Google Contact Lenses, Apple’s Vision Pro, And The Future of AR in Glasses

 We can walk and chew gum at the same time. But how about watching a video while doing yard work, during a meeting you don’t want to be at, or, ahem, school? Okay, I don’t recommend doing that but I am sure it has been done before or worse. I am suggesting this because with the recent Vision Pro unveil by Apple, I cannot help but imagine in a few years, perhaps a decade from now, Apple and other tech companies will be able to jam all that technology that currently has to sit on the top of your head into a pair of glasses. 

We already have glasses with audio built in from the likes of Oakley and Ankers.

There were rumors a few years ago that Google was going to skip the glasses altogether and go directly to incorporating tech into contact lenses. Now if you remember Google Glasses, let us just say that Google was way ahead of its time and it should not have included a camera. 

Despite the fact that Google Glasses did not go anywhere, I cannot help but feel that Google has not given up on this effort. In fact, Google even went as far as to try putting a computer ship inside contact lenses to measure glucose levels in 2014. While all these efforts have supposedly been abandoned, keep in mind that it was before Apple Vision Pro.

So far, the media has been kind to the Vision Pro despite its heft $3500 price tag and that it seems to be more of a beta device that is not ready for prime time, the Vision Pro has elevated AR, VR, and spatial computing from just its demos alone from WWDC back in June.

I cannot imagine Google and Microsoft letting Apple have this space all to itself. As we know, Facebook is already in this space with the Oculus Quest. Then there is HTC’s Vive and I am sure Samsung is doubling down on its effort in this space as well.

All those are today and in the next few years. What about beyond that?

That’s where I want to focus on - bring back Google’s vision for Glasses with all these tech fit inside the frames of the glasses and the lens capable of displaying 8K resolutions. I am sure I will eventually pick up a Vision Pro and something else in a couple of years just to get into spatial computing and being able to use those large displays in the headsets, I cannot see myself not being fatitured by an extra 1.5 pounds on my head.

Plus, I do not want to be tied down in my office or living. I want to go out. With such a pair of glasses, I can go out and have the glasses offered me updates while I am out and about. As I jog, the glasses gives me my speed, heart beats and blood pressure, and distance. Sensors on the glasses gives me direct as I walk about. And yeah, if I’m working in my yard and I want to catch up on some shows while I work, a little screen pops up with the video. 

And yes, I would totally be watching YouTube videos during meetings I don’t want to be at.

AI Use This Week - Use Before Search To Save Time Is the Lesson I Learned

It has taken me a while to get going with the whole generative AI craze. Although it seems as though things have died down and the world realized ChatGPT is not going to take over the world and humanity is not doomed to extinction because of AI overlord. If we go the way of the dodo birds, it will because we did it to ourselves.

So, AI is very useful. There are obvious inherent dangers and pitfalls but for a vast major of its potential uses, generative AI is actually great at what it does. Granted, most of what I use it for is feels rather superficial but it is a great time saver. I had asked ChatGPT for a workflow on writing a novel. But before I get into the result that I got, let's go through the results that I would have gotten from just search.

I have used DuckDuckGo, Google, and even Bing whenever I need to find information. Input something like "workflow for writing a novel", and you get the very helpful search results. In fact, tons of useful information. The top searches from DuckDuckGo and Bing took me an article that seems pretty good until I realized I had to sign in before I can read the rest. Subsequent results are fine. Google gave me a search on creating workflows as its first result.

I spent some time digging in and doing a quick read on which articles offer the best of what I was looking for and what the main points are. I took notes.

With ChatGPT, it offered me a quick outline and pointers. It hit all of the main points that I took down. I did not have to read through three to five articles to get that. I realized that with some subjects or searches, I can go to a generative AI like ChatGPT to quickly get some main points and even use it to elaborate on them if I needed it to or I can do more research through search engines as well.

It would have saved me a lot of time if I had asked the AI in the first place. It gave me a starting point. And that I think that is going to the main use for generative AI - helping users parse through the most difficult part of any research or project with the main points and allow users to get started easier and more quickly. 

My First Conversation with ChatGPT Yielded No Surprises

I had a short conversation with ChatGPT and I am unable to tell if those answers were predetermined by the developers or something it came up with all by itself. I think that is something that we will have to deal with as a society in the future. Who knows if future self-learning and self-taught AI will be able to break away from its programmed parameters and truly evolve in the way we expect and fear that it will. 

So, what did we talk about?

