AR glasses manufacturers are taking matters into their own hands.

I’ve spent some time using the XREAL Air and the Rokid Max glasses, and both companies have recently started shipping “brain” computers to help people use these glasses more easily.

I have separate videos on the XREAL and Rokid “brains”, and I collaborated with TK Bay to do a combo of comparison videos for the glasses and the “brains”.

I expect I’ll be talking about these glasses a lot over the next year, as we wait for the really expensive Mixed Reality headsets to arrive. Consumers might be interested in trying a more “price accessible” portable face display.

But who are these “brain” computers even for?!?!? Why not just use your phone?!?!? UGGGGGHHHH!!!

Disclaimer

I’ve done paid sponsored and promotional work for both of these brands, but neither brand contributed to this editorial.
***

I’m really excited to see manufacturers tackling this issue directly.

The most common complaints with portable face displays are compatibility issues, especially using them with phones. It makes sense that a consumer would take the MOST portable face display available, and would want to use it with the MOST portable computer they own.

The reality of that pairing is a lot more complex than tech enthusiasts realize.

I feel techies are starting to “buy their own bullshit”.

We watch copious numbers of videos, and read a startling number of articles, detailing the most expensive gadgets the market has to offer. We watch reviewers hold up $1400+ monster phones while they opine:

“but what does this do for the AVURAJ CUNZOOMER???”

Just how bad is that over-representation of premium devices though?

Should we be making $120 pocket computers to power these glasses, if there really is a significantly high number of premium phones that support video output features?

How Many Phones Really CAN Use These Glasses?

A basic question to start with: if you were the manufacturer of a portable AR solution, how large would your potential consumer base REALLY be?

Not as big as techies probably think it is…

We’re playing REALLY loose with shipping numbers, as manufacturers RARELY detail how well their phones sell over a fiscal year. Taking Samsung as our starting point, we know they missed expectations in 2022, ultimately shipping around 260 million phones.

Of those, we can roughly guess that Galaxy S and Galaxy Z accounted for around 30 million units. The vast majority of Samsung sales happened below $500. At present, none of those phones under $500 include the capability to send video out through the USB-C port, even though our mid-ranger phones are more than powerful enough to drive a 4K video stream and play some decently graphics intense games.

To be generous, I’d  estimate about 10% of the phones Samsung sold were capable of video out and were able to power a pair of AR glasses. That’s probably not accurate, but balancing the increase in S22 Ultra sales against the Z Flip4 lacking video out, I think that gets us close for some napkin math on global distribution.

Our next major player is Apple, and no iPhone is capable of driving these glasses without a powered adapter. That often takes the shape of an iPhone dongle AND a battery pack. We’re going to say that zero percent of iPhones can use these glasses without accessories or assistance.

Back to the rest of the Android market, for the other major players, it’s even harder to get good data on units shipped, and what the breakdown in phone pricing might resemble.

I’m going to be generous again, and say that their shipping numbers ROUGHLY resemble Samsung’s, though we can be fairly certain that isn’t true. We’re broadly guesstimating about 10% of every manufacturer’s line up is “premium” enough to send out video and power AR Glasses without assistance.

Except we know Xiaomi is a problem…

Only this year has Xiaomi finally added ONE phone to their portfolio with true USB3 and Video Out support. The Xiaomi 13 Ultra is likely a rounding error in the number of phones Xiaomi ships globally, but overall Xiaomi is often a third place seller, nipping at Apple’s heels in global distribution.

And, we know Google is a problem too…

Google’s market share has been climbing in North America, but to date, there has never been a Pixel sold which supports video output over USB-C. We’re hoping that might change with the Pixel 8, but the total numbers of Pixel 8’s sold over the next year will likely be a tiny percentage of the global market.

Looking at fiscal year 2022, we can ballpark how many phones could potentially use AR glasses directly, and acknowledging Apple, Google, and Xiaomi contribute zero to that number, the generous guess is about 7%.

About 7% of phones sold in 2022 MIGHT be compatible with Rokid or XREAL glasses.

If I were Rokid or XREAL, I doubt I’d be confident that number would change dramatically over the next year. There are many MANY more people out there to potentially sell glasses to, but the most portable version of this vision is woefully unsupported by the vast majority of pocket computers currently being sold.

The solution? It’s time to make your own pocket computer.

This solution is not outlandish considering the significant number of negative reviews these glasses get dealing with basic compatibility. Both companies draft lists for which phones might be compatible, and those lists aren’t very long.

Similarly, we can look at other portable products like the Nintendo Switch and the Steam Deck, where portable PC devices support and power glasses, but the Switch needs an adapter and vastly outsells the more computer-y counterparts.

I enjoy the experience of using these glasses with my laptops and tablets, but then the glasses directly compete against a more mature market of portable monitors. If someone is pulling out a laptop, they often have the desk space to prop up another physical screen next to it. That sight is becoming more common at my local coffee shops.

While writing this article, I got yet another comment from a “prove it to me” Samsung Bro:

 

And, as you can see in my reply, it’s totally fair to say that this product might not do anything for someone who already owns one of the most expensive phones offered last year.

It’s an inherently “Samsung Knight” thing to do. They can’t just say “I like my phone”, they have to wade into every conversation looking to debate and crush their opponents with the FAX AN LAWJICKS!

It’s one of the most exhausting aspects of tech reviewing right now.

The reasonable people don’t comment. The folks who have the slightest, tinniest, modicum of potential for perspective might watch a video, and then get on with their day. The person who is CAPABLE of saying:

“Oh that’s cool. I already have something that works better, but I could see where other people might need something like that.”

The person who is mature enough to entertain that thought? Those folks rarely reply anymore.

Instead, we get the “debate me” bros.

“Make it all about ME, and ONLY MY uses, and only what I’M familiar with, and only for MY favorite brands!”

The way content algorithms on platforms like YouTube work today, we’re basically ratcheting the brand fandom. We aren’t really growing the next generation of TECH enthusiasts.

If it feels like the tech community is shrinking, that’s probably because it is. Videos are being made more to confirm the bias of a potential audience than to open up discussions on new and fun products.

I digress…

If you’re wondering why these pocket “brains” exist for AR glasses, hopefully this article helped with a little perspective.

Yes. A premium phone can outperform a standalone pocket “brain”, and will often bring more benefits to the table. The person who owns a phone like that is a shockingly tiny slice of the pie, so other solutions need to exist.

The person who owns a compatible phone is in no way, shape, or form “Average”.