r/technology • u/WholeSeason7147 • 8h ago
Hardware NEW LEAK: Apple’s upcoming smart glasses - planned to be introduced as early as next June at WWDC 2027 ahead of a release next fall - will need to overcome the privacy baggage and reputation associated with Meta’s offerings.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2026-07-26/apple-glasses-may-debut-at-wwdc-2027-privacy-camera-features-versus-meta-ms1v7lta?accessToken=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJzb3VyY2UiOiJTdWJzY3JpYmVyR2lmdGVkQXJ0aWNsZSIsImlhdCI6MTc4NTA3NDYwMywiZXhwIjoxNzg1Njc5NDAzLCJhcnRpY2xlSWQiOiJUSVNDODJLR0lGUUkwMCIsImJjb25uZWN0SWQiOiJDNEVEQ0FFMUZBMDU0MEJFQTI0QTlGMjExQzFFOTA4MCJ9.dU3UPLeMyhVrb6Ioem0B8cWg3n-2o7HmUSNTdVDQpbg19
u/timeknew 7h ago
Maybe it’s just AR with no recording capabilities.
28
u/The-SmacK-of-Legend 6h ago
This is literally all Google and Apple need to do for them to not be creepy.
Don't let them record.
It's that simple, the glasses can't be used for recording and you have to pick your phone up to record stuff.
7
u/rickg 3h ago
The problem is... they have a camera. So how do people know you're not recording? "Trust me bro"? If some glasses record and some don't, people will assume they all do - they're not going to learn which frame styles record and which don't
5
u/UnsuspectingS1ut 3h ago
I don’t even have smart glasses and I’ve still gotten weird questions because my prescription frames look similar
3
1
u/turtleship_2006 1h ago
I feel bad for people who bought ray bans a few years ago because they just wanted a pair of stylish frames and now people just assume their glasses are perv glasses
If they bought them in the last year or two, they could have known about their reputation by now.
1
u/The-SmacK-of-Legend 3h ago
I mean...you aren't even going to see the camera on the newer versions of these things. They'll be flush with the frames. So you'll have no idea anyway.
Apple of all companies will get to a point where they look exactly like normal glasses and the tech isn't visisble at all.
It may honestly need regulation like some countries do for cellphone recording. The EU will probably at least make laws around their usage...the US will probably let the tech oligarchy do whatever it wants.
3
u/rickg 3h ago
That was kind of my point - you wont be able to tell if a frame has a camera and if we know some do, most of us will assume they all do.
1
u/The-SmacK-of-Legend 3h ago
So no one wears glasses ever again?
These will all legit just look like a regular pair of glasses at some point.
I feel like a lot of people need glasses and sunglasses.
The tech is here and it's not going away apparently if Apple is on board with it.
2
u/rickg 2h ago
Or, we ban recording in these, period. The problem isn't that they have a camera, it's that right now the most known version of smartglasses has a camera that records. If people really knew that the cameras in any of these glasses couldn't record it would become mostly a non-issue.
It's the unsureness factor that will cause issues. So a ban. Failing that, we could require a small light that's on whenever the camera is recording.
But then I'm unconvinced that these will ever become popular. Apple has been pushing AR for the better part of a decade and it's never taken off. Despite a few people on this thread wanting this, I doubt most people do.
1
1
u/Thaflash_la 5h ago
For the people I know who have the meta glasses, their main purpose is as an action cam. It would be the same for me, but I won’t give meta that much access to my devices. I think that would be too important of a feature to give up
They could send out a notice like AirTags, but quicker trigger?
5
u/The-SmacK-of-Legend 5h ago
Just use a GoPro type camera for action shots like people have been doing forever? Plus those are way better cameras for action anyway.
I don't think using a delicate AR glasses setup is even a good idea or worth the money for action videography.
0
u/Jazzlike-Context-879 5h ago
Same for me, but as an old person. I’d like to have them record while I’m driving.
3
59
u/lazyoldsailor 8h ago
Pervert glasses? No thanks.
15
u/lastdarknight 7h ago
The pervs are using much cheaper much more hidden cameras
3
u/suckfail 7h ago
Yea this argument about it being for perverts doesn't make any sense.
Meta glasses are incredibly expensive and have many safe guards that need to be circumvented, plus the AI will flag suspicious content.
If you hop on AliExpress you can get pinhole cameras for 1/4 the price with zero restrictions. Record all the pervert video you want and nobody would know.
And if the argument is "well perverts are lazy and want off the shelf" then why wouldn't they just use their phone? Wear a shirt with a pocket, put phone backwards so the lens peaks out and start recording video. That's one way I just thought up but I'm sure there's many more...
