or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google confirms iPhone compatibility for Glass, but questions remain over notifications
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google confirms iPhone compatibility for Glass, but questions remain over notifications - Page 2

post #41 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Not to mention it's a total chick magnet. /s

My girlfriend is super jealous and wants one as well. 1wink.gif
post #42 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilmushroom View Post

I went to Google's SF Glass Foundry and got to use the device for two days. It most certainly isn't vaporware. 

I cannot provide details as I am under NDA, but I can say this; it was awesome. I actually felt loss returning the device after two days, almost as I had lost one of my senses.  I cannot wait until I get my Explorer unit hopefully soon. 1smile.gif

It feels so pedestrian now to actually have to do the following with my cellphone:
1) reach into my pocket
2) pull out my phone
3) turn on my phone
4) unlock my phone
5) look at the text/email/time/whatever
6) turn off my phone
7) put back in pocket
....vs just having to flick my eyes for half a second a bit up.


Google is on to something here--- even if Glass is not the device for you, in the future a similar device will be. It's just too convenient.

Thanks for the eyewitness report. As usual, best to keep an open mind till the thing is in hand, or on face.

I initially thought it was a mistake to address one eye only, since we already have a problem socially with one-hemisphere dominance. I'm hoping Apple's approach will carry on what shows in their patents so far—full stereo vision, using both eyes.

Can you tell us if it is switchable, I mean movable, from one eye to the other? Or do you only get either a left or a right eyed model, depending on your eye dominance?
post #43 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post


Thanks for the eyewitness report. As usual, best to keep an open mind till the thing is in hand, or on face.

I initially thought it was a mistake to address one eye only, since we already have a problem socially with one-hemisphere dominance. I'm hoping Apple's approach will carry on what shows in their patents so far—full stereo vision, using both eyes.

Can you tell us if it is switchable, I mean movable, from one eye to the other? Or do you only get either a left or a right eyed model, depending on your eye dominance?

 

I don't want to risk the NDA so I can't give details... I can say that I am left eye dominant and it was no problem and was still awesome. 

post #44 of 71
$1400? Man, this thing really is a Segway for your face.
post #45 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Perhaps my post was too ambiguous, I mean tech as fashion, not as simply as assistance for the disabled. Note that hearing aids try always sought to be inconspicuous, not standout and say "Hey, look at me, I'm mostly deaf."


Those are marketing shots. They're always more obvious than the shots suggest. And that doesn't go back further when those options simply weren't available. I suppose people have forgotten about that now.

Also: headphones, earbuds. The knowledge of iPods spread in part because of their white earbuds. I think I see a sociological connection with headphones, earbuds and BT earpieces, it might be a level of distaste with the idea they're ignoring you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by evilmushroom View Post

I went to Google's SF Glass Foundry and got to use the device for two days. It most certainly isn't vaporware. 

I cannot provide details as I am under NDA, but I can say this; it was awesome. I actually felt loss returning the device after two days, almost as I had lost one of my senses.  I cannot wait until I get my Explorer unit hopefully soon. 1smile.gif

It feels so pedestrian now to actually have to do the following with my cellphone:
1) reach into my pocket
2) pull out my phone
3) turn on my phone
4) unlock my phone
5) look at the text/email/time/whatever
6) turn off my phone
7) put back in pocket
....vs just having to flick my eyes for half a second a bit up.

Google is on to something here--- even if Glass is not the device for you, in the future a similar device will be. It's just too convenient.

I get the convenience, but $1400 convenient? I dunno. The cost will go down, but that'll be a few years.
Edited by JeffDM - 2/22/13 at 9:13pm
post #46 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Those are marketing shots. They're always more obvious than the shots suggest. And that doesn't go back further when those options simply weren't available. I suppose people have forgotten about that now.

Also: headphones, earbuds. The knowledge of iPods spread in part because of their white earbuds. I think I see a sociological connection with headphones, earbuds and BT earpieces, it might be a level of distaste with the idea they're ignoring you.

1) Of course they've gotten smaller but they've never tried to be obvious to wit pass themselves off as fashion statements.

2) When a coffee shop of some public place reading I will almost always where my headphones without playing anything. It helps drown out a little of the sound but my main goal to keep people from interrupting me. Unfortunately it simply doesn't work well enough that I've thought of replacing my in-ear phones with some massive headphones that cover up the entire ear.

