or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Using Google Glass: A series of awkward encounters
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Using Google Glass: A series of awkward encounters - Page 6

post #201 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


I personally think Google will find a way to significantly improve battery life. One of the changes already slated for the consumer version is an OLED display which by itself may be a big assist.


What good is OLED screen?  It is a much hyped display. 

post #202 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post

One of the AI reviews said the battery life is poor.  I doubt Google can improve the battery life significantly with the consumer version.  GG designers probably do not know people wearing glasses the weight is an important factor.

 

I don't think GG is meant as a mass consumer device yet.  It's still an experiment in progress.  Complaining right now is like complaining about the iOS 7 beta.
 
That said, it is interesting how many people here take offense at a GG wearer possibly filming their conversation.  That seems to make its near-future use probably tend to be more as a semi-niche device.  (Translation, tourism, professional, industrial, etc)
 
In other words, there are lots of valid and cool uses for a gizmo like this, but apparently wearing one all the time as a personal video diary might not be a publicly acceptable one.
 
post #203 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

 

I don't think GG is meant as a mass consumer device yet.  It's still an experiment in progress.  Complaining right now is like complaining about the iOS 7 beta.
 
That said, it is interesting how many people here take offense at a GG wearer possibly filming their conversation.  That seems to make its near-future use probably tend to be more as a semi-niche device.  (Translation, tourism, professional, industrial, etc)
 
In other words, there are lots of valid and cool uses for a gizmo like this, but apparently wearing one all the time as a personal video diary might not be a publicly acceptable one.
 


I doubt GG can be impractical for profession use.  The video streaming may have to be turned on fro extended period.  This will use large amount of data.  Worse of all it will drain the battery much faster.


Edited by tzeshan - 7/9/13 at 2:03pm
post #204 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

And that's not what Apple sells the iPhone 5 for. A lot of people are willing to pay the non-subsidized (contract free) price of at least $649.

Yep. I paid € 875 for my 64GB, off contract, as that would only make it more expensive. True, depending on carrier, that is.
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #205 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz1 View Post

Well, i do use the iPad now for star gazing. But pointing to a star with a device that blocks your sight is quite complicated.
It seems to me that just looking at a star is the (far) more simple approach.

You do know that there are plenty of augmented reality apps available that do exactly what you're talking about.

The ONLY difference is that GG is hands free.
post #206 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post


What good is OLED screen?  It is a much hyped display. 

 

All tech is hyped. The ideal option for you may come down to what you use your phone for most. If you like to watch movies and play games on your phone, AMOLED might be the better choice, thanks to its hugely superior contrast ratio compared to LCD. However, if web browsing and document viewing is more your thing, LCD usually offers slightly crisper text, making it easier to read what's on screen over long periods. In either case, you're unlikely to be disappointed with the best of what manufacturers offer.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #207 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

As annoying as mobile phones can be, they are not stealth. If someone points their stupid phone at me, I see it.
If someone wears something like GG integrated into normal looking eyeglasses, then it's very stealth.

If someone points a camera at you, you can confront the person to stop doing it, delete the footage, and if things are harassing call the police.
If someone walks around with camouflaged GG, you can do exactly nothing, because you don't even know it's happening.

HUGE DIFFERENCE.

Edited by zoetmb - 7/10/13 at 6:36am
post #208 of 231
While I completely agree that there will be major backlash to GG and that there are major privacy issues, the fact remains that under U.S. law, there is no expectation of privacy in a public place.

And while I personally hate the idea of GG, we might get over this just as we've gotten over people walking down the streets talking to themselves and the egos of people who spend their lives on Twitter, Facebook and other such sites and think we care about what fast food they ate for lunch.
post #209 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

While I completely agree that there will be major backlash to GG and that there are major privacy issues, the fact remains that under U.S. law, there is no expectation of privacy in a public place.

And while I personally hate the idea of GG, we might get over this just as we've gotten over people walking down the streets talking to themselves and the egos of people who spend their lives on Twitter, Facebook and other such sites and think we care about what fast food they ate for lunch.

