How Google Screwed Up Glass

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Forbes has an article posted today that explains how Google screwed up Glass. Hmmm, I don't know, maybe a little damage control might have helped back when people started using the term "glasshole."

Glass really is a great idea. The technology can and probably will change the world. So how did Google screw it up? Yes, screw it up. Since first announcing the product in 2012, Google Glass has been subject to ridicule and even violence. It’s become a symbol of the anti-tech, anti-Silicon Valley crowd.
Click to expand...
 
There's a counter tech-culture movement going on with the NSA debacle so the timing of Glass is very bad. I think the tech has obvious use and future great potential but it's going to be hard to it to distance itself from privacy issues. And I would imagine there are going to be some big privacy debates that come from the use of this technology. However, nothing ventured, nothing gained.
 
I love tech. I love advancements... The problem is just because we can do something doesn't mean we should. Having information quickly available is amazing, however, Glass brings it to a level that just makes people uncomfortable.

You are, in essence, walking around with a camera pointing at people. Off or on, It's enough to put people on edge. It also puts a layer between you and the people you interact with. That can be quite off putting to people.

There is no doubt there are some pretty cool advantages to glass and wearable tech like it, but it needs to be balanced with the downsides. Personally, 100% connected all the time is too much. There is no need for it. Very few people need to be connected that much. These days I really enjoy the time away from tech.
 
griffinhart said:
I love tech. I love advancements... The problem is just because we can do something doesn't mean we should.
Click to expand...
Exactly, its an entirely flawed concept. There's a big difference between a go-pro or camera on your smartphone and wearing a device 24x7 into bars and what not that at least LOOKS like it could be recording you, and recording you pointed right at your face... nobody wants a camera in their face all the time.

And then of course considering that more people are killed by distracted driving due to smartphone abuse in their vehicles trumps drunk driving deaths by a wide margin, imagining millions of glassholes reading emails and what not at 75mph on the freeway is enough to piss off all but the most faithful.
 
Yes Its so terrible... that every company is trying to develop their own version.

The so called backlash is a lot of passive aggressive fear that Google champions yet another market and leaves everyone else with a thumb in their ass wondering what happened.

The only real issue is that there's no consumer optimized and priced version yet. When that happens then all the hand wringing will go out the window and these cute anecdotal stories about a bar owner "taking a stand" against Teh Glazz will mean little
 
DPI said:
The so called backlash is a lot of passive aggressive fear that Google champions yet another market and leaves everyone else with a thumb in their ass wondering what happened.
Click to expand...
Walk into a bathroom with this, point your head down at the urinal with one of these anywhere out of San Francisco, and watch how passively a fist aggresses your face.
 
Ducman69 said:
Walk into a bathroom with this, point your head down at the urinal with one of these anywhere out of San Francisco, and watch how passively a fist aggresses your face.
Click to expand...

If you're afraid of getting beat up, you should probably avoid staring down at other dude's junk at the urinals even if you're not wearing Google glasses.
 
This is the section of the article that I think best describes where Glass went wrong

The wrong market was chosen. Google Glass could be a very important tool for professional use, and not just some kind of consumer tech toy on the face of a Stanford educated hipster from Mission Bay. Anyone operating a truck, a train, a taxi, a boat or an airplane could be demanding better data to help them navigate quicker and safer. Machine operators could be fed up to the minute information about a manufacturing process. Police and security personnel could receive data about threats around them to better protect the public. The list goes on. Google should have taken this device to a specific market and worked with the developers in that industry to create business-use applications that would be used to help companies provide better services. In turn, the public would be intrigued about this important and serious tool. It would not be ridiculed if it were shown to have a useful business application. And it would’ve gone a long way to justifying the $1,500 per unit price too.

The problem I see is that the public believes this is for entitled glasshole pricks who are socially unable to get along with normal people in the real world. As much as I absolutely hate Glass, it has so much potential in the right hands and right profession. I just do not like the idea of someone recording me without me knowing, and heaven forbid someone try to bring one of those into a public restroom.
 
DPI said:
Yes Its so terrible... that every company is trying to develop their own version.
Click to expand...
There are several others in development, true, but that doesn't mean they will take the world by storm.
The so called backlash is a lot of passive aggressive fear that Google champions yet another market and leaves everyone else with a thumb in their ass wondering what happened.

The only real issue is that there's no consumer optimized and priced version yet. When that happens then all the hand wringing will go out the window and these cute anecdotal stories about a bar owner "taking a stand" against Teh Glazz will mean little
Click to expand...

