Google Glass: Schmidt Says It Will Return - InformationWeek

InformationWeek is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

IoT
IoT
Comments
Google Glass: Schmidt Says It Will Return
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Gary_EL
50%
50%
Gary_EL,
User Rank: Ninja
3/23/2015 | 11:28:37 PM
Not ready for primetime
If you define primetime as the consumer market. At $1500 or so, it's too expensive for most consumers. But $1500 isn't too much to pay for an instrument to be used by surgeons, commercial jet mechanic or jewelers. The uses that these and other professionals could put glass to are easy to imagine. And, there was also the perception that glass made it too easy to "spy" on people in public, as if we have any privacy in public at all by this stage of the game. Glass will reappear as a consumer device once the cost comes down, as it surely will. Really, could there ever have been any serious doubt?

 
Susan Fourtané
50%
50%
Susan Fourtané,
User Rank: Author
3/24/2015 | 2:22:03 AM
Re: Not ready for primetime
"Glass cost too much financially and socially, and it did little that couldn't be accomplished with a smartphone, at least as a consumer product."

That could have been part of why Google postponed Glass. The first comments about Glass were not very motivating either. Launching the product without enough consumers waiting to buy it it's risky, maybe more risky than the risk Google was willing to take. 

Maybe the product needs to not only something more than what a smartphone can do but also wait to the right moment, when consumers are ready for it without too many fears and with more curiosity.

-Susan 

 
Susan Fourtané
50%
50%
Susan Fourtané,
User Rank: Author
3/24/2015 | 2:34:58 AM
Re: Not ready for primetime
Gary, 

The price was said to start at $600, not $1500, so it would have the price tag of a smartphone. Having the price of a smartphone and doing what a smartphone does there was little to complain about the price and more to complain about having a hands-free phone attached to your face. 

I agree with you that surgeons and others who need their hands on what they are doing but yet they need to consult some information, or be in contact with someone for remote assistance would benefit a lot from Glass. There were several case studies about this as well. 

As for those feeling they would lose privacy, well, the streets, public building are full of CCTV cams. They are all over the place, they are also on trees so no one can see them, etc. I am surprised that at this point someone still believes that no one is watching them unless it's so evident as someone wearing a camera atatched to their face. 

-Susan
SaneIT
50%
50%
SaneIT,
User Rank: Ninja
3/24/2015 | 7:51:27 AM
Re: Not ready for primetime
Price aside since every first generation of a technology tends to get everyone riled up over its price, Google glass was a great introduction to augmented reality for many people.  Sure we have seen it in movies and on TV but it wasn't anywhere near usable in real life yet.  Glass came along and now we have HoloLens and MagicLeap who watched Google take a chance with Glass and then took things up a notch.  Even if Glass never comes back as a consumer product it did a great service to the wearable and augmented reality markets.  I'd call that a success even if it doesn't look that way on the balance sheets. 
Drew Conry-Murray
50%
50%
Drew Conry-Murray,
User Rank: Ninja
3/24/2015 | 11:38:35 AM
Re: Not ready for primetime
@Susan I don't think it's that no one believes they aren't being watched. I think Google Glass personalized persistent surveillance--the device literally put it in your face. I personally find that more uncomfortable than public security cameras, because at the very least I feel like I get some herd protection from being in a crowd. Even if that's an incorrect perception, it makes the public surveillance easier to ignore.
Thomas Claburn
50%
50%
Thomas Claburn,
User Rank: Author
3/24/2015 | 11:45:17 AM
Re: Not ready for primetime
>Really, could there ever have been any serious doubt?

Well, I have trouble answering this question, and I suspect Google does too: What common app do consumers need to use frequently in hands-free mode?

I can't think of one.

Occassionally, it might be nice to take videos or images from one's smart glasses. But would anyone need to do that so frequently he or she would pay several hundred dollars despite the availability of a smartphone in a pocket?
Susan Fourtané
50%
50%
Susan Fourtané,
User Rank: Author
3/24/2015 | 1:38:13 PM
Re: Not ready for primetime
Drew, There is no Glass around, but in the hypothetical case it were you would be in a crowd anyway if someone were wearing Glass. Another thing is that I doubt every Glass user would have the camera on filming a bunch of strangers. Couldn't someone with a smartphone just do the same? Yes. So what's the difference with Glass? I don't understand what people are afraid of, if Glass would actually exist out there. What would you be afraid of, for example? -Susan
Drew Conry-Murray
50%
50%
Drew Conry-Murray,
User Rank: Ninja
3/24/2015 | 2:36:12 PM
Re: Not ready for primetime
Hi Susan,

Yes, someone with a smartphone could be filming me, but that's more obvious than a camera mounted at eye level. I guess I'm thinking about situations where, for example, I'm at a bar and someone next to me is wearing Glass, or I'm in line at the pharmacy and the person behind me is wearing Glass, or I'm at a park with my kids and someone on a bench is wearing Glass. It's the potential intimacy of the situation combined with the surreptious nature of the recording capability (including audio and visual) that disturbs me. I'm not saying it's a rational fear, but it just feels more creepy.
Susan Fourtané
50%
50%
Susan Fourtané,
User Rank: Author
3/24/2015 | 2:58:02 PM
Re: Not ready for primetime
Drew, 

More than creepy it sounds paranoid to me. :) Imagine someone, in all those same situations you mentioned, holding a smatphone pretending they are typing a message when they could well be filming or taking pictures instead. And no, you don't necessarily notice what they are doing if they know how to do it. 

And, why on Earth would a stranger want to film you or take pictures of you by the way? :D 

-Susan
Drew Conry-Murray
50%
50%
Drew Conry-Murray,
User Rank: Ninja
3/24/2015 | 3:40:32 PM
Re: Not ready for primetime
People want to take pictures of me so they can steal the design of my tin foil hat.  : ) 
Page 1 / 2   >   >>


The State of IT & Cybersecurity Operations 2020
The State of IT & Cybersecurity Operations 2020
Download this report from InformationWeek, in partnership with Dark Reading, to learn more about how today's IT operations teams work with cybersecurity operations, what technologies they are using, and how they communicate and share responsibility--or create risk by failing to do so. Get it now!
Slideshows
10 Cyberattacks on the Rise During the Pandemic
Cynthia Harvey, Freelance Journalist, InformationWeek,  6/24/2020
News
IT Trade Shows Go Virtual: Your 2020 List of Events
Jessica Davis, Senior Editor, Enterprise Apps,  5/29/2020
Commentary
Study: Cloud Migration Gaining Momentum
John Edwards, Technology Journalist & Author,  6/22/2020
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
Video
Current Issue
Key to Cloud Success: The Right Management
This IT Trend highlights some of the steps IT teams can take to keep their cloud environments running in a safe, efficient manner.
White Papers
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Sponsored Live Streaming Video
Everything You've Been Told About Mobility Is Wrong
Attend this video symposium with Sean Wisdom, Global Director of Mobility Solutions, and learn about how you can harness powerful new products to mobilize your business potential.
Sponsored Video
Flash Poll