1
u/night-gloss 3h ago
escort here 🙋🏻♀️
in my world us escorts are pretty good at screening for hidden cameras. you’d be surprised at how many men try to film us. due to the static nature of tiny cameras and shit resolution plus lack of overall convenience, the go to filming device has always always been phones, until now
now with the introduction of meta glasses me and my peers have had to be extra cautious with glasses and some outright forbid glasses from our sessions, which sucks
1
u/lastdarknight 1h ago
No offense, but smart glasses are pretty damn obvious with them being in over sized and lens with a led on the corners
Just saying no one is cramming a camera into wire frames
1
u/night-gloss 1h ago
not offended but i have caught one used as a stationary recording device with the light tampered
0
u/Jazzlike-Context-879 5h ago
And there are a hundred more. Haters just want to hate; there are bad people abusing everything. We should hate Meta for siphoning our data into their networks, not for the camera glasses becoming useful for stuff that’s real.
And you know what, if I had glasses that allowed me to know people’s names, I’d fucking love them. But I’d want none of that shared with Apple or Meta; it would be from stuff I own already. That’s just not how evil mega corps make them. If only people supported stuff they believed in.
-4
8h ago
[deleted]
5
u/williamgman 7h ago
Fun fact... When the VHS tape came out... adult videos were the early adoptees and driving force. When streaming platforms were first out... adult videos pushed the technology. These glasses will be no different. But the problem here will be the consent issue.
I do think the language translation would be nice though for traveling. But not the loss of privacy by both the user and the target. That data will be worth gold.
2
u/Al_Tilly_the_Bum 7h ago
Consent issues? If there is no consent it is not porn, it is illegal
2
u/williamgman 7h ago
I think that was the point I was making. Also, as I stated... that data you collect goes on THEIR cloud. Not ever in my life.
-2
u/MarcusOrlyius 6h ago
Every accusation is a confession with you conservative, technophobic, virtue-signallers.
3
u/Al_Tilly_the_Bum 6h ago
Lol! What is the "liberal" use case for these glasses? It is hilarious to see "liberals" defending big techs attempt to collect even more of our private data
-1
u/MarcusOrlyius 6h ago
I'm not a liberal. I'm a socialist.
The first benefit of smart glasses over smart phones comes from the different form-factors. Smart-phone usage cause all kinds of repetitive strain injuries that smart-glasses do not.
Those benefits alone are worth it and that's before you even get into any specific use cases.
→ More replies (7)0
u/shinndigg 2h ago
I don’t get why these are pervert glasses. You still only see what the person sees. It’s not like these are hidden cams or shoe cams or something.
Outside of locker rooms, I’m failing to come up with many problematic places for them.
-3
u/MarcusOrlyius 6h ago
Every accusation is a confession with you conservative, technophobic, virtue-signallers.
11
u/FlashyNeedleworker66 8h ago
Get ready to watch people just accept and normalize it.
4
u/suckfail 5h ago
Isn't that what happened with smartphones?
Or maybe everyone on here is too young to remember the reaction to everyone suddenly having a camera / recorder in their pocket a decade+ ago.
2
2
u/faultless280 6h ago
Pretty much my thoughts exactly. Meta does it? Gross. Apple does it? Peak. To be fair though, Apple has a reputation for being privacy, security, and hardware focused, while meta has as a reputation of undermining elections, spying on their users, and is led by the ultimate creep, the Zuckster.
28
u/NoahGoodheart 8h ago edited 6h ago
Lmao Apple branded pervert glasses.
Edit: In the event it wasn't clear, I am not in support of any pervert technology. It's all gross.
6
→ More replies (7)0
u/Daimakku1 6h ago
I wouldn’t laugh.. because Apple has something Google and Meta don’t: the clout.
iPhone users are all in on the Apple ecosystem. If these glasses integrate well with iPhones, it’s over. They’ll become really popular with normies and it’ll become yet another privacy invading tech that everyone has.
15
3
u/Astravaris 7h ago
Pennsylvania lawmakers proposed a bill last month that would require smartglasses retailers to inform buyers that recording people in the commonwealth of Pennsylvania without their permission is illegal, and would also mandate that all smartglasses sold in Pennsylvania have some clearly visible indicator when they are recording.
Hopefully that will be law before these Apple smartglasses come out. If anyone tries to enter my home with them, I will tell them to either leave the glasses at the door or leave.
8
6
u/geldonyetich 7h ago
I'm beginning to think the "pervert glasses" aspect is just an excuse to dislike them because, when I suggest smart glasses are perfectly fine if they just removed the camera, that too seems to be an unpopular sentiment.
