Google Glass will fail miserably

alexpasch's picture
Rank: Neanderthal | 2,035

Google glass is doomed to fail because it's simply just not a "cool" product, see below for a particularly funny site:

http://whitemenwearinggoogleglass.tumblr.com

I remember when the very first iPhone came out (I got one right when it came out). I would take that thing to a bar and everyone would want to play with it and test it out. It was "cool" and you definitely wanted to show it off.

Now, if someone went into a bar with Google Glass I think most people would just chuckle or openly point and laugh. I know I wouldn't be caught dead with a pair of them on, that's for sure.

There's nothing Google Glass can do that a smartphone can't, and even if it's slightly more efficient for certain tasks, only social morons are going to eschew looks for a very slight bump in productivity.

Sure, some nerds and technophiles will buy them. But will it become a mainstream accessory like a smartphone? No, no way; not even close.

Comments (55)

May 24, 2013

maybe in the U.S. it will only be super nerdy white guys, as your link so eloquently puts it, but in other parts of the world where people care zero about how they look and have negative fashion sense, will get it, especially since these parts of the world are high growth and very tech savvy.

May 20, 2016

delete

May 24, 2013
London calling:
trailmix8:

maybe in the U.S. it will only be super nerdy white guys, as your link so eloquently puts it, but in other parts of the world where people care zero about how they look and have negative fashion sense, will get it, especially since these parts of the world are high growth and very tech savvy.

Wait...you think that people in the US have on average a better sense of fashion than elsewhere in the world...?!

I lol'd at that too :P

May 24, 2013

I think you underestimate how quickly social norms can change. They may look odd now, but I'd be very willing to take you up on a substantial bet that in 10 years they'll be almost as common as smartphones are now, and not considered odd in the slightest.

Will it be an enormous product straight out of the gates? Probably not, though I think it will do substantially better than you think. Will it be an enormous product within a decade? For me, there's almost no question.

May 24, 2013
Mike McDermott:

I think you underestimate how quickly social norms can change. They may look odd now, but I'd be very willing to take you up on a substantial bet that in 10 years they'll be almost as common as smartphones are now, and not considered odd in the slightest.

Will it be an enormous product straight out of the gates? Probably not, though I think it will do substantially better than you think. Will it be an enormous product within a decade? For me, there's almost no question.

Define "enormous product within a decade"? What market penetration % are we talking about?

I remember when the Segway came out. "This is going to redefine transportation!" When was the last time you saw anyone but a mall cop using one? Similar example is bluetooth headsets/earpieces. The trade-off between the marginal improvement in function relative to downsides (additional expense, hassle of carrying around and charging, weird-looking, etc) is just not there. They're already claiming the battery doesn't last long enough. There's not much room to make it smaller if that's the case (Moore's law does not apply to batteries). Even if you could make the optical screen smaller and meld it in with traditional glasses, you'd still need much larger than normal rims on those glasses to get the battery life to where you want it to be (and hence, goofy-looking). I can see a fair number of people buying these for the "cool new buzz-worthy gadget" factor and then not actually using them very much, if at all. Wait until the first hot girl chuckles at you wearing them.

The reality is that a smart watch has about one hundred times more likelihood of being adopted than Google Glass (not saying iWatch is the future per se as I think that would be a niche product too, but I definitely think it's far more probable than an eye-wear design). You get rid of the concerns regarding privacy and the general look; plus it's almost as convenient as Google glass for most functions.

May 24, 2013

Two problems I can see with Google Glass are a) interacting with it (nobody wants to be walking around saying "Ok Glass" all the time) and b) privacy concerns.

May 24, 2013

Google glass will take off when wearing a pair becomes indiscernible from wearing normal reading glasses.

May 24, 2013

Sure, but what if LeVar Burton wore them?

May 24, 2013

That's just like, your opinion man...

