×
Rivian’s AI pivot is about more than chasing Tesla

Rivian’s AI pivot is about more than chasing Tesla

RJ Scaringe is sitting in Rivian’s Palo Alto offices, explaining why the adventure-themed EV company suddenly decided to build its own self-driving cars, when an unexpected guest glides by the window outside: Waymo.

A robotaxi from the Alphabet-owned company pulls up outside the office. The passenger, an analyst from Goldman Sachs, briefly takes a selfie before climbing inside. The Rivian founder and CEO chuckles at the scene.

“That’s amazing,” he laughs. “So perfect.”

The arrival of the Waymo helps clarify the challenge that lies ahead for Rivian. A few hours earlier, Scaringe was onstage in front of an audience of hundreds of investors, reporters, and influencers gathered for the company’s announcement of a huge, expensive, and undeniably risky bet on autonomy and AI. The goal, he said, is for Rivian to design its own AI chips that can help power higher levels of autonomy, eventually leading to Level 4 — no human supervision required within certain limits. Could Rivian achieve what has taken Waymo decades to accomplish, but on a much shorter timeline?

More importantly, can it do it safer and more effectively than Tesla, the other EV-only company that is attempting its own messy transformation into an AI and robotics company? Rivian was founded as the outdoor lover’s answer to Elon Musk’s company: rugged, off-road worthy, and fully electric. Now it seems like it’s trying to chase the mercurial billionaire down an AI rabbit hole.

Scaringe insists this isn’t anything motivated by Tesla, but a recognition that the auto industry is staring up its own cliff. Advances in transformer-based encoding and large-parameter models prompted a fundamental shift in Rivian’s thinking of the “physical AI” of autonomous driving, he says. As such, Rivian began a clean-sheet redesign of its autonomy platform in early 2022. With the introduction of its Gen 2 platform, the company began building a “data flywheel” to train a large driving model (sort of like an LLM, but for driving) using real-world driving data from its fleet. And because the model is trained end-to-end, Rivian says that improvements in sensors or compute directly enhance its capabilities, allowing the system to continuously improve as hardware advances.

Either Rivian pursues its own self-produced, vertically integrated autonomy strategy, or it risks being left in the dust by Waymo, Tesla, and others. Several times during the presentation, Scaringe notes that this isn’t some bandwagon chasing, but rather a move born out of years of hard work and thoughtful design.

“I spent some time last night with the team talking about this right before we’re about to show it today,” Scaringe says onstage. “And one of the lead engineers looked at me and said, ‘Boy, we’ve been working on this for years, and I haven’t been able to talk about it. It’s so cool. Tomorrow I can start to talk about what I do every day, all day long.’”

Universal Hands-Free will work on 3.5 million miles of road in North America.
Image: Rivian

Hands-free, eyes-off, and beyond

Rivian certainly isn’t shy about sharing details now. The company’s “AI and Autonomy Day” is set up like a Silicon Valley high school science fair. Tours take us throughout the Rivian office to see various projects: the new chip that will help power its AI ambitions, complete with microscopes to inspect the silicon in extreme close-up; its new in-car, AI-powered voice assistant that can navigate you to your favorite winery or pick the right song by Jelly Roll; and the lidar sensor that will help its vehicles drive themselves by creating a 3D picture of the world around it. There’s even an R2 wrapped to look like R2-D2 from Star Wars.

The most notable thing I get to experience is a test drive with an early preview of Rivian’s new hands-free point-to-point capability. A software update, released soon after the event, allows Rivian owners to operate “hands-free” on 3.5 million miles of road in the US and Canada. The point-to-point capability will come at a later date and will unlock even more partial autonomous driving. Think of it as Rivian’s answer to Tesla’s Full Self-Driving feature.

Rivian says that starting next year, if a road has clear, painted lane lines, drivers will be able to use hands-free driving. It’ll be part of a paid package called Autonomy Plus, offered either as a one-time purchase of $2,900 or a monthly $49.99 subscription. (By comparison, Tesla offers its premium FSD option for $8,000 upfront or a $99-per-month fee.) Rivian’s Autonomy Plus package will be available free to all customers until March 2026.

The most notable thing I get to experience is a test drive with an early preview of Rivian’s new hands-free point-to-point capability.

I get to experience about 45 minutes of this feature from the passenger seat of an R1S as it drives through a series of tricky scenarios around Palo Alto. A Rivian engineer sits in the driver’s seat, ready to take control if anything goes wrong, but he mostly keeps his hands in his lap and his feet off the pedals as the R1S navigates intersections, traffic signals, and a bevy of pedestrians, cyclists, and other vulnerable road users.

The car seems to handle itself just fine, with the engineer only once taking control of the vehicle to avoid getting stuck at a red light. At one point, we thread a narrow path between a passing truck on one side and a cyclist in a bike lane on the other — and while I think we come a little too close to the cyclist, the car didn’t slow down or wobble in the lane. Days after the event, I learn of other test rides with more disengagements than mine.

There’s none of the jerkiness or hesitancy that I typically associate with a first-gen driver-assist system. Maybe that’s because in addition to 11 cameras, the system is also receiving data from five radar sensors, helping it form a more complete view of the world around it. Tesla’s FSD system, by comparison, is camera-only.

With more cars equipped with partial automation hitting the road, safety researchers are growing increasingly worried about driver attention and the potential for these systems to cause crashes. But Rivian subscribes to the theory that drivers should work with the hands-free system by adjusting the steering or pushing the accelerator without disengaging it. Rivian can switch between two different types of steering controllers that allow the driver to input their own steering when they want, Nick Nguyen, director of product and programs for autonomy, tells me.

“We’re big believers in collaboration,” he says. “We want you to interact with it as much or as little as you want.”

The company’s new lidar sensor will come with the R2.

The company’s new lidar sensor will come with the R2.
Image: Rivian

The real test is still to come. Rivian’s Gen 3 system will include the company’s proprietary silicon chip and the same sensor stack as Gen 2, with one crucial addition: lidar. The laser sensor is not typically found in privately owned vehicles, featuring more prominently in robotaxis like Waymo. Rivian is planning to add it to the upcoming more affordable model, the R2 — and taking a huge risk in the process.

