I can already see some idiot wearing this to a bar, maybe even trying to do a pick up....sad.
I can see someone getting punched in the face for wearing them.
Google's techno-specs Google Glass can now deliver Google+ notifications direct to the eyeball - while consuming less power and also reporting back to the Chocolate Factory when things go pear-shaped. The firmware update is being sent out to those selected by the advertising giant for early access to Glass, which still lacks a …
I can already see some idiot wearing this to a bar, maybe even trying to do a pick up....sad.
I can see someone getting punched in the face for wearing them.
I could see you getting the same treatment though without the need of a prosthetic.
Funny, I read that as "endangering"...
"I can already see some idiot wearing this to a bar, maybe even trying to do a pick up....sad.
I can see someone getting punched in the face for wearing them."
Your down voters must live in la la land! If anyone wore that in my local, you'd definately be mocked before having to defend yourself. Thats the way life is. Small I know. But small all the same.
I think you would have to be talking loudly into a bluetooth handsfree ear piece and wearing an upskirt camera device on your shoes to come anywhere close to the chilling effect these things will have in social situations.
They're probably more useful in a commercial setting - people fulfilling orders in large warehouses and so on where a HUD might be useful.
"They're probably more useful in a commercial setting - people fulfilling orders in large warehouses and so on where a HUD might be useful."
That's a good point; that sort of use hadn't occurred to me at all.
It will be interesting to see if their use is restricted to that, however: I personally would expect that there will be jurisdictions that will outlaw these things from being worn in public places, as being far too intrusive into people's lives and activities.And there will be any number of commercial establishments that will prohibit people from wearing them on premises.
(But on a personal note, I need not concern myself with any of my friends wearing them while at my house, or when being with me at all. Because I don't have any friends who would be interested in this sort of shitty little gimmick.)
meh, I think people will just take them off when they're not appropriate, like most people do when they are wearing bluetooth headsets, ipod headphones, or sunglasses. It's not the big issue people are making it out to be...
LOL. Trust me, anyone wearing something like this posing a threat....maybe in your neck of the woods.....here though.....again, LOL.
There are already places restricting them.
I definitly need a pair. Has been a decade since I was allowed to hurt someone and get away free by claiming self defence.
The only places where this stuff is restricted are the same typ of places that restrict cameras, camera phones etc. as well. And that is "disallowed because of privat / government property" not because of legal reasons
You have so much more faith in humanity than me.
And it will get worse when they are available for prescription lenses because there is no way glasses wearers will carry around another pair of (expensive) lenses for the times when Glass is a social faux pas (that is most of the time).
Glass is pretty much doomed the moment the MPAA finds out it is possible to take a flaky, shaky recording of some of a movie in a cinema - the lawyers will have a field day. And in Google versus Hollywood I find it hard to pick who I'd like to lose more.
So, so wrong....
"And - shock - it phones home to the cuddly ad giant" ? Well, as you later point out it's actually "reporting back to the Chocolate Factory when things go pear-shaped" by "reporting crash status codes back to Google".
So which is it ? The headline grabbing hyperbole, the latter more intelligible statements about error reporting (something many OSes support for good reasons) or both ?
You can just say you don't like them you know - many don't - without resorting to Daily Mail mode.
"without resorting to Daily Mail mode"
Och! Come on, now. Is there any need for that? It's not Daily Mail mode. I demand an apology and a correction.
It's Register mode.
as well as reporting crash status codes back to Google.
Error code 0x00015502: user walked into door whilst checking email.
That's what I come here for. Judging by your upvotes it's had the desired effect of getting the phandroids all batey....
"Och! Come on, now. Is there any need for that? It's not Daily Mail mode. I demand an apology and a correction.
It's Register mode.
You are, of course, correct - I just didn't want to be quite that rude... ;)
noone is rushing out with a rival product tells you all you need to know about its mass-market appeal.
I think Google will do okay on it just because enough geeks will want it that they'll just about cover costs and give their brand a boost as a high-profile innovator, but there's just not a market for this and that will soon become apparent.
I'm sure I'll eat my words when the iPatch (TM) is released next week and people queue around the block to be first to look like a high-tech scourge of the high seas.