    • 1
May 24, 2013

I think it will be successful. It looks pretty good right now and the thing is only a 1st gen. Give the concept a couple of years and the sensor will get smaller, the features will increase and more people will get on board. Yeah, only "nerdy white guys" have it now, but it was only released to a small group of people, people who are most likely techie (largely nerdy white guys). Doesn't mean non nerdy white guys didn't want to get their hands on this.

May 24, 2013

I agree with the posts above. Plus, all it takes is Google to wise up and partner with Armani, and we probably reduce adoption time from 10 years to 3, assuming the tech gets a little less clunky.

May 24, 2013

I saw my first Google Glass in person yesterday while eating at the cafe of the building I work at.

It looked pretty silly to me, and from watching him a bit he looked really self conscious - almost as if he were looking around to see how many people were looking at him.

I also didn't expect to see someone wearing Google Glass in my building, considering Microsoft owns around 3 out of 11 floors here.

May 24, 2013
alexpasch:

Google glass is doomed to fail because it's simply just not a "cool" product, see below for a particularly funny site:

http://whitemenwearinggoogleglass.tumblr.com

I remember when the very first iPhone came out (I got one right when it came out). I would take that thing to a bar and everyone would want to play with it and test it out. It was "cool" and you definitely wanted to show it off.

Now, if someone went into a bar with Google Glass I think most people would just chuckle or openly point and laugh. I know I wouldn't be caught dead with a pair of them on, that's for sure.

There's nothing Google Glass can do that a smartphone can't, and even if it's slightly more efficient for certain tasks, only social morons are going to eschew looks for a very slight bump in productivity.

Sure, some nerds and technophiles will buy them. But will it become a mainstream accessory like a smartphone? No, no way; not even close.

That's what they said about Google+ - oh...wait....

May 24, 2013
DaisukiDaYo:
alexpasch:

Google glass is doomed to fail because it's simply just not a "cool" product, see below for a particularly funny site:
http://whitemenwearinggoogleglass.tumblr.com
I remember when the very first iPhone came out (I got one right when it came out). I would take that thing to a bar and everyone would want to play with it and test it out. It was "cool" and you definitely wanted to show it off.
Now, if someone went into a bar with Google Glass I think most people would just chuckle or openly point and laugh. I know I wouldn't be caught dead with a pair of them on, that's for sure.
There's nothing Google Glass can do that a smartphone can't, and even if it's slightly more efficient for certain tasks, only social morons are going to eschew looks for a very slight bump in productivity.
Sure, some nerds and technophiles will buy them. But will it become a mainstream accessory like a smartphone? No, no way; not even close.

That's what they said about Google+ - oh...wait....

Google+ faced a huge uphill battle because of FB (and other things too). No one wanted to get off a mature platform like facebook and go to this new network.

In this case, they are seen as pioneers in the field. And arguably, this time they might have network/ecosystem effects to their advantage with the ubiquity of android phones.

May 24, 2013

If Regina George wore google glasses, everyone would

May 24, 2013

There is a very big difference between walking around with a cell phone in your pocket and a HUD on your face

May 24, 2013

I agree with the OP's sentiment. It's hard to change social norms without a real catalyst. Google glass has no catalyst whatsoever. It's basically siri on your glasses, and siri blows. No one wants to be seen talking to their computer, whatever they're doing is public, and it's confusing and weird to the people around them.

May 24, 2013

I'm waiting for the iteration where it's not a separate device, but is an attachment that can be applied onto any existing glasses frame (for those of us who wear glasses normally).

May 24, 2013
freeloader:

I'm waiting for the iteration where it's not a separate device, but is an attachment that can be applied onto any existing glasses frame (for those of us who wear glasses normally).

You'd still need a battery to power it. I don't know what the power consumption is on them but an iPhone has a battery of about 1,000 mAh. Let's assume their ideal is 500mAh. They probably use a cylindrical Li-Po battery for these. Typical 500 mAh cylindrical battery would be in the neighborhood of 1cm diameter and 8cm length (give or take). Apparently the battery life on these sucks, so let's say a 100mAh battery then. You're still talking 0.7cm diameter and 3.5cm length (give or take). May sound really small, but keep in mind you've got to enclose it, and you'd still need some space for chips. How many glasses do you see that have 1cm diameter (not height) rims? They might be using a custom battery to maximize every ounce of space, but there are still limits to what you can do given power densities (which improve ever so slowly).

