Why Google Glass Broke • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Google Glass Broke

#61

Post by kefka » Thu, Feb 05, 2015, 3:39 PM UTC

rdtsc wrote: post #56

kefka wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're assuming that it is the only defense. It isn't. We look at security as one would look at an onion.

OP is right though. As far as the onion is concerned you better add more characters to the security pass-phrase, also make sure WPS is disabled on all routers etc. Once someone has determined to break in, even minimally sophisticated they will spoof the mac address. It is good that you want to add extra security, but even as your story shows it just creates confusion, and make using the system harder.

Those decisions come the people in the glass room in the security office. Not much I can do to change global security policy.

Re: Why Google Glass Broke

#62

Post by drzaiusapelord » Thu, Feb 05, 2015, 3:43 PM UTC

kefka wrote: post #13

I work in a capacity that reviews, tests, and develops proofs of concepts for new tech. We purchased 3 glasses when they came on the market. Our review: 1. pathetic battery life. You're going to have at most 6 hours of life. And that's with the GG radios off (and functionality at a nil). 2. You can't turn it off. it goes into a screen-off non-standby that still chews through battery. So when you think that youre cons…

>And, they took out one of the neatest features: facial recognition.

Care to clarify who "they" is here? Last I heard, the local governments were going to pass legislation banning this feature. Google was more or less strong-armed by the state.

Yeah, its fun to give an overly-negative review of 1st gen dev platforms, but the reality is that a lot of whats happened with glass was more or less planned to happen. It was a test platform and part of google's largest wearables initiative. Glass may not even pan out, especially considering what MS is doing right now with AR, but it helped laid the groundwork for making wearables socially acceptable and helped make tech reviwers understand that wearables are going to be big. Glass opened the door for my Moto360. The Moto360 is opening the door for a million other things. I see Glass like owning a Vic-20; a largely unimpressive computer. The Macintosh was released a short three years later. Lets not piss on early adopters and test platforms too much. Glass was never going to be a consumer product.

>$1500

Then don't buy into the program. Its not a consumer product its a test/dev platform. It blows my mind people think they were paying for some hot new product. No, you were paying to be part of a dev program.

Also "google quality" is pleasant enough. I paid next to nothing, compared to other smartphones, for my N4 and N5. Those are fine phones.

Re: Why Google Glass Broke

#63

Post by motoboi » Thu, Feb 05, 2015, 3:43 PM UTC

dublinben wrote: post #44

kefka wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And one last story regarding the Glass. Google engineers came to us for a public demonstration. Now, our network has a secure component (WPA2-enterprise) and a non-secure component. However to use either, you need to register the MAC address with our system. Simple. No. For a company that made Android, and focuses oh so much on security, they dont support WPA2-enterprise. Just doesn't work. So, we were relegated to t…

This is obviously an issue with Google Glass, but MAC address filtering is a waste of time. It offers absolutely no protection against a determined adversary. It is a perfect example of security theater.

Please remember that with, say, a macbook, one can easily monitor traffic between your access points and authorized clients of your wireless network.

From that, is simple to extract the mac address of an authorized client, configure your macbook wireless card with that mac address and join your unencrypted network.

This is why mac filtering is useless on wifi networks.

Re: Why Google Glass Broke

#64

Post by soylentcola » Thu, Feb 05, 2015, 3:53 PM UTC

aluhut wrote: post #36

kefka wrote: post #13

I work in a capacity that reviews, tests, and develops proofs of concepts for new tech. We purchased 3 glasses when they came on the market. Our review: 1. pathetic battery life. You're going to have at most 6 hours of life. And that's with the GG radios off (and functionality at a nil). 2. You can't turn it off. it goes into a screen-off non-standby that still chews through battery. So when you think that youre cons…

The "privacy" issue was not there to cover the privacy of the person with glass but the people around him. I can totally understand that. Even if I know that there will be (are) ways around but as long as not everybody can do it, it's something. You forgot one: 9. You look like an idiot. It's the same thing as the smart watches. Suddenly everybody had one but now they become a joke. As well as the people who wear the…

Maybe I'm revealing my lack of fashion sense but I picked up a smart watch and the only time anyone's noticed it, they thought it looked pretty neat. Picked up a Moto 360 on sale for $175 a month ago and so far I've enjoyed it. Is it a must-have game-changing productivity device? Oh hell no. But considering how many watches you can buy for easily $250 or a lot more, I didn't think $175 was terrible for a novelty/luxury item.

If only for the fact that I can change the face to look like any style of watch or display info in an appealing way, it's been cool. The notifications and voice commands are more like added extras IMO.

