This doesn't sound intrusive at all. Maybe the glasses can start tracking what people look at and make google services EVEN BETTER with more targeted ads! Augmented Reality while driving will be epic.
love gimmicks.
Yup the best way tech can "augment" my driving reality is to either drive the car by itself or make the car fly. Other than that, I'm happy just as it is with my iPhone in it's windshield holder thingy.
Another step on the path that will lead to your Google implant, so they can show you ads related to what you are thinking about. If you don't want anyone to know what you are thinking, you shouldn't be thinking about it.
I am going to gaze into my crystal ball and predict that soon after the release of Google Glasses (TM) that news headlines around the world will report on an accident where a wearer walks into a street and is hit by a car because he was distracted by the device. Which will then lead to laws prohibiting the use of devices while walking, anti-distracted walking laws.
The point isn't to get something ground breaking or useful on the market, the point is to get some basic concept in the air so that when Apple shows them how to do it correctly they can just follow suit and then say that it was either obvious all along or that they started it first.
i do agree with you on that.
google can't make a mobile phone with decent battery life yet i am to believe this thing won't need a large battery? Frankenstein i imagine.
while i totally hate Apple's stance on their products, they do usually make the product 'right' or not at all. The Stanford boys running google think everything is a school project that never really has to be fleshed out for consumption.
When Apple releases their version of this tech 5 years from now everyone here will be parading about how "Apple finally got it right"
Doesn't really sound like Google is trying to create a mass market product here, rather a experimental socio-technological bridge tool. I know just about everyone here loves to rag on Google, but it sound pretty neat.
Where is that list option? I don't see it listed in any menus. Or do you mean just ignore him?
For the regulars who are probably more knowledgeable and able to refute claims, putting other members on ignore simply because you don't agree with them probably does more harm than good.
Consider that AI averages over 300K pageviews per day according to what I found. Your missing pair of eyes won't affect the 299,999 others who may see that post. By you ignoring the post, never seeing it, failing to call it out if it's false, it may indicate to casual readers that the claim is true instead.
Just a thought. This isn't just a little community of a couple dozen regulars. There's lots of eyes that pass thru here. Some of you regulars are being way short-sighted.
In actuality you couldn't do a bigger favor to those spreading half-truths than putting them on ignore. It makes it appear they were right all along if no one disagrees. Just an FYI.
Consider that AI averages over 300K pageviews per day according to what I found. Your missing pair of eyes won't affect the 299,999 others who may see that post. By you ignoring the post, never seeing it, failing to call it out if it's false, it may indicate to casual readers that the claim is true instead.
In actuality you couldn't do a bigger favor to those spreading half-truths than putting them on ignore. It makes it appear they were right all along if no one disagrees. Just an FYI.
This. This is exactly why I'll never use the Ignore option.
This. This is exactly why I'll never use the Ignore option.
You're welcome. Just thought it was worth mentioning as I doubt some here ever thought it thru.
For those more interested in reading just pro-Apple views (perfectly valid reason for visiting IMO) and not engaging others who might disagree, using the ignore button is a fine choice. Otherwise it's not the best idea as far as I'm concerned.
When Apple releases their version of this tech 5 years from now everyone here will be parading about how "Apple finally got it right"
Doesn't really sound like Google is trying to create a mass market product here, rather a experimental socio-technological bridge tool. I know just about everyone here loves to rag on Google, but it sound pretty neat.
in all fairness a 'tablet' sounded neat too but no one made anything that didn't really stink till apple did it. even now 99% (or 100% depending on how you look at it lol) of competitors tablets still stink.
i LOVE the idea of a HUD but i don't want to have a 2 hour battery life on a gargantuan cludgy headset or some cable that dangles down to a big battery.
They’ve made heads-up glasses for years, iPod-video-compatible long before the iPhone, and I love the idea! Some let you see through the video, others are dark until you flip them up. I’ve been watching for them to come down in price and up in resolution. A niche product, sure, but still pretty cool. I want the idea to succeed, in Google’s hands or otherwise. (But I’d rather buy an accessory for my existing device I already carry, not an expensive cellular-enabled standalone glasses unit.)
Of course what I really want is a stereoscopic motion-tracking consumer HMD that is a) cheap and b) widely supported by games (and we’re getting there). Virtual reality is so awesome, and has caught on so amazingly slowly! I know it’s bad for the eyes in the long term but... so much fun!
"Sources said the eyewear would include a small screen intended to sit just a few inches from the user's eyes."
Has the FDA been castrated of all authority here as well as everywhere else?
"Insiders indicated that the glasses would not be designed for constant use, though some power users would likely choose to wear them a lot."
Ah, the earbud precedent moves on? "It's not our fault you're deaf/blind. We told you not to actually use what we sold you. You're just supposed to pay us for it and keep in in a drawer until we tell you it's time to buy a new one 14 months from now."
But all in all, I just can't wait. Spex and smart gloves. Yee hah. I've always felt I belonged in a Bruce Sterling novel. I can just see myself at some dinner party, looking around the room and clawing at the air like I'm fighting off killer bees, when in fact I'm just summoning a taxi to escape from people who serve wine in a box or otherwise fail to appreciate my genius.
I'll have to buy it online, though. "Eyewear" is one of those words I can't force past my larynx without wishing myself and everyone else dead.
Comments
This doesn't sound intrusive at all. Maybe the glasses can start tracking what people look at and make google services EVEN BETTER with more targeted ads! Augmented Reality while driving will be epic.
love gimmicks.
