9 ms·

I think this is significantly better than what Google did with Google Glass. It's better because it focuses on the one thing that is really easy to do well. It

I think this is significantly better than what Google did with Google Glass. It's better because it focuses on the one thing that is really easy to do well. It does not try to do everything at once. It doesn't try to give you apps in your glasses and everything under the sun. This is the right approach to products. Do one thing but do that well. Before you criticize me think back to the original iPhone, it didn't start with an App Store and everything under the sun like the iwatch did. And yet the iPhone is an icon and the watch is no big deal.

cromwellian 10y ago
Of course, Glass took significant heat over the fact that it had a camera that you can record people without them knowing (except that it was quite obvious when Glass was 'on'). This thing appeals to have two cameras, and given that it just does video recording, it might be able to be on significantly longer. I wonder if it has any privacy safeguards, like a red led indicating recording in progress?
- notatoad 10y ago
  I think the privacy safeguard here is that they're nothing but a camera, so if you're interacting with somebody who's wearing them you can assume you're being filmed. Glass's problem was that it was a device that you were supposed to wear all the time, and a camera.
- Gaelan 10y ago
  It can only film for 10 seconds, so if they have not tapped it in the last 10 seconds you know you are not being recorded.
  - unimpressive 10y ago
    I would think that's a software limit not a hardware limit. I'm sure once these are out somebody will either jailbreak them or they'll come with no security to begin with.
potatoyogurt 10y ago
It also doesn't look nearly as dorky as Google Glass did. Google Glass had the problem where it was trying to be an all-purpose life-enhancing thing that people would wear all the time, so it was trying to be both invisible and distinctive. This doesn't need to pretend to be something that you can forget you're wearing or something that you can pair with any type of outfit -- it has a strong sense of style, and it's easier to work cameras into a design that is loud than a design that is quiet.
- mozumder 10y ago
  This is a dead-end product. People aren't going to wear this, because they don't want to creep out people by having a camera pointed at them all the time. This was the real problem with Google Glass. Also, everyone already carries around a camera in their smartphone. They aren't going to add another.
  - fowlerpower 10y ago
    Famous last words on this product. I obviously don't agree with you based on my previous comment but I could be wrong. I will say this though that we all vastly underestimate what people want to do and share with each other. This is the company that spawned the self deleting video. I thought that was the dumbest idea ever. My point is privacy is something they thought of and this isn't as dumb as it looks. This product could evolve to become more than meets the eye. No pun intended.
  - xkcd-sucks 10y ago
    It's impossible for attractive, socially connected, young people to be creepy. So, it's pretty brilliant for Snapchat to be making this sort of thing. Probably the devices to hit the market will be given to a very carefully curated set of people, and ubiquitous surveillance by camera-glasses will become fashionable.
    - supercoder 10y ago
      So if an young guy who you rated as attractive came up to you and started filming you , that wouldn't make you at all uncomfortable ?
megablast 10y ago
The iPhone is a particularly bad example. It did so much, phone, SMS, web, email, maps, compass, iPod, weather, stocks, and a lot more.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
Retra 10y ago
>It's better because it focuses on the one thing that is really easy to do well. Which thing is that? Being a camera, or being a pair of sunglasses?
dmritard96 10y ago
Don't buy this do one thing and well for a second. Using your own example: Before the iPhone, you had seperate: GPS Camera Flashlight MP3 Player and many other things With the iPhone, you got all of these and a nice compact package that you could carry with you at all times. Thats not to say feature creep can't be a problem, but more that sticking to hard and fast rules like 'do one thing but do that well' is largely an oversimplification of the world to make the world more comprehendible to those that don't want to look at the real nuance of products/markets etc.
- nekopa 10y ago
  Also, in the now famous introductory presentation of the iPhone, Jobs even spoofed the audience that there were 3 products he was about to release, spinning them all into 1 item.
- kalleboo 10y ago
  The iPhone didn't have all that with version 1 though.
  - dEnigma 10y ago
    It didn't have GPS and I think no flashlight, but it did have a camera, could play MP3s (and Video) and even supported geotagging for photos (though not GPS based)
unimpressive 10y ago
I disagree. It's better because the marketing doesn't suggest that it's anything more than a toy. There's no expectation that you're going to reorient your lifestyle around the Spectacles, but it was implied that you would be filming your entire life 24/7 with Google Glass. As a productivity device it's weak, but as a toy it looks pretty fun and I'm amazed at the sea of people screaming about what a stupid idea it is and how it'll never catch on. If I had disposable income I could certainly see myself buying one and playing with it.
Nanite 10y ago
What happened to google glass is textbook: Exec walks into R&D lab and falls in love with alpha stage project, utters the words: we should release this to the public, stat! and failure ensues. Glass as a AR demonstrator is doing quite well as a beta product for enterprise. Augmedix comes to mind.

