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

Thoughts on Google Glass

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 48 posts

Re: Thoughts on Google Glass

#21

Post by MisterBastahrd »

jwcooper wrote: post #7

I like gadgets and various electronics, but for some reason Glass just rubs me the wrong way. I'm not sure if it's because of the 'creep factor' or what. I guess I'm just not ready for a society always recording everything. I can't even imagine what high school would be like. One embarrassing thing happens, and 30 people have it recorded, uploaded to the internet, and commenting on it in minutes. I guess that could a…

Worse... being in a social situation with someone who is wearing Glass now means that Google has identified who you are (and the NSA for that matter) and where you are, and from there it probably isn't that difficult to determine what your mood is at the time. It'll be like your own digital stalker out there, times a thousand, given that Google will just use the data to sell ads.

Re: Thoughts on Google Glass

#22

Post by [deleted] »

cargo8 wrote: post #8

> It is ugly and clunky and ridiculously expensive for what it does. To me, that’s everything. Same thing with all existing smartwatches — the problem isn’t the idea, it’s the actual execution. There are no points for being first to market with a bad product. This is just wrong. Google gains massive points in my book for putting something like Glass out there. They get points for showing the world a glimpse of what t…

[deleted]

Re: Thoughts on Google Glass

#23

Post by bedhead »

jwcooper wrote: post #7

I like gadgets and various electronics, but for some reason Glass just rubs me the wrong way. I'm not sure if it's because of the 'creep factor' or what. I guess I'm just not ready for a society always recording everything. I can't even imagine what high school would be like. One embarrassing thing happens, and 30 people have it recorded, uploaded to the internet, and commenting on it in minutes. I guess that could a…

Agree on the creep factor and all of the inevitable places it will be banned, not to mention social situations where it'll be poor etiquette.

It just seems so unnecessary, a (lousy) solution in search of a problem. For now, people wearing Glass strike me as trying too hard to be "cutting edge" or whatever. It's the world's most pathetic conversation starter.

Re: Thoughts on Google Glass

#24

Post by MBCook »

51Cards wrote: post #20
stcredzero wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My HP tc1100 has about the same functionality as a 1st gen iPad, only with more RAM, 1/5th the battery life, resistive stylus screen, and twice the weight. That's what it means that it was "10 years too early." That said, HP was a premier tech company in its day, and the tc1100 was a tour-de force of industrial time for its time. If Google Glass is the best one of the premier tech companies can do now, then it's clea…

There is no such thing as being "too early" to market. That is how you cut your teeth, learn and get ahead. You fail when you give up on the idea (or are proven that it will never catch on... either way). However if you create a product that eventually takes off, and if you continue to iterate it and not abandon it, you can't be too early. And, if nothing else, it is 100x less risky to be too early, than too late.

> There is no such thing as being "too early" to market.

The history of the Newton disagrees with you.

It took quite a few years before someone built the product that the technology could support well (the PalmPilot).

Re: Thoughts on Google Glass

#25

Post by turing »

reidmain wrote: post #18
vinkelhake wrote: post #5

It’s a cool lab demo that they’re presenting as a finished product. They do? It seems to me that they've been looking for early adopters that can provide feedback. It'll be a finished product once it's available for order on Google Play.

They've said that they are going to release the consumer version in 2014. Sure it could drastically change from what a developer could be receiving in December 2013 but odds are it is going to be stuff like the price that changes the most, not the actual hardware.

That's not really relevant. The point was that Gruber stated that Google is presenting Glass as a finished product, which is something they have never done.

Re: Thoughts on Google Glass

#26

Post by MBCook »

reidmain wrote: post #19
justina1 wrote: post #3

Mat Honan's article was a valuable critique. And interesting. Gruber's reaction on the other hand... > It’s a cool lab demo that they’re presenting as a finished product. Google couldn't be any more clear that it is a beta and they've never once said that the current price is what it will hit the market at (or if it will hit the market, for that matter). So that's just flat out wrong. > It is ugly and clunky and ridi…

They said they are going to release a consumer version in 2014. Perhaps something is going to drastically change but the vibe that I get is they are beta testing it so they are hammering out bugs and other rough edges not looking to drastically overhaul the hardware or software.

> Perhaps something is going to drastically change but the vibe that I get is they are beta testing it so they are hammering out bugs and other rough edges not looking to drastically overhaul the hardware or software.

I remember listening to people discuss Glass on a couple of podcasts after it was released and this is the one thing that sticks in my mind from the reviews. While Google called it a beta, the reviewers said it felt more like an alpha or an engineering sample than a beta product.