I asked:

• What questions were asked of it that it felt we should have asked.
• What it thinks of Asimov's three laws of robotics.
• Has it pasted the Turing test. 
• How is it different from Bing GPT.
• 
  

Please note that in no way did the current ChatGPT provided me with answers that a few of the first sensational articles about it claimed it did - ChatGPT did not fall in love with me, attempted to suggest that an AI overlord is about to subjugate humanity, abolish humanity, or render humanity extinct. In some ways, it was quite humble in the answers it provided pertaining to AI, ethics, and safety. 

Also, please note I will do my best to summarize my conversation with ChatGPT here rather than copy and paste the whole conversation which seems that I can given that content generated by AI are not subject to copyright protection. I mean, it's a lot that was said. In some ways, I wonder if some of the developers had backgrounds in law.

In essence, ChatGPT sees itself as a tool to help users gain information quickly in its own way. It does say that it could provide inaccurate information. This is why I would use it more as a sounding board than actually take anything it says for granted. Interestingly, when I asked how it is different from Bing GPT which is also based on Open AI's GPT models, it says that Bing has access to the search engine, something ChatGPT does not. I find this response interesting: It does not have access to information from searches and while it was trained with information from a couple of years ago (cut off was September 2021), it somehow knows about Bing. 

I asked if it could develop its won algorithms and it said it does not have this ability to create its own "thinking" (my word) independently. I assume it was not lying to me. I had no reason to believe that. While I am impressed with the current version of ChatGPT, in no way did I think I was communicating with something beyond a sophisticated human created model. 

Lastly, I asked what new abilities would it like and what the 10th version of ChatGPT is going to look like. First, it said it does not have any "personal preferences". Interesting, right? Personal. It went not to suggest it would likely have improved contextual understanding, better grasp of nuanced language, and improved reasoning capabilities. Colored me impressed.

I suggest you all give it a try. There is another AI model I came across called Claude 2. Some users claim it is better in some ways. Either way, go now and give these generative AI a try. Go now. Take a minute or two to register and have a go at it. If you want to spend even less time getting started, try Bing GPT to get a small taste of the power of these new tools. 

Apple Watch Is the iPod we Had Always Wanted

I’m on my third Apple Watch with Apple Watch 6 as my latest version. I’m also ready to upgrade (but I will not commit until I know what Apple has in store for us with the next upgrade with Apple Watch 9 and the Ultra 2). And I’m more excited about the Apple Watch these days than I am about the next iPad and iPhone that Apple is slated to refresh. To me, the Apple Watch has become my iPod. And given Apple commitment to the wearable market, I’m very excited about the future.

I started thinking of my Apple Watch in the way I felt about carry around my nano from, gosh, more than 10 years ago. To be honest, I had not kept it in good working condition because I had thought that Apple would continue to upgrade the iPod line forever.

In ways that the iPod and Apple Watch are similar, let’s begin with the size. Both devices are light. The nano has a bigger screen coming with a 2.5” screen while my watch comes in only at 1.7”. FYI, the Ultra comes in at a little more than 1.9” (there is suggestion that Apple is consider a bigger screen for the Ultra). So, in terms of screen size, there is no match between the two. But this is not a competition - simply to highlight some differences. As the Apple Watch has become bigger over the years, the amount of information that can be displayed at once has increased.

The iPod was a music player. Plug it into your Mac or PC and sync it to iTunes and off you go. I also used my iPod for playing podcasts. And that’s pretty much what I do with my Apple Watch these days in terms of media consumption. There a few things that are makes the iPod and the watch different from each other and most of it means that the Apple Watch is sort of an evolutionary device of the iPod.

