I just wore Google's glasses for 2 weeks and I'm never taking them off

http://www.businessinsider.com/robert-scoble-i-just-wore-googles-glasses-for-2-weeks-2013-4

by tellarin • 13 years ago

33 69 13 years ago

supercoder• 13 years ago

Think he might live to regret the claim he'll never live a day without a pair of smart glasses (is that the right term for the general device space?), but even if he does it's possible he might be the odd one out.

To me it's like someone getting the first Segway and saying they'll never live a day without it. It might be great to them as a nerd, but doesnt do anything to validate how everyone else is going to view it.

patrickaljord• 13 years ago

Google Glass is no Segway though, he explains why Segway is not practical most of the time while Glass is https://plus.google.com/111091089527727420853/posts/ZGFr8eMF...

shawabawa3• 13 years ago

I still don't really get what google glass is for.

The only things he mentions using it for is directions and taking pictures, my phone works perfectly for both those things (I can't remember any time where I've missed a good picture because I couldn't get my phone in time)

Maybe its something you need to try to really understand, but I'm not excited by it.

tellarin2• 13 years ago

Well, I can remember many times where I didn't have my phone handy and missed some great pictures.

But that's not enough to convince me of the usefulness of smart glasses.

Nonetheless, I'd love to try one out for a couple weeks and I can see me buying one for USD$ 200 if it gets to that price.

dm26• 13 years ago

The current version of Google Glass is a stepping stone. It's just to see what features people might unexpectedly use or find out they really want or do not want.

The future versions have unlimited possibilities such as automatically recording live events then replaying them, playing games, taking inventory, or even overlaying TV shows on top of screens at a bar so that you can effectively watch whatever you want. Infrared, night-vision, and auto-tracking of objects are also possibilities.

The military has had such a system for many years, it's called Land Warrior. It can map waypoints in a 3d environment, give directions, display messages, and display any information that the user needs. I imagine that in the near future the system will be able to identify hostiles or friendlies, detect mortars instantly and tell the user where to move, and will be integrated with the boomerang shooter detection system.

The possibilities are endless, we have to start somewhere though.

dorian-graph• 13 years ago

A lot of those examples you gave so easy to do from home, in a bedroom or toilet. The military use example seems fine and some useful HUD type information would be neat.

UnoriginalGuy• 13 years ago

Just like Google Wave. "Unlimited possibilities (no *current applications)."

I buy a device for what it can actually do, not for the potential of what it could do in 3-100 years time.

The ironic part about you bringing up Land Warrior program is that Land Warrior was cancelled in 2007. It still lives on but has never been expanded and or been adopted by other units or branches of the US military.

OGinparadise3• 13 years ago

You do understand that to do all those supposedly great things, you have to wear the dorky glasses on (yes, they're dorky!) AND a have smartphone with you. So there is a cost, both financial and social.

Not sure how you thought of the bar scenario, but people usually go to bars to socialize, they watch a game or show but usually in a group setting and that starts a conversation, debate etc etc about it. Not sure if enough people go to bars with dorky glasses on so they could watch whatever they like, alone. No doubt some would, but most would not.

>> taking inventory

Niche and "There's an [or 500] app/s for that."

>> automatically recording live events then replaying them

IMO that takes away from enjoying it, unless you're being paid to record it.

My point is that niche applications exist but most people will not see the benefit of having glasses on. Google loves them, imagine the "unlimited possibilities" of showing ads right in your eyeball, but what's in for the wearer? Not much, IMO.

P.S. I tune out people like Scoble, they're famous for being famous and they cement this by being social media whores "early adopters" or whatever. His opinion means jack, in fact it's worse since he's sponsored by RackSpace. Each time he gets mentioned, it's better for them and for him, thus the bombastic claims.

brunomlopes• 13 years ago

I'd like to propose another use case: HUDs.

I've recently took up cycling to work and back, and would love to have speed/gears/time up on the glasses, instead of having to look and focus down. Riding my scooter would also be better with it, since the speedometer and turning light indicators are a bit out of my normal field of vision.

Also, be able to see who's calling on the cell phone would be a plus (I've found that having the phone 'say' who's calling results in a jumble that I can't make heads or tails of, as most of the names are not English names)

dm26• 13 years ago

Yes! Integrating it with your car to see gas (or battery) levels. No integration needed to see speed, directions, stop lights, traffic, construction ahead. You could take it one step further and crowd-source to find stolen cars or license-plates.

gnaffle3• 13 years ago

Lots of people say "don't get it" when faced with a new technology. That's the problem with generic platforms. "Why would I need a smartphone" is a similar question. The potential answers are obvious today, but they weren't 10 years ago.

I don't think it's about understanding, but rather imagining what could be done better with this technology. A lot of workers are carrying barcode scanners and tablets around in the field today because they need to input or access information. That's a potentially very lucurative niche.