    • 1
May 24, 2013

Wait until Apple perfects this technology, they know how to make great products

My finance blog: AdviceAboutFinance.com

Twitter @samleefinance

May 24, 2013
epoch707:

Wait until Apple perfects this technology, they know how to make great products

http://gigaom.com/2013/03/16/why-i-stopped-wearing...

I love Apple but I think they agree with me that this is a niche market at best. They might come out with an iWatch since a lot of the above blogger's complaints are reasonably fixable, but I think that's the most they'd do.

May 24, 2013

I actually tested Google Glasses recently - I was visiting some friends on the west coast and one of them had it. It's really not that special - it doesn't have that "gasp/oohhh/wow" aspect to it. I played around with it for 5 min, took a picture and handed it back.

May 24, 2013

If they are priced reasonably ($200 to $300) EVERYONE will buy them. It is a great novelty that everyone wants; a perfect Christmas gift. The question is whether people will wear them and public and consistently utilize them. If people don't, because it is just seen as a gimmick, then Google will have issues monetizing into the future (i.e. apps)

Best Response
May 24, 2013

See article below from Dec 09

Why Apple's rumored iTablet will fail big time
Clever engineering still can't overcome these fundamental limitations of tablet computing

By Randall C. Kennedy | InfoWorld

Tablet PCs suck. They're underpowered, only marginally portable, and awkward to use in anything but a traditional seated position, with a desk to support them. Microsoft and its cadre of hardware partners have been trying for years to create a compelling tablet computing experience -- and consistently failed. Yet this year, persistent rumors of an Apple tablet -- an "iTablet" -- created a real buzz. But to believe that Apple can somehow succeed where all others have failed is to ignore some fundamental realities of tablet computing.

Reality No. 1: The lap doesn't work as a desk
Have you ever tried filling out a paper questionnaire on a moving train? Even with a clipboard, the mechanics are anything but graceful. With each lurch or bump you risk missing the mark. At best you end up with illegible chicken scratch; at worst, you put the pen right through the paper. It's a real mess.

Now imagine this same scenario with the iTablet. You're trying to enter an e-mail address or a URL using a nifty onscreen keypad. Each time you aim for the "R" key you end up hitting "T" instead. Then, just as you go to touch the Send button, you slip and hit Cancel -- or worse.

Contrast this with a typical small laptop or netbook, where the combination of your lap and palms acts as stabilizing influences. Add the surety of a traditional keyboard -- for typing, navigating, and so on -- and this "lapdesk" modus operandi gives the clamshell form factor a distinct advantage when operating in raucous mobile environments.

And don't think that your iPhone skills will somehow map over to the larger, clipboard-style implementation of the iTablet. There's a big difference between interacting with a handheld device that fits snuggly in the palm of your hand and a book-sized device that rests awkwardly in the crook of your elbow (or jammed, tray-like, into your abdomen).

Reality No. 2: Typing is much faster than writing
I don't know about you, but I type a heck of a lot faster than I write with pen and paper, and given the prevalence of text messaging, word processing, and similarly keyboard-centric technologies, I'm guessing I'm not alone in this sentiment. For many of us, the act of scribbling with a traditional writing instrument seems almost anachronistic.

So given our preference for typing, why would anyone want to go back to the prehistoric world of dragging and scratching? Sure, the various touch-centric navigation gimmicks of an iTablet would be fun for a while. But when it came time to enter data -- to type a long e-mail message or edit a complex document -- the limitations of the tablet form factor (onscreen keyboards or stylus, plus handwriting recognition) would begin to grate on even the most die-hard touchscreen aficionados.