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #47 of 71
I think it would be better as a contact lens type of device. Kind of like what they do to the 'protector' chick in that Canadian show continuum.less obtrusive.
It's the heat death of the universe, my friends.
Reply
It's the heat death of the universe, my friends.
Reply
post #48 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Entropys View Post

I think it would be better as a contact lens type of device. Kind of like what they do to the 'protector' chick in that Canadian show continuum.less obtrusive.

Sure. Something smaller, less obstructive and more natural looking is better butthetech to make that possible isn't close to being a reality.

You also need to consider that when it is afeasible will it be necessary. Who knows, maybe by then nanobots will make itso we don't need manually pop something on our cornea.

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #49 of 71

I've been long overdue for a new pair of glasses and if my insurance can pay for it, why not? 1wink.gif

post #50 of 71
Hope these weren't invented by Navin R. Johnson…

600

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/an-TEDR4tmJbhbJmm/the_jerk_1979_opti_grab_news_piece/
post #51 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

 

A great deal of the functionality of the goofy glasses is the same functionality purported to be in Apple's upcoming goofy bracelet.  

 

 

Purported, not verified.  Who knows what will be in this bracelet. If it even ever happens.

post #52 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post

 

I wonder if these devices, conspicuously in use as they must be, will be automatically banned in casinos, subways and other public places.

 

I believe it was Apple that had a patent on tech to block cameras and even cell phones. For such places.

 

And I can't help wondering if this kind of concern and possible lawsuits from it is part of why Google made the unit so ugly and obvious. No way not to know you might be filmed by the people wearing that nonsense

post #53 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Waiting for Person of Interest episode where Harold hacks someones Google Glasses and use it to track him/her.

 

Will that be before or after the episode where he has a custom pair built for John to watch video feeds etc.

 

And reveals that he invented the whole thing, just like social media.

 

for a view of our possible future check out the show Continuum. 

post #54 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post
but I see people all the time distracted with their cell phones while driving cars which is really scary and these young people are growing up with this mindset.

 

Is that a tech issue or a values one. People scoffed at the woman that gave her 13 year old an iPhone with a 20 point contract but it sounds like she's trying to raise a kid that won't be face in device all the time, among other issues.

post #55 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
. But don't put it right on my eyes. And don't put any information around the center of my field of view.

 

Thats the part that bugs me. As I understand it they are projecting this information right into folks eyes. That's how they are keeping the info private. 

 

And it bothers me that a tech company is allowed to do this. Call me paranoid but my eyes are my life and career and I do background checks on the doctors that RX my contacts. The notion of some tech company having the power to point anything into my eyes gives me shudders. I can't believe there isn't a way to use a lens that somehow obscures the image from the outside. So it's on the glasses not my eyeballs.

post #56 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by jakeb View Post

$1400? Man, this thing really is a Segway for your face.

 

Yep which will hamper any kind of mass adoption.

 

thîs could be a place where Apple under delivers and its the right way to go. Their glasses, watch etc could be dumb displays of a sort working only when paired to an iPhone, iPad or Touch. Display, Bluetooth earpieces (for stereo music playback) and camera with perhaps a Siri trigger on the side frame etc. but all real action is in the device. 

 

This could allow them to make it cheaper than this Google Glass and thus encourage adoption by a greater mass. Then in a year or two they could develop the means to put more functionality in the 'fashion' devices. 

post #57 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

 

Thats the part that bugs me. As I understand it they are projecting this information right into folks eyes. That's how they are keeping the info private. 

 

And it bothers me that a tech company is allowed to do this. Call me paranoid but my eyes are my life and career and I do background checks on the doctors that RX my contacts. The notion of some tech company having the power to point anything into my eyes gives me shudders. I can't believe there isn't a way to use a lens that somehow obscures the image from the outside. So it's on the glasses not my eyeballs.

If you take just a tiny bit of time to watch the Topolsky video at TheVerge you'll see you're mistaken. Images are not "projected right into folks eyes" so you can stop shuddering now.1smile.gif

http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/22/4013406/i-used-google-glass-its-the-future-with-monthly-updates

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #58 of 71

From the sounds of it, these are just BlueTooth headsets and since they aren't actual phones built in, they can't be traced. Which means, if you buy these and wear them in public places, expect someone to hit you over the head and steal them from you. I think there will be lots of people trying to steal these things since they are expensive geek toys. I'd stay away and not bring attention to oneself. Just a thought

post #59 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

From the sounds of it, these are just BlueTooth headsets and since they aren't actual phones built in, they can't be traced. Which means, if you buy these and wear them in public places, expect someone to hit you over the head and steal them from you. I think there will be lots of people trying to steal these things since they are expensive geek toys. I'd stay away and not bring attention to oneself. Just a though

Stolen like Apple gear is stolen so don't take your iPad or MacBook out in public either? IMO you're over-thinking it.