Yup the best way tech can "augment" my driving reality is to either drive the car by itself or make the car fly. Other than that, I'm happy just as it is with my iPhone in it's windshield holder thingy.
The point isn't to get something ground breaking or useful on the market, the point is to get some basic concept in the air so that when Apple shows them how to do it correctly they can just follow suit and then say that it was either obvious all along or that they started it first.
i do agree with you on that.
google can't make a mobile phone with decent battery life yet i am to believe this thing won't need a large battery? Frankenstein i imagine.
while i totally hate Apple's stance on their products, they do usually make the product 'right' or not at all. The Stanford boys running google think everything is a school project that never really has to be fleshed out for consumption.
"On a personal note, I think this will be the most exciting technology product release this year."
I think many of you are being short-sighted simply because it's coming from Google rather than Apple, Microsoft or even some small tech startup.
When Apple releases their version of this tech 5 years from now everyone here will be parading about how "Apple finally got it right"
Doesn't really sound like Google is trying to create a mass market product here, rather a experimental socio-technological bridge tool. I know just about everyone here loves to rag on Google, but it sound pretty neat.
Doesn't really sound like Google is trying to create a mass market product here, rather a experimental socio-technological bridge tool.
And that's what disgusts me about it.
And that's what disgusts me about it.
Disgusting that it's not mass-market yet? Why?
Please put DaHarder on your ignore list rather than respond.
Where is that list option? I don't see it listed in any menus. Or do you mean just ignore him?
Where is that list option? I don't see it listed in any menus. Or do you mean just ignore him?
Well, both work, but the forums have an actual Ignore option under your user control panel.
Well, both work, but the forums have an actual Ignore option under your user control panel.
Thanks
Where is that list option? I don't see it listed in any menus. Or do you mean just ignore him?
For the regulars who are probably more knowledgeable and able to refute claims, putting other members on ignore simply because you don't agree with them probably does more harm than good.
Consider that AI averages over 300K pageviews per day according to what I found. Your missing pair of eyes won't affect the 299,999 others who may see that post. By you ignoring the post, never seeing it, failing to call it out if it's false, it may indicate to casual readers that the claim is true instead.
Just a thought. This isn't just a little community of a couple dozen regulars. There's lots of eyes that pass thru here. Some of you regulars are being way short-sighted.
In actuality you couldn't do a bigger favor to those spreading half-truths than putting them on ignore. It makes it appear they were right all along if no one disagrees. Just an FYI.
Consider that AI averages over 300K pageviews per day according to what I found. Your missing pair of eyes won't affect the 299,999 others who may see that post. By you ignoring the post, never seeing it, failing to call it out if it's false, it may indicate to casual readers that the claim is true instead.
In actuality you couldn't do a bigger favor to those spreading half-truths than putting them on ignore. It makes it appear they were right all along if no one disagrees. Just an FYI.
This. This is exactly why I'll never use the Ignore option.
This. This is exactly why I'll never use the Ignore option.
You're welcome. Just thought it was worth mentioning as I doubt some here ever thought it thru.
For those more interested in reading just pro-Apple views (perfectly valid reason for visiting IMO) and not engaging others who might disagree, using the ignore button is a fine choice. Otherwise it's not the best idea as far as I'm concerned.
ahh you guys never cease to get me laughing
When Apple releases their version of this tech 5 years from now everyone here will be parading about how "Apple finally got it right"
Doesn't really sound like Google is trying to create a mass market product here, rather a experimental socio-technological bridge tool. I know just about everyone here loves to rag on Google, but it sound pretty neat.
in all fairness a 'tablet' sounded neat too but no one made anything that didn't really stink till apple did it. even now 99% (or 100% depending on how you look at it lol) of competitors tablets still stink.
i LOVE the idea of a HUD but i don't want to have a 2 hour battery life on a gargantuan cludgy headset or some cable that dangles down to a big battery.
Of course what I really want is a stereoscopic motion-tracking consumer HMD that is a) cheap and b) widely supported by games (and we’re getting there). Virtual reality is so awesome, and has caught on so amazingly slowly! I know it’s bad for the eyes in the long term but... so much fun!
They?ve made heads-up glasses for years. . .
... but HUD glasses like these with the capabilities and connectivity they're said to offer have never been made for consumers. Not at any price.
Has the FDA been castrated of all authority here as well as everywhere else?
"Insiders indicated that the glasses would not be designed for constant use, though some power users would likely choose to wear them a lot."
Ah, the earbud precedent moves on? "It's not our fault you're deaf/blind. We told you not to actually use what we sold you. You're just supposed to pay us for it and keep in in a drawer until we tell you it's time to buy a new one 14 months from now."
But all in all, I just can't wait. Spex and smart gloves. Yee hah. I've always felt I belonged in a Bruce Sterling novel. I can just see myself at some dinner party, looking around the room and clawing at the air like I'm fighting off killer bees, when in fact I'm just summoning a taxi to escape from people who serve wine in a box or otherwise fail to appreciate my genius.
I'll have to buy it online, though. "Eyewear" is one of those words I can't force past my larynx without wishing myself and everyone else dead.
FWIW, 9to5Macs's Seth Weintraub has to say about it:
"On a personal note, I think this will be the most exciting technology product release this year."
I think many of you are being short-sighted simply because it's coming from Google rather than Apple, Microsoft or even some small tech startup.
I think it's mainly that people have come to expect crap from Google.