Lidar is pricey, but those costs are coming down. Rivian wouldn’t disclose its lidar supplier, but the difference between a camera-only system like Tesla’s and one with multiple sensors is stark. During the presentation, James Philbin, Rivian’s vice president for autonomy and AI, shows a side-by-side visual comparison of Rivian’s autonomy software identifying and interpreting objects ahead using only its cameras; cameras and radar; and the trifecta of cameras, radar, and lidar. The latter setup is the clear victor, spotting several hidden objects and even pedestrians that the camera-only or camera-plus-radar approaches could not.

In our interview, Scaringe clarifies that the R2 will begin production next year without lidar or the Gen 3 autonomy computer, both of which won’t be added until the end of 2026. On Reddit, Rivian fans are upset that the company couldn’t better time the rollout so that early adopters wouldn’t be left to choose between a less powerful R2 right away or a more powerful one later. But Scaringe insists that demand for R2 is already so high that Rivian doesn’t expect a significant sales impact.

What could impact sales is a janky, unreliable system. But Scaringe assures me that Gen 3 is anything but. The AI computer will feature a dual-chip setup capable of 1,600 trillion operations a second (TOPS), a figure that he claims would have been unimaginable a few years ago.

But what actually matters is how fast the computer processes information, like pixels for camera-based robotics. Rivian says its Gen 3 system will be able to process 5 billion pixels a second, which is not a common specification you hear tossed around in the AI world, but one Scaringe believes should impress people even more than the TOPS measure.

Scaringe insists that demand for R2 is already so high that Rivian doesn’t expect a significant sales impact.

“Tesla recently talked about theirs,” he says. “I’ll let you Google it, but it’s a lot less.” (It’s 1 million pixels per milisecond.)

The next major milestone is “eyes-off” driving, where users no longer need to watch the road and, according to Scaringe, can fully reclaim their time to read, use their phone, or relax. Beyond that lies personal Level 4 capability, where the vehicle operates entirely on its own on certain roads, no human supervision required.

Whether Rivian ultimately gets there will depend on whether the company can create trust around its products. And that will require a transparent approach to legal liability that most automakers, Rivian included, have yet to fully embrace.

Scaringe notes that as autonomy improves, human driving will shrink from roughly 80–90 percent of miles today to 10–20 percent within a few years, and eventually to zero. At that point, a driver’s personal skill level becomes irrelevant to risk assessment, and insurance must shift accordingly, he says. Rivian has a partnership with Nationwide for its insurance claims, but has yet to work out how it will accept liability for crashes that occur in its autonomous vehicles.

“This is like the ticky-tacky of the real work streams to make this all real,” Scaringe says. “Beyond the technology, but actually, like, the business systems that need to be designed.”

Rivian’s RAP1 chip, or the first-generation Rivian Autonomy Processor.

Rivian’s RAP1 chip, or the first-generation Rivian Autonomy Processor.
Image: Bloomberg via Getty Images

In Palo Alto, the reactions to Rivian’s announcements are enthusiastic. All the influencers and analysts I talk to are impressed with what they’re being shown. But despite this, the company’s stock falls 6 percent the day of the event to close at $16.43 per share. Tesla, meanwhile, continues to trade at over $460 per share. Rivian’s stock has since bounced back slightly, and while the company has eked out a gross profit in the past, it’s still facing a very tough road ahead with the elimination of the EV tax credit and the enormous capital costs that will be needed to realize its AI dreams.

And there’s still the issue of why Rivian is doing this in the first place. While fans may be left scratching their heads over why their favorite outdoor brand is chasing after Tesla with its AI strategy, the company is doing the necessary work to keep itself relevant in a new era, says mobility investor Reilly Brennan.

“Having an AI strategy is growing into a necessary component for public auto companies in this era — at least the ones that want public market comps on the high end of the continuum, a la Tesla,” Brennan tells me. “Consider it like those overachieving high school students trying to get into Harvard: It’s not a requirement that they both started a charity and play the contrabassoon, but it sure seems like everyone else who gets in is doing it.”

There’s peer pressure, and then there’s the necessity of finding new ways to earn money off your customers. A $50-a-month autonomy subscription could be a lucrative new revenue stream for Rivian, which needs to become profitable to survive.

Scaringe sounds like a true convert. He thinks that we’re rapidly approaching a time in which AI will become as accessible as “running water and electricity,” he says during the presentation. No mention is made of how much running water and electricity is consumed by AI, which, for a company that purports to care about the environment, could quickly become a problem.

And Rivian is not fully committed to following Musk’s ceaseless, clout-chasing pursuit of robotaxis and humanoid robots — though Scaringe admits that both remain a possibility. The company spun off its own robotics division as Mind Robotics earlier this year, after all.

“The part of the problem that’s not solved is the Level 4,” he tells me, standing up because he has several more interviews ahead, and my time is up. “And so that’s our focus, on the tech.”

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.


Source link
#Rivians #pivot #chasing #Tesla

Google Glass. For one, they actually exist in a way that has been commercially viable, thanks mostly to Meta. With the help of Ray-Ban branding, Meta has sold millions of smart glasses, and, if recent reporting is any indication, it already has several more pairs on the way this year alone.

Its initial success hasn’t gone unnoticed, either. Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses have pulled Google, Samsung, and potentially even Apple into the mix, with the former two companies planning to release their own pair this year. And that’s not even counting the various other upstarts that have managed to carve out a niche already.

The interest in face-worn wearables is palpable, and in a lot of ways, smart glasses, for all of their obvious flaws, feel concrete. But as concrete as the interest is, the category also feels as nebulous as ever, and Meta, for all its popularity, is a perfect example.

Meta’s Smart Glasses Are Long Ways From Their ‘Eureka’ Moment
                Smart glasses have come a long way since the days of Google Glass. For one, they actually exist in a way that has been commercially viable, thanks mostly to Meta. With the help of Ray-Ban branding, Meta has sold millions of smart glasses, and, if recent reporting is any indication, it already has several more pairs on the way this year alone.

 Its initial success hasn’t gone unnoticed, either. Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses have pulled Google, Samsung, and potentially even Apple into the mix, with the former two companies planning to release their own pair this year. And that’s not even counting the various other upstarts that have managed to carve out a niche already. The interest in face-worn wearables is palpable, and in a lot of ways, smart glasses, for all of their obvious flaws, feel concrete. But as concrete as the interest is, the category also feels as nebulous as ever, and Meta, for all its popularity, is a perfect example. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Take apps, for instance. Meta has made some strides since the launch of the Meta Ray-Ban Display last year to try to add more functionality, but for the most part, it still feels like there’s not a ton to do once they’re on your face. You can get notifications, you can get directions, and you can swipe through Instagram Reels, and sure, it’s novel to be doing those things on a small screen on your face, but they don’t necessarily add up to a game-changing experience.

