Glasses Instead of Smartphones: Why Mark Zuckerberg Is Betting Everything Again

Meta is making smart glasses its main bet on the future — and this time not because the company's chief has started daydreaming again, but because it has no home of its own in the computing world. Apple and Google control the operating systems that host Zuckerberg's apps, and a single stroke of the pen in Cupertino can cost Meta billions in advertising revenue — as already happened with the introduction of new privacy rules in iOS. Mark Zuckerberg has said that a future without smart glasses is practically unimaginable, and, unlike his earlier predictions about the metaverse, this time his words are backed by hard market logic, not just fantasy.

From the metaverse to glasses on your face

A couple of years ago Zuckerberg was convincing everyone that future work meetings would take place as cartoon avatars in the airless expanse of the metaverse. As TechCrunch notes, Zuckerberg's predictions deserve skepticism — after all, he was certain that we would all long since be "hanging out" in the metaverse. Today Meta's rhetoric has changed dramatically: the company no longer invites users into fully virtual worlds, but wants to augment the world they are already in. In this logic, smart glasses are not a stylish accessory but an attempt to build the company's own computing platform and finally escape the dictatorship of other companies' app stores.

Why Meta can't stop

Meta's vulnerable position is easy to explain: it is a tech giant without a "home" of its own. As long as the company's apps run inside operating systems built by Apple and Google, any decision by those companies — from new privacy rules to app store policies — can hit Meta's advertising revenue for billions of dollars. If Meta manages to convince users to put glasses on their faces, the company will gain control over its own computing platform and stop depending on someone else's rules of the game. That's exactly why the smart glasses project is not an experiment for Zuckerberg, but a matter of strategic independence after the failure of the metaverse bet.

Orion: how it differs from Google Glass

Technologically, the shift to glasses looks more logical than the move into VR. The recently unveiled Orion prototype demonstrates that Meta has learned to pack serious computing power and complex lenses into a form factor that doesn't scare people off. Unlike bulky VR headsets, the glasses don't isolate the user from reality: they let you see notifications, translate a restaurant menu in real time, and get tips from an AI assistant while still looking at the world with your own eyes. It is precisely the integration with modern language models that gives this project a chance Google Glass never had ten years ago.

Risks: "glassholes" and physics

Skepticism about Zuckerberg's timelines is warranted — he has more than once mistaken wishful thinking for reality, assuming that technologies are ready for the mass market sooner than they actually are. The problem of "glassholes" — people with cameras on their faces causing discomfort to those around them — hasn't gone away, and social acceptance of such gadgets remains an open question even with flawless design. On top of that come thoroughly physical barriers: limited battery life and overheating of the casing, which can't be talked away with marketing slogans.

If Apple Vision Pro is an attempt to move a computer onto your face, then Zuckerberg's glasses are an attempt to make reality itself interactive and remove the last link between the user and the screen — the motion of reaching for your pocket.

Why is

Meta betting on smart glasses rather than the metaverse?

Because the metaverse burned through billions of dollars of shareholder money and didn't bring Meta independence, while smart glasses are an attempt to build its own computing platform. Meta depends on the operating systems of Apple and Google, and the rules of those companies (as with iOS privacy) can cost Meta billions in advertising revenue at any moment. Glasses on the user's face, in Zuckerberg's plan, are the last chance to get rid of that dependence.

How does the Orion prototype differ from Google Glass?

The main difference is integration with modern language models, which Google Glass didn't have ten years ago. Orion packs serious computing power and complex lenses into a form factor that doesn't scare people off, and, unlike bulky VR headsets, it doesn't isolate the user from reality: the glasses display notifications, translate a restaurant menu in real time, and give AI-assistant tips right over the field of view.

What risks remain for Meta's smart glasses project?

There are two main risks: social and physical. The social one is the unsolved "glasshole" problem, where a camera on someone's face causes discomfort to those around them regardless of design quality. The physical one is limited battery life and overheating of the casing, which for now remain barriers that marketing can't solve. Plus there's a general risk factor: Zuckerberg has already been wrong more than once about how soon technologies would be ready for the mass market.

*Meta has been designated an extremist organization and is banned in Russia.