I don't really think (and certainly don't hope) Google Glass will ever be socially acceptable, though.

ohwp• 13 years ago

Well I still don't own a smartphone because I ask myself the question "Why would I need a smartphone". And when I look around a lot of people don't need it. So in a way "I don't get" why a lot of people "need" a smartphone.

Kiro• 13 years ago

You weren't excited by the smartphone either.

rikacomet• 13 years ago

You take them off every night, I mean seriously!

buro93• 13 years ago

I wish I had Glass yesterday when I was stuck in traffic.

OK Glass, show me traffic to Home.

I wanted a sixth sense, to be able to see a map of London with all traffic marked out so that I could pick my rat race run through the back streets and at least be moving.

And whilst I got out of the traffic fine, I wish I had Glass and it knew to tell me before I got into it.

davej• 13 years ago

As someone who owns a motorbike and uses it for my daily commute, I'm really excited about Google Glass because it means I will be able to get rid of my GoPro helmet cam and I will also have a GPS & traffic monitor. But mine is a niche case.

threeseed• 13 years ago

Do you not have a sat nav ?

buro93• 13 years ago

Seems a bit much for London.

I have a TomTom but the map & traffic subscriptions equate to over £100 per year. And I can't even update the maps using Linux, so I basically let it expire and have abandoned it.

I do occasionally use Google Navigation on my Android for sat nav purposes, but for driving around a city that I know really well it is redundant except for traffic info (but even then I can usually work out my own route with better local knowledge of where traffic goes).

So yes, I could've fumbled around and got my phone from my bag (behind the seat), and wired it up, and viewed the traffic. But I was driving, even when I was mostly stationary I wouldn't take my attention away from the road like that.

Hence, if I had Glass, then I wouldn't need to prep in advance, nor fumble around... the tools would just be with me for when I needed to activate them.

Yesterday seemed exceptional though, something fouled up the whole of Fulham and Chelsea and the domino effect knocked out all major routes around too. That's an exception, not the rule... even if my TomTom subscription was active and up to date I wouldn't have wired it up just for a cross-town drive.

gnaffle3• 13 years ago

I have a sat nav, but after having driven a car with a HUD once (showing navigation, speed and OCR-read speed limit) I'd love to have Google Glass just get this feature without having to buy a new car.

EvanAnderson• 13 years ago

Check out Waze. I don't know about London, but it helps commuting around home and really shined when I used in during a trip to Los Angeles. It gives me that "sixth sense" feeling you're talking about.

buro93• 13 years ago

Neat and deserves linking: http://www.waze.com/

In principle that looks really good.

I probably won't use it though as I really do not trust apps that ask to access information on all my contacts when nothing in what the app appears to do would require it.

I don't feel I have permission from my contacts to share their details with someone else. I got to the install screen and backed off.

hexasquid• 13 years ago

> "OK Glass, Take a Picture" works. "OK Glass, Take a Photo" doesn't. The Glass is forcing your voice commands to be a certain set of commands and no others will be considered.

This is quite a forgiving attitude; I'd expect both to work.

jaibot• 13 years ago

Could be that having more command versions results in too many false positives.

jiggy2011• 13 years ago

I think the idea is to match very specific phrases so you are less likely to accidently trigger it in normal speech.

hornetblack• 13 years ago

They should probably add some more built in commands. But I think locking the commands may help privacy issues. If you could get it to trigger on something common like "and" you may have issues with people using it for "bad" things.

thomholwerda• 13 years ago

No, you shouldn't. Ever wonder why Palm succeeded where Newton and other failed?

It's because Palm used a standardised, single-stroke learned script, whereas its competitors used full natural handwriting recognition that sucked balls. Glass is clearly going for the same thing.

cremnob• 13 years ago

The difference is that it's 2013.

nikolakirev• 13 years ago

I am really interested in the whole "smart glasses" idea and Google's implementation. What I am concerned about are all those cellular/radio antennas strapped to your head and how do they affect a person's health. I have not found any discussions about this topic yet.

Luyt• 13 years ago

Radio waves are non-ionizing.

illuminate4• 13 years ago

"I have not found any discussions about this topic yet"

Because cellular phones do not affect a person's health, no matter what a small group of tin-foil hat wearers may believe.

ivanb2• 13 years ago

Wearing even 0-dioptries glasses for long periods can be detrimental to eye health. Glasses limit peripheral vision and restrict eye movement. This can lead to weakened muscles, worse blood flow and worse eyesight.

nodata• 13 years ago

cite?

Adirael• 13 years ago

Citation needed.