 Meta clearly knows that those “core” apps aren’t enough, which is why it recently opened up its developer program for the Meta Ray-Ban Display so that people can make apps that use both the built-in screen as well as the included Neural Band, the wristband you use to control the UI inside the smart glasses. While the apps being built are in early stages and aren’t being made generally available to people who own the smart glasses yet, initial results are… something? There are people making speedometers, apps that control your smart home, and Doom (because, of course). Someone even made the bold choice of making an app that can unlock your car. Again, they’re interesting ideas, but I’m not sure that any of them will have people rushing out to spend 0 on a pair of smart glasses.

 Meta’s non-display smart glasses face similar issues. While I like the fact that you can use them as an open-ear audio device—they’re great for calling and listening to music while you’re riding a bike or exercising—some of the banner features of Meta’s “AI glasses” feel less-than-useful, and one of them is the AI itself. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Features like computer vision, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to answer questions about the world around you, are somewhat novel, but maybe not altogether useful for most. Don’t get me wrong, I think it could be great for accessibility purposes—people who have vision impairments could use computer vision to parse their surroundings. But for a general audience, the AI part of AI glasses can feel underwhelming, and I’m not the only one who thinks so. “The biggest hurdle to success that I see so far for Meta is the quality of Meta AI and the slow nature of getting third-party apps onboard,” says Anshel Sag, principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy, which follows the consumer tech space closely. “The ways that they enhance my life in their most simple form, as smart glasses, are still pretty much paired to just Meta apps.”

 Outside of translating a menu or telling you about items in your surroundings, I’ve yet to see lots of practical uses for computer vision, and that’s not even factoring in the bad habit that Meta AI has of getting things wrong, which is a real issue in my experience using the Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses. I get that not every new gadget has to have a purpose right off the bat. Take the Apple Watch, for example, which entered the scene as a frivolous accessory to your iPhone. In many ways, you can write off smart glasses for the same reasons that people wrote off the Apple Watch at first. Yes, it delivers notifications and comes in a wearable form factor, but it mostly duplicates the experience of using your phone. And not only that, it’s utterly dependent on your phone to work, same as Meta’s Ray-Bans and Oakleys.

 © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Those criticisms didn’t hold up forever, though. Eventually, the Apple Watch found health tracking features like heart rate monitoring and crash detection, and now it’s a device unto itself that also acts as an accessory to your iPhone. The thing is, health features aren’t exactly up for grabs anymore, though Meta has tried to introduce nutrition tracking as a feature, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to log what you eat and then gives you AI-powered recommendations. Whether that gets any traction remains to be seen, but I personally don’t envision loads of people lining up to have Meta AI shame them for their diets. So, smart glasses will have to find their own niche, just like the Apple Watch, though whether such a niche really exists is anyone’s guess. It’s not that smart glasses can’t be useful at times—they can—but as it stands, even Meta lacks a “killer app” to drive adoption. Sure, people like recording stuff, but that is an entire can of worms from a privacy perspective, and for as many people that want smart glasses for their recording abilities, there are just as many that hate them for it. Millions of units sold or not, smart glasses like Meta’s still feel like they’re a long way from the proverbial Apple Watch moment—a holy grail that is never guaranteed to arrive.      #Metas #Smart #Glasses #Long #Ways #Eureka #MomentMeta,Ray-Ban Meta,smart glasses,The Next Interface,Wearables
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Take apps, for instance. Meta has made some strides since the launch of the Meta Ray-Ban Display last year to try to add more functionality, but for the most part, it still feels like there’s not a ton to do once they’re on your face. You can get notifications, you can get directions, and you can swipe through Instagram Reels, and sure, it’s novel to be doing those things on a small screen on your face, but they don’t necessarily add up to a game-changing experience.

Meta clearly knows that those “core” apps aren’t enough, which is why it recently opened up its developer program for the Meta Ray-Ban Display so that people can make apps that use both the built-in screen as well as the included Neural Band, the wristband you use to control the UI inside the smart glasses.

While the apps being built are in early stages and aren’t being made generally available to people who own the smart glasses yet, initial results are… something? There are people making speedometers, apps that control your smart home, and Doom (because, of course). Someone even made the bold choice of making an app that can unlock your car. Again, they’re interesting ideas, but I’m not sure that any of them will have people rushing out to spend $800 on a pair of smart glasses.

Meta’s non-display smart glasses face similar issues. While I like the fact that you can use them as an open-ear audio device—they’re great for calling and listening to music while you’re riding a bike or exercising—some of the banner features of Meta’s “AI glasses” feel less-than-useful, and one of them is the AI itself.

Ray Ban Meta Gen 2 09
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Features like computer vision, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to answer questions about the world around you, are somewhat novel, but maybe not altogether useful for most. Don’t get me wrong, I think it could be great for accessibility purposes—people who have vision impairments could use computer vision to parse their surroundings. But for a general audience, the AI part of AI glasses can feel underwhelming, and I’m not the only one who thinks so.

“The biggest hurdle to success that I see so far for Meta is the quality of Meta AI and the slow nature of getting third-party apps onboard,” says Anshel Sag, principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy, which follows the consumer tech space closely. “The ways that they enhance my life in their most simple form, as smart glasses, are still pretty much paired to just Meta apps.”

Outside of translating a menu or telling you about items in your surroundings, I’ve yet to see lots of practical uses for computer vision, and that’s not even factoring in the bad habit that Meta AI has of getting things wrong, which is a real issue in my experience using the Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses.

I get that not every new gadget has to have a purpose right off the bat. Take the Apple Watch, for example, which entered the scene as a frivolous accessory to your iPhone. In many ways, you can write off smart glasses for the same reasons that people wrote off the Apple Watch at first. Yes, it delivers notifications and comes in a wearable form factor, but it mostly duplicates the experience of using your phone. And not only that, it’s utterly dependent on your phone to work, same as Meta’s Ray-Bans and Oakleys.