It's no secret that the first peripheral to appear for many popular touch-only handheld device categories is an external keyboard. Adding such a kludgy option to an otherwise sleek piece of Apple engineering would no doubt ruin the whole iHalo effect -- you know, that hip, white-on-white, earbuds-displayed-prominently-for-all-to-see look that seems to lure so many of the beautiful people into the Apple Reality Distortion Field. An external keyboard? Dangling from your iTablet like some weird appendage? I just can't see it happening.

Reality No. 3: The netbook conundrum
But perhaps the biggest hurdle to iTablet success is the netbook. Lightweight and sleek, today's units have all of the advantages of a notebook PC -- including nearly full-sized keyboards -- and none of the disadvantages. Compared to an iTablet, netbooks simply make more sense for how the vast majority of users think and work. And that, more than anything, will decide the iTablet's fate.

Unless Apple pulls something truly revolutionary out of its hat, the iTablet will become yet another footnote in the sad, miserable history of tablet computing.

    • 2
May 24, 2013
randomguy:

See article below from Dec 09

Why Apple's rumored iTablet will fail big time
Clever engineering still can't overcome these fundamental limitations of tablet computing

I'm not saying my predictions are infallible. But you're crazy if you think citing the iPad as a counter-example somehow refutes my argument. I can come up with examples too (in fact I'd say there's far more examples of hype not coming through than of products living up to the hype - the iPad was a HYPED product, that article you cite notwithstanding). Here's an article from 2001 saying the Segway is the future of transportation. I remember just how much buzz the Segway got (most of you were younger and probably don't remember, but it's akin to the buzz Google Glass is getting now).

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1...

May 24, 2013

Screw glasses, im waiting for Google contact lenses

My finance blog: AdviceAboutFinance.com

Twitter @samleefinance

May 24, 2013

I find the monkey shit amusing, btw. :D

May 24, 2013

Maybe. But remember a few things.
1) Fashion is a cultural imprint of people and their history, as are habits and customs. Using the nerdy white guys example to make a bold statement such as "Google Glass is doomed" makes you sound silly.
2) Big-picture technology trends are largely unpredictable, and Google Glass R&D is an inexpensive bet towards a market that could be huge. In a way, firms like AAPL and GOOG are actually half fat cash cows, half VC funds that try to incubate the next fat cow with the money that the existing fat cow generates.
3) Small-picture technology trends are largely unpredictable as well: you don't know how fast stuff will evolve in the next years, such as battery saving technology, input formats and accuracy, flash storage, connectivity (client, server & infrastructure), etc etc.
Let me add that I have no clue whether it will work. I just think we haven't seen enough to say it won't.

    • 1
May 24, 2013
SenhorFinance:

Maybe. But remember a few things.
1) Fashion is a cultural imprint of people and their history, as are habits and customs. Using the nerdy white guys example to make a bold statement such as "Google Glass is doomed" makes you sound silly.
2) Big-picture technology trends are largely unpredictable, and Google Glass R&D is an inexpensive bet towards a market that could be huge. In a way, firms like AAPL and GOOG are actually half fat cash cows, half VC funds that try to incubate the next fat cow with the money that the existing fat cow generates.
3) Small-picture technology trends are largely unpredictable as well: you don't know how fast stuff will evolve in the next years, such as battery saving technology, input formats and accuracy, flash storage, connectivity (client, server & infrastructure), etc etc.
Let me add that I have no clue whether it will work. I just think we haven't seen enough to say it won't.

1) I will admit that fashion can be fickle. Currently, mainstream people do not see Google Glass as cool (it's cool in that yes, it's very sci-fi; but are you going to actually wear that about?). I don't believe this will change but hey, anything can happen.
2) I don't think that it's a bad business decision for Google actually. I totally agree that it's not an expensive bet and the potential payoff has a positive non-zero probability (albeit a pretty low one). It's a flyer option play to them (at least, that's what I would look at it as). If I were Google I'd probably be developing this too.
3) I've worked in energy industry in the past and my current company uses small form factor batteries in its products. The battery is the biggest limiting agent when it comes to size of Google Glass and I don't see any marked improvements in that in the near future; and of this I can be very certain. Without a smaller size, it will be hard to remove the dorkiness factor (they've already tried to remove it as much as possible).

