Meta's camera-free Ray-Bans undercut its own new camera model by $100

A PCMag reviewer wore the new frames through an outdoor demo with people talking nearby, found the sound clear with minimal leakage, and wrote that "it was nice to know I wouldn't be accused of being a creep while wearing them in public, since it's clear the glasses lack any outward-facing cameras." ^[12][11]

So Meta now charges for the camera. The gap between the two products announced at Connect is $100 ^[1]. The battery runs the other way: the camera-free pair gets three to four more hours on a charge than earlier Meta glasses ^[2], and 60 hours in total if you count the case ^[3].

The microphones stayed. There are six of them, and Meta says they also detect and suppress background noise during voice calls ^[8]. Engadget's write-up says that without the lens and the recording light, "you might not know the Ray-Ban Meta Audio are anything other than Ray-Bans" unless you clocked the slightly larger temples and the cut-outs for speakers ^[13]. For the person sitting across the table, what $349 removes is the lens.

The two publishers disagree about the move. PCMag's headline has Meta ditching the camera to avoid creep complaints ^[20]. Engadget reports that Meta does not characterize the glasses as a response to public backlash. Meta presents them instead as an acknowledgement that audio has always been the most popular feature of its smart glasses ^[10]. Meta says "audio has been our most popular feature since day one, because our glasses give you high-quality sound without closing you off from the world around you" ^[9]. The company also unveiled Hearing Enhancement, which uses its smart glasses as an alternative to traditional hearing aids ^[18]. No venue, employer or court has been reported to have barred smart glasses ^[4]. The documented pressure is a nickname that Engadget says invasive use of the camera models earned them ^[19], plus Meta's own account of what customers use.

Engadget's assessment is that the launch "isn't likely to convert critics, but they could convince someone uncomfortable with the optics of smart glasses in general" ^[14]. It also notes that Meta has not released the facial recognition feature it was previously testing ^[15].

Jobs that need photos or video still point at the $449 Gen 3 ^[4]. Hands-free calls and an assistant, in a room where a visible camera would end the conversation, is the $349 case ^[2]. Where neither applies, the comparison is the earbuds already in the bag, and $349 buys a frame that takes a prescription ^[17] in two styles across 23 color and lens combinations ^[16].