Meta Ray Ban Display neural band
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Those criticisms didn’t hold up forever, though. Eventually, the Apple Watch found health tracking features like heart rate monitoring and crash detection, and now it’s a device unto itself that also acts as an accessory to your iPhone. The thing is, health features aren’t exactly up for grabs anymore, though Meta has tried to introduce nutrition tracking as a feature, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to log what you eat and then gives you AI-powered recommendations. Whether that gets any traction remains to be seen, but I personally don’t envision loads of people lining up to have Meta AI shame them for their diets.

So, smart glasses will have to find their own niche, just like the Apple Watch, though whether such a niche really exists is anyone’s guess. It’s not that smart glasses can’t be useful at times—they can—but as it stands, even Meta lacks a “killer app” to drive adoption. Sure, people like recording stuff, but that is an entire can of worms from a privacy perspective, and for as many people that want smart glasses for their recording abilities, there are just as many that hate them for it.

Millions of units sold or not, smart glasses like Meta’s still feel like they’re a long way from the proverbial Apple Watch moment—a holy grail that is never guaranteed to arrive.

#Metas #Smart #Glasses #Long #Ways #Eureka #MomentMeta,Ray-Ban Meta,smart glasses,The Next Interface,Wearables">Meta’s Smart Glasses Are Long Ways From Their ‘Eureka’ Moment
                Smart glasses have come a long way since the days of Google Glass. For one, they actually exist in a way that has been commercially viable, thanks mostly to Meta. With the help of Ray-Ban branding, Meta has sold millions of smart glasses, and, if recent reporting is any indication, it already has several more pairs on the way this year alone.

 Its initial success hasn’t gone unnoticed, either. Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses have pulled Google, Samsung, and potentially even Apple into the mix, with the former two companies planning to release their own pair this year. And that’s not even counting the various other upstarts that have managed to carve out a niche already. The interest in face-worn wearables is palpable, and in a lot of ways, smart glasses, for all of their obvious flaws, feel concrete. But as concrete as the interest is, the category also feels as nebulous as ever, and Meta, for all its popularity, is a perfect example. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Take apps, for instance. Meta has made some strides since the launch of the Meta Ray-Ban Display last year to try to add more functionality, but for the most part, it still feels like there’s not a ton to do once they’re on your face. You can get notifications, you can get directions, and you can swipe through Instagram Reels, and sure, it’s novel to be doing those things on a small screen on your face, but they don’t necessarily add up to a game-changing experience.

 Meta clearly knows that those “core” apps aren’t enough, which is why it recently opened up its developer program for the Meta Ray-Ban Display so that people can make apps that use both the built-in screen as well as the included Neural Band, the wristband you use to control the UI inside the smart glasses. While the apps being built are in early stages and aren’t being made generally available to people who own the smart glasses yet, initial results are… something? There are people making speedometers, apps that control your smart home, and Doom (because, of course). Someone even made the bold choice of making an app that can unlock your car. Again, they’re interesting ideas, but I’m not sure that any of them will have people rushing out to spend 0 on a pair of smart glasses.

 Meta’s non-display smart glasses face similar issues. While I like the fact that you can use them as an open-ear audio device—they’re great for calling and listening to music while you’re riding a bike or exercising—some of the banner features of Meta’s “AI glasses” feel less-than-useful, and one of them is the AI itself. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Features like computer vision, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to answer questions about the world around you, are somewhat novel, but maybe not altogether useful for most. Don’t get me wrong, I think it could be great for accessibility purposes—people who have vision impairments could use computer vision to parse their surroundings. But for a general audience, the AI part of AI glasses can feel underwhelming, and I’m not the only one who thinks so. “The biggest hurdle to success that I see so far for Meta is the quality of Meta AI and the slow nature of getting third-party apps onboard,” says Anshel Sag, principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy, which follows the consumer tech space closely. “The ways that they enhance my life in their most simple form, as smart glasses, are still pretty much paired to just Meta apps.”

 Outside of translating a menu or telling you about items in your surroundings, I’ve yet to see lots of practical uses for computer vision, and that’s not even factoring in the bad habit that Meta AI has of getting things wrong, which is a real issue in my experience using the Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses. I get that not every new gadget has to have a purpose right off the bat. Take the Apple Watch, for example, which entered the scene as a frivolous accessory to your iPhone. In many ways, you can write off smart glasses for the same reasons that people wrote off the Apple Watch at first. Yes, it delivers notifications and comes in a wearable form factor, but it mostly duplicates the experience of using your phone. And not only that, it’s utterly dependent on your phone to work, same as Meta’s Ray-Bans and Oakleys.

 © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Those criticisms didn’t hold up forever, though. Eventually, the Apple Watch found health tracking features like heart rate monitoring and crash detection, and now it’s a device unto itself that also acts as an accessory to your iPhone. The thing is, health features aren’t exactly up for grabs anymore, though Meta has tried to introduce nutrition tracking as a feature, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to log what you eat and then gives you AI-powered recommendations. Whether that gets any traction remains to be seen, but I personally don’t envision loads of people lining up to have Meta AI shame them for their diets. So, smart glasses will have to find their own niche, just like the Apple Watch, though whether such a niche really exists is anyone’s guess. It’s not that smart glasses can’t be useful at times—they can—but as it stands, even Meta lacks a “killer app” to drive adoption. Sure, people like recording stuff, but that is an entire can of worms from a privacy perspective, and for as many people that want smart glasses for their recording abilities, there are just as many that hate them for it. Millions of units sold or not, smart glasses like Meta’s still feel like they’re a long way from the proverbial Apple Watch moment—a holy grail that is never guaranteed to arrive.      #Metas #Smart #Glasses #Long #Ways #Eureka #MomentMeta,Ray-Ban Meta,smart glasses,The Next Interface,Wearables

. For one, they actually exist in a way that has been commercially viable, thanks mostly to Meta. With the help of Ray-Ban branding, Meta has sold millions of smart glasses, and, if recent reporting is any indication, it already has several more pairs on the way this year alone.

Its initial success hasn’t gone unnoticed, either. Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses have pulled Google, Samsung, and potentially even Apple into the mix, with the former two companies planning to release their own pair this year. And that’s not even counting the various other upstarts that have managed to carve out a niche already.

The interest in face-worn wearables is palpable, and in a lot of ways, smart glasses, for all of their obvious flaws, feel concrete. But as concrete as the interest is, the category also feels as nebulous as ever, and Meta, for all its popularity, is a perfect example.