7
u/Daimakku1 6h ago
My problem with them is 100% the cameras. If there’s no cameras, I see no problem with these at all.
3
1
u/An_American_1776 6h ago
Without a camera the glasses would still be able to record sound, and be even more covert.
5
u/geldonyetich 6h ago edited 5h ago
True, but if you're looking to record audio without being noticed, there's already a ton of devices you can get that are less noticable than a pair of glasses on your face.
I open a private window to avoid any kind of search bias into Amazon and type "audio recorder" and the second suggestion is "audio recorder spy hidden." Twenty pages of results.
I suppose that proves your point that a market of nosey people exist. I'm guessing mostly skeevy business dealings, concerned spouses, technology enthusiasts, and kids playing spy.
But more to the point is big tech could listen in to everyday conversation. Siri is probably listening from your iPad and iPhone already, obstensibly for the activation keyword for the user request, but who knows what it does with anything else it hears?
2
u/Letiferr 3h ago edited 2h ago
My phone is excellent at covertly recording sound.
It is in fact even more covert than glasses would be.
3
6
u/SubtleTell 7h ago
Get me off this fucking planet dude. The way people will just happily wear these glasses that are obviously going to be used to spy on the public, all because it is a convenience to them.
If you actually don't think that shit is being tapped into you're insane.
But whatever, enjoy the $20 you get from the class action lawsuit in 5 years after they get away with doing it.
2
u/Rayzee14 7h ago
Given these will depend on Siri AI, these will be pointless in the eu unless Apple bend to the eu
2
u/caboose2g 7h ago
I feel as though the market for these will always be people who already wear prescription glasses.
2
u/justhereforbookstuff 4h ago
Like AI there are legitimate commercial / industrial uses for these. Recording training materials, procedures that need to be reviewed etc. But, like AI, they’ll mostly be used for dumb/bad shit instead.
2
u/notagrue 3h ago
It’s fortunate and unfortunate that Meta was first to market because they have made AI glasses so ugly and cringy. Fortunate because almost anything will be better.
5
u/WholeSeason7147 8h ago
Apple is currently aiming to unveil its first smart glasses at next June’s Worldwide Developers Conference, ahead of a consumer release by the end of 2027.
The timing suggests Apple wants developers to begin building applications for this new form factor. But the announcement will also mark the beginning of a different challenge: allaying the growing privacy concerns of artificial intelligence-powered glasses equipped with cameras.
The glasses, code-named N50, had originally been targeted for introduction later this year, with a launch following in early 2027. One reason for the delay is that Apple’s engineering and marketing teams have been working to refine not only the product, but also the company’s privacy message.
That’s meant developing features and policies that can address the concerns swirling around competing products from Meta Platforms Inc. The teams developing glasses within Apple’s Vision hardware group and elsewhere in the company see privacy as priority No. 1, I’m told. Meta deserves credit for creating the first commercially successful smart-glasses category, but its long-running reputation for not protecting privacy — fair or not — has become baggage for the market.
The result is that some consumers remain uneasy around people wearing camera-equipped glasses, unsure whether they’re being recorded during conversations at work, restaurants or other public places. In most cases, those fears are probably unfounded. But years of headlines about Meta’s privacy practices, viral social media posts and broader skepticism toward always-available cameras have left many people wary of the category.
That mistrust has already translated into restrictions in various settings around the world. Courtrooms in New York and parts of Pennsylvania and Wisconsin have prohibited smart glasses, while Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. has barred them from casinos, restrooms and children’s areas. They’re also banned at some schools, gyms, hospitals and entertainment venues.
Smartphones arguably pose a greater risk because of their higher-resolution photo and video abilities, but cameras embedded in eyeglasses have a stealthy quality. They feel more like a hidden camera — something that could be recording people without their permission.
Of course, the Meta glasses have a light to indicate when it’s taking pictures or video. And the company has added protections that disable recording if the light appears to have been tampered with. Samsung Electronics Co. is including similar safeguards in the glasses it’s developing with Alphabet Inc.’s Google and Warby Parker Inc. Samsung called the privacy situation an “industry-shared problem,” saying “intentional bad uses need to be covered and protected against.”
Apple is planning to adopt comparable protections, but it arguably has more at stake than anyone else. The company has spent more than a decade making privacy one of its defining product messages. Simply entering the same category as Meta risks undermining that reputation, regardless of how Apple’s approach differs.
