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

101–110 of 180 posts

Re: Glass

#101

Post by drivebyacct2 »

Osmium wrote: post #94
drivebyacct2 wrote: post #52

If you think Glass is the end product that matters, you're not paying any attention. Tim Cook wants to start shit-talking Glass and talking about how they're going to bring out watches? Cool. So are three other Android manufacturers. Who is the only person with the AI and data sets to power things like Google Now and really make form factors like Glass or Watch practical? You don't hear anyone talking about that. The…

I wouldn't exactly say Tim Cook's "shit-talking" it. His quote from D11 on Glass is: "There are some positives in the product. It's probably likely to appeal to certain vertical markets. The likelihood that it has broad appeals is hard to see." I think that's actually a fairly well-balanced statement. He also says this about glasses and watches: "Nothing that's going to convince a kid that's never worn glasses or a…

Look, I'm not a fashionable guy, but come on:

"Nothing that's going to convince a kid that's never worn glasses or a band or a watch or whatever to wear one."

I'm kind of embarrassed by Tim's comments. He won't even make a non-pessismistic comment about watches, which, I guess everyone could be wrong but it seems they'll introduce one soon; it's as if he's already pushing the notion "Apple iWatch is magical and people want to wear it and not the three competing Android watches that better integrate with your phone and have more features".

Who knows, it's taken HTC years (and losing tons of market share) to design fashionable looking hardware. Maybe Apple will win purely on design and Tim's comments will be vindicated. Either way, I hope he's not putting all his eggs in that iPhone basket, unless iOS7 just prints money.

Re: Glass

#102

Post by petenixey »

Is the image from glass projected into your eye or onto a screen? If it's projected directly into your eye then wouldn't it possible to set the focal distance to be roughly the same as where you're already looking?

NB given I have never ever heard of this happening i suspect there's a hole in my knowledge of optics but it would be awesome if it was possible.

Re: Glass

#103

Post by drivebyacct2 »

threeseed wrote: post #90
drivebyacct2 wrote: post #52

If you think Glass is the end product that matters, you're not paying any attention. Tim Cook wants to start shit-talking Glass and talking about how they're going to bring out watches? Cool. So are three other Android manufacturers. Who is the only person with the AI and data sets to power things like Google Now and really make form factors like Glass or Watch practical? You don't hear anyone talking about that. The…

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 before I quickly use Google Now and say "Google: note to self, pick up milk" and it's in there.

[soon] So now, when Google's autonomous car is driving me home and I'm watching the road attentively, Google Now pops up in Glass and offers to redirect the car to the grocery store most minimizing the way out of my route (or the one that has the best deals listed with Google Shopping, or that has the best coupons, or that Google Wallet has my rewards card for). And it reminds me to grab my milk. [/not yet]

And then on the way out of the store it again offers directions back to my house.

This is all there (except the Keep intuition bit that I sincerely hope is coming and will really prove Google Now). (And sadly, and I'm whining, but I didn't get into the super special Glass program :[)

Sorry, I've rambled, back on point: I don't doubt that those you list have the power and smart people to build the tech, but I don't think they have the data. I think Apple Maps was but a small example of the advantages Google has in areas of data.

Re: Glass

#104

Post by DanBC »

petenixey wrote: post #102

Is the image from glass projected into your eye or onto a screen? If it's projected directly into your eye then wouldn't it possible to set the focal distance to be roughly the same as where you're already looking? NB given I have never ever heard of this happening i suspect there's a hole in my knowledge of optics but it would be awesome if it was possible.

There are some "virtual retinal displays", but they're mostly vapourware rather than actively developed and sold devices. They use a laser beam into the eye.

(http://www.hitl.washington.edu/projects/vrd/)

(http://ascentlookout.atos.net/en-us/enabling_information_tec...)

(http://eclecti.cc/hardware/blinded-by-the-light-diy-retinal-...)

That last link is a DIY (terrifying) project. Your eyes, your choice. Retinas are delicate.

EDIT: One company doing stuff is "Microvision" - (http://www.microvision.com/index2.html) but they've changed to pico-projectors.

Re: Glass

#105

Post by DominikR »

kmasters wrote: post #92

There's a problem with glass. As far as I can tell. What Google is hoping for is to tease us into wanting something, that no one has asked for. Google is not alone in this historically. Let's step back a decade, when we were all told that Microsoft (by Microsoft) had the biggest R&D budget in the world. What products came out of that R&D? ZERO. Apple on the other hand spent years developing the iPhone with iPod profi…

"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.

Re: Glass

#106

Post by ry0ohki »

zacharycohn wrote: post #49

As someone who just got their Glass last night, I have a FEW conflicting points, although a lot of it is spot on. -I don't think the screen is not bright enough, and I haven't had the issue where you have to look at something dark to see it. -I also disagree about "dangerous while driving." In fact, I would argue quite the opposite. It's SO much safer than looking at your phone for directions. The fact that any infor…

I just got my invite to order and his comment about it being dangerous while driving is a non-starter...that's the main reason I'd find this useful (while cycling)

Re: Glass

#107

Post by kmasters »

DominikR wrote: post #105
kmasters wrote: post #92

There's a problem with glass. As far as I can tell. What Google is hoping for is to tease us into wanting something, that no one has asked for. Google is not alone in this historically. Let's step back a decade, when we were all told that Microsoft (by Microsoft) had the biggest R&D budget in the world. What products came out of that R&D? ZERO. Apple on the other hand spent years developing the iPhone with iPod profi…

"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.

Re: Glass

#108

Post by DominikR »

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.

Both products are amazing but that's a silly comparison.

The Rift gives you an instant 3D experience whereas Glass sits there idle most of the time and waits for it to be used as a tool when needed.

So to really assess the value of Glass you would have to use for a few weeks, while the Rift only has to be used for a few minutes to really experience what it is all about.

Re: Glass

#109

Post by seraphimserapis »

kayoone wrote: post #71

i can totally see myself using something like Glass while working, but in my private life i believe that a smartphone + maybe a smartwatch is more than enough.

I guess that's the approach that many people are going to have. Glass (or something similar) might be a worthy addition for lots of professionals.

Re: Glass

#110

Post by seraphimserapis »

mtgx wrote: post #50
droidist2 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, so we're finally getting virtual reality helmets? I've been waiting since the early 1990s. They seemed to be right around the corner and were featured in several films like Lawnmower Man (1992), that Aerosmith video ( Amazing , 1993), Disclosure (1994), Virtuosity (1995), Johnny Mnemonic (1995), Hackers (1995). I suppose it makes sense, every technology seems to take about 20 years to reach the consumer…

Oculus Rift is the real deal. Not sure why people compare it with Glass, though. They are not even remotely competing with each other.

Agreed. Google Glass is more about showing some useful information while you're on the go and not about immersive 3d gaming.
Post reply on HN