No No, just wait for the eyePhone to come out!
Shouldn't that be the iEyePhone, so still pirate or popeye related ;-) (obviously this wink serves the traditional purpose and also acts as a small pun).
but there's just not a market for this
Really? You've conducted both in-depth consumer market research as well as talking to professional groups like surgeons & surveyors about the possible applications for Glass? You've investigated and rejected how this could be used in logistics if combined with say an RFID unit to assess visually the level of stock in a warehouse.
I'm sure that's how you've come to your conclusions about whether there's a market for Glass and similar products or not.
AugmentedReality glasses - sure they have applications. The industry has experimented with the tech for at least a decade. Deliver a set that is light weight, has good endurance, no need to use the GMail man / StJobs and interfaces with Windows/x86 and commercial Unix boxes(1) and you have a winner in the tech sector and designers ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_automatic_virtual_environment )
Google Classes - no use. Tied to a toybreed OS and the GMail man. Not that SaintJobs version would be any better. GG has the same problem as Evernote since both force you to give your data to a non trustworthy, non government observed third party (Unlike say DATEV in germany)
" but there's just not a market for this."
Reminds me of a Company Engineering Conference in the 1990s. The youngsters were asked to perform an entertainment on the theme of "obstacles to innovation".
There was "The Gameshow" - complete with a smiling host in a glitter jacket. The prize was funding for a project. The losing contestant was the one who had a pragmatic track record of good delivery and reasonable profit margins. The winner was the one who had a track record of under-estimating their development time/budget - and over-estimating the potential sales and margin.
A trench-coated Private Investigator delivered a monologue about "who killed innovation" - complete with gunshot climax.
A prescient "Smoking Room" was the place that non-smokers went to "network" with influential staff.
There was the "Low hanging fruit" - with a tree containing two apples - one very big and one very small. Harvesting the new line in apples was delayed by a marketeer's persistent questions. Their final line was - "If none were sold last year - then there's obviously no market for them". Cue stereotypical French onion seller* wheeling his bike down the theatre aisle - and picking the largest apple.
* the late Jack Houldsworth of X400 fame. He had commissioned the sketches - bravely giving the youngsters a free hand over content.
This one isn't pretty - but it's a prototype.
Even ugly as it is now, I can think of one general use to it: using augmented reality to help in some jobs. Think a warehouse, with 2D barcodes on the creates. The glass could overlay significant information to the worker.
Another (more controversial) use would be to sales people. A customer gets in. The glass does a facial recognition, and brings up the client's preferences/order. I know, I know. There are a lot of people who wouldn't want/like/accept this. I'm just showing practical uses to the tech.
If we stop and think a little, there ARE professional activities wich could be enhanced by this.
Agreed, the augmented reality aspect will eventually become as pervasive as smartphones are now, it's all the other gubbins Google seem to think is necessary which may actually hinder the take up of the technology.
There has been work on using lasers to paint directly onto the retina which when perfected would be a massive improvement as it could be directed from the side of the eye so it won't interfere with the
victims users field of view.
Sales people could work.
I go into PC-World-R-us and the glasses on the spotty 17year old would recognise me, check my MS-MVP and stackoverflow score and tell them to leave me alone because I'm only in there while the wife is looking at curtains next door
Having tried a prototype Retinal Imaging system at the University of Washington back in 1995 (Last century, like!) and been totally blown away and in awe of the potential for "hyper-realistic" (i.e. images that appear more vivid than the real world, I am convinced it is the game changing technology that will take VR and AR into the true mainstream.
It will then render(!) all other methods of HCI redundant, I think...
My thoughts exactly. It might be worth picking up a pair of these if the API is open and one could write a custom app for them. I'm thinking of viewing maintenance/repair documents while fiddling with some gadgets. Plus the ability to snap disassembly photos.
As to their wear out on public, why didn't Google go with a symmetrical look? Like the trendy nerd glasses already mentioned, this would be less noticable at a distance. Plus, the left side frame could hold a second battery.