 

BTW, it's not just a Bluetooth headset. 

 

" there’s WiFi and Bluetooth, along with GPS, but no cellular radio – but the familiar sensors are present, including a gyroscope and an accelerometer to keep track of where the wearer is facing and what angle their head is at.

The eyepiece itself runs at 640 x 360 resolution and, when Glass is positioned on your face properly, floats discretely just above your line of vision; on the inner edge of the L-shaped housing there’s an infrared eye-tracking camera, while a bone conduction speaker is further back along. Glass is designed to get online either with its own WiFi connection, or to use Bluetooth and tether to your smartphone. That given, it’s pretty much platform agnostic for whatever device is used to get online: it doesn’t matter if you have a Galaxy S III in your pocket, or an iPhone, or a BlackBerry Z10, as long as they can be used as a modem."


Edited by Gatorguy - 2/23/13 at 8:47am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #60 of 71
This reminds me of my daughter's favorite cartoon, Dragonball Z. The Saiyans wore scouters over one eye to provide read outs on power levels and such. Is this "prior art" I wonder?
post #61 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

It'll be as compatible as Google Maps was before getting the heave-ho...

1wink.gif

Yep just enough to say its compatible but will leave out the best features. I don't blame them though, it is their product.
post #62 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Waiting for Person of Interest episode where Harold hacks someones Google Glasses and use it to track him/her.

Google does it for him. He just buys the info with his billions.
post #63 of 71

$1400 ??? Insane

 

Considering how much glasses get left behind, its an expensive mistake.

 

But what about the fact that peoples phones get nicked from their hands all the time in broad daylight.

 

How many people will have someone run up behind them, grab the glasses and leg it? At that value, its a great incentive for theives.

 

I love new tech and think this is a great step forward, but its got too many problems, many stated here already

 

1. What if you wear glasses already? Cant wear two.

2. Too easy to nick

3. WAAAY to expensive

4. Privacy

5. 'Prat' labels

6. iWatch will likely be $99-149 IMO

7. Has there been any research into the long term damage that could be done by your retinas having to focus on something so close all the time

8. Distraction device. How long before you are fined for driving with them on? 

post #64 of 71
All the cons everyone has mentioned are the same cons everyone was saying about the smartphone, the internet, every new technology that has been adopted. Here are the pros to these Glasses

  • Sign Language translation: An app can be made that can detect someone using sign language and translate it into text on the screen. This alone is HUGE
  • Scanning product bar codes: Imagine how shopping can change just by these glasses. You can compare prices INSTANTLY, don't even have to pull out your smartphone and take a pictures
  • Immediate text translation: You could go to China and understand everything that's written everywhere. (This is aside from the fact that you can easily get navigation)
  • Capturing Moments: There are times when taking out your smartphone and taking a picture or a video is 5 seconds too late. Imagine having the capability to capture something within a few seconds.
  • Augmented Gaming: Google has a game called ingress where you go around closing down portals and opening portals. The game revolves around actually moving around in the world. I can already imagine playing ingress with Google Glass.
  • Facebook: They already said they're excited to work on Google Glass. Imagine looking at someone and immediately being able to see their Facebook profile, or instantly sharing contact information by just adding them to Facebook with a nod of the head or something.
  • Other: Easily changing music tracks, receipt management (looking at a receipt saves it to like Mint or something), Trulia app (Seeing a house for sale, for how much, etc), listening to a song on the radio and buying it immediately if you like it, getting notifications instantly, Augmented Books, Going to a store and knowing if they have a Groupon or Living Social deal and saving money.