Meta’s Smart Glasses Are Long Ways From Their ‘Eureka’ Moment
                Smart glasses have come a long way since the days of Google Glass. For one, they actually exist in a way that has been commercially viable, thanks mostly to Meta. With the help of Ray-Ban branding, Meta has sold millions of smart glasses, and, if recent reporting is any indication, it already has several more pairs on the way this year alone.

 Its initial success hasn’t gone unnoticed, either. Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses have pulled Google, Samsung, and potentially even Apple into the mix, with the former two companies planning to release their own pair this year. And that’s not even counting the various other upstarts that have managed to carve out a niche already. The interest in face-worn wearables is palpable, and in a lot of ways, smart glasses, for all of their obvious flaws, feel concrete. But as concrete as the interest is, the category also feels as nebulous as ever, and Meta, for all its popularity, is a perfect example. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Take apps, for instance. Meta has made some strides since the launch of the Meta Ray-Ban Display last year to try to add more functionality, but for the most part, it still feels like there’s not a ton to do once they’re on your face. You can get notifications, you can get directions, and you can swipe through Instagram Reels, and sure, it’s novel to be doing those things on a small screen on your face, but they don’t necessarily add up to a game-changing experience.

 Meta clearly knows that those “core” apps aren’t enough, which is why it recently opened up its developer program for the Meta Ray-Ban Display so that people can make apps that use both the built-in screen as well as the included Neural Band, the wristband you use to control the UI inside the smart glasses. While the apps being built are in early stages and aren’t being made generally available to people who own the smart glasses yet, initial results are… something? There are people making speedometers, apps that control your smart home, and Doom (because, of course). Someone even made the bold choice of making an app that can unlock your car. Again, they’re interesting ideas, but I’m not sure that any of them will have people rushing out to spend 0 on a pair of smart glasses.

 Meta’s non-display smart glasses face similar issues. While I like the fact that you can use them as an open-ear audio device—they’re great for calling and listening to music while you’re riding a bike or exercising—some of the banner features of Meta’s “AI glasses” feel less-than-useful, and one of them is the AI itself. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Features like computer vision, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to answer questions about the world around you, are somewhat novel, but maybe not altogether useful for most. Don’t get me wrong, I think it could be great for accessibility purposes—people who have vision impairments could use computer vision to parse their surroundings. But for a general audience, the AI part of AI glasses can feel underwhelming, and I’m not the only one who thinks so. “The biggest hurdle to success that I see so far for Meta is the quality of Meta AI and the slow nature of getting third-party apps onboard,” says Anshel Sag, principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy, which follows the consumer tech space closely. “The ways that they enhance my life in their most simple form, as smart glasses, are still pretty much paired to just Meta apps.”

 Outside of translating a menu or telling you about items in your surroundings, I’ve yet to see lots of practical uses for computer vision, and that’s not even factoring in the bad habit that Meta AI has of getting things wrong, which is a real issue in my experience using the Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses. I get that not every new gadget has to have a purpose right off the bat. Take the Apple Watch, for example, which entered the scene as a frivolous accessory to your iPhone. In many ways, you can write off smart glasses for the same reasons that people wrote off the Apple Watch at first. Yes, it delivers notifications and comes in a wearable form factor, but it mostly duplicates the experience of using your phone. And not only that, it’s utterly dependent on your phone to work, same as Meta’s Ray-Bans and Oakleys.

 © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Those criticisms didn’t hold up forever, though. Eventually, the Apple Watch found health tracking features like heart rate monitoring and crash detection, and now it’s a device unto itself that also acts as an accessory to your iPhone. The thing is, health features aren’t exactly up for grabs anymore, though Meta has tried to introduce nutrition tracking as a feature, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to log what you eat and then gives you AI-powered recommendations. Whether that gets any traction remains to be seen, but I personally don’t envision loads of people lining up to have Meta AI shame them for their diets. So, smart glasses will have to find their own niche, just like the Apple Watch, though whether such a niche really exists is anyone’s guess. It’s not that smart glasses can’t be useful at times—they can—but as it stands, even Meta lacks a “killer app” to drive adoption. Sure, people like recording stuff, but that is an entire can of worms from a privacy perspective, and for as many people that want smart glasses for their recording abilities, there are just as many that hate them for it. Millions of units sold or not, smart glasses like Meta’s still feel like they’re a long way from the proverbial Apple Watch moment—a holy grail that is never guaranteed to arrive.      #Metas #Smart #Glasses #Long #Ways #Eureka #MomentMeta,Ray-Ban Meta,smart glasses,The Next Interface,Wearables
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Take apps, for instance. Meta has made some strides since the launch of the Meta Ray-Ban Display last year to try to add more functionality, but for the most part, it still feels like there’s not a ton to do once they’re on your face. You can get notifications, you can get directions, and you can swipe through Instagram Reels, and sure, it’s novel to be doing those things on a small screen on your face, but they don’t necessarily add up to a game-changing experience.

Meta clearly knows that those “core” apps aren’t enough, which is why it recently opened up its developer program for the Meta Ray-Ban Display so that people can make apps that use both the built-in screen as well as the included Neural Band, the wristband you use to control the UI inside the smart glasses.

While the apps being built are in early stages and aren’t being made generally available to people who own the smart glasses yet, initial results are… something? There are people making speedometers, apps that control your smart home, and Doom (because, of course). Someone even made the bold choice of making an app that can unlock your car. Again, they’re interesting ideas, but I’m not sure that any of them will have people rushing out to spend $800 on a pair of smart glasses.

Meta’s non-display smart glasses face similar issues. While I like the fact that you can use them as an open-ear audio device—they’re great for calling and listening to music while you’re riding a bike or exercising—some of the banner features of Meta’s “AI glasses” feel less-than-useful, and one of them is the AI itself.

Ray Ban Meta Gen 2 09
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Features like computer vision, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to answer questions about the world around you, are somewhat novel, but maybe not altogether useful for most. Don’t get me wrong, I think it could be great for accessibility purposes—people who have vision impairments could use computer vision to parse their surroundings. But for a general audience, the AI part of AI glasses can feel underwhelming, and I’m not the only one who thinks so.

“The biggest hurdle to success that I see so far for Meta is the quality of Meta AI and the slow nature of getting third-party apps onboard,” says Anshel Sag, principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy, which follows the consumer tech space closely. “The ways that they enhance my life in their most simple form, as smart glasses, are still pretty much paired to just Meta apps.”

