5 ms·

Google Glass hands-on: Not a good device for consumers

33 points by carlyle4545 13y ago

WalterSear 13y ago
>But give it a few months. Soon, it’ll be streaming Netflix queues, taking brilliant long-form blog post dictation, and offering up a wealth of casual social games, a portal into an endless labyrinth of distraction. No it won't. Give it a few years, maybe.
- Zikes 13y ago
  And so what if it did? Would her article be any more or less true if she dictated it as opposed to writing it? Is a movie watched on a private screen close to our eyeballs any less entertaining than one viewed on a mobile phone or television? If the only real argument against Google Glass, as a product or as a concept, is that it offers too much, then I'm not sure I see what the problem is.
  - WalterSear 13y ago
    The argument against Google Glass is that we don't have the technology to make it work properly yet.
    - Zikes 13y ago
      Well yes, but that's what the limited prototype is for, isn't it? I mean, this one product isn't really sink or swim for the technology, and even if it doesn't meet the loftiest of expectations there's sure to be a lot to gain from the attempt in regards to features, usability, and UX. After all, Blackberry smart phones sold extremely well prior to iPhone coming along and doing it "properly", but I'm sure Apple learned a lot of lessons from it. Even if many of those lessons were in what not to do.
      - WalterSear 13y ago
        The limitations specific to this device aren't the problem. The genuine issues will not be fixed before production, simply because don't have the technology. Specifically: the battery life, the poor voice recognition and the headaches.
danso 13y ago
I thought her allusion to the Star Trek:TNG's episode of "The Game" was especially adroit. In a futuristic world where you have an unimaginable array of tech toys, such as the holodeck, why would visors be appealing? Well, it wasn't the greatest TNG episode, but I guess even in a Trek future, people will value the immediacy of such eyes-only technology. Just think about how phones have revolutionized thhe way we non-interact with each other in physical space. Last night I saw the "Great Gatsby" and thought, like the book, it captured the timelessness of the story in that it would not feel any different in a modern setting, despite being written 80 years ago. But I kept thinking..."this is just like today, except no one is checking their phones"
- rayiner 13y ago
  The thing about Great Gatsby is that, aside from the smart phones, it was just like today. The 1920's and 1930's were modern times. Manhattan was a place of 2.3 million people (substantially bigger than today), and was heavily built up: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=34300&page=30 http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=34300&pag.... The electrical grid, subway systems, roads, etc, were all mostly in place by then. We have pervasive digital technology today, and there are more cars and bigger high-rises in Manhattan, but you can picture a fancy dinner party today on Park Avenue in a building that was built in the 1920's and 1930's (like many luxury buildings in New York), with people who took a train in from Long Island on a line that was already old in 1920, etc.
nsxwolf 13y ago
Sharp glass prism secured in front of your eyeball, just waiting for you to bump your head on something. Imagining an airbag.
ignostic 13y ago
I actually expected a "hands on" article. What I got instead were a couple stories, and then a bunch of vague predictions on the future of Glass. > "And some overzealous Emily Post type (probably at an old-timey print rag) will write a much-mocked op-ed about the slight but growing disconnection between people." A few paragraphs later... >"...it’s not enhancing your life. It’s robbing you of the joy of actually experiencing your life. You’ll realize it the first time you step in dog shit or have your girlfriend get mad at you for not listening to her or lose your kid in a store."
gavinh 13y ago
Imagine working on an airplane engine and having the manual right in front of you For example, you already have Google Maps to guide you around your city with turn-by-turn audio navigation. That tool doesn’t get any better when it’s smack-dab against your eyeball. I don't see why a manual for an airplane mechanic is better smack-dab against his eyeball but a map in one's line of sight is not better for a person navigating. Her claims that Glass distract you from reality are counter to Google's thesis that Glass frees you from the distraction of staring at your phone. Both claims could be true, but I haven't seen much evidence regarding Glass.
- aaronbrethorst 13y ago
  > I don't see why a manual for an airplane mechanic is better smack-dab against his eyeball but a map in one's line of sight is not better for a person navigating. If I'm performing a series of complicated manual tasks, I'm going to need both hands free. It's a pretty safe bet on something the size of an airplane that I'm going to be moving around a fair amount, too. My phone, giving me turn-by-turn directions, will always be just a foot or so away from me, and clearly visible from the driver's seat. I don't benefit from having it "smack-dab against [my] eyeball."
  - gavinh 13y ago
    Your phone might be 1' from your hands, but not your eyes. I always hated trying to read a 4" screen on my windshield or in my cup holder while driving. I am not sure if refocusing your eyes on Glass's display would be an improvement though.
  - stormbrew 13y ago
    Speaking of looking like a dork, though, holding your phone right out in front of you while you try to navigate your way to a restaurant as a pedestrian is pretty much the height of that.
bo1024 13y ago