 

On the street, maybe so, but not when they enter private property or many other types of public establishment.

post #210 of 231

Some authors keep saying GG is a computer. This is also wrong. GG is not a computer.  GG is not a cell phone.  GG is a smartphone accessory. Google is being hyped by the stupid media.  Like this the street.com article.  Note that Edwards has worked for cnet.  This speaks very well how technical cnet people really is.  And Google has been disingenuous since the beginning.

 

http://www.thestreet.com/story/11975081/1/the-digital-skeptic-get-ready-for-a-google-glass-crash.html?puc=yahoo&cm_ven=YAHOO

"Edwards is deeply worried that Google's slick, soon-to-market, wearable immersive computer, Google Glass, is on track to be Web Advertising 3.0. That is, just another in a long line of Internet marketing disasters."


Edited by tzeshan - 7/11/13 at 8:59am
post #211 of 231

GG is just a prototype. The next thing is Google contacts: Google will cram all the tech power of GG into a contact lens just like in the movie.  Hope Apple can beat Google to it.

post #212 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by coollector View Post

Please explain why you prefer Apple over Google. You like to pay the Apple tax? You like to be treated with disdain?

Apple tax? Google is charging $1500 for a cell phone accessory.

Also I bet he values his privacy. Something Google tries to work around and sell.
post #213 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


Google is charging $1500 for a cell phone accessory.

It's the price paid by the developers to get a prototype. The public price will be much lower.

 

But I agree with you that Google is bad at privacy.

post #214 of 231

I think Glass is too much for a consumer product.

 

However, there are alot of potential professional applications for this sort of thing.  Imagine a construction or factory worker being able to superimpose blueprints or instructions on the material he's actually working on, and record incidents at work?  Not to mention, the technology is transferable to HUDs of all types, and the miniaturization techniques are transferable to phones.  

 

Projects like Glass and the Google car aren't intended to be big commercial successes right now, but they will undoubtedly shape the products of tomorrow.  

post #215 of 231
This google glass sounds extremely priced, and what do they do for people with prescription lenses?
post #216 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curtis Hannah View Post

This google glass sounds extremely priced, and what do they do for people with prescription lenses?

http://mashable.com/2013/03/12/google-glass-prescription-lenses/
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #217 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curtis Hannah View Post

This google glass sounds extremely priced, and what do they do for people with prescription lenses?

 

It's obviously still a work in progress.  More like an experiment than anything else.

 

I think more companies should do such experimentation, instead of just waiting until they think something id perfect enough to be a big commercial success.

post #218 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

 

It's obviously still a work in progress.  More like an experiment than anything else.

 

I think more companies should do such experimentation, instead of just waiting until they think something id perfect enough to be a big commercial success.

 

I'm sure lots of companies do similar experimentation, they just don't get on a pedestal and shout about what they're doing. 

 

In my opinion, things like this and self-driving cars are Google's equivalent of a "halo effect". 

post #219 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post

 

I'm sure lots of companies do similar experimentation, they just don't get on a pedestal and shout about what they're doing. 

 

In my opinion, things like this and self-driving cars are Google's equivalent of a "halo effect". 


Not sure if you were being facetious, but I agree that it is a "halo effect" and has worked well for google's public image/brand.

 

What amazes me is the double-standard that the media/public have towards this.  Google is given a free pass when they fail at things like TV, self-driving cars, google apps, smart phones, etc.  But Apple is torn into shreds when iPhones do not have NFC, etc.

 

Maybe Apple would be better off taking the google approach (similar to ATV) and just have a whole lot more "hobbies"?

post #220 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewys808 View Post


Not sure if you were being facetious, but I agree that it is a "halo effect" and has worked well for google's public image/brand.

 

What amazes me is the double-standard that the media/public have towards this.  Google is given a free pass when they fail at things like TV, self-driving cars, google apps, smart phones, etc.  But Apple is torn into shreds when iPhones do not have NFC, etc.

 

Maybe Apple would be better off taking the google approach (similar to ATV) and just have a whole lot more "hobbies"?