The possibilities for these glasses are endless. This is definitely the right direction to go, all the pros outweigh the cons in my book
post #65 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrrodriguez View Post

All the cons everyone has mentioned are the same cons everyone was saying about the smartphone, the internet, every new technology that has been adopted. Here are the pros to these Glasses

[ Sign Language translation: An app can be made that can detect someone using sign language and translate it into text on the screen. This alone is HUGE]
[Scanning product bar codes: Imagine how shopping can change just by these glasses. You can compare prices INSTANTLY, don't even have to pull out your smartphone and take a pictures]
[Immediate text translation: You could go to China and understand everything that's written everywhere. (This is aside from the fact that you can easily get navigation)]
[Capturing Moments: There are times when taking out your smartphone and taking a picture or a video is 5 seconds too late. Imagine having the capability to capture something within a few seconds.]
[Augmented Gaming: Google has a game called ingress where you go around closing down portals and opening portals. The game revolves around actually moving around in the world. I can already imagine playing ingress with Google Glass.]
[Facebook: They already said they're excited to work on Google Glass. Imagine looking at someone and immediately being able to see their Facebook profile, or instantly sharing contact information by just adding them to Facebook with a nod of the head or something.]
[Other: Easily changing music tracks, receipt management (looking at a receipt saves it to like Mint or something), Trulia app (Seeing a house for sale, for how much, etc), listening to a song on the radio and buying it immediately if you like it, getting notifications instantly, Augmented Books, Going to a store and knowing if they have a Groupon or Living Social deal and saving money.

The possibilities for these glasses are endless. This is definitely the right direction to go, all the pros outweigh the cons in my book


I don't think anyone here is against the idea of visual feedback built into a lens, just that Google hasn't shown this to be a very useful tech that will be adopted by the masses. You can say the same about the Apple Newton. No one reasonable would have said back then that we should always use CRT displays that aren't portable; the problem with the Newtown was that it simply wasn't a good enough device, which was mostly part of being released at a time where the technology didn't let it to work well for the market. This is important to technology. Being "too early" simply means that your technology doesn't make for a revolutionary product even if you are first to market. Look at the iPad despite MS having about 2 decades of attempts to make it work. Nothing about Google Glass has given me a sign it will be a success in creating a thriving market even though everything you stated (and a whole lot more) are ways that this will market will work… once the technology catches up to our desires and needs.

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #66 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Personally, I'm bothered by Google Glasses just because of the terrifying new world it purports to bring.

I don't want to see a generation raised on having an HUD on their faces 24/7. I don't want to see more morons causing accidents and killing people because they're looking at their HUDs instead of where they're going. I wouldn't be bothered by it except that the idiots killing themselves off also kill off intelligent people who can't get out of their way. If these things have GPS in them, they'd really ought to shut off and be wholly inoperable above speeds greater than 15MPH. 

This. Plus I don't even remotely want to have to think about that what I see just might be collected by a information-greedy company.
Luckily, Google is... Uhm...
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, my opinion, man.
Reply
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, my opinion, man.
Reply
post #67 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrrodriguez View Post

All the cons everyone has mentioned are the same cons everyone was saying about the smartphone, the internet, every new technology that has been adopted. 

 

Sometimes I joke that naysayers of any technology should be put on a master list, and when that technology becomes widespread, they should be the last to get it.  Ditto for people who put down the way predicted products look (for example, all those who claimed the iPhone 4 leaks "didn't look Apple like").

 

  • Sign Language translation: An app can be made that can detect someone using sign language and translate it into text on the screen. This alone is HUGE

 

  • Or translating speech to text for the deaf.  Or pointing out the direction of sounds and what they are, like an arrow pointing towards a siren coming down the street.

 

  • One search I would love to have is in bookstores.  How often have you tried to scan for a certain title?  What if you said, "Glasses, where's the book by T. Smith?" and it scans the spines of the books on the rack and circles the one you're looking for.

 

I think the technology will really take off when it can be built into regular frames for those of us who already wear glasses.  And/or into sunglasses that polarize as needed.

post #68 of 71

My question is this, whats in it for google ?

I assume they will use the poor buggers to data mine, like their silly street cars.

Serving up ads 24/7 is not my concern as I won't be partaking in this social engineering craze.

i will not take to kindly to wearers in conversing with me, I will simply ignore them, or use sign language (middle digit) to convey my disgust.

post #69 of 71
In three years, devices with better than this functionality will be $300, and about half of smartphone users will be using them. $1400? Getouttahere.
post #70 of 71
post #71 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


Not that i'll waste $1500 on this.

Thoughts are that Google Glass will sell in the $300-$500 range. If so it may be more successful than some here might expect (or wish). At $1500 I'd agree with you.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Google confirms iPhone compatibility for Glass, but questions remain over notifications
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google confirms iPhone compatibility for Glass, but questions remain over notifications