We'll see. They may be popular, but wearable tech hasn't really taken the world by storm yet and this product is fairly invasive for people. Success of glass is dependent on people that don't buy into is as people that do.
 
The only problem with Google Glass is that people don't like the idea of a camera facing them all day long. Take your phone and hold it in such a way that it seems like you're recording someone. Chances are they will flip out and begin to essentially deficate into their hands and fling it at you, while spewing out obscenities.

There will be no lack of people wanting one. That I can assure you. Just make sure that if you're buying one that you're bigger then the person who's pissed off at you.
 
Ashbringer said:
The only problem with Google Glass is that people don't like the idea of a camera facing them all day long.
Click to expand...

Chances are you don't live in a city...
Most developed cities have 24/7 surveillance and also in most places there are no laws against taking photos in public places.

Article is a load of bs anyway.

No one is sure if it was even launched: It hasn't

It’s designed poorly. See above

The timing could not have been worse. So surveillance is now a feature? I thought you weren't sure what features it had...

The price is way too high. The price thing? The product hasn't been released so I don't know where they are getting their figures from.

The wrong market was chosen. People will invest for business use after it has proven itself. See iPad for details

Finally, no one really “gets” it. IT HASN'T BEEN RELEASED! There is no app store. We haven't had half a chance to "get" it.

Steve, stop posting this swill.
 
They screwed it up, by making it obvious! Just about every kid wanted spy glasses at one point. Not many kids wanted a camera strapped to their head.

If Google really wanted these to catch on, they should have talked to the Oakley marketing department and designed something sleek. The camera is obvious and the glasses are nerdy.
 
amdgamer said:
Anyone operating a truck, a train, a taxi, a boat or an airplane could be demanding better data to help them navigate quicker and safer. Machine operators could be fed up to the minute information about a manufacturing process. Police and security personnel could receive data about threats around them to better protect the public.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but that's nonsense:
1) It doesn't have the battery life necessary for a work day. Engadget review came short of 6 hours w/ moderate use. Constant recording drains it much faster.
2) Google warns not to wear it for more than an hour, because it causes eye strain.
3) This is a distraction to anyone operating heavy equipment, and many taxi drivers don't even have the money to invest in a $100 Garmin yet alone a $1500 Google Glass, a $300 Smart Phone, and an extra $40 a month for a higher tier cellular plan that allows tethering data to another device (something the Glass needs to work).

Admit it, its a failed concept entirely. Narcissistic hipster douches with more money than sense are the only ones that could realistically get enjoyment out of this, but no one likes them.
 
sleepeeg3 said:
The camera is obvious and the glasses are nerdy.
Click to expand...
Again because its a failed concept. They wanted a wearable computer, not just a camera, which means you have high power requirements and have to house the electronics somewhere.

There's no way to make it less bulky and obvious than the Glass is, unless you were to have regular glasses with a thin fiber cable that links to a battery/electronics somewhere else on your body... but then its a PITA to put on and off.

Failed concept.
 
Every police officer should have to put on a pair in record mode the second they step out of the car.
There should have been your target market.
It could drastically reduce the number of police brutality and excessive force charges, plus if a perp lied and said the officer did something they didn't they just paid for themselves in a civil suite against the department.
Normal people don't need to be wearing them constantly, it infringes too heavily on other people's privacy.
 
The only issue I have with this whole article is Google glass is not in release stage it is still in beta. Supposedly the release version is only going to be $300.

The biggest flaw was they did this beta program where if someone got into the closed beta they could for the elitist price of 1500 get a dev set more if you put it on your prescription.

Recently it went open beta. The glassholes going to be sore when the final smaller version comes out that only costs 300 clips to most frames and has double the battery life.
 
JayJapanB said:
Chances are you don't live in a city...
Most developed cities have 24/7 surveillance and also in most places there are no laws against taking photos in public places..
Click to expand...
Most people are on camera, but those cameras footage looks like crap and isn't one click from being on Youtube. Generally the owner of the camera isn't trying to be put stuff there. And if it is put there its a fixed location and you know who did. Someone risks losing their job.
 
it's hard to imagine a modern space where people are intimidated by cameras and Facebook. Public space is inundated with people using their devices and posting whatever is going on with and around them. This is a total non-issue except in places that are already feuding with Google (or similar companies) and their employees...or anyone perceived to be attached to them above the norm. Places like SF and only then certain people within those places. I'd be surprised if anywhere close to a hundred people posted in this thread that they hate the thing. I don't even think half that would but a hundred is plenty enough cushion to still demonstrate that it's a relative non-issue.
 