I'm not sure, I felt (and feel) the same way about tablets, and about smartphones except in limited cases. But tons of people got them and now they're standard. So I wonder if a good litmus test for this sort of review might be to find/replace Glass with iPad and see if any of the criticism doesn't apply. Very little in the article seems to pass the test, so even though I tend to agree with the sentiments, I'm not sure most consumers will feel the same.
- bradwestness 13y ago
  The thing is that being in the tech industry (I assume based on the fact that you're posting on HN in the middle of the day), you don't really need a smartphone because you're likely at your computer most of the day on most days. I don't have one either, or a tablet because there's no value added for me since I need a "real" computer with a keyboard anyway. But folks outside the tech industry are dropping PCs completely in favor of these types of consumption-centric devices.
- gms 13y ago
  Smartphones and iPads don't make you look like a dork while using them.
  - wvenable 13y ago
    I remember a time when I was literally the only person around me who had a Smartphone. I would play with it on transit. Did a feel a bit like a dork? A little bit, yes. Now everyone has them, it's way more obvious, and nobody feels like a dork.
  - LesZedCB 13y ago
    I remember iPads felt that way for some when they first came out.
  - DigitalJack 13y ago
    Depends on context. I saw someone using an iPad in a movie theatre (before the movie started). I'm not sure if he looked more like a dork or an ass (with that ultra bright screen).
mtgx 13y ago
A counter-argument: http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/226604 http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/226604
yellow 13y ago
Well that's one way to handle a big review about technology of the future: don't write a review and suggest weaning yourself off of technology.
tomkarlo 13y ago
If she's going to write about a product, maybe she should actually use it, given that she actually has a pair. It's bad enough when journalists write about a product without having it. She has it, but she's not using it, and then she's writing sweeping articles about it's long-term future.
- JshWright 13y ago
  Not only that, but you could replace 'Glass' with any mobile technology over the last decade (many of which are wildly successful consumer devices), and the 'review' still makes perfect sense (albeit, with the same, incorrect, conclusions). Maybe that should have been a signal to the author...
  - bradwestness 13y ago
    Yeah this is the same thing that happened with the iPad (it's a huge iPhone without the phone part? who would ever buy that?!) and more recently, with Windows 8 (metro is a failure! Microsoft is doomed!). Google Glass, in its current iteration, will likely never catch on with consumers. But it's a limited availability "preview" for a reason. Something like this is eventually going to get cheap enough and usable enough that consumers will buy it.
mvkel 13y ago
Yet another person speaking for consumers on a device that isn't even finalized yet. The only evidence I need that it sucks (in its current form) is that 1) Robert Scoble loves it. 2) Robert Scoble thinks he looks good wearing it. You can't buy taste.
geetee 13y ago
For the typical day to day, I just don't see the killer application for a heads up display. My phone is never more than arm's reach away, and then it's out of sight when I'm done with it.
- ditojim 13y ago
  it's way easier to just look up and talk than to pull a device out of your pocket, unlock it, pull down notifications/open an app, then interact with the device. it will save you minutes everyday with that process alone.
  - geetee 13y ago
    I guess I could see that being a demanding and time consuming task if I had no arms.
Delenda 13y ago
"It’s robbing you of the joy of actually experiencing your life. You’ll realize it the first time you step in dog shit or have your girlfriend get mad at you for not listening to her or lose your kid in a store." Last two things there? Both of them of them? It's you being a terrible person. Stop blaming technology for letting you be awful and blame yourself for being awful.
- chadrs 13y ago
  I don't believe the world is filled with "terrible" people. I do believe the world is filled with people who use their smartphones in inappropriate situations all the time. There's a discrepancy here, and it's clear new tech is being consumed faster than we can propagate the social norms around the tech.
- derefr 13y ago
  Couldn't agree more. If you have your priorities straight, communication tools can be wonderful--in this case, for example, letting you do a "hangout" with said girlfriend while stuck at work for lunch. When you screw up your priorities, all communication tools begin to look evil.
- bradwestness 13y ago
  Yeah, I'm not about to buy Google Glass any time soon, but arguing about it ruining your life is kind of like claiming that having a GPS robs you of all the fun of getting lost and knowing how to fold roadmaps
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
HunterV 13y ago
It's amusing to see this back and forth of tech community where one side thinks it's the next big thing, the other thinks that because these "nerdy" tech journalists like Google Glass it won't be popular, and then the rebuttal that the critics are either jealous or just naysayers. Honestly, it's all fun and games till the average consumer has the ability to buy it. The rest is just speculation.
- danielweber 13y ago
  I feel slightly verklempt every time I see someone say Google Glass won't work because no one wants to wear glasses.
  - arkitaip 13y ago
    Even worse: glasses are so difficult to wear that they make you step into dog shit :(
nlh 13y ago