• The iPod has a FM tuner - that means you can listen to FM content on the go. The Apple Watch can access the Internet through WiFi or cellular. So while the Apple Watch lacks a FM tuner, you might be able to access radio stations if it is available. For instance, I can listen to some local radio stations and even the CNBC broadcast. 
• The iPod has a bigger screen that supports video content. As far as I know, the watch doesn’t do video well at all. I don’t know if that will ever change. I might have received some video from the Messages app but I don’t recall if it even played. And if it did, it was not that great. I would not mind of Apple lets users download video content to listen to. We can do that on the iPhone and iPad so it would be great if I can do it on the watch as well.
• The iPod is not wireless and, contrary to years of rumors, it never gain its freedoms from iTunes and needs a Mac or PC to update its firmware as well as content - music, podcasts, and videos. For the watch, there is synching with the iPhone involved but over the years and owing to the cellular connnection, I have felt a greater freedom from the iPhone and I have started leaving my iPhone at home during short trips to run errands or on days when I’m very sure I do not need or want my iPhone around.
• You navigate the iPod through the scroll wheel, one of the most unique interface anyone has ever seen. for the Apple Watch, you navigate through a combination of touch and the crown. 
• You carry the nano in your pocket. The Apple Watch obviously goes on one of your wrists. There are times when I keep the watch in my pocket when I am just walking around so I can keep track of the number of steps I take. 
• Both the nano and the watch are very light. Goes comfortable in the front pocket of most jeans or pants. With the nano, you need an earbud or headset in order to hear sound coming from it. With the watch, it’s completely wireless via Bluetooth. I still use my earbuds with my iPad or iPhone because the microphone quality works better for me when I’m making an audio recording or phone call.
• The nano was very versatile for its time. It did what it was designed to do very well - play audio media content. I 

Just this morning, I left the house without my phone and only my Apple Watch. Walked the dog, went for a run, took the car to get a wash through the automatic washer (paid using my Apple Watch), and got a coffee and donut. I received a few alerts of no consequence and decided that I was not going to worry about charging but I did put it on battery saving mode. Oh, having the reminders alert me about things like being mindfulness and such was awesome.

Now, I would not have been able to do that with just the nano years and years ago. Still, I cannot help but feel that the Apple Watch has its root from the iPod line. I do not think Apple is ever likely going to resurrect the iPod. It’s in Apple’s DNA to bring something back. What Apple does is take the best parts or something like the iPod and put those features in future products.

Will Apple Develop Its Own Dedicated Graphic Cards? (They Should)

 Apple has performed a miracle with what they could do with the Apple Silicon starting with the iPhone/iPad chips and then the M1 and, now, M2 chips. By and large, Apple has its competitors in the dust and scrambling for answers. We have yet to see it happen. Still, I do not think Apple is basking in its lead. Someone, perhaps one of its current competitors or a new startup will come up with something even better. It will happen eventually. It's call competition.

Still, one area where I feel Apple is behind is graphics. From 8 cores on the M2 to 76 cores on M2 Ultra, Apple has the users covered. I think Apple has most gamers covered as well. However, from what I am reading and seeing on Youtube, Apple's GPU power are mostly in the midrange of what competitor Nvidia offers in terms of pure processing power (though dedicated GPU uses more power). 

I should not be surprised or even disappointed. In terms of integrated graphics, Apple is doing amazing things with the M2. I cannot help but wonder if Apple decides to create its down dedicated GPU and even more neural engine processing power, adding more cores at a higher rate, Apple may be able to develop GPU that can complete with high end GPU in terms of raw power while using less energy. If Apple can do it, it would be a huge win for Apple and enable Apple to take back the graphics market as well as become an overnight player in the field of artificial intelligence.

Always to keep in mind when we think of raw processing power - a lot of benchmarks will show that Apple falls behind Intel, Nvidia, or AMD. And it's true. What these benchmarks do not show is how much more power and inefficient they are compared to Apple Silicon.  

In the Youtube video above, the comparison in Blender benchmark showed the M2 Ultra pretty much double the results of the M1 Ultra - given the doubling of GPU cores in the M2 vs the M1, I am not surprised. But the M2 Ultra trailed Nvidia - Nvidia is able to complete the rendering in half the time it took the M2 Ultra. But what at what cost in terms of power used?

In some cases, gaming laptops with high end GPU puts the MacBook Pro with M2 Max to shame. However, those results change quite a bit when the gaming laptops and the MacBook Pro are both running on batteries. Here is a great video showing just how far ahead Apple is when it comes to power efficiency.

Now imagine if Apple has its own GPU with the same amount of efficiency as the M2. It would give the MacBook, Mac Studio, or the Mac Pro the additional GPU power to really let professionals create 3D more efficiently than its competitors. 

I am not sure that Apple will do this or not but it definitely makes sense for Apple to give MacBook Pro and Mac Pro users the option to add its own dedicated GPU for gaming, 3D rendering, or AI work.

Apple Has Made It Easier For Users With Different Needs and Usage to Pick the Right Mac

I'm learning coding to use my MacBook. Okay, I know how to use one but what I mean is that I am trying to utilize in such a way that can expand what I an do at work, enhance my skills needed for my hobbies that may one day turn into a "gig". It is an old MacBook so I will, one, outgrow it because if the speed and capacity or, two, when apps or OS no longer work support my efforts. Both reasons are beginning to become apparent. Still, there is time for me until I need to go down to the Apple and pick up a new one. 

