I sat in for a presentation with these guys. Best I can tell, they're designed as aids for people with low vision, and their appeal is that they're hipaa-compliant because nothing leaves that device. Much of this was learned after the fact because of how god-awful the presenter was. I think orcam suffers from a bit of little man syndrome

I've heard more stories of these things being returned or not used than just about any piece of recent assistive technology out there. They are using the high price of the product to finance their research and development of more mainstream products, and making promises of its effectiveness that are way beyond the actual capabilities. There's a reason these things are just being given away. Unfortunately, seniors and others are being convinced to buy the product as an easier means of independence over using a smartphone, computer, or other devices which in the long run will be much more useful to them.

Because of the way the Orcam is designed, it can be used in situations where a phone isn't allowed (Orcam doesn't connect to the internet). In some situations where a phone can't be brought in, the Orcam would be allowable. Granted, that situation would be fairly rare.

The times I've used it (for training), I never found it too useful. However, others I've worked with have liked it, especially the hands-free aspect. But the higher cost is a factor.

Tried one a few times and personally found it to be complete and utter crap. Much better results with seeingAI or tap tap see even. Don't waste your money and time.

I think there is a market for it for people who formally had sight and don’t want or are not able to learn how to use smartphones. The expense often stops even this small market in their tracks. The 2 is a vast improvement from the first release.

I’ve tried it and would’t buy it or use it.

Yhey’re way to expencive.

Had no idea wht this is, but it looks like OrCam are basically just a phone with google eyes installed and set to give audio output, at a greater cost and profit than seems reasonable given how little the actual hardware and software costs to make.

Personally, I absolutely hate these things. I mean, the representatives were actually on Doctor Phil, with some guy that just loves it. And of course, my Grandma wanted me to watch it. And of course, at the end, she was just so excited.

No, I don't see a point in these. Seeing AI can do just about everything this can, for far less money, and a much better battery. Now, if they allowed me to run Seeing With Sound, the vOICe, I would think a little more about it. But no.

Professionally, I recommend consumers use what they have as much as possible. If they can't use an iPhone for some reason, then sure, they can look into the Orecam. But it's an overpriced machine that obviously doesn't have the AI power that even Microsoft or Apple has.

If your friend wants to sell the device, I offer 100 dollars. I would not use it in public because it looks rediculus, but its functions in scanning and reading text are good.

I had no clue what OrCam is, I had to Google it.

I've never tried it out so can't speak whether an app is better or not. Certainly a benefit is that it attaches to glasses, so much more conspicuous rather than pointing the phone at someone to recognise their face, which I also never use on phone either, heh.