 

I was being entirely genuine. Maybe "halo effect" is the wrong term; it's similar to Lexus building a super car that will never hit the streets. It's impractical, but benefits the brand (it gets people talking, and there's the trickle down "I wanna check out what else they have").

 

To a certain degree, this is what Apple's Mac Pro is for, from a business perspective at least (I think Apple also genuinely has pride in it).

 

My point though was that you shouldn't expect any of these devices to ever be successful products. They're there to show off, and promote the Google brand. Of course, some tech will make its way into actual consumer products. 

post #221 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post


You are ignoring the truths.  The article wrongly called Google Glass as a cell phone.  It does not have a cell phone chip inside it.  So it can not be called a cell phone.  Google and its supporters want the fools believe that Google created a great device.  The truths is GG is not worth $1500.  Its components worth probably just $100. 

Google Glass runs Android with a card interface. It has Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, gyroscope and an accelerometer. It pairs with other devices that don't have to be cell-phones to get signal and GPS data. 

 

It displays live updating turn-by-turn driving directions. It has a camera, microphone, and display. It's a cell-phone minus the cell modem that is intended to be used for calling. Telling people it's a cell phone for the head is actually a pretty good summary, especially when they don't care about whether or not it pairs with a phone in the pocket, but instead care about what it's doing on the wearer's head pointed at them.

post #222 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post

 Telling people it's a cell phone for the head is actually a pretty good summary, especially when they don't care about whether or not it pairs with a phone in the pocket, but instead care about what it's doing on the wearer's head pointed at them.

You are disingenuous as Google and many Google fans. You can not make a call without pairing with a smartphone running a GG app.  

post #223 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post

You are disingenuous as Google and many Google fans. You can not make a call without pairing with a smartphone running a GG app.  

Not entirely correct.

 

iOS has no Google Glass app. When paired with any iPhone, it will take and make calls based on the contacts that are in Glass via web setup (releases 4, 5, 6 of the Android OS for glass.)

 

It's also possible to use Glass with Nexus 7 which has no cell modem or phone dialer, but passes the GPS data from Nexus to Glass. (A bit of a cheat might be using Google Voice on Android as the dialer, and establishing calls that way.)

 

But based on Glass' BOM, it's got a lot in common with a smartphone. What do you use a cell phone for? Taking pictures, sharing, making web searches, emailing, getting driving directions. What does Google want people to use Glass for? So far, the same things.

 

How do you quickly summarize it for people who want to know what's pointing at them, or what you're looking at in the corner of your eye?

post #224 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post

Not entirely correct.

 

iOS has no Google Glass app. When paired with any iPhone, it will take and make calls based on the contacts that are in Glass via web setup (releases 4, 5, 6 of the Android OS for glass.)

 

It's also possible to use Glass with Nexus 7 which has no cell modem or phone dialer, but passes the GPS data from Nexus to Glass. (A bit of a cheat might be using Google Voice on Android as the dialer, and establishing calls that way.)

 

But based on Glass' BOM, it's got a lot in common with a smartphone. What do you use a cell phone for? Taking pictures, sharing, making web searches, emailing, getting driving directions. What does Google want people to use Glass for? So far, the same things.

 

How do you quickly summarize it for people who want to know what's pointing at them, or what you're looking at in the corner of your eye?

Please google the meaning of cell phone.  I think you are confused of the meaning of cell phone. 

post #225 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post

Not entirely correct.

It's also possible to use Glass with Nexus 7 which has no cell modem or phone dialer....

The Nexus 7 has had a 3G version since the beginning. Though it doesn't come standard with phone functionality, just data, XDA has a APK that can be installed to add it by using the software from the Nexus 4. Making the Nexus 7 into a cheap phablet, not a bad one either.
Edited by Relic - 7/21/13 at 2:18am
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #226 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewys808 View Post


Not sure if you were being facetious, but I agree that it is a "halo effect" and has worked well for google's public image/brand.

 

What amazes me is the double-standard that the media/public have towards this.  Google is given a free pass when they fail at things like TV, self-driving cars, google apps, smart phones, etc.  But Apple is torn into shreds when iPhones do not have NFC, etc.

 

Maybe Apple would be better off taking the google approach (