Meta’s First ‘Real’ Smart Glasses Come With a Big Catch: A Neural Wristband

Meta’s upcoming smart glasses, codenamed Hypernova, represent a major step forward in the company’s push into wearable technology. Unlike earlier attempts such as Google Glass, which struggled with poor public reception due to their bulky, conspicuous design and privacy concerns, Meta’s new glasses—rumored to be branded under Oakley—are expected to look more like regular sunglasses, making them far more socially acceptable. This shift in design is likely why Meta’s Ray-Ban smart glasses have seen strong sales, even as other parts of its metaverse hardware lineup have faltered. The real innovation behind Hypernova, however, may not be the glasses themselves, but the accessory that comes with them: a neural wristband. This device is said to read electrical signals in the user’s arm to detect finger and hand movements, allowing for intuitive control of the glasses’ display and mini apps. The idea is bold—using subtle neuromuscular signals to interact with a wearable device without physical buttons or voice commands. In theory, it’s a leap toward seamless, natural interaction with augmented reality. But this promising feature also introduces a significant challenge. The need for a separate wearable—especially one that must be charged, worn on the wrist, and visible—undermines the appeal of an all-in-one smart glasses experience. Most consumers buying high-end smart glasses at a rumored $800 price point likely expect a clean, standalone device. Adding a second piece of hardware, particularly one that’s not only functional but also potentially unattractive or inconvenient, could deter adoption. The issue isn’t just practicality—it’s perception. Google Glass failed in part because it looked like a gadget, not a fashion accessory, and users were mocked as “glassholes.” Meta’s Ray-Ban glasses succeeded because they looked like real sunglasses, blending into everyday life. Hypernova risks repeating that mistake if its functionality depends on a noticeable, separate device. Even if the wristband is small and sleek, the idea of wearing two distinct gadgets—glasses and a wristband—could make the whole setup feel clunky and gimmicky. Moreover, while the concept of neural input is impressive, it’s unproven at scale. Consumers are already skeptical of wearable tech that requires constant charging, complex setup, or unusual form factors. The wristband could become a liability rather than a feature—especially if it’s uncomfortable, unreliable, or fails to deliver on its promise of effortless control. In the end, Meta’s Hypernova could be a game-changer—if it can deliver a truly seamless experience. But for that to happen, the company must make the wristband feel optional, invisible, or so essential that it’s worth the trade-off. Otherwise, the very innovation that sets Hypernova apart could be the reason it fails to gain traction. The past isn’t just prologue—it’s a warning.