Some of the proposed uses for Google Glass are very cool; but at the end of the day they are NICHE uses. I'm not saying no one will buy them. But will this be the next big consumer electronics gadget? No, almost certainly not. Frankly, I think we've pretty much run our course as far as revolutionary new consumer electronic gadgets go (barring moving TV content to an a-la-carte model, but that's not a new gadget). At best we can come up with some nifty accessories to the existing ones.

Remember when tv glasses first came out (not 3D glasses, though there's a corollary there but they are too recent to draw conclusions)? That was another much-hyped consumer product back in the day that even despite low costs, has not taken off at all. See here if you don't know what I'm talking about: http://itvgoggles.com

Glasses have always been seen as dorky. Mainstream people do not like wearing glasses. I wear glasses but I don't like them (I wear contacts when I go out). Why do I wear contacts? Because it improves my chances of getting laid hahaha.

May 24, 2013

Don't want to make any predictions, but I certainly hope they fail miserably.

"That dude is so haole, he don't even have any breath left."

May 24, 2013

Who knows it's not in consumer adoption yet. Anyone remember all the Anti-iPad people out there when it was first released?...

May 24, 2013

What you all think of the glasses is irrelevant. All that matters is how 15 year girls feel about it. If they think it's cool 15 year old boys will also get it. Then they will all grow older buyng apps while all of you complain about privacy and how we can never go back to the good old times... If a few 15 year old girls start gluing some shiny things on to the glasses and call it fashion, Google will make a lot of money. It may also help Yahoo recover part of the billion it just invested in a bunch of 15-year old girl blogs

May 24, 2013

your opinion is noted and filed, thanks for contributing

How big is yours?

May 24, 2013

No one has ever accused me of being too cool, or even cool at all, but if you google "Google glass" and look at images, I don't think it looks that dorky. Dorky people will always look dorky. Good looking people will continue to look good when wearing Google Glass or a similar product. The one thing I splurge on is expensive sunglasses--Ray Ban, Oakley, Armani, and Prada are just some of the brands I've owned in the last few years. You team up Google with one or more of these designers and slap "Prada" onto the side of Google Glass and you watch it become cool over night. You get that price tag down to the $500 range from the $2,500 range and you'll see large scale acceptance among the upper middle class and upper class. Because of the price, I think it'll be a good while before the true masses of society start buying this technology as far cheaper technology exists to meet their needs.

I do agree with alex that there doesn't appear to be an amazing new battery technology that is coming imminently to the market that will allow us significantly better battery life, but I have been reading about new battery technology that will allow us to fully re-charge our smartphones in 60 seconds vs 60 minutes. That would make using Google Glass a lot more palatable. I also agree with the person that pointed out that Siri is garbage--it's not just garbage, it's complete horseshit. If Google Glass is in fact premised on Siri-like voice command technology then we are about 10 years away from this technology gaining traction among the masses. I love my iPhone 4s but Siri is just crap--a straight up waste. A novelty at best.

May 24, 2013

When the original iPhone came out, I thought it was a total joke. Jobs was making such a big case for it, to hear him it was going to be this world changing technology, as important as the discovery of penicillin or flight. I just didn't get it - why would you want to tap a screen to type? I played with tablets before (in the early 2000s, on the first Windows tablets, and the Newton) and thought the idea would never replace a good keyboard, the way the mouse has lasted decades.

2 years later, I stopped laughing. Everybody was buying one. It even came up in Sex in the City (gf of the time insisted...) which is probably a sign of "early majority" adoption.

Took me another year to muster the courage to buy one of those weird products. It cost a fortune, and I had to wait 5 hours at the shop for them to unlock it (ah, Switzerland...) and finally I got it, and in 4 hours I was wondering why I was using this tiny screened, limited-OS Blackberry crap. Around that time, everybody at work had switched their berries for iPhone 4s.