Outside of translating a menu or telling you about items in your surroundings, I’ve yet to see lots of practical uses for computer vision, and that’s not even factoring in the bad habit that Meta AI has of getting things wrong, which is a real issue in my experience using the Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses.

I get that not every new gadget has to have a purpose right off the bat. Take the Apple Watch, for example, which entered the scene as a frivolous accessory to your iPhone. In many ways, you can write off smart glasses for the same reasons that people wrote off the Apple Watch at first. Yes, it delivers notifications and comes in a wearable form factor, but it mostly duplicates the experience of using your phone. And not only that, it’s utterly dependent on your phone to work, same as Meta’s Ray-Bans and Oakleys.

Meta Ray Ban Display neural band
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Those criticisms didn’t hold up forever, though. Eventually, the Apple Watch found health tracking features like heart rate monitoring and crash detection, and now it’s a device unto itself that also acts as an accessory to your iPhone. The thing is, health features aren’t exactly up for grabs anymore, though Meta has tried to introduce nutrition tracking as a feature, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to log what you eat and then gives you AI-powered recommendations. Whether that gets any traction remains to be seen, but I personally don’t envision loads of people lining up to have Meta AI shame them for their diets.

So, smart glasses will have to find their own niche, just like the Apple Watch, though whether such a niche really exists is anyone’s guess. It’s not that smart glasses can’t be useful at times—they can—but as it stands, even Meta lacks a “killer app” to drive adoption. Sure, people like recording stuff, but that is an entire can of worms from a privacy perspective, and for as many people that want smart glasses for their recording abilities, there are just as many that hate them for it.

Millions of units sold or not, smart glasses like Meta’s still feel like they’re a long way from the proverbial Apple Watch moment—a holy grail that is never guaranteed to arrive.

#Metas #Smart #Glasses #Long #Ways #Eureka #MomentMeta,Ray-Ban Meta,smart glasses,The Next Interface,Wearables">Meta’s Smart Glasses Are Long Ways From Their ‘Eureka’ Moment

Smart glasses have come a long way since the days of Google Glass. For one, they actually exist in a way that has been commercially viable, thanks mostly to Meta. With the help of Ray-Ban branding, Meta has sold millions of smart glasses, and, if recent reporting is any indication, it already has several more pairs on the way this year alone.

Its initial success hasn’t gone unnoticed, either. Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses have pulled Google, Samsung, and potentially even Apple into the mix, with the former two companies planning to release their own pair this year. And that’s not even counting the various other upstarts that have managed to carve out a niche already.

The interest in face-worn wearables is palpable, and in a lot of ways, smart glasses, for all of their obvious flaws, feel concrete. But as concrete as the interest is, the category also feels as nebulous as ever, and Meta, for all its popularity, is a perfect example.

Meta’s Smart Glasses Are Long Ways From Their ‘Eureka’ Moment
                Smart glasses have come a long way since the days of Google Glass. For one, they actually exist in a way that has been commercially viable, thanks mostly to Meta. With the help of Ray-Ban branding, Meta has sold millions of smart glasses, and, if recent reporting is any indication, it already has several more pairs on the way this year alone.

 Its initial success hasn’t gone unnoticed, either. Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses have pulled Google, Samsung, and potentially even Apple into the mix, with the former two companies planning to release their own pair this year. And that’s not even counting the various other upstarts that have managed to carve out a niche already. The interest in face-worn wearables is palpable, and in a lot of ways, smart glasses, for all of their obvious flaws, feel concrete. But as concrete as the interest is, the category also feels as nebulous as ever, and Meta, for all its popularity, is a perfect example. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Take apps, for instance. Meta has made some strides since the launch of the Meta Ray-Ban Display last year to try to add more functionality, but for the most part, it still feels like there’s not a ton to do once they’re on your face. You can get notifications, you can get directions, and you can swipe through Instagram Reels, and sure, it’s novel to be doing those things on a small screen on your face, but they don’t necessarily add up to a game-changing experience.

 Meta clearly knows that those “core” apps aren’t enough, which is why it recently opened up its developer program for the Meta Ray-Ban Display so that people can make apps that use both the built-in screen as well as the included Neural Band, the wristband you use to control the UI inside the smart glasses. While the apps being built are in early stages and aren’t being made generally available to people who own the smart glasses yet, initial results are… something? There are people making speedometers, apps that control your smart home, and Doom (because, of course). Someone even made the bold choice of making an app that can unlock your car. Again, they’re interesting ideas, but I’m not sure that any of them will have people rushing out to spend 0 on a pair of smart glasses.

 Meta’s non-display smart glasses face similar issues. While I like the fact that you can use them as an open-ear audio device—they’re great for calling and listening to music while you’re riding a bike or exercising—some of the banner features of Meta’s “AI glasses” feel less-than-useful, and one of them is the AI itself. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Features like computer vision, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to answer questions about the world around you, are somewhat novel, but maybe not altogether useful for most. Don’t get me wrong, I think it could be great for accessibility purposes—people who have vision impairments could use computer vision to parse their surroundings. But for a general audience, the AI part of AI glasses can feel underwhelming, and I’m not the only one who thinks so. “The biggest hurdle to success that I see so far for Meta is the quality of Meta AI and the slow nature of getting third-party apps onboard,” says Anshel Sag, principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy, which follows the consumer tech space closely. “The ways that they enhance my life in their most simple form, as smart glasses, are still pretty much paired to just Meta apps.”

 Outside of translating a menu or telling you about items in your surroundings, I’ve yet to see lots of practical uses for computer vision, and that’s not even factoring in the bad habit that Meta AI has of getting things wrong, which is a real issue in my experience using the Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses. I get that not every new gadget has to have a purpose right off the bat. Take the Apple Watch, for example, which entered the scene as a frivolous accessory to your iPhone. In many ways, you can write off smart glasses for the same reasons that people wrote off the Apple Watch at first. Yes, it delivers notifications and comes in a wearable form factor, but it mostly duplicates the experience of using your phone. And not only that, it’s utterly dependent on your phone to work, same as Meta’s Ray-Bans and Oakleys.

 © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Those criticisms didn’t hold up forever, though. Eventually, the Apple Watch found health tracking features like heart rate monitoring and crash detection, and now it’s a device unto itself that also acts as an accessory to your iPhone. The thing is, health features aren’t exactly up for grabs anymore, though Meta has tried to introduce nutrition tracking as a feature, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to log what you eat and then gives you AI-powered recommendations. Whether that gets any traction remains to be seen, but I personally don’t envision loads of people lining up to have Meta AI shame them for their diets. So, smart glasses will have to find their own niche, just like the Apple Watch, though whether such a niche really exists is anyone’s guess. It’s not that smart glasses can’t be useful at times—they can—but as it stands, even Meta lacks a “killer app” to drive adoption. Sure, people like recording stuff, but that is an entire can of worms from a privacy perspective, and for as many people that want smart glasses for their recording abilities, there are just as many that hate them for it. Millions of units sold or not, smart glasses like Meta’s still feel like they’re a long way from the proverbial Apple Watch moment—a holy grail that is never guaranteed to arrive.      #Metas #Smart #Glasses #Long #Ways #Eureka #MomentMeta,Ray-Ban Meta,smart glasses,The Next Interface,Wearables
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Take apps, for instance. Meta has made some strides since the launch of the Meta Ray-Ban Display last year to try to add more functionality, but for the most part, it still feels like there’s not a ton to do once they’re on your face. You can get notifications, you can get directions, and you can swipe through Instagram Reels, and sure, it’s novel to be doing those things on a small screen on your face, but they don’t necessarily add up to a game-changing experience.

Meta clearly knows that those “core” apps aren’t enough, which is why it recently opened up its developer program for the Meta Ray-Ban Display so that people can make apps that use both the built-in screen as well as the included Neural Band, the wristband you use to control the UI inside the smart glasses.

While the apps being built are in early stages and aren’t being made generally available to people who own the smart glasses yet, initial results are… something? There are people making speedometers, apps that control your smart home, and Doom (because, of course). Someone even made the bold choice of making an app that can unlock your car. Again, they’re interesting ideas, but I’m not sure that any of them will have people rushing out to spend $800 on a pair of smart glasses.

Meta’s non-display smart glasses face similar issues. While I like the fact that you can use them as an open-ear audio device—they’re great for calling and listening to music while you’re riding a bike or exercising—some of the banner features of Meta’s “AI glasses” feel less-than-useful, and one of them is the AI itself.

Ray Ban Meta Gen 2 09
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Features like computer vision, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to answer questions about the world around you, are somewhat novel, but maybe not altogether useful for most. Don’t get me wrong, I think it could be great for accessibility purposes—people who have vision impairments could use computer vision to parse their surroundings. But for a general audience, the AI part of AI glasses can feel underwhelming, and I’m not the only one who thinks so.

“The biggest hurdle to success that I see so far for Meta is the quality of Meta AI and the slow nature of getting third-party apps onboard,” says Anshel Sag, principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy, which follows the consumer tech space closely. “The ways that they enhance my life in their most simple form, as smart glasses, are still pretty much paired to just Meta apps.”

Outside of translating a menu or telling you about items in your surroundings, I’ve yet to see lots of practical uses for computer vision, and that’s not even factoring in the bad habit that Meta AI has of getting things wrong, which is a real issue in my experience using the Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses.

I get that not every new gadget has to have a purpose right off the bat. Take the Apple Watch, for example, which entered the scene as a frivolous accessory to your iPhone. In many ways, you can write off smart glasses for the same reasons that people wrote off the Apple Watch at first. Yes, it delivers notifications and comes in a wearable form factor, but it mostly duplicates the experience of using your phone. And not only that, it’s utterly dependent on your phone to work, same as Meta’s Ray-Bans and Oakleys.

Meta Ray Ban Display neural band
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Those criticisms didn’t hold up forever, though. Eventually, the Apple Watch found health tracking features like heart rate monitoring and crash detection, and now it’s a device unto itself that also acts as an accessory to your iPhone. The thing is, health features aren’t exactly up for grabs anymore, though Meta has tried to introduce nutrition tracking as a feature, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to log what you eat and then gives you AI-powered recommendations. Whether that gets any traction remains to be seen, but I personally don’t envision loads of people lining up to have Meta AI shame them for their diets.

So, smart glasses will have to find their own niche, just like the Apple Watch, though whether such a niche really exists is anyone’s guess. It’s not that smart glasses can’t be useful at times—they can—but as it stands, even Meta lacks a “killer app” to drive adoption. Sure, people like recording stuff, but that is an entire can of worms from a privacy perspective, and for as many people that want smart glasses for their recording abilities, there are just as many that hate them for it.

Millions of units sold or not, smart glasses like Meta’s still feel like they’re a long way from the proverbial Apple Watch moment—a holy grail that is never guaranteed to arrive.

#Metas #Smart #Glasses #Long #Ways #Eureka #MomentMeta,Ray-Ban Meta,smart glasses,The Next Interface,Wearables
Aventon Soltera 3 (8/10), weighs 37 pounds and costs around $500 less than the Air. It’s a superb blend of push bike feel and lightweight electric power and with more power on offer, a faster top speed, and cheaper price, it remains the one to beat. But there’s no denying the appeal of the Fiido Air. It’s a beautiful bike to ride, with stylish looks, nimble acceleration, and push bike practicalities. At 30 pounds, it is impressively light, and easy to live with.

Lightweight electric bikes are starting to appear but competition remains slim. Ribble’s new aluminum Allgrit E AL Sportfit Apex weighs 30.4 pounds and has a hugely practical 12 speed SRAM Apex XPLR AXS gearing. It does cost twice as much, though. Carbon options are limited to a couple of folding designs for now, including the $2,420, 35-pound ADO Air Carbon, and $1,599 Urtopia Carbon Fold Step Thru that weighs just 31 pounds.

So the Fiido Air ticks a lot of boxes, and if you’re looking for a cool pedal-assist electric bike for short, flat urban rides, I highly recommend it. But if there are hills in your life, and you want to keep both hands on the handlebars at all times, the Fiido Air might not be the bike for you.