I love reading stories like this, especially with hyper-revolutionary products like Google Glass. Because the more people say "it will never succeed with consumers", the fewer people will go into Gold Rush mentality (at least for now), and the more opportunity there will be for folks like me (and, I hope, other HN types). I couldn't be more confident that some variation of this -- whether it's Google Glass or Apple Eyeball or whatever -- is going to really, seriously, emphatically, be a multi-billion-dollar market. So keep going VentureBeat and others. Keep telling the world it's just a nerd toy or a fad or whatever. More time and more opportunity for the rest of us ;) "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."
- cortesoft 13y ago
  Apple iBall
  - WalterSear 13y ago
    I'm sure it's going to be stereoscopic, though. :)
    - AdamFernandez 13y ago
      Apple iSight?
      - ihuman 13y ago
        Apple i
      - WalterSear 13y ago
        iBalls.
- wzdd 13y ago
  To be fair, the difference between this and 'some variation on this' is also the difference between the iPhone and Windows Mobile 6.
revelation 13y ago
People think "HN is too negative", but can you believe the goddamn journalists fretting over this, despite 1) never having used it and 2) this was clearly presented as an early-adopter developer version? Still mad about not having Reader available to do their work.
Dewie 13y ago
This article seems to piggyback on the recent meme of 'technology can be useful but also asocial and isolating/Why I deactivated my Facebook/Twitter/Google+', which I agree with, but she is a bit too preachy; please tell me why exactly Glass is bad, not just some general appeals to the bad side-effects of modern consumer gadgets. > On the other hand, for myriad kinds of workers, I can see Glass being an extraordinarily helpful, hands-free tool. Imagine working on an airplane engine and having the manual right in front of you or using it to photograph and catalog new species during a deep-sea diving expedition. Imagine being someone who has to fix his sink, so he has to bust out a manual and figure out the sink at the same time... oh wait, turns out this nugget doesn't only apply to professional contexts. Consumer-applications ← not just playing casual games and updating social media about what you had for dinner. I can see Glass being excellent for some things, while maybe not being ideal for most of the things that you do. Imagine that you are in a foreign country and don't speak the language and you want to talk to someone; do you bust out your smart phone and let the other person spell out the words, then have them played back to you or you read it yourself? Or do you simply talk to that person and see the subtitles pop up as you go? The latter one is clearly superior, IMO. This is like a review of cellphones from the 80's, "Stuff like this will never be used by anyone else than really busy professionals. It doesn't even fit in your pocket!" EDIT: A lot of the time I really only need my smart phone for special purposes. Things like finding my way around places I haven't been is much easier with google maps than with a physical map and/or asking directions. Other than that? Well, surfing the web and listening to music, the former being a way to kill time and the latter something that my iPod Nano does better. Yet, smart phones are here to stay for most people.
orangethirty 13y ago
How long till lawmakers prohibit using Glass while driving? Unlike hands-free ear pieces, Glass can distract the driver (like texting). Given Google's track record, I would not hesitate to think of a future where Glass will have ads pop in randomly. It is, after all, an advertising company.
- tomkarlo 13y ago
  Some studies found that even hands-free phone calls impair drivers significantly, as do traditional activities like changing the radio or just talking to another person in the car. Arguably anything that increases cognitive load (including a stick shift) could have this effect. Unless we're going to get into regulating everything you do in car, we probably need to just leave it to drivers or have self-driving cars. http://mysite.verizon.net/horrey/papers/Horrey_HF2006meta.pdf http://mysite.verizon.net/horrey/papers/Horrey_HF2006meta.pd...
Groxx 13y ago
>If you’re using it recreationally, not professionally to complete a task, don’t kid yourself — it’s not enhancing your life. It’s robbing you of the joy of actually experiencing your life. Same with cell phones. And computers. And books. And your car. And Legos. And art. And music. Wait. But we like books and creative things, right? This is the sort of vacuous statement that irks me. "Well duh" is an obvious response, but it goes deeper. This can be applied to doing anything you enjoy, but it's wielded most frequently against new things, in a "get off my lawn" / rose-tinted glasses way. Sure. New things get used for things you don't approve of. Easy art reproduction brought about the proliferation of porn and the commoditization of art in general. The printing press brought about the end of scribes, and is used to spread Christian, Buddhist, atheist, communist, anarchist, and democratic propaganda. But new things also get used for things you do approve of. Like porn, art in every room, and spreading propaganda for your latest cause. Can we please get an ounce of information, instead of vague new-thing-hate?
ryusage 13y ago
> And train yourself to rely less on your smartphone, while you’re at it. This pretty much sums up this "review" for me. It's not a hands-on article so much as a reaction to her husband's device usage habits. May as well be about cell phones.
dilipray 13y ago
You can't put your fingers on head all the time to control. It's the most annoying thing. Very human eye has focus, Google just think din't about that. I would love something as lens in the future than glass in the present. I would prefer glass for calls but not video calls.
yamalight 13y ago
It is so professional and insightful to discuss a product that's not even finalized yet. Journalism ftw!