I suppose that while walking down the high street, your Google Glass could overlay icons over the various shops to indicate their purpose, contact details, what they stock, prices, and customer reviews. Though for most of those you could just step through their door.
But you could have the local burger joint come up with its last food hygiene rating from the council. Don't know about walking directions, would rather have them discretely in an ear piece.
Just as I posted my rant to Bernard and his 'there's no market for this' including the example of logistics, I read your post suggesting exactly the same thing!
stack overflow score...lol... do you put it on your CV too?
to sell people.
There, fixed it forya
Now i can watch porn on the bus and no one will know!
"Now i can watch porn on the bus and no one will know!"
Yes they will...
And in other news, Reg readers recite all the same applications for augmented-reality technology that have been tried or mooted for the past couple of decades. Oh, wait, they seem to have left out "virtual tour guide".
In other words, yawn. This has all been done before. Yes, there are vertical markets for AR in the workplace. No, there's no reason at this point to believe Google Glass or knockoffs thereof will significantly increase demand outside those vertical markets.
Have a day.
The older AR solutions where less mobile since they typically required a workstation level computer. Glasses or a less Google-specific follow up are no longer tied to that since mobile computing has made big advances over the last years.
The same can be seen in other areas. Smartphones have been along for almost a decade but only recently have they become "mass market" items. Notebooks took a decade of development before reaching the homes.
He's normally a bit more down to earth. I mean "DON'T USE GOOGLE+? TOUGH, GOOGLE GLASS WILL INJECT IT INTO YOUR EYES", "It phones home" etc..
It's hard to tell if it was sarcasm moaning about the blogs and news reports talking about Glass in an article about Glass?
However, in my opinion, it is a pretty cool product, well packaged and the first of it's kind that has enough backing, marketing and hype and a decent UX to have the chance of mass market appeal.
Remember when everyone (me included) was saying that the Apple Tablet was ridiculous, no-one would want one. It had been done before and it was less use to have an iPhone as a tablet than PC which had failed? Then it took the market by storm.
Go back even further to mobile phones. Ridiculously expensive, not practical, not needed by anyone and anyone with one was just a tw@t who deserved a "punch in the face". And now?
So I think the major hurdle will be the price and social acceptance. If it becomes normal and okay to walk around wearing them and they are cheap enough then they could well be a massive hit.
One thing, I bet if Apple had 'invented' it then there would be a ton more hype, reporting and queuing around the block to get them. It would be hailed as the most innovative thing on earth ever and a sure fire hit.
It's good that Google are in a position to try out projects that may just fail as it generally enhances technology and you aren't sat on a history of "What Ifs" and "if only someone had the guts to make it".
"Remember when everyone (me included) was saying that the Apple Tablet was ridiculous, no-one would want one. ... One thing, I bet if Apple had 'invented' it then there would be a ton more hype, reporting and queuing around the block to get them. It would be hailed as the most innovative thing on earth ever and a sure fire hit."
Well this is the thing - if we look at the 2010 Apple tablet coverage, most of the media coverage wasn't being critical. Instead, the entirely of the media were giving it vast amounts of positive coverage even before it was officially announced, whilst the Android tablets (actually released first, initially called "media players" in 2009) were ignored, and surprise surprise apple did better. Tablets were already mainstream by 2010, we just called them other names like smartphones, PDAs or media players.
People like us may have been criticising it - I think that 10" tablets aren't very useful for my needs, and would much rather have an ultra-portable laptop at that size. But then, I *still* think that, and our arguments aren't invalidated by what other people buy. By that reasoning, no one could criticise Windows, Apple fans couldn't criticise the overwhelmingly popular Android ;) I've also said that 7" is a much better size, as well as tablets being something that make more sense at a lower cost, and it looks like the market is turning out to agree with me on both points.
When people say than Apple popularised something, it's almost always a false perception based on them getting far more media coverage, which typically happens *before* the release. Given that Google - unlike the companies like Archos releasing the first Android tablets - do get at least some media coverage, I'm glad that they are doing things like this, so that alternative products get some awareness too.
(Oddly the media *now* say that no one wants tablets when it comes to Windows 8, and say people would much rather have separate smartphones and laptops... the bias is painful to watch.)