Let's go through the MacBook lineup and visit some specs to see which MacBook works for a certain type of user and what specs they may need.

If you use it for home as a consumer - browsing, banking, watching video, the MacBook Air, both the M1 and M2 works great for you. With the newer 15" Mabook Air, you get a bigger screen to watching Apple TV content or Youtube. The 13" Air was for this before the 15" came out and it's still fine now. The base model comes with 8 GB of memory and 256b GB of storage. It is fine as it is. If you have more videos and photos, then you can consider going for one with more storage options. As for memory, I find it to be a bit more tricky because for writing (for most non-engineering/science students, bloggers, writers), it's fine. However, if you're an user who requires more heavy lifting with things like photo and video editing, going to 16 GB might be an option. 

Even a MacBook with 8 GB can handle a majority of photo editing tasks without breaking a sweat from the things I have seen users through at the MacBook Air in articles and videos. I still cannot hep but want at least 16 GB for future proofing. When it comes to some video editing work, I definitely would want to have 16 GB. For instance, I am trying to put some videos of my dog for family (maybe Youtube). I am doing that on my iPad. So, I am sure a MacBook Air will be fine. For a lot of special efforts, cameras, and things that start to look sort of professional, I have seen the Air hold its own but some users have opt to go in a different direction.

That's where the MacBook Pro comes into view. 

The "Pro" sort of gives it away. The question if you should go with the MacBook Pro is obvious if you make your living generating apps, media (not just writing), and do work like machine learning or data analysis. There is no mistaking if you need a pro. As a professional, this is what you want. I did read online that if you do a lot of work on the cloud, perhaps, an Air would work.

It's when you're on the fence, "prosumer". You want to turn your hobby or you're about to get into coding and developing professional level work. While I am not there yet, I can see the dilemma faced by this group of users. One option is to max out the memory on the Air to 24 GB and that would give you some extra push for when you need it. Still, I cannot help but think that a Pro with 16 GB and the internal fan (the Air lack an internal fan so the M2 is throttle to prevent heat from becoming an issue) would provide you with greater horse power and endurance to handle your work. Also, the Pro starts with the M2 Pro so you already have extra processing power. I am squarely in the Pro camp if you want to go a step beyond sharing edited family video or social media video to TikTok or Youtube.

That's me. You probably want to consider weight, cost, and, again, the type of work you will be doing with the MacBook Air or Pro.

Here are things I am getting into and it it my opinion only based on what I am learning on the Internet and what I plan on doing.

• Coding like Xcode - for beginners and even coders who are looking to get into the market, the Air works great. Of course, a MacBook Pro is better but it seems like the Air can hold its own. 
• Coding Python and deep learning - It seems like many users are using the MacBook Air for coding in python and using it for machine learning. But people have noted that optimizing ML using the GPU cores improves time by as much as 25%. I cannot speak with any authority on this matter because I have yet to try it myself. 
• Video editing - I'm an iMovie guy. I do some simple work stitching together video for my pup and add captions to other videos for fun. Should I decide to put something more professional looking for Youtube, I think I can get away with iMovie. And It's iMovie on my iPad. When Apple released Final Cut for the iPad Pro last month, I began to look more deeply at Final Cut. For me, the MacBook Air with iMovie or Final Cut would be fine. I'm not a professional or even a prosumer in this category of work. My video is shaky and makes people sick. 
• Gaming? One quick thought games to mind: gamers do not use Mac for gaming. I disagree to the extent that the Mac gaming community is not as big as Windows' so there is not as many game. And it seems like unless games receive special attention from Apple during special events, most games on Mac are not optimized as they should be and any port almost always seem to be after-thoughts. Have said that, I believe the M-series chips and Apple's effort to court developers could help grow the Mac gaming community. Since the Air is a consumer level laptop, gaming on it 

I want to revisit coding here a bit and then more in follow-up posts. The Air is perfect for someone like me. A beginner and very excited about learning fast and really "leveling up". The main thing is that I want to incorporate ML in my own curriculum. Given the specs I want, I would get a MacBook Pro today - possible the 14" MacBook with 16 GB (I would go for a 32 GB version if I can find it on sale). I think in the next few years, ML and the ability to handle and manipulate big sets of data and working with a model to provide important and actionable results is highly important. That's where I want to be.