33 points by carlyle4545 13y ago

>But give it a few months. Soon, it’ll be streaming Netflix queues, taking brilliant long-form blog post dictation, and offering up a wealth of casual social games, a portal into an endless labyrinth of distraction. No it won't. Give it a few years, maybe.

Zikes 13y ago
And so what if it did? Would her article be any more or less true if she dictated it as opposed to writing it? Is a movie watched on a private screen close to our eyeballs any less entertaining than one viewed on a mobile phone or television? If the only real argument against Google Glass, as a product or as a concept, is that it offers too much, then I'm not sure I see what the problem is.
- WalterSear 13y ago
  The argument against Google Glass is that we don't have the technology to make it work properly yet.
  - Zikes 13y ago
    Well yes, but that's what the limited prototype is for, isn't it? I mean, this one product isn't really sink or swim for the technology, and even if it doesn't meet the loftiest of expectations there's sure to be a lot to gain from the attempt in regards to features, usability, and UX. After all, Blackberry smart phones sold extremely well prior to iPhone coming along and doing it "properly", but I'm sure Apple learned a lot of lessons from it. Even if many of those lessons were in what not to do.
    - WalterSear 13y ago
      The limitations specific to this device aren't the problem. The genuine issues will not be fixed before production, simply because don't have the technology. Specifically: the battery life, the poor voice recognition and the headaches.

danso 13y ago

I thought her allusion to the Star Trek:TNG's episode of "The Game" was especially adroit. In a futuristic world where you have an unimaginable array of tech toys, such as the holodeck, why would visors be appealing? Well, it wasn't the greatest TNG episode, but I guess even in a Trek future, people will value the immediacy of such eyes-only technology. Just think about how phones have revolutionized thhe way we non-interact with each other in physical space. Last night I saw the "Great Gatsby" and thought, like the book, it captured the timelessness of the story in that it would not feel any different in a modern setting, despite being written 80 years ago. But I kept thinking..."this is just like today, except no one is checking their phones"

rayiner 13y ago
The thing about Great Gatsby is that, aside from the smart phones, it was just like today. The 1920's and 1930's were modern times. Manhattan was a place of 2.3 million people (substantially bigger than today), and was heavily built up: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=34300&page=30 http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=34300&pag.... The electrical grid, subway systems, roads, etc, were all mostly in place by then. We have pervasive digital technology today, and there are more cars and bigger high-rises in Manhattan, but you can picture a fancy dinner party today on Park Avenue in a building that was built in the 1920's and 1930's (like many luxury buildings in New York), with people who took a train in from Long Island on a line that was already old in 1920, etc.