Google didn't screw Glass up. What it didn't do was have the marketing dollars ready to address the marketing dollars being spent to stop Google Glass. Most of the stuff going on is due to it's competitors spending money to stop them.

Any time you have bars banning Google Glass but not say your freaking SMART PHONE which has most likely TWO cameras on it you should probably say something to address the stupidity of that move.
 
Lunas said:
The only issue I have with this whole article is Google glass is not in release stage it is still in beta. Supposedly the release version is only going to be $300.

The biggest flaw was they did this beta program where if someone got into the closed beta they could for the elitist price of 1500 get a dev set more if you put it on your prescription.

Recently it went open beta. The glassholes going to be sore when the final smaller version comes out that only costs 300 clips to most frames and has double the battery life.
Click to expand...

If anyone can purchase one, it's not a "beta" or a "test" product. A company might be marketing it as such so that people are more stupidly willing to pay a lot of money for something with obvious flaws and shortcomings, but the moment it goes on sale, it's just another product regardless of what it's called.

People who believe that sticking the word beta somewhere in the marketing material are falling prey to a pretty popular and fairly recent sales method that'll eventually go the way of the dinosaur when enough of the world slowly catches on that they're being once again duped like a bunch of clueless idiots. But hey, it works for crappy games on Steam so whatever...milk the money cow while you can.
 
kac77 said:
Um there is no expectation of privacy in public places. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Yet stalking laws exist.

That expectation was formed from a time before the technology we have today. Times change. The expectation will change too.
 
What I love is the Glass hate when there are devices out there that have been doing this longer (and better) than Glass can. Looxcie is a good example. Inconspicuous and looks like a Bluetooth ear piece.

Honestly, people need to a get a grip. Glass is awful for taking video. The battery gets destroyed when recording. The resolution is awful.

The "I don't want to be recorded without knowing" group need to get a grip too. There are these neat tools out there called smartphones. Everyone has one. They can all take better video and longer video than Glass can. You don't know if the person holding the device up is recording or taking a picture or whatever.

People are simply pissed that Google has a great thing going and they have to bitch about something. Honestly, Google just needs to put a little red LED on Glass when it's recording and shut people up.
 
jpm100 said:
Yet stalking laws exist.

That expectation was formed from a time before the technology we have today. Times change. The expectation will change too.
Click to expand...

And the laws will change. With more attacks on a specific group for what they wear, how they look, or their lifestyle; someone will be protected and it will not be the crowd handing out the punches. Hate crimes and "gay bashing" laws were created for similar instances. I wouldn't be surprised if there are "glass laws" created to protect people targeted for wearable technology.

If you don't like people wearing cameras on their face while you get a beer, ask that person to put it away polity or move. When you start using your fists, that is when laws are written against you.
 
So we need an extra law to protect Google Spycam drones from getting what they deserve? Seriously? It's assault/theft/whatever else already. There's no need for additional laws to make Glassholes feel more special which is just the kind of attention they're desperately seeking when they wear one outside.
 
jpm100 said:
Yet stalking laws exist.

That expectation was formed from a time before the technology we have today. Times change. The expectation will change too.
Click to expand...

Aside from the bizarre juxdaposition, changing that would be something way bigger than just Google Glass. You are talking about privacy rights which literally affect how all of us interact with technology. From phpBB to Bing, from your TV to the security cameras that exist outside on the roofs of establishments, all of that would need to be addressed.

Condensing all of that down to the impact of Google Glass just seems to me to be comical.
 
Laws won't change for that. There are already laws to protect stupid Google Glass owners and no additional litigation is necessary to adjust legal codes. I know people want to think Glass is some revolutionary thing that'll change the world, but it isn't and it won't. It'll just polarize people into smart non-Glass owners and dumb people seeking attention, even negative attention through baubles and devices (not that certain tablet owners don't already do that).
 
Glass had one problem and one problem only, style. It looks geeky, plain and simple. Nobody wants to wear something that makes them look like a star trek nerd. The features it offered did not outweigh the fashion sense is neglected. It doesnt matter how many features it offered really, at the end of the day you have to ask yourself "how much info do I really need in front of my eyes". It has an almost narcissistic projection that what you are doing is so important that you need internet access for every waking moment of your life. Think of it like texting while driving, which is where the glasshole concept came from I believe. It's too big of an advertisement that you are "connected" and everyone else is not. It would really be like if you just walked around holding your cellphone up at all times. If I'm having a conversation with you and you're reading a glass txt message or whatever, then you're basically saying I am not worth 100% of your attention.
 
