> The hands free display is the only advantage and it's not worth it. If there were a market for hands free displays, there's nothing stopping us from having on

> The hands free display is the only advantage and it's not worth it. If there were a market for hands free displays, there's nothing stopping us from having one for our smartphones just like Bluetooth earpieces. Right, because the only reason things don't exist is because there's no market for it. Google spent several years iterating and trying to get the Glass into a workable size (it was originally basically a smartphone strapped to a pair of glasses), and there was no way it could be in a small enough package until very recently. > Yes, by a small fringe element of idiots. Most people seem to either want one, or are relatively apathetic, so either most people don't think it looks stupid or they think the penalty of looking stupid is worth it for the benefits. > Why do you think all of the Google hype videos for Glass show the same exact thing over and over again; somebody doing something exciting and videoing it with Glass? Because that's the ONLY use case for it. I would assert that it's a terrible use case too, but even if I don't argue that point, that single use case is not enough for Glass to see widespread adoption. Except for the videos with people doing mundane things like biking, playing in the park, or trying to catch a train? If you ignore 1 or 2 sky diving videos, almost all of the videos with Glass I've seen were situations I'm in daily or frequently enough that they aren't exceptional situations.