nsxwolf 13y ago

Sharp glass prism secured in front of your eyeball, just waiting for you to bump your head on something. Imagining an airbag.

ignostic 13y ago

I actually expected a "hands on" article. What I got instead were a couple stories, and then a bunch of vague predictions on the future of Glass. > "And some overzealous Emily Post type (probably at an old-timey print rag) will write a much-mocked op-ed about the slight but growing disconnection between people." A few paragraphs later... >"...it’s not enhancing your life. It’s robbing you of the joy of actually experiencing your life. You’ll realize it the first time you step in dog shit or have your girlfriend get mad at you for not listening to her or lose your kid in a store."

gavinh 13y ago

Imagine working on an airplane engine and having the manual right in front of you For example, you already have Google Maps to guide you around your city with turn-by-turn audio navigation. That tool doesn’t get any better when it’s smack-dab against your eyeball. I don't see why a manual for an airplane mechanic is better smack-dab against his eyeball but a map in one's line of sight is not better for a person navigating. Her claims that Glass distract you from reality are counter to Google's thesis that Glass frees you from the distraction of staring at your phone. Both claims could be true, but I haven't seen much evidence regarding Glass.

aaronbrethorst 13y ago
> I don't see why a manual for an airplane mechanic is better smack-dab against his eyeball but a map in one's line of sight is not better for a person navigating. If I'm performing a series of complicated manual tasks, I'm going to need both hands free. It's a pretty safe bet on something the size of an airplane that I'm going to be moving around a fair amount, too. My phone, giving me turn-by-turn directions, will always be just a foot or so away from me, and clearly visible from the driver's seat. I don't benefit from having it "smack-dab against [my] eyeball."
- gavinh 13y ago
  Your phone might be 1' from your hands, but not your eyes. I always hated trying to read a 4" screen on my windshield or in my cup holder while driving. I am not sure if refocusing your eyes on Glass's display would be an improvement though.
- stormbrew 13y ago
  Speaking of looking like a dork, though, holding your phone right out in front of you while you try to navigate your way to a restaurant as a pedestrian is pretty much the height of that.

bo1024 13y ago

I'm not sure, I felt (and feel) the same way about tablets, and about smartphones except in limited cases. But tons of people got them and now they're standard. So I wonder if a good litmus test for this sort of review might be to find/replace Glass with iPad and see if any of the criticism doesn't apply. Very little in the article seems to pass the test, so even though I tend to agree with the sentiments, I'm not sure most consumers will feel the same.

bradwestness 13y ago
The thing is that being in the tech industry (I assume based on the fact that you're posting on HN in the middle of the day), you don't really need a smartphone because you're likely at your computer most of the day on most days. I don't have one either, or a tablet because there's no value added for me since I need a "real" computer with a keyboard anyway. But folks outside the tech industry are dropping PCs completely in favor of these types of consumption-centric devices.
gms 13y ago
Smartphones and iPads don't make you look like a dork while using them.
- wvenable 13y ago
  I remember a time when I was literally the only person around me who had a Smartphone. I would play with it on transit. Did a feel a bit like a dork? A little bit, yes. Now everyone has them, it's way more obvious, and nobody feels like a dork.
- LesZedCB 13y ago
  I remember iPads felt that way for some when they first came out.
- DigitalJack 13y ago
  Depends on context. I saw someone using an iPad in a movie theatre (before the movie started). I'm not sure if he looked more like a dork or an ass (with that ultra bright screen).

mtgx 13y ago

A counter-argument: http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/226604 http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/226604

yellow 13y ago

Well that's one way to handle a big review about technology of the future: don't write a review and suggest weaning yourself off of technology.

tomkarlo 13y ago

If she's going to write about a product, maybe she should actually use it, given that she actually has a pair. It's bad enough when journalists write about a product without having it. She has it, but she's not using it, and then she's writing sweeping articles about it's long-term future.