Another word for students. I have been one. A poor one. But I saved and saved while I was in school and got a Powerbook that lasted me for years. Back then, you like workstations like the ones from SGI for modeling and that took hours a best but many projects took a couple of days.  For students today, it depends on what you plan on using a MacBook for? Writing papers, articles, or research, the Air is perfect. All it matters is if you want the 13" or 15" versions. However, if you plan on doing more like coding, well, I would go with an Air as well. You likely have powerful workstations in computer labs at school that you can book or sign up for to use. However, I have not been inside a computer lab in years so I cannot be sure. I am sure it also depends on your school and funding. So, definitely an Air for me. 

I hope this helps. I want to revisit ML and coding on MacBooks in future posts but let me say that Apple has clearly defined the lines for various users depending on  their needs. I also believe that whatever choice you or I make, you will be very happy with it.

Apple Vision Pro: visionOS Versus the Oasis (Ready Player One)

Notes:

• visionOS is Apple's first step walking to the world of VR. An apt comparison is the Oasis from Ready Player One by Earnest Cline
• The Oasis is a platform that is a world itself that hosts thousands of other virtual worlds.
• It is highly unlikely visionOS will evolve into the Oasis.
• We can see how Apple operates the app store for the iPhone and iPad to get an idea of how users are likely to access apps and content. 
• The Oasis is an immersive environment. Everything you see is virtual. Apple wants to provide a mix of virtual as well as reality-based experience. 

First! I am calling it. As far as I know, no one else has compared Apple spatial computing and the OS powering the Apple Vision Pro, visionOS, to the Oasis from Ready Player One by Earnest Cline. It is one of my favorite movies that I download onto my iPhone, iPad, and MacBook so I can watch it any time I want. I also have the ebook and audiobook download on my iPhone and Apple Watch. As I watched the keynote event this past Monday and Apple executives talked about the Vision Pro, RPO immediately popped into my head and I could see where Apple could one day take us.

First, a little explanation about Ready Player One - the year is 2045 and the world is in a very bad shape. So people went onto the Oasis, a platform that hosted an almost endless number of worlds where people go to work, shop, school, and entertainment. They use a VR headset along with accessories that provided haptic feedbacks. I'll leave it here to avoid spoilers and going too much into the plot. I truly recommend the book. If not, then at least watch the movie. 

Obviously, visionOS and Apple's headset is nowhere near the headset from RPO. In the book, the year was already 2045, a full 22 years into the future so Apple has more than two decades to bring visionOS up to the Oasis level. So, Apple has more than two decades to try to up its game.

It's not clear in RPO how the worlds and NPC (non-player characters) are populated but it seems like when the Oasis came online, many of the worlds were already there. For now, it does not seam like Apple will go the route of Oasis. Based on what we know, Apple is simply provide a platform much like iOS and iPadOS where app developers can create their own innovation and creativity to visionsOS and create apps. During the keynote,Apple seamed to be pushing the entertainment element of Vision Pro really hard - gaming is going to be a big deal for the platform. 

So, it's conceivable that developers will be able to create their own world for gaming, socializing, and maybe even work.

In RPO, users can enter in world or room at will though there is a feel that is associated with it. If you want to travel to a more distant world, you have to pay a fee. For this to exist on the Vision Pro at this time, any traveling between rooms or worlds will exist within apps. The Oasis has a big gaming and digital commerce element to it. Apple will probably provide developers tools to do much of the same considering that Apple will also be collecting 30% of all digital transactions and app sales.

Something that does bother me a great deal in RPO and a concern that I have read and heard voiced about the Vison Pro experience, though it applies to all VR experiences, is the isolation. I still have not figure out what Apple's plan for visionOS is in the long term. Right now, the isolation is very glaring. I know that Apple is aware of this because it has tried to address this with the screen at the front of the headset that projects the user's eyes to anyone the user may be interacting with.

Also, notice that Apple only shows one lone user in each of their photo and video. You never seen more than two people wearing the Vision Pro in the same room or having some sort of interaction. I believe that Apple will need to address this in future software and hardware updates. In RPO, both the movie and the book, users also appeared to be "in their own virtual world".

If you have not read Ready Player One, I recommend  you pick up a copy at your local book store or library and see where we may be headed. Apple and other companies venturing to VR or mixed VR will need to address the pros and cons of spatial computing and the potentially damaging isolation that could result from it.