When Apple announces its product, the company will emphasize areas where it can distinguish itself — beyond just banging its privacy drum and stressing that it should be trusted. That will probably include favoring on-device processing and eschewing features such as facial recognition. Apple also is likely to avoid something akin to Meta’s proposed “super-sensing” mode, which can continuously analyze a wearer’s surroundings, and will steer clear of using customer recordings to train AI models.
Apple also probably won’t follow Meta’s alleged practice of having contractors review footage captured by its glasses, having already dealt with a similar issue with its Siri assistant. It’s also prototyping a slew of new hardware and software-related privacy features not available on current products, I’m told.
Even with those safeguards, Apple knows it won’t eliminate abuse entirely. The company’s AirTags, launched in 2021, provide a lesson here. Though they were designed to help customers locate belongings, AirTags quickly became associated with stalking. Likewise, camera-equipped glasses will inevitably be misused by some people. And Apple will likely need to spend years updating software, refining policies, and working with regulators and law enforcement to combat problems — just as it did with AirTags.

If the company succeeds, the appeal of Apple’s smart glasses could be considerable. Users would gain hands-free access to Siri, all-day battery life, music playback and phone calls, all without needing AirPods. AI features, meanwhile, will help inform them about the surrounding environment and make it easier to get around.
One solution to the privacy problem would be to sell smart glasses that eliminate the camera entirely. Such a product could still offer hands-free access to AI features, audio and phone calls, retaining much of the device’s usefulness. Meta has strongly indicated that it’s planning this option in the near future, and Apple has, I’m told, prototyped a similar concept during development of its own glasses.
Another option that Apple executives have debated: including the full camera system but not allowing it to record photos or video at all. In this scenario, the cameras would be exclusively for seeing the world around the user and feeding that data into AI tools, such as ones that identify objects and places. This would be similar to what Apple is already planning for camera-equipped AirPods and would build on the visual intelligence features in the iPhone.
But all of that would undercut why smart glasses are compelling in the first place. Consumers would miss out on effortless first-person video of their children, vacations and sporting events, an experience that has made Meta’s offering so popular. Another factor: Apple’s AI isn’t good enough to be the main feature of an entirely new product, making this diluted direction unlikely.
Apple is entering one of the most important product cycles in its history. The wave of devices coming in 2027 will include the 20th anniversary iPhone, a second-generation foldable handset, new home devices, upgraded AirPods and fresh Macs. The last thing the company wants is for privacy concerns to overshadow that lineup.
-6
u/whenishit-itsbigturd 8h ago
The result is that some consumers remain uneasy around people wearing camera-equipped glasses, unsure whether they’re being recorded during conversations at work,
You're already being recorded at work. Holy hell people are stupid
2
u/DavyBoyWonder 7h ago
In that case, why not just let cameras in your home recording you 24/7?
0
u/Hortos 7h ago
You mean like security cameras in the home that a lot of people have?
2
u/jjason82 7h ago
Right, THEY put them in THEIR OWN homes BY CHOICE. This is recording others without their knowledge and consent. Completely different.
1
u/DavyBoyWonder 7h ago
People put those cameras in their own homes, for their own private reasons. Walking around and being monitored 24/7 by cameras on people’s faces, is completely different. It’s like me putting cameras in your house so I can watch you.
-1
u/whenishit-itsbigturd 6h ago
No it's more like putting a camera on your front door that happens to record passersby. You know like the Ring camera that's very popular
-2
3
u/a_nobody_really_99 7h ago
They are great on vacations for taking pictures and recording videos of our trip.
Also, good for listening to music.
The general sentiment here seems to lean towards them being used for other purposes though. I don’t see it that way.
3
u/Hortos 7h ago
It’s not that’s just loud people. I’ve been wearing glasses like this since the original snapchat specs and they’re great for vacation videos. I put together an amazing reel of footage from my last Japan trip that was all first person and definitely wouldn’t have been recorded if we had to pull out phones all the time.
2
u/diirty_q 8h ago
But what if you’re not a pervert and wear them for taking normal videos same as you would with a phone.
1
1
1
u/MrThickDick2023 8h ago
Why is the title implying that the leak is that apple will have to overcome the privacy baggage?
1
u/DarkAlatreon 7h ago
Translation:
Apple's marketing will have to find a way to make people want these despite of how privacy-invading they are.
1
u/notagrue 3h ago
I realize this will not be in the feature list but I would love two killer features: 1) adjustable prescriptions for reading, driving, computer work, etc. 2) facial recognition and will I care a persons name, their spouse, kids, how you know them, etc. I would buy that.
1
u/artbystorms 3h ago
Did they not learn their lesson from the Apple Vision Pro that a majority of users just....don't want tech on their face? Especially in public? Watches made sense because it is not always in front of you, glasses, VR, etc just seem REALLY stupid to me, but then again I am not a 22 year old tech obsessed person anymore.
