Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Glass

dcurt.is

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 180 posts

Re: Glass

#151

Post by rmk2 »

danielweber wrote: post #150
rmk2 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry if I'm being a bit dense, but I don't understand your comment. :( If I physically move my head, nothing I am looking at is moving with me, i.e. the computer screen does not move to where I look. The point is that you look through glasses, yet the Google Glass screen makes you focus on it, not through it, and hence it moves with your general head movement. Or have I misunderstood what you said?

If you want to look at your glasses themselves, bespectacled-people learn to flik their eyes, not their whole head.

> If you want to look at your glasses themselves, bespectacled-people learn to flik their eyes

I still fail to see the point. Maybe because I never try to look at my own glasses...

edit: When I want to look over the rim of my glasses, I still move my head while looking up with my eyes, otherwise I wouldn't be able to look at what I was looking at before.

Re: Glass

#152

Post by cbr »

kmasters wrote: post #107
DominikR wrote: post #105

Earlier 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.

Supposedly Apple sold 23M iPads in Q1 2013, or 250K/day [1] but Google sold 4.6M Nexus 7s in 2012 [2].

[1] http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/23/apple13q1-iphone-ipad-ipod/

[2] http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/19/analyst-estimates-peg-total...

Re: Glass

#153

Post by r00fus »

SimpleStatement wrote: post #79

Dustin Curtis does not even own Glass, he is using a 'friends' item. He just wants readership/attention/validation, hence the opinionated and slightly snarky blog post.

So basically if I want to have an opinion about a product, I must have purchased it?

Given confirmation bias, that'd basically skew all reviews about products to the positive - hardly useful or objective.

Re: Glass

#154

Post by chinpokomon »

nahname wrote: post #32

After 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…

The UI may initially take some time, but not any more than learning how to use a pencil the first time. Glass feels unlike anything you've used before because it is. That said, my experience at Google I/O, I figured out how to use it very quickly and I thought the interface was intuitive as I navigated. Using the touchpad on Glass is more like using a smartphone before touchscreens. It feels a little disconnected in that it is indirect control, but when Blackberries only had a jog wheel, millions of users had no problem using those devices.

Given that Glass doesn't have a launcher like most Android devices, the real challenge will be in actively using Glass. Passive use, whereby you are connected to applications using the Mirror API, means that you just receive notifications pushed by remote services, and if you don't respond to a card, it just gets pushed down the stack. You can navigate backwards to find those cards again, but just as you don't respond to every Facebook post, you can just let them flush out and choose to ignore it.

The two problems that have to be resolved, are how do you control "native" applications, built using the GDK, and how do you control the flood of extraneous information when you might subscribe to tens or hundreds of services that send you messages through the Mirror API.

While you can control what notifications you receive, it would be very easy to subscribe to "important" services and still feel overwhelmed by notifications that aren't particularly interesting just so that you do receive the notifications that you do care about. Culling this stream into something more useful is where some of the AI research may also pay off. It is a difficult balance to figure out today, but as this tech evolves, I have no doubt this problem can be solved too.

Re: Glass

#155

Post by djim »

mikeg8 wrote: post #122
SimpleStatement wrote: post #79

Dustin Curtis does not even own Glass, he is using a 'friends' item. He just wants readership/attention/validation, hence the opinionated and slightly snarky blog post.

This comment adds zero value to any meaningful discussion. aJust because he doesn't own it himself doesn't mean he is incapable of a thoughtful analysis of his experience with the product. Keep your jealousy to yourself.

actually, the author got quite a few key facts wrong, so in this case, i think not owning the device does factor into the equation. for example, he complains about not being able to use them in direct sunlight. google provides a sunglass add-on to all explorers, which is a critical component for using glass in direct sunlight. sergey brin himself told me as much the day i picked them up. he got a few other things wrong as well. all-in-all, he has a lot of valid points i agree with, but with some false information mixed in, it could end up leading to a lot of folks further misunderstanding this device.

Re: Glass

#156

Post by nmcfarl »

Fuzzwah wrote: post #141
nmcfarl wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do it about once every 2-3 years. Just last month I misjudged a curb cut while on a bike trail after dark. Before that a railroad crossing, on a angle, grabbed my tire. For me this is not all that rare...

Thoughts on this system: http://www.yankodesign.com/2013/05/21/lumigrids-while-cyclin...

I like it - but I'd worry about wheather it'd be useful warning oncoming traffic, and if not, how we'll it'd perform in the presence of another more traditional headlight.

Still a spiffy idea.

Re: Glass

#157

Post by livepreview »

gbog wrote: post #128
coldtea wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, with such high profile such as Kurzweil, we might even get the singularity emerge in Google Glass first. /s

I'd be following Taleb here and would be very skeptic about the positive or negative outcome from the hiring of a Kurzweil at Google. To expand: Big companies may have the need for very talented particulars, like Peter Norvig, who can drive innovation over big teams and have a very precise mind, and all the humility required. But in the case of Kurzweil, it looks more like he is invited to play the clown and amuse th…

It's easy to knock Mr. Kurzweil, given his supranormal convictions about the relatively near-term future of our society. However, check out some of the names on this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Murray_Hopper_Award

   ...it looks more like he is invited
   to play the clown and amuse the assistance,
   [rather] than to lead [to] anything concrete.
It may be a bit preemptive to discount him so readily.

Re: Glass

#158

Post by lnanek2 »

r00fus wrote: post #153
SimpleStatement wrote: post #79

Dustin Curtis does not even own Glass, he is using a 'friends' item. He just wants readership/attention/validation, hence the opinionated and slightly snarky blog post.

So basically if I want to have an opinion about a product, I must have purchased it? Given confirmation bias, that'd basically skew all reviews about products to the positive - hardly useful or objective.

His review was pretty off, though. I've worn mine a month and only ever was asked to take it off once at a company with a bunch of private meetings going on. Meanwhile he claims the most important flaw is that it is not socially acceptable. You actually get treated like a minor celebrity for wearing one, with people on the streets often asking about it, how much it costs, how to get one, if they can try it, if they can get a picture of themselves wearing it, etc.. No one has batted an eye at me giving it voice commands either, they are all used to people with Bluetooth headsets.

I've never had any trouble using it in sunlight myself either. I half suspect he just saw the screen was a little faded and went, woot, another complaint I can make instead of actually using it. A lot of his other issues are similar. Other people voice controlling it is almost never an issue since you are the one who taps it or looks up right beforehand - it isn't on all the time. He doesn't know the shortcuts to skip to Googling or skip to the menu either.

Re: Glass

#159

Post by lnanek2 »

marcosscriven wrote: post #70

Basic question - is the little screen focused at infinity?

It is several feet out at least. I certainly don't have to focus on it like if I hold my finger the same place. Heck, if I don't wear contacts I need my distance glasses in front to see it. I don't think Dustin got much time with it, he has a lot of mistakes in his review.

Re: Glass

#160

Post by lnanek2 »

falcolas wrote: post #27
pixie_ wrote: post #8

I spent an hour tonight debating someone on how the Oculus Rift is revolutionary while Glass is not. The first hand reviews of the Rift vs Glass are night and day. One is the future the other is meh.

At the potential of starting a flame war, I would categorize the Oculus Rift as the meh, and the glass is the future. I was able to use a head mounted (and tracking) 3d display with a computer back when ROTT was popular (circa 1994). It's a novelty at best, and a headache inducing nightmare at worst. I didn't see the magic then, and I certainly don't see the magic now. A seamless hud, on the other hand, has the poten…

Agreed. Things like the Rift have been all over for a decade. Sony Glasstron, etc..
Post reply on HN