JshWright 13y ago
Not only that, but you could replace 'Glass' with any mobile technology over the last decade (many of which are wildly successful consumer devices), and the 'review' still makes perfect sense (albeit, with the same, incorrect, conclusions). Maybe that should have been a signal to the author...
- bradwestness 13y ago
  Yeah this is the same thing that happened with the iPad (it's a huge iPhone without the phone part? who would ever buy that?!) and more recently, with Windows 8 (metro is a failure! Microsoft is doomed!). Google Glass, in its current iteration, will likely never catch on with consumers. But it's a limited availability "preview" for a reason. Something like this is eventually going to get cheap enough and usable enough that consumers will buy it.

mvkel 13y ago

Yet another person speaking for consumers on a device that isn't even finalized yet. The only evidence I need that it sucks (in its current form) is that 1) Robert Scoble loves it. 2) Robert Scoble thinks he looks good wearing it. You can't buy taste.

geetee 13y ago

For the typical day to day, I just don't see the killer application for a heads up display. My phone is never more than arm's reach away, and then it's out of sight when I'm done with it.

ditojim 13y ago
it's way easier to just look up and talk than to pull a device out of your pocket, unlock it, pull down notifications/open an app, then interact with the device. it will save you minutes everyday with that process alone.
- geetee 13y ago
  I guess I could see that being a demanding and time consuming task if I had no arms.

Delenda 13y ago

"It’s robbing you of the joy of actually experiencing your life. You’ll realize it the first time you step in dog shit or have your girlfriend get mad at you for not listening to her or lose your kid in a store." Last two things there? Both of them of them? It's you being a terrible person. Stop blaming technology for letting you be awful and blame yourself for being awful.

chadrs 13y ago
I don't believe the world is filled with "terrible" people. I do believe the world is filled with people who use their smartphones in inappropriate situations all the time. There's a discrepancy here, and it's clear new tech is being consumed faster than we can propagate the social norms around the tech.
derefr 13y ago
Couldn't agree more. If you have your priorities straight, communication tools can be wonderful--in this case, for example, letting you do a "hangout" with said girlfriend while stuck at work for lunch. When you screw up your priorities, all communication tools begin to look evil.
bradwestness 13y ago
Yeah, I'm not about to buy Google Glass any time soon, but arguing about it ruining your life is kind of like claiming that having a GPS robs you of all the fun of getting lost and knowing how to fold roadmaps

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

HunterV 13y ago

It's amusing to see this back and forth of tech community where one side thinks it's the next big thing, the other thinks that because these "nerdy" tech journalists like Google Glass it won't be popular, and then the rebuttal that the critics are either jealous or just naysayers. Honestly, it's all fun and games till the average consumer has the ability to buy it. The rest is just speculation.

danielweber 13y ago
I feel slightly verklempt every time I see someone say Google Glass won't work because no one wants to wear glasses.
- arkitaip 13y ago
  Even worse: glasses are so difficult to wear that they make you step into dog shit :(

nlh 13y ago

I love reading stories like this, especially with hyper-revolutionary products like Google Glass. Because the more people say "it will never succeed with consumers", the fewer people will go into Gold Rush mentality (at least for now), and the more opportunity there will be for folks like me (and, I hope, other HN types). I couldn't be more confident that some variation of this -- whether it's Google Glass or Apple Eyeball or whatever -- is going to really, seriously, emphatically, be a multi-billion-dollar market. So keep going VentureBeat and others. Keep telling the world it's just a nerd toy or a fad or whatever. More time and more opportunity for the rest of us ;) "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."

cortesoft 13y ago
Apple iBall
- WalterSear 13y ago
  I'm sure it's going to be stereoscopic, though. :)
  - AdamFernandez 13y ago
    Apple iSight?
    - ihuman 13y ago
      Apple i
    - WalterSear 13y ago
      iBalls.
wzdd 13y ago
To be fair, the difference between this and 'some variation on this' is also the difference between the iPhone and Windows Mobile 6.

revelation 13y ago

People think "HN is too negative", but can you believe the goddamn journalists fretting over this, despite 1) never having used it and 2) this was clearly presented as an early-adopter developer version? Still mad about not having Reader available to do their work.

