21–30 of 89 posts
TL;DR, don't make and market tech products for tech people, because they're all queasy autists who will make your product look dorky and ugly. Aim your products at the cool people, the beautiful people, the Kardashians and Iggy Azaleas of the world. They're the people who matter .
Did they fix the privacy issues that arose with Google glasses or is everyone just conveniently forgetting that?
Snapchat-loyal press have been well trained to highlight the spinning LEDs and not question the privacy angle. Perhaps they're "ok" with it because clips are shorter and it's not the big bad G. IMO while it's more noticeable than Glass's single pixel it's still a concealed camera.
also, i'd say there's a general cultural trend of becoming more and more comfortable with less and less privacy.
TL;DR, don't make and market tech products for tech people, because they're all queasy autists who will make your product look dorky and ugly. Aim your products at the cool people, the beautiful people, the Kardashians and Iggy Azaleas of the world. They're the people who matter .
There's no doubt that tech people have mattered in driving a lot of products and services by being early adopters. However, there is a difference between "tech products" and fashion accessories, which I think this is, even if it happens to also be technical.
On a separate but related note, as a lifelong nerd I feel comfortable in saying this: There are few things I cringe more at than nerds getting rich and popular without handling that gracefully. If I were to market a product I would definitely market through "professional" famous people that are comfortable with that role, for good and bad.
I look forward to a future in which we are all wearing ridiculously walled-garden tech on our faces, and a future in which we've gotten over it. I feel like just as we're slowly recovering the art of making food from the excesses of the early 20th century, our children's children will have to recover the art of being a social human being from the excesses of the early 21st century. I recognize that otherizing an inev…
IMHO it's not something very ingenious, they are shooting ideas - some of them stick to the wall.
> They built trust in the community of shameless consumers
..and that's why the idea sticks (just like whole snapchat et al.). It's shameless and to put it more straight - frequently egoistic (and maybe arrogant as well?) users who use this and go crazy about it.
With google's glass the media raged about how it's a huge privacy problem [&]. Snapchat's spectacles? Genius!! Short memory.
[&] Though to be more critical, having a huge price point and available to few people was the problem as well, but IMHO the media sunk the ship before it was a float by labeling it as a huge privacy issue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Snapchat-loyal press have been well trained to highlight the spinning LEDs and not question the privacy angle. Perhaps they're "ok" with it because clips are shorter and it's not the big bad G. IMO while it's more noticeable than Glass's single pixel it's still a concealed camera.
probably the same in practice, but glass really looked like it was trying to be inconspicuous / disappear, which made it much creepier. specs are so clearly conspicuous and not trying to hide that it makes them seem more harmless. also, i'd say there's a general cultural trend of becoming more and more comfortable with less and less privacy.
How? If anything, the lense-less frame with a bulge on the side is very noticable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Snapchat-loyal press have been well trained to highlight the spinning LEDs and not question the privacy angle. Perhaps they're "ok" with it because clips are shorter and it's not the big bad G. IMO while it's more noticeable than Glass's single pixel it's still a concealed camera.
probably the same in practice, but glass really looked like it was trying to be inconspicuous / disappear, which made it much creepier. specs are so clearly conspicuous and not trying to hide that it makes them seem more harmless. also, i'd say there's a general cultural trend of becoming more and more comfortable with less and less privacy.
TL;DR, don't make and market tech products for tech people, because they're all queasy autists who will make your product look dorky and ugly. Aim your products at the cool people, the beautiful people, the Kardashians and Iggy Azaleas of the world. They're the people who matter .
For the marketing purposes of driving mass adoption of your fashion product: yes, unquestionably. If tech people want to drive fashion, maybe they should stop looking down their noses at the industry and embrace it.
How soon we forget: Google Glass actually collaborated with Diane von Furstenberg (a famous fashion designer) and did a launch party at New York Fashion Week.
https://www.fastcompany.com/3001142/google-glass-hits-runway...
But Google positioned Glass as a platform for apps, meaning they had to get devs in the loop, while Spectacles are intended for precisely one thing: Snapchat.
> That’s why the first memorable photos of Spectacles weren’t shot by Scoble, but by famous fashion photographer Karl Lagerfeld. How soon we forget: Google Glass actually collaborated with Diane von Furstenberg (a famous fashion designer) and did a launch party at New York Fashion Week. https://www.fastcompany.com/3001142/google-glass-hits-runway... But Google positioned Glass as a platform for apps, meaning they had…
I look forward to a future in which we are all wearing ridiculously walled-garden tech on our faces, and a future in which we've gotten over it. I feel like just as we're slowly recovering the art of making food from the excesses of the early 20th century, our children's children will have to recover the art of being a social human being from the excesses of the early 21st century. I recognize that otherizing an inev…
I'm already experiencing this in the small with people who are glued to the Apple ecosystem (I'm a Mac user, I just don't use an iPhone or Facetime, etc). Some people are so into iMessage and not on WhatsApp/Snapchat/whatever, that it actually impedes communication with them.