#Meet #Commuting #Companion #Lightweight #Fiido #Air #Carbon #Fiber #Ebikereviews,review,cycling,outdoors,bicycles">Meet Your New Commuting Companion: The Lightweight Fiido Air Carbon Fiber EbikeIt picks up quickly at lights, and acceleration—especially in Sport mode—is reassuringly quick when it’s time to overtake. I’m delighted by how effortless the overall performance is, and how smoothly the torque kicks in. What’s more, moving it, wheeling it through the house, lifting it onto bike racks, and even just doing basic things like locking it up, is just easier in every way. The motor is quiet, too. While not totally silent, it’s not a distraction.Impressively, too, the Air can also be ridden reasonably easily without electric assist. A 30-pound single speed bike won’t set any track records, but if power does fail you—or more likely, you misjudge the battery level and forget to charge overnight like I did—it won’t be too much of a workout to get home.But please don’t confuse this commuter-style electric bike with a powerful mid-drive motor electric bike. With a meagre motor and only one gear (and quite a low one at that) it does not love hills. Steady inclines are easy, but there’s one short, sharp-ish hill close to my office that requires me to stand up and pedal hard to get to the top. I wasn’t as gassed as I would be without any motor assistance, but I definitely wasn’t flying effortlessly up hills.I’ve also become a convert to the brilliance of belt-drive bikes. They need less maintenance, last longer, and prevent greasy black marks on pant legs. Fiido uses a Gates belt drive here, one of the best systems available, and ideal for urban riding.Competition and VerdictWIRED’s current favorite commuter ebike, the Aventon Soltera 3 (8/10), weighs 37 pounds and costs around 0 less than the Air. It’s a superb blend of push bike feel and lightweight electric power and with more power on offer, a faster top speed, and cheaper price, it remains the one to beat. But there’s no denying the appeal of the Fiido Air. It’s a beautiful bike to ride, with stylish looks, nimble acceleration, and push bike practicalities. At 30 pounds, it is impressively light, and easy to live with.Lightweight electric bikes are starting to appear but competition remains slim. Ribble’s new aluminum Allgrit E AL Sportfit Apex weighs 30.4 pounds and has a hugely practical 12 speed SRAM Apex XPLR AXS gearing. It does cost twice as much, though. Carbon options are limited to a couple of folding designs for now, including the ,420, 35-pound ADO Air Carbon, and ,599 Urtopia Carbon Fold Step Thru that weighs just 31 pounds.So the Fiido Air ticks a lot of boxes, and if you’re looking for a cool pedal-assist electric bike for short, flat urban rides, I highly recommend it. But if there are hills in your life, and you want to keep both hands on the handlebars at all times, the Fiido Air might not be the bike for you.#Meet #Commuting #Companion #Lightweight #Fiido #Air #Carbon #Fiber #Ebikereviews,review,cycling,outdoors,bicycles

(8/10), weighs 37 pounds and costs around $500 less than the Air. It’s a superb blend of push bike feel and lightweight electric power and with more power on offer, a faster top speed, and cheaper price, it remains the one to beat. But there’s no denying the appeal of the Fiido Air. It’s a beautiful bike to ride, with stylish looks, nimble acceleration, and push bike practicalities. At 30 pounds, it is impressively light, and easy to live with.

Lightweight electric bikes are starting to appear but competition remains slim. Ribble’s new aluminum Allgrit E AL Sportfit Apex weighs 30.4 pounds and has a hugely practical 12 speed SRAM Apex XPLR AXS gearing. It does cost twice as much, though. Carbon options are limited to a couple of folding designs for now, including the $2,420, 35-pound ADO Air Carbon, and $1,599 Urtopia Carbon Fold Step Thru that weighs just 31 pounds.

So the Fiido Air ticks a lot of boxes, and if you’re looking for a cool pedal-assist electric bike for short, flat urban rides, I highly recommend it. But if there are hills in your life, and you want to keep both hands on the handlebars at all times, the Fiido Air might not be the bike for you.

#Meet #Commuting #Companion #Lightweight #Fiido #Air #Carbon #Fiber #Ebikereviews,review,cycling,outdoors,bicycles">Meet Your New Commuting Companion: The Lightweight Fiido Air Carbon Fiber Ebike

It picks up quickly at lights, and acceleration—especially in Sport mode—is reassuringly quick when it’s time to overtake. I’m delighted by how effortless the overall performance is, and how smoothly the torque kicks in. What’s more, moving it, wheeling it through the house, lifting it onto bike racks, and even just doing basic things like locking it up, is just easier in every way. The motor is quiet, too. While not totally silent, it’s not a distraction.

Impressively, too, the Air can also be ridden reasonably easily without electric assist. A 30-pound single speed bike won’t set any track records, but if power does fail you—or more likely, you misjudge the battery level and forget to charge overnight like I did—it won’t be too much of a workout to get home.

But please don’t confuse this commuter-style electric bike with a powerful mid-drive motor electric bike. With a meagre motor and only one gear (and quite a low one at that) it does not love hills. Steady inclines are easy, but there’s one short, sharp-ish hill close to my office that requires me to stand up and pedal hard to get to the top. I wasn’t as gassed as I would be without any motor assistance, but I definitely wasn’t flying effortlessly up hills.

I’ve also become a convert to the brilliance of belt-drive bikes. They need less maintenance, last longer, and prevent greasy black marks on pant legs. Fiido uses a Gates belt drive here, one of the best systems available, and ideal for urban riding.

Competition and Verdict

WIRED’s current favorite commuter ebike, the Aventon Soltera 3 (8/10), weighs 37 pounds and costs around $500 less than the Air. It’s a superb blend of push bike feel and lightweight electric power and with more power on offer, a faster top speed, and cheaper price, it remains the one to beat. But there’s no denying the appeal of the Fiido Air. It’s a beautiful bike to ride, with stylish looks, nimble acceleration, and push bike practicalities. At 30 pounds, it is impressively light, and easy to live with.

Lightweight electric bikes are starting to appear but competition remains slim. Ribble’s new aluminum Allgrit E AL Sportfit Apex weighs 30.4 pounds and has a hugely practical 12 speed SRAM Apex XPLR AXS gearing. It does cost twice as much, though. Carbon options are limited to a couple of folding designs for now, including the $2,420, 35-pound ADO Air Carbon, and $1,599 Urtopia Carbon Fold Step Thru that weighs just 31 pounds.

So the Fiido Air ticks a lot of boxes, and if you’re looking for a cool pedal-assist electric bike for short, flat urban rides, I highly recommend it. But if there are hills in your life, and you want to keep both hands on the handlebars at all times, the Fiido Air might not be the bike for you.

#Meet #Commuting #Companion #Lightweight #Fiido #Air #Carbon #Fiber #Ebikereviews,review,cycling,outdoors,bicycles

Post Comment