Dewie 13y ago

This article seems to piggyback on the recent meme of 'technology can be useful but also asocial and isolating/Why I deactivated my Facebook/Twitter/Google+', which I agree with, but she is a bit too preachy; please tell me why exactly Glass is bad, not just some general appeals to the bad side-effects of modern consumer gadgets. > On the other hand, for myriad kinds of workers, I can see Glass being an extraordinarily helpful, hands-free tool. Imagine working on an airplane engine and having the manual right in front of you or using it to photograph and catalog new species during a deep-sea diving expedition. Imagine being someone who has to fix his sink, so he has to bust out a manual and figure out the sink at the same time... oh wait, turns out this nugget doesn't only apply to professional contexts. Consumer-applications ← not just playing casual games and updating social media about what you had for dinner. I can see Glass being excellent for some things, while maybe not being ideal for most of the things that you do. Imagine that you are in a foreign country and don't speak the language and you want to talk to someone; do you bust out your smart phone and let the other person spell out the words, then have them played back to you or you read it yourself? Or do you simply talk to that person and see the subtitles pop up as you go? The latter one is clearly superior, IMO. This is like a review of cellphones from the 80's, "Stuff like this will never be used by anyone else than really busy professionals. It doesn't even fit in your pocket!" EDIT: A lot of the time I really only need my smart phone for special purposes. Things like finding my way around places I haven't been is much easier with google maps than with a physical map and/or asking directions. Other than that? Well, surfing the web and listening to music, the former being a way to kill time and the latter something that my iPod Nano does better. Yet, smart phones are here to stay for most people.

orangethirty 13y ago

How long till lawmakers prohibit using Glass while driving? Unlike hands-free ear pieces, Glass can distract the driver (like texting). Given Google's track record, I would not hesitate to think of a future where Glass will have ads pop in randomly. It is, after all, an advertising company.

tomkarlo 13y ago
Some studies found that even hands-free phone calls impair drivers significantly, as do traditional activities like changing the radio or just talking to another person in the car. Arguably anything that increases cognitive load (including a stick shift) could have this effect. Unless we're going to get into regulating everything you do in car, we probably need to just leave it to drivers or have self-driving cars. http://mysite.verizon.net/horrey/papers/Horrey_HF2006meta.pdf http://mysite.verizon.net/horrey/papers/Horrey_HF2006meta.pd...

Groxx 13y ago

>If you’re using it recreationally, not professionally to complete a task, don’t kid yourself — it’s not enhancing your life. It’s robbing you of the joy of actually experiencing your life. Same with cell phones. And computers. And books. And your car. And Legos. And art. And music. Wait. But we like books and creative things, right? This is the sort of vacuous statement that irks me. "Well duh" is an obvious response, but it goes deeper. This can be applied to doing anything you enjoy, but it's wielded most frequently against new things, in a "get off my lawn" / rose-tinted glasses way. Sure. New things get used for things you don't approve of. Easy art reproduction brought about the proliferation of porn and the commoditization of art in general. The printing press brought about the end of scribes, and is used to spread Christian, Buddhist, atheist, communist, anarchist, and democratic propaganda. But new things also get used for things you do approve of. Like porn, art in every room, and spreading propaganda for your latest cause. Can we please get an ounce of information, instead of vague new-thing-hate?

ryusage 13y ago

> And train yourself to rely less on your smartphone, while you’re at it. This pretty much sums up this "review" for me. It's not a hands-on article so much as a reaction to her husband's device usage habits. May as well be about cell phones.

dilipray 13y ago

You can't put your fingers on head all the time to control. It's the most annoying thing. Very human eye has focus, Google just think din't about that. I would love something as lens in the future than glass in the present. I would prefer glass for calls but not video calls.

yamalight 13y ago

It is so professional and insightful to discuss a product that's not even finalized yet. Journalism ftw!