Can you retitle this to "Google Glass"? I know the policy is to copy the original title, but "Glass" is too generic.
The mod should edit the title shortly.
Glass
21–30 of 180 posts
Re: Glass
#22[deleted]
Re: Glass
#23Anyone 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…
sitting at a table messing on a computer in your hand used to be socially unacceptable.
And speaking to a live person via cellphone, in many places and contexts, is still considered socially un-acceptable. And this hasn't changed all that much after a decade-plus of near-ubiquitous cell phone ownership.
So I can't see how replacing the phone-and-person with wearable-and-computer-agent is going to see social change along any further/faster.
Re: Glass
#24In many of the reviews - the camera is noted as one of the most useful or interesting current features. As unique as the camera perspective offered by Glass may be - virtually none of my favorite photos using traditional cameras were taken at head-level.
Cameras built into electronics have become so cheap that they are being dedicated to specific functions (things like a front skype/facetime camera and a back "take pictures of things" camera on an IOS device).
It does feel like the head mounted camera in Glass is hardware that hasn't found its killer app yet. Yet it is easy to imagine lots of possibilities (auto face recognition so you never forget a name, photo search with commands like: "Identify this leaf" and it takes a picture and tells you the plant name, the input side of a WordLens style app, etc), which I think is exactly why it is early adopters and developers that have them now.
Re: Glass
#25Anyone 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…
sitting at a table messing on a computer in your hand used to be socially unacceptable.
Wasn't it just an extension of operating a typewriter?
Re: Glass
#26Anyone 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…
I agree with the idea that talking to yourself is a social taboo. However, there are startups that are working to solve the data input problem (Thalmic Labs and the Myo being the one I'm most excited about). Combined with glass I think the future is bright.
Re: Glass
#27I 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 potential to do great things for your interaction with the environment. Based on reviews, however, it's still years out.
Re: Glass
#28Google glass seems like a solution looking for a problem. Impressive tech, but what is the use case that makes up for awkward controls and two hour battery life? You can strap your smart-phone to your wrist for $30 and get hands-free operation.
I am much more excited about self-driving cars. Maybe Google could transfer some of the tech to heads-up displays for drivers.
Re: Glass
#29I 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.
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 market. I wonder if it has anything to do with patents lasting for 20 years.
Re: Glass
#30This 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 tells you to start kneading if you want some bread. With Apple you know you are getting a fantastic loaf and with Google you get to help bake.
Each has their benefits and drawbacks.