I just figure that if I can buy a Timex for $175, a Moto360 for $175 isn't the worst luxury gadget I could buy. The traditional watch has the benefit of years-long battery life whereas mine gets put on a dock when I go to sleep. But mine is also a "Fitbit" and I can put any number of faces on it or spend 30 minutes in Photoshop designing my own. As a gadget lover and hobbyist graphic designer, I'll take changeable faces with neat ways of displaying weather and fitness info even if it means I can't wear it on a multi-day camping trip due to battery life.

Re: Why Google Glass Broke

#65

Post by AndrewKemendo » Thu, Feb 05, 2015, 3:58 PM UTC

Symmetry wrote: post #43

adnanh wrote: post #2

Personally I think it was the camera that killed it. That, and the fact that google put out an unfinished product without providing plethora of resources and apps for it, to get people excited, hoping the community would finish it for them... That, and the fact that people started calling Google Glass users "glassholes".

One of the biggest potential uses of something like Google Glass I see is automatically pulling up information about things you're looking at and there's no way to do that without a camera. Now, as far as I know the Glass didn't have enough horsepower to do that usefully but theoretical future versions might. It's just too bad their advertising focused on people making recordings of what they were seeing.

This is exactly right, any AR device needs a camera input, the problem is in the video recording aspect - it creeps too many people out.

Re: Why Google Glass Broke

#66

Post by pvarangot » Thu, Feb 05, 2015, 3:58 PM UTC

spiralpolitik wrote: post #18

I look at Google Glass as this decades 'Segway'. Hyped beyond all proportions, it failed as a mass market product, but found enough of a niche that you still see them to this day. That will be the future of 'Glass.

But it can't be bought anymore... if it does fill a niche, which I'm not sure it does, people in that niche will be buying GoPros and cellphones and strapping them to their heads.

Re: Why Google Glass Broke

#67

Post by rdtsc » Thu, Feb 05, 2015, 4:06 PM UTC

kefka wrote: post #61

rdtsc wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP is right though. As far as the onion is concerned you better add more characters to the security pass-phrase, also make sure WPS is disabled on all routers etc. Once someone has determined to break in, even minimally sophisticated they will spoof the mac address. It is good that you want to add extra security, but even as your story shows it just creates confusion, and make using the system harder.

Those decisions come the people in the glass room in the security office. Not much I can do to change global security policy.

I understand, it was more of a comment in general, or maybe the glass room people would stop by and read too ;-)

Re: Why Google Glass Broke

#68

Post by aluhut » Thu, Feb 05, 2015, 4:36 PM UTC

soylentcola wrote: post #64

aluhut wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "privacy" issue was not there to cover the privacy of the person with glass but the people around him. I can totally understand that. Even if I know that there will be (are) ways around but as long as not everybody can do it, it's something. You forgot one: 9. You look like an idiot. It's the same thing as the smart watches. Suddenly everybody had one but now they become a joke. As well as the people who wear the…

Maybe I'm revealing my lack of fashion sense but I picked up a smart watch and the only time anyone's noticed it, they thought it looked pretty neat. Picked up a Moto 360 on sale for $175 a month ago and so far I've enjoyed it. Is it a must-have game-changing productivity device? Oh hell no. But considering how many watches you can buy for easily $250 or a lot more, I didn't think $175 was terrible for a novelty/luxu…

Most of those people who (still) have one of those, never wore a watch before.

Re: Why Google Glass Broke

#69

Post by crumpled » Thu, Feb 05, 2015, 5:29 PM UTC

I don't understand why everybody is pretending that the Google Glass that "explorers" and developers have is a consumer product, and that it failed in the market.

Google Glass has yet to hit the consumer market. All of the criticisms of it as a fashion statement or a consumer device are pretty much moot. It's like people pretended to understand that they were alpha/beta testers and then conveniently forgot.

Yes, this explorer phase of the beta is over. Why do we need to make up some deeper reasons? Maybe a lot of issues were discovered, but that's precisely the point! Arguably, Google now has more insight into the real-world use of optical wearables than anyone else. When the market (that they incubated) develops more, they can be ready with a capable, fashionable product.

Re: Why Google Glass Broke

#70

Post by untog » Thu, Feb 05, 2015, 6:21 PM UTC

crumpled wrote: post #69

I don't understand why everybody is pretending that the Google Glass that "explorers" and developers have is a consumer product, and that it failed in the market. Google Glass has yet to hit the consumer market. All of the criticisms of it as a fashion statement or a consumer device are pretty much moot. It's like people pretended to understand that they were alpha/beta testers and then conveniently forgot. Yes, this…

Does this page look like a beta:

https://play.google.com/store/devices/details/Glass_Explorer...

"Who are Glass Explorers?

From chefs to cyclists, Glass Explorers are the first to make, move, and marvel through Glass. They're bold and inspiring and they're helping shape the future of Glass."

It certainly doesn't even use the word 'beta' even once. And when there are frames made by DVF available I'd say that, yes, you can critique it as a fashion statement, too.