cromwellian 10y ago

Of course, Glass took significant heat over the fact that it had a camera that you can record people without them knowing (except that it was quite obvious when Glass was 'on'). This thing appeals to have two cameras, and given that it just does video recording, it might be able to be on significantly longer. I wonder if it has any privacy safeguards, like a red led indicating recording in progress?

notatoad 10y ago
I think the privacy safeguard here is that they're nothing but a camera, so if you're interacting with somebody who's wearing them you can assume you're being filmed. Glass's problem was that it was a device that you were supposed to wear all the time, and a camera.
Gaelan 10y ago
It can only film for 10 seconds, so if they have not tapped it in the last 10 seconds you know you are not being recorded.
- unimpressive 10y ago
  I would think that's a software limit not a hardware limit. I'm sure once these are out somebody will either jailbreak them or they'll come with no security to begin with.

potatoyogurt 10y ago

It also doesn't look nearly as dorky as Google Glass did. Google Glass had the problem where it was trying to be an all-purpose life-enhancing thing that people would wear all the time, so it was trying to be both invisible and distinctive. This doesn't need to pretend to be something that you can forget you're wearing or something that you can pair with any type of outfit -- it has a strong sense of style, and it's easier to work cameras into a design that is loud than a design that is quiet.

mozumder 10y ago
This is a dead-end product. People aren't going to wear this, because they don't want to creep out people by having a camera pointed at them all the time. This was the real problem with Google Glass. Also, everyone already carries around a camera in their smartphone. They aren't going to add another.
- fowlerpower 10y ago
  Famous last words on this product. I obviously don't agree with you based on my previous comment but I could be wrong. I will say this though that we all vastly underestimate what people want to do and share with each other. This is the company that spawned the self deleting video. I thought that was the dumbest idea ever. My point is privacy is something they thought of and this isn't as dumb as it looks. This product could evolve to become more than meets the eye. No pun intended.
- xkcd-sucks 10y ago
  It's impossible for attractive, socially connected, young people to be creepy. So, it's pretty brilliant for Snapchat to be making this sort of thing. Probably the devices to hit the market will be given to a very carefully curated set of people, and ubiquitous surveillance by camera-glasses will become fashionable.
  - supercoder 10y ago
    So if an young guy who you rated as attractive came up to you and started filming you , that wouldn't make you at all uncomfortable ?

megablast 10y ago

The iPhone is a particularly bad example. It did so much, phone, SMS, web, email, maps, compass, iPod, weather, stocks, and a lot more.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

Retra 10y ago

>It's better because it focuses on the one thing that is really easy to do well. Which thing is that? Being a camera, or being a pair of sunglasses?

dmritard96 10y ago

Don't buy this do one thing and well for a second. Using your own example: Before the iPhone, you had seperate: GPS Camera Flashlight MP3 Player and many other things With the iPhone, you got all of these and a nice compact package that you could carry with you at all times. Thats not to say feature creep can't be a problem, but more that sticking to hard and fast rules like 'do one thing but do that well' is largely an oversimplification of the world to make the world more comprehendible to those that don't want to look at the real nuance of products/markets etc.

nekopa 10y ago
Also, in the now famous introductory presentation of the iPhone, Jobs even spoofed the audience that there were 3 products he was about to release, spinning them all into 1 item.
kalleboo 10y ago
The iPhone didn't have all that with version 1 though.
- dEnigma 10y ago
  It didn't have GPS and I think no flashlight, but it did have a camera, could play MP3s (and Video) and even supported geotagging for photos (though not GPS based)

unimpressive 10y ago

I disagree. It's better because the marketing doesn't suggest that it's anything more than a toy. There's no expectation that you're going to reorient your lifestyle around the Spectacles, but it was implied that you would be filming your entire life 24/7 with Google Glass. As a productivity device it's weak, but as a toy it looks pretty fun and I'm amazed at the sea of people screaming about what a stupid idea it is and how it'll never catch on. If I had disposable income I could certainly see myself buying one and playing with it.

Nanite 10y ago

What happened to google glass is textbook: Exec walks into R&D lab and falls in love with alpha stage project, utters the words: we should release this to the public, stat! and failure ensues. Glass as a AR demonstrator is doing quite well as a beta product for enterprise. Augmedix comes to mind.