Tablet was the same story. When the iPad came out, I thought it was another stupid idea. Why would I want a limited computer that is basically a larger iPhone, with the same OS and same functionality? I don't own an iPad, but I've also stopped laughing. My Nexus 4 is basically a mix between iPhone 4 and iPad mini. Bars and restaurants here in Singapore use the iPad for ordering. iPads are used in warehouses and Ikea. The damn thing is appearing everywhere.

This taught me the real meaning of "tech visionary", and that I wasn't one (nor most people I know). And whilst I can't see myself wearing the GGlass (except maybe on sunglasses when going running or sailing, or whatever) I can't wait to see what the visionaries saw this time.

May 24, 2013
EURCHF parity:

When the original iPhone came out, I thought it was a total joke. Jobs was making such a big case for it, to hear him it was going to be this world changing technology, as important as the discovery of penicillin or flight. I just didn't get it - why would you want to tap a screen to type? I played with tablets before (in the early 2000s, on the first Windows tablets, and the Newton) and thought the idea would never replace a good keyboard, the way the mouse has lasted decades.

2 years later, I stopped laughing. Everybody was buying one. It even came up in Sex in the City (gf of the time insisted...) which is probably a sign of "early majority" adoption.

Took me another year to muster the courage to buy one of those weird products. It cost a fortune, and I had to wait 5 hours at the shop for them to unlock it (ah, Switzerland...) and finally I got it, and in 4 hours I was wondering why I was using this tiny screened, limited-OS Blackberry crap. Around that time, everybody at work had switched their berries for iPhone 4s.

Tablet was the same story. When the iPad came out, I thought it was another stupid idea. Why would I want a limited computer that is basically a larger iPhone, with the same OS and same functionality? I don't own an iPad, but I've also stopped laughing. My Nexus 4 is basically a mix between iPhone 4 and iPad mini. Bars and restaurants here in Singapore use the iPad for ordering. iPads are used in warehouses and Ikea. The damn thing is appearing everywhere.

This taught me the real meaning of "tech visionary", and that I wasn't one (nor most people I know). And whilst I can't see myself wearing the GGlass (except maybe on sunglasses when going running or sailing, or whatever) I can't wait to see what the visionaries saw this time.

Agree with this. What's funny is that I want an iPad but I don't know why. There are a few things it can do that are kind of neat that I can't really do with my laptop. For example, if I were with a client on a one-on-one presentation sitting at a table I could whip out an ePen and write on the charts and graphs. That's kind of cool. Or I can draw pictures to illustrate a point while with someone. But really, even in 2013, the iPad--all tablets--are ridiculously overpriced novelties, and yet tablets have wide scale acceptance. I still can't wrap my head around spending $600 or so on an inferior piece of technology to our laptops because it's a nice web surfing experience while watching "Frasier". Goes to show that we in the West really do have too much excess money. I literally want a product which has contrived uses, the vast majority I have no interest in.

May 25, 2013
DCDepository:
EURCHF parity:

When the original iPhone came out, I thought it was a total joke. Jobs was making such a big case for it, to hear him it was going to be this world changing technology, as important as the discovery of penicillin or flight. I just didn't get it - why would you want to tap a screen to type? I played with tablets before (in the early 2000s, on the first Windows tablets, and the Newton) and thought the idea would never replace a good keyboard, the way the mouse has lasted decades.
2 years later, I stopped laughing. Everybody was buying one. It even came up in Sex in the City (gf of the time insisted...) which is probably a sign of "early majority" adoption.
Took me another year to muster the courage to buy one of those weird products. It cost a fortune, and I had to wait 5 hours at the shop for them to unlock it (ah, Switzerland...) and finally I got it, and in 4 hours I was wondering why I was using this tiny screened, limited-OS Blackberry crap. Around that time, everybody at work had switched their berries for iPhone 4s.
Tablet was the same story. When the iPad came out, I thought it was another stupid idea. Why would I want a limited computer that is basically a larger iPhone, with the same OS and same functionality? I don't own an iPad, but I've also stopped laughing. My Nexus 4 is basically a mix between iPhone 4 and iPad mini. Bars and restaurants here in Singapore use the iPad for ordering. iPads are used in warehouses and Ikea. The damn thing is appearing everywhere.
This taught me the real meaning of "tech visionary", and that I wasn't one (nor most people I know). And whilst I can't see myself wearing the GGlass (except maybe on sunglasses when going running or sailing, or whatever) I can't wait to see what the visionaries saw this time.

