I think it is mildly ridiculous how much attention "Glass" receives. The concept behind the product seems remotely OK, however from all the initial reviews this seems like yet another failed Google experiment. Poor, buggy software, and bulky hardware that looks like a joke - I'd be embarrassed to wear those. I think people really need to stop spinning the whole Google Glasses topic, they don't really deserve the attention.
Glass
111–120 of 180 posts
Re: Glass
#112Anyone want an unsolicited opinion? waits for everyone to leave I hope Google Glass is an experiment, because voice reco isn't particularly important outside of when you're driving. When I get tired of texting and consider voice reco, 2 things hit me (and others, I've done solid research on this) 1. Voice reco would be slightly better now that I'm tired of texting, but not much. 2. It is nowhere near socially accepta…
Voice recognition is also useful when it's really cold out and you have gloves on, or when you can't/don't want to be looking at your phone (e.g. because you're navigating a crowded or dangerous place)
Re: Glass
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Google has never, not once, in its history, had a successful launch of a hardware product" Sure, Apple brought us the iPad Mini because the Nexus 7 failed so hard. The Nexus 4 and 10 are also known as big failures that customers hate.
You are correct, No Nexus device from the time it was released to today has sold as much as the iPad or iPhone sells in one day. Google has never had a successful launch of a hardware product, not even once.
So what? Has it ever been the purpose of them to sell as many Nexus devices as their competitors and thereby risking to alienate their partners? (Samsung, HTC, Lg and so on)
It was nevertheless a successful hardware product because users and reviewers loved the Nexus devices and they sold everything they produced.
Re: Glass
#114OK GLASS FORMAT C:
Re: Glass
#115After trying google glass out last week, it still has a long way to go. Many tech people lined up to try it out. All of us failed to do anything useful with it. We had to be told how to activate it. We had to be told what we could do with it. What phrases it keys off of ('Okay glass'). These were all highly technical people and we couldn't figure it out on our own. Contrast that with a few christmas' ago when I left…
>All of us failed to do anything useful with it. We had to be told how to activate it. We had to be told what we could do with it.
If I'm going to wear something on my head like a nutcase, I would hope that it has been designed for _usability_ not _Discoverability_. Making everything idiot-proof or at least "didn't bother to read the manual proof" leaves us with only devices suited for idiots and people too lazy to read the manual.
EDIT: That said....I'm not going to wear something on my head like a nutcase, because no matter how cool it is, I'm too shy/vain/self conscious to do so. The only people willing to wear glass I would bet are people who are wiling to learn to use something to get the most benefit out of it (I would bet a huge overlap with emacs and vim users).
Re: Glass
#116Anyone want an unsolicited opinion? waits for everyone to leave I hope Google Glass is an experiment, because voice reco isn't particularly important outside of when you're driving. When I get tired of texting and consider voice reco, 2 things hit me (and others, I've done solid research on this) 1. Voice reco would be slightly better now that I'm tired of texting, but not much. 2. It is nowhere near socially accepta…
Voice reco isn't very important now, but it is important to the future of computing. It enables a lot of things in fields like wearable computing that aren't really doable right now, because the HID becomes a microphone instead of a keyboard or other input device, which is much easier to stuff into small awkward places.
Voice recognition is NOT the only thing that could do that, and when something else comes along that is better, THAT will really change things.
Re: Glass
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
with the AI and data sets to power things like Google Now Microsoft, Amazon, IBM and Yahoo to name but a few. And I've used Google Now and I fail to see what makes it so incredibly advanced that no one else could possibly replicate it. Maybe I am missing something but it doesn't seem to hold a candle to say Watson.
Maybe you're right, but Google has the personal data from me that they don't, across a variety of services that allow for integration and knowledge about me that is hard for me to really wrap my head around. I've used this example before, but Google Now already recommends destinations based on what I Google Maps at my desk before I head out. It also knows what is on my "grab when I go by the grocery store" list befor…
Thanks for the downvotes, sorry I said anything bad about poor ole Tim Cook. Yeesh.
Re: Glass
#118The industrial design is solid, and though it is being manufactured in small batches, it has the build quality you might expect from something being mass-produced. Not sure what to make of this statement. The design is beautiful, but I don't see why that would be an artifact of mass-production. The early prototypes for Glass were much sexier in terms of build integrity (optics, for example) than the current mass-prod…
Re: "The industrial design is solid, and though it is being manufactured in small batches, it has the build quality you might expect from something being mass-produced."
I expect high quality from hand produced jewelry, art, etc. Knowing nothing else, I wouldn't expect high build quality and beauty from handmade consumer electronics. I assumed the OP was just saying that it doesn't look like a prototype or hack.
Re: Glass
#119The industrial design is solid, and though it is being manufactured in small batches, it has the build quality you might expect from something being mass-produced. Not sure what to make of this statement. The design is beautiful, but I don't see why that would be an artifact of mass-production. The early prototypes for Glass were much sexier in terms of build integrity (optics, for example) than the current mass-prod…
> For example, you'll see as if the frame takes up a portion of the sides, but in reality, there is circuitry hidden behind it--by looking at it you'd never know.
What?
Re: Glass
#120This is a perfect example of a primary difference between apple and google. Apple makes sure that before you ever use it that almost every single thing akin to what Dustin pointed out is a non-issue. Google gives you an alpha/beta product and wants you to find the flaws for them, and maybe help shape it. Using bread as an analogy, Apple gives you a beautiful tasty loaf ready to eat; Google gives you some dough and te…
I think ice cream shops might make for a better analogy. Apple is like one that makes the absolute best vanilla and chocolate ice creams you've ever had. And maybe in the back, they're working on an amazing mint-chocolate-chip, but they haven't quite found just the right supplier of peppermint extract, and until then, nobody gets to try it. Google is like that crazy experimental ice cream shop that has all sorts of w…
That is indeed a very good analogy.