SGA76 said:
Every police officer should have to put on a pair in record mode the second they step out of the car.
There should have been your target market.
Click to expand...
Hell no, I don't want to pay for that, nor even want the extra features it can provide. Police often also tackle people and get rough, and who wants to break $1500 glasses that aren't the ideal thing to run with anyway, and even Google says you're only supposed to wear it for an hour.

If you want a cap with a small camera, or worn on the chest, those are VERY inexpensive. Hell, the mobius action camera (similar to gopro) weighs virtually nothing, and records in a loop indefinitely at 1080p with very high quality for about $60.
 
Google Glass seems to have the hybrid/electric syndrome: If car manufacturers could make a hybrid or electric car that a) looked good and b) didn't have the words hybrid/electric/or zero emissions plastered on the side like a billboard, they might get more sales. Glass could be successful if the technology could be hidden. With its current goofy frame, it's like a douchebag billboard.
 
SGA76 said:
Every police officer should have to put on a pair in record mode the second they step out of the car.
There should have been your target market.
It could drastically reduce the number of police brutality and excessive force charges, plus if a perp lied and said the officer did something they didn't they just paid for themselves in a civil suite against the department.
Normal people don't need to be wearing them constantly, it infringes too heavily on other people's privacy.
Click to expand...

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Sorry, the fact that someone's still this naive is amusing.

How things REALLY work is "Oops! I somehow jostled them so they didn't record properly while I allegedly beat this perp's face in. But I swear I was defending myself! Trust me!"

Or "Oh. They got smashed to bits in the fight, then the perp rolled over them with his car trying to get away, so I shot him."

The police don't want to be recorded any more than you or I would (and some of them never want to be recorded for anything).
 
heatlesssun said:
There's a counter tech-culture movement going on with the NSA debacle so the timing of Glass is very bad.
Click to expand...

I think that hurt a lot of new tech - Glass, Kinect, etc.. Anything that has the possibility of getting, retaining, spying with your data is going to be under scrutiny.

Glass has a lot of potential. Price needs to come down, features need to be added, design needs to be better... But, the tech itself it pretty awesome.
 
mope54 said:
it's hard to imagine a modern space where people are intimidated by cameras and Facebook. Public space is inundated with people using their devices and posting whatever is going on with and around them. This is a total non-issue except in places that are already feuding with Google (or similar companies) and their employees...or anyone perceived to be attached to them above the norm. Places like SF and only then certain people within those places. I'd be surprised if anywhere close to a hundred people posted in this thread that they hate the thing. I don't even think half that would but a hundred is plenty enough cushion to still demonstrate that it's a relative non-issue.
Click to expand...

There's a difference between snapping photos on a cell phone and walking around with a video camera strapped to your noggin.

With a regular/phone camera, it's pretty obvious what people are trying to do and easier to avoid if you don't wish to participate.

With Glassholes, it's actually fairly difficult to tell whether or not you're being recorded. And by the time you know they're there, they could have caught anything in a recording. And more, by the time you make your wishes known, you've already been recorded some more.

And before someone starts bringing up security cameras. Most sec-cams are fairly low-rez. And the footage never gets looked at or even handled unless there were criminal proceedings.

With Glass, you have an interested party in possession of a bunch of video footage. And they have the ability to put it up online for the world to see without so much as a by-your-leave. And once it's up, it's up forever essentially.

That kind of exposure makes people feel vulnerable. And something like this can cause an EXTREME chilling effect on social behavior.
 
Chas said:
There's a difference between snapping photos on a cell phone and walking around with a video camera strapped to your noggin.
Click to expand...
Amen. And if someone at a bar or restroom or whatever puts their hand up to block their face or your camera view and says cut it out, don't be like that dumb ho that was on the news and insist you have a right to record everyone and label it a hate crime. Just take it off your face.
 
Kelby said:
And the laws will change. With more attacks on a specific group for what they wear, how they look, or their lifestyle; someone will be protected and it will not be the crowd handing out the punches. Hate crimes and "gay bashing" laws were created for similar instances. I wouldn't be surprised if there are "glass laws" created to protect people targeted for wearable technology.

If you don't like people wearing cameras on their face while you get a beer, ask that person to put it away polity or move. When you start using your fists, that is when laws are written against you.
Click to expand...
Being a douche and using the law to shield oneself from repercusions is nothing new. Abused enough, it never lasts forever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top