Agree with this. What's funny is that I want an iPad but I don't know why. There are a few things it can do that are kind of neat that I can't really do with my laptop. For example, if I were with a client on a one-on-one presentation sitting at a table I could whip out an ePen and write on the charts and graphs. That's kind of cool. Or I can draw pictures to illustrate a point while with someone. But really, even in 2013, the iPad--all tablets--are ridiculously overpriced novelties, and yet tablets have wide scale acceptance. I still can't wrap my head around spending $600 or so on an inferior piece of technology to our laptops because it's a nice web surfing experience while watching "Frasier". Goes to show that we in the West really do have too much excess money. I literally want a product which has contrived uses, the vast majority I have no interest in.

I use my iPad for an hour or two while in bed before I go to sleep. Sure beats a laptop which just gets way too hot given the fan can't cool it properly (plus it's heavy). Convenient for playing games, chatting, watching youtube (I watch more youtube than I do TV), whatever. I was definitely gun ho about the iPhone but not so much about the iPad (I didn't think it would fail like I think Glass will). The apps are what made the iPad for me and made me decide to get one. I've been trying hard to think of an app that would be so awesome that it would make me get Google Glass. I haven't been able to think of one. If the price for Google Glass were $200 maybe I'd use it as a GPS HUD solely for when I'm driving. That's literally the only thing I can think of. I seldom take pictures so I don't care about that functionality (and even so, I have my phone for that). Driving with a HUD would be pretty neat though.

May 25, 2013
DCDepository:
EURCHF parity:

Agree with this. What's funny is that I want an iPad but I don't know why. There are a few things it can do that are kind of neat that I can't really do with my laptop. For example, if I were with a client on a one-on-one presentation sitting at a table I could whip out an ePen and write on the charts and graphs. That's kind of cool. Or I can draw pictures to illustrate a point while with someone. But really, even in 2013, the iPad--all tablets--are ridiculously overpriced novelties, and yet tablets have wide scale acceptance. I still can't wrap my head around spending $600 or so on an inferior piece of technology to our laptops because it's a nice web surfing experience while watching "Frasier". Goes to show that we in the West really do have too much excess money. I literally want a product which has contrived uses, the vast majority I have no interest in.

But that's the beauty of it. YOU don't want an iPad. Maybe 10% of computer users want an iPad. Maybe 30% want a cheap, 70% there iPad (my in-laws like to play chess on a Galaxy 10). Look at profit margin by manufacturer vs market share. The early adopters finance the R&D and feeling around for the definitive version. Every Angry Birds purchaser is financing the touch screen revolution. People love to hate on Windows but without the enormous expansion in PC ownership they caused, IT would still be decades behind us. It's the apparent "waste" of money that finances the tech innovation that, years down the road, we revere as groundbreaking.

The same is true in maths, actually. There was a time when matrices and vectors were considered "pure maths" (i.e. without practical use). Concepts move from pure maths to physics to chemistry and engineering and finally to routine customer products. Maybe in 100 years our cyborg descendants will look at videos of cats on their personal, implanted HUD (that sends electrical signals directly to the optic nerve, replacing the imperfect biological eye). And they will look back and see Sergey as a visionary, even if the Glasses will look about as dated by then as Star Trek TOS' analog, button-driven controls appear to our touch screen generation.

