27/09
07/27/09
07/27/09
07/27/09
Also this is pretty cool, just ruined by the myspace school of photography. Look's kinda like the eye piece in MGS4.
Oh what's it cost?
07/27/09
I'd prefer tech that weens us off our monitor addiction.
07/27/09
I'd prefer tech that weens us off our monitor addiction
That tech exists, it's called "outside".
could someone please tell me how to do blockquotes on here.
07/27/09
Photoshopped.
07/27/09
I don’t see a system like this going mainstream any time soon. I think it will be held back until they come out with a cheap reliable synaptic interface.
07/27/09
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wearable_computer
07/27/09
07/27/09
07/27/09
07/27/09
Vista is Blue Start with Black taskbar.
My computer logo is also a light blue hue n looking right. Vista the PC is dark blue n looks left(stupidly, unless you replace it)
07/27/09
07/27/09
-It's about 50% on his 60wh battery.
-That's... that's not what I was expecting...