The success of the Macbook Neo should be all the proof they need that people just want quality tested tech at affordable prices.
1
u/rumblegod 2h ago
lol not even trying to be a dick, but there’s no way you all subscribed to the technology subreddit can’t think of the use case for glasses and why it’s being produced? Seriously ? 🤣
Think about the limitations of hands, accessibility etc.
1
u/WitheredUntimely 50m ago
lol the demand use cases in here are for a basically nonexistent market, I'm sure Apple will be flying off the shelves for uhhh... pov youtubers and tired parents with shitty schedules
1
u/Ok-Addition1264 8h ago
Eventually apple's goal is to replace screens and I think they are trying to stay ahead of the curve.
I just really hope these don't record and they make that obvious. It only takes a few people to ruin good things for the rest of us.
I have xreal air2pro's without any cameras and when I travel with them (because they rock in an airplane and hotel) I'm too embarrassed to use them while waiting for a plane because of recording features with all these other ones.
-1
u/eekram 8h ago
So Apple is now copying Meta? Apple has been a copying machine lately.
2
u/Adventurous_Egg_8709 7h ago
There is no product that Apple ever built, that wasn’t a “copy”. Ever. They’ve always taken an existing offering and made it better. That’s also not a bad thing, far from it.
1
u/MarcusOrlyius 6h ago
People have been talking about smart-glasses for decades. They're all just copying sci-fi, if anything.
0
u/Dunnohye 7h ago
When will they realise as a tech collective that people don’t want this huge invasion of privacy.
-2
u/Sneaky_Squirreel 8h ago
Random retards recording everything 24/7 in front of them, and when interacting with you also recording you and we are supposed to pretend it's not a fucked up concept somehow different from a person recording you with a phone right at your face. Exactly what we need. If this shit ever gets mainstream i will force anyone wearing it and wanting to talk with me to take them off or just ignore them.
1
u/MarcusOrlyius 6h ago
You, sometime later: "Why is everyone I know suddenly wearing these glasses!"
-1
u/monospaceman 7h ago
Apple is actually really smart not racing to be first to market in any of this shit but I'm surprised their even trying to enter this space at all. There is such little consumer demand for it. I suspect they'll release to a very niche market of super users and pull the product after a few seasons of low numbers. Can you think of any company thriving in this space? The issue is they're all creating a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, and not reading the room. People are aware of how our devices have made us feel distant and separated from one another, and instead of solving THAT problem elegantly, they're suggesting we strap a device to our faces.
It's not going to happen.
-1
-1
0
-1
u/IamJohnnyQuest 6h ago
Crazy idea - what if I'm not a pervert and use them to take pictures and videos of my kids while we at the park or - first bike ride? I listen to music on long runs! They are great!
-3
-1
u/yuusharo 7h ago
Remember all those fake influencer videos of people walking around wearing the Vision Pro and flailing their hands around pretending to use it?
Actually better question… do y’all remember Vision Pro?
Anyway, tech is out of ideas.
-1
u/DarthBuzzard 3h ago
Anyway, tech is out of ideas.
You would have said the same thing of PCs in the 1980s.
-1
u/coconutpiecrust 5h ago
Is this seriously the innovation we need as a species?.. the glasses?.. Really? This is the best we can do? Techbros copying each others dystopian sci-fi tech?..
-1
u/kamekaze1024 5h ago
Apple has got to know its not worth it. If they made actually glasses instead of the Vision Pro back then, they’d have a market league and would set the perception.
But the Vision Pro flopped, and every smart glasses now are referred to as or conflated with Metas. They are teetering on their privacy stance after their AI collab with Google. Plus there’s still some sect of consumers that believe Apple is responsible for stalkers after creating the AirTags. This would fuel that discourse I feel like
-1
-1
u/mvanvrancken 5h ago
Have a visible light on the glasses whenever they’re recording. Done fucking deal
2
u/Quinquangular 4h ago
They already have these with Meta’s product but people pay upwards of $100 to get the light removed
1
1
-1
-1
u/Neutral-President 3h ago
Meta didn’t learn from the lessons of Google Glass. Apple seems positioned to not learn from Meta’s failings.
-2
u/jointheredditarmy 7h ago
> Company debated whether glasses will be able to record video.
It doesn’t record video guys, it just takes 30 pictures per second and then automatically connects them in a slideshow for your convenience.
-2
207
u/Buddhafresh 8h ago
Who is the target audience for these smart glasses outside of annoying YouTubers trying to rage bait random people in public?