May 25, 2013

google glass will be adopted when you can look at hot chicks and have it automatically google their facebook page

May 25, 2013

would not be surprised if that sort of technology exists in the next five years or so
when these things can read your thoughts and do shit based on that i'm hoping i'm rich enough so that i can retire to some random country away from all of that shit

May 25, 2013

Two exceptional books to drive home this idea of how fast tech is moving, and the extent to which we know so much more today: "I could never be so lucky again" by Jimmy Doolittle (and truly it is amazing that most of you will never have heard the name) and "Kelly: more than my share of it all" by Kelly Johnson. There's something about aviation and war that allows for rapid understanding of complex ideas, perhaps because the stakes are so high. Both men were changed history, so you should read the books anyway...

(Johnson's book also gives some enlightening examples on how to run Defense contracts under budget, delivering before the deadlines - science fiction harder to believe in today than optic nerve implants)

May 25, 2013

I'm pretty into fashion (not runway) and follow several forums and blogs. Utilitarian techwear is quickly becoming very popular.

And even if it wren't, this is just cool and something I'd definitely use.

Why Google Glass? Let Sergey Brin explain:

http://www.ted.com/talks/sergey_brin_why_google_gl...

May 25, 2013
Little Engine Would:

I'm pretty into fashion (not runway) and follow several forums and blogs. Utilitarian techwear is quickly becoming very popular.

And even if it wren't, this is just cool and something I'd definitely use.

Why Google Glass? Let Sergey Brin explain:

http://www.ted.com/talks/sergey_brin_why_google_gl...

After seeing this video, I'm actually less convinced that Google Glass will catch on. Is the best use for Google Glass live action video? Really? Seems like an expensive camera. I don't see the average American doing extreme sports very often to take cool videos.

May 25, 2013
DCDepository:
Little Engine Would:

I'm pretty into fashion (not runway) and follow several forums and blogs. Utilitarian techwear is quickly becoming very popular.
And even if it wren't, this is just cool and something I'd definitely use.
Why Google Glass? Let Sergey Brin explain:
http://www.ted.com/talks/sergey_brin_why_google_gl...

After seeing this video, I'm actually less convinced that Google Glass will catch on. Is the best use for Google Glass live action video? Really? Seems like an expensive camera. I don't see the average American doing extreme sports very often to take cool videos.

The idea is for it to be able to do anything that your smartphone can do with your hands being free and you not having to look down.

So any street you're on, you can have a GPS map in front of you. Google shit while talking to people, whatever.

And it vibrated sound waves directly into your skull so that you don't need to wear earbuds, which I don't know how I feel about yet...

May 25, 2013

I mean, I think Google Glass (or some competing form) will eventually catch on. I think that's inevitable. But they definitely have hurdles to overcome over the next decade--privacy concerns, battery life, design/fashion, functionality, and finally cultural acceptance.

But I do think this will catch on--but not immediately like the smartphone caught on.

That said, the moment Google Glass becomes as cheap as an iPad--$600 or less--I'm all over it. LOL. I'm a technology whore.

May 25, 2013

The initial product may not be a hit. But, that's not what is exciting about Google Glasses. The technology behind it is what is exciting. There is much more development needed to get it to the point where it will be widely-used and accepted commercially.

I'll draw this analogy for you. When cellphones arrived on the markets, they were twice the size of a normal phone receiver at the time. In 20-25 years, the technology has advanced to smartphones such as APPL's iPhone or MSFT's Windows Phone. Now, imagine -- what the technology of Google Glasses will be like in 5,10,15 years.

    • 1
May 27, 2013

All I'm going to say is this...

Speaking with someone using a different language and having Google glass auto-translate everything real time. Translation software would get EXPONENTIALLY better to accommodate this market (and there'd probably be some crowdsourcing feature to feed slang data).

...that alone makes this revolutionary.

May 28, 2013
alexpasch:

I remember when the very first iPhone came out (I got one right when it came out). I would take that thing to a bar and everyone would want to play with it and test it out. It was "cool" and you definitely wanted to show it off.

Haha really. Some fucking hipsters.

May 31, 2013

It all comes down to marketing. The success of these token products referenced (e.g. ipad, segway, iphone) is driven more by marketing than product attributes.

May 31, 2013
Comment
Jun 3, 2013