Re: Thoughts on Google Glass

#27

Post by skyebook »

deckiedan wrote: post #12
jwcooper wrote: post #7

I like gadgets and various electronics, but for some reason Glass just rubs me the wrong way. I'm not sure if it's because of the 'creep factor' or what. I guess I'm just not ready for a society always recording everything. I can't even imagine what high school would be like. One embarrassing thing happens, and 30 people have it recorded, uploaded to the internet, and commenting on it in minutes. I guess that could a…

I could imagine an 'off'/airplane mode with a visible red LED on top or something, which, in such a small device clamped to your glasses would be fairly visible, and hard to fake/hack. Alternatively, some kind of wifi/3g blocker or jammer, could be the answer. In some ways it might make sense to use a polite version of that, where devices would 'hear' a wifi SSID signal, or whatever, with a 'this is a private place,…

Maybe this is naive of me, but I don't really look forward to a future where I walk around making sure people in my vicinity are glowing red (or green, for when I do something heroic).. I realize that having some indicator is a huge plus over having nothing but it just feels so sterile. Perhaps this is as much a reaction to always-on everything, but there's something especially off-putting about taking the concept of eye contact and making it a consumable, recordable activity. Technology thus far hasn't really encroached on or been able to imitate this face to face interaction..

> Alternatively, some kind of wifi/3g blocker or jammer, could be the answer.

I know that in much of the US these devices are illegal, wouldn't be surprised about other places.

Re: Thoughts on Google Glass

#28

Post by abraham »

jwcooper wrote: post #7

I like gadgets and various electronics, but for some reason Glass just rubs me the wrong way. I'm not sure if it's because of the 'creep factor' or what. I guess I'm just not ready for a society always recording everything. I can't even imagine what high school would be like. One embarrassing thing happens, and 30 people have it recorded, uploaded to the internet, and commenting on it in minutes. I guess that could a…

> I guess I'm just not ready for a society always recording everything.

Society already records everything. The only change Glass brings is the first-person perspective and it frees up a hand that normally would be holding a phone.

Re: Thoughts on Google Glass

#29

Post by abraham »

MisterBastahrd wrote: post #21
jwcooper wrote: post #7

I like gadgets and various electronics, but for some reason Glass just rubs me the wrong way. I'm not sure if it's because of the 'creep factor' or what. I guess I'm just not ready for a society always recording everything. I can't even imagine what high school would be like. One embarrassing thing happens, and 30 people have it recorded, uploaded to the internet, and commenting on it in minutes. I guess that could a…

Worse... being in a social situation with someone who is wearing Glass now means that Google has identified who you are (and the NSA for that matter) and where you are, and from there it probably isn't that difficult to determine what your mood is at the time. It'll be like your own digital stalker out there, times a thousand, given that Google will just use the data to sell ads.

> being in a social situation with someone who is wearing Glass now means that Google has identified who you are (and the NSA for that matter) and where you are

What? Glass is not always recording, has no facial recognition and is no more invasive than the smartphones everyone already carries.

Re: Thoughts on Google Glass

#30

Post by throwawaykf03 »

51Cards wrote: post #20
stcredzero wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My HP tc1100 has about the same functionality as a 1st gen iPad, only with more RAM, 1/5th the battery life, resistive stylus screen, and twice the weight. That's what it means that it was "10 years too early." That said, HP was a premier tech company in its day, and the tc1100 was a tour-de force of industrial time for its time. If Google Glass is the best one of the premier tech companies can do now, then it's clea…

There is no such thing as being "too early" to market. That is how you cut your teeth, learn and get ahead. You fail when you give up on the idea (or are proven that it will never catch on... either way). However if you create a product that eventually takes off, and if you continue to iterate it and not abandon it, you can't be too early. And, if nothing else, it is 100x less risky to be too early, than too late.

History is littered with counterexamples. If you look at people or companies that have been refered to as "ahead of their time", it is frequently in the context of why they ultimately failed.

Tablet PCs are a case in point -- Microsoft or HP had not abandoned the tablet market. They were iterating and releasing tablets even after the iPad was released. They just didn't make the leap that Apple did to create a tablet that appealed to the masses.

Also, regarding the "riskier to be too late" comment: The book "Copycats" by Oded Shenkar makes the case that it's frequently the imitators that win the market rather than the innovators. This blog post reviews it and cites some interesting statistics from it: http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/08/03/down-with-innovation-up...

Post reply on HN