What happens to the muscles, blood flow and eyesight of people that need to wear glasses every minute they're not asleep? Why their eyesight and general eye health doesn't deteriorate over time if it "can lead to weakened muscles, worse blood flow and worse eyesight"?

ivanb2• 13 years ago

Unfortunately I have no citation to prove my statement. It is just my concern and opinion. I remember that I read something about this in books on eye exercises and health. It may or may not be true.

julianpye• 13 years ago

I love technology and my gadgets as much as the next one, but I would never want to get that dependent on one type of technology. Scientists have long warned us about solar storms and there is a chance that one day all your technology could go out. I was recently asked if I was a luddite, because I didn't want to get rid of my box of printed maps, but hey, maybe one day I need them. So every once in a while, take a weekend and switch off your gadgets and see if you can cope.

nutanc• 13 years ago

Point 2:As the price got down to $200 literally every hand went up. At $500 a few hands went up.

Point 3: Nearly everyone had an emotional outburst of "wow" or "amazing" or "that's crazy" or "stunning."

Takeaway: $200 is the going rate for people willing to be "wow"ed or amazed

lucb1e• 13 years ago

And yet we all buy $750 computers or something. I think it's a little more complicated than "you can ask $200 for something amazing".

danpalmer3• 13 years ago

I think that $200 depends on the crowd, and on the device or software. I wouldn't pay $100 for a game that wow'ed me with it's graphics for example, but (if I had the money) I might pay $50,000 for a car that wow'ed me.

Cthulhu_• 13 years ago

I wonder if he's so excited about the device because it's awesome in itself, or because of all the attention and interest he gets showered with wearing it and using it to publish things online. It's a novelty; I'm sure the first people with mobile phones and later on smartphones experienced something similar, before they became a common sight. Even now, people with the newest, shiniest new phone will get some measure of attention, a confirmation for their expense.

Kurtz79• 13 years ago

No doubt, but that is already saying a lot about the device in itself.

If it generates such interest and attention the way the first mobile phones or the first iPhone did, then it might really be something that in a few years will be a "common sight".

I think it's really something that excites the imagination, and rightly so, it remains to be be seen if it will be a substantial improvement in terms of functionality compared to current mobile devices.

nicholassmith• 13 years ago

Interesting how many people have admitted to letting others use them when Google has expressly forbidden that. I think at this stage they'll be shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.

I'm not surprised Robert Scoble loves them, he's a hardware lover and an early adopter. I'm not surprised audiences at places Scoble has been too love it. I'm not sure my parents would love it. I think they'd actively avoid it for the most part, and whilst there's lots of geeks like me who'll get them to at least experiment I'm still unsure of whether it's got significant mass market appeal. Maybe v2 or v3, but it'll take time.

illuminate4• 13 years ago

"I think at this stage they'll be shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted."

Naw, they love it. You have to keep a false sense of exclusivity to make a product look sexy before it becomes a commodity device.

uptown2• 13 years ago

Previous discussion of same article: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5617165

tellarin2• 13 years ago

Hadn't seen that one. :-/

pinaceae• 13 years ago

1., This is Scoble. He hypes professionally, literally anything. Try following him on Twitter or G+ and say goodbye to your newsfeed.

2., Valid critique - wearing Google Glass is like wearing Bluetooth headset all the time. Which guys like Scoble probably did, way before anyone else. Anyone being pretentious assholes.

illuminate4• 13 years ago

The very definition of persons who wear novelty devices just to have something to talk about. I wonder how quickly people move away from him at a cocktail party?

jdrobins2000• 13 years ago

I just wore Google's glasses for 2 weeks and I'm never taking them off*

*until they stop getting me attention

danpalmer3• 13 years ago

I can't justify buying a Google Glass. I doubt they will be $200, I think $800 is more likely at launch.

But then I couldn't justify my iPad when I bought it. $600 for something I can check email on and browse the web? I already have a laptop for that right? Well I ended up using my iPad loads for far more than I could have imagined.

I really shouldn't have bought my MacBook Pro. It was twice the price of a Windows laptop that would have suited me fine, and I could have even installed Linux and had a great development setup right? Well yes, but I'm so much more productive on a Mac now than I ever was on Windows, and I have to fix the software a lot less than I do on my Linux computers.

Just because I can't justify buying a Google Glass doesn't mean it's not worth buying. I've got that feeling of excitement about a technology that I haven't had since I bought my first smartphone. Is it worth it right now? Maybe not. But if no one bets on it, it's not going to happen, so I'll give it a shot.

codva• 13 years ago

He also proclaimed RSS and Podcasts as world changing technologies back in the day. And he proclaimed Netflix dead in 2007. That's 3 huge misses right there. There are probably more, and he may have got a couple right along the way too.

danpalmer3• 13 years ago

RSS might not be world-changing, but it is absolutely crucial to the web.

uptown2• 13 years ago

I haven't used Glass yet, but I do know I don't want drivers of cars or motorcycles using them on the road while they're supposed to be driving:

http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/28/living-with-glass-day-fou...

This has the potential to be a huge safety problem.

I just wore Google's glasses for 2 weeks and I'm never taking them off

Related Stories