To all those who think nobody would ever wear anything like this... modern sunglasses would once have been very bizarre, as would a baseball cap or shorts. Fashions change so it's only a matter of time before this is seen as normal.
Plus of course, thick-frame glasses are cool right now so simply add another thick arm and some plain glass lenses and it will barely be noticeable, especially as the tech shrinks.
I still think a baseball cap is naff and bizarre, -10 Internets for wearing one, -10000 internets for wearing one backwards
Plus of course, thick-frame glasses are cool right now
When I need new glasses last year my optician tried to suggest some of these to me ... I resisted and went for my standard style of thin metal frames (though daringly I switch from bronze to metalic grey!). However, I was amused to see that the ranges of thick-framed glass were described as "geek glasses"!
"modern sunglasses would once have been very bizarre, as would a baseball cap or shorts."
Short bottom coverings were the first clothes people wore. For a hunter gatherer in a warm climate they were protective without getting in the way.
If you mean the below-the-knee ones beloved of modern youth. Their football shorts remind me of the old footballer players like Stanley Matthews - a style going back to at least the 1890s. About 1960 there was a rapid shortening - culminating in the classic 1966 World Cup "continental" style. My school football shorts followed that fashion too - just by wearing the same pair from 11 to 18.
The current long shorts leisure fashion harks back to Baden Powell and the Boy Scouts. They were considered very old fashioned in England even in the late 1950s. During the 1960s even the Scouts followed the "continental" short shorts fashion that peaked in England in the 1970/80s.
However there is a slow change in men's leisure shorts going back above the knee. Women are already adopting the "hot pants" of the early 1970s. With my Fred Perry 1970s short shorts from Oxfam I'll soon be back in the height of fashion. The 50 year cycle will be complete when Speedo swim briefs become the leisure fashion - and not just for high divers.
Just think of all those twitter celebs not having to tweet, followers will be able literally **OMG** to follow their idols 24/7/365 via live "life" streaming feeds. Advertisers paying to be on those feeds, fashions changing in an instant as celebs A goes "they're nice shoes" and a million followers buy them. Rampant consummerism causing chaos with logistics. No CCTV anymore as all citizens will have a legal requirement to view any incidents happening in their view range. Real time, instant perv sharing with your mates of similar persuasions, complete voyourism at its best.
I could go on but I wont. These things are game changers and make owning an iPhone look so last century.
Good point. A new Twitter will arise that lets you literally follow someone as they walk about (or TWitter/FB/G+ will do it)... thounsands of people sitting inside watching Stephen Fry try on shoes...
the iPhone delivered what Apple thought people already wanted to do (make phone calls) with what they also wanted to do (listen to music, watch videos, play games) in a better combination than existing phones. And now most all smartphones do something similar.
Google glass delivers what Google think people might want to do but aren't doing at the moment. And people aren't doing it or asking for it because it's a rubbish idea for the vast majority of the populace.
Might be a rubbish idea for the majority of the population but I can think of many niche uses for this type of tech. I'd suggest that Google make the sdk open source (like Microsoft eventually did with the Kinect) and see what other folk come up with.
On the other hand, the downsides could be a little "challenging" if widely adopted. It's bad enough on the streets with both drivers and pedestrians being constantly distracted by their phones, this could add a whole new level to the usual lack of situational awareness.
Tip to Google - do as you did with the Nexus and outsource the design and build, only this time to Oakley...
"And now most all smartphones do something similar."
As they were already doing long before the iPhone was even designed.
Good marketing != Innovation.
"make phone calls" and "listen to music, watch videos, play games"?
Smartphones were doing "something similar" around 2000, and bog standard mainstream "feature" phones were doing "something similar" around 2005. "Better combination" is just a matter of opinion, which people clearly disagree on (as seen by endless debates on forums like these). A particular flaw in your argument is that a 2007 iphone couldn't actually do "play games" anyway (or do any apps in general), that came in 2008 by which time the competition had moved on even further. Not that I'd consider it a smartphone anyway until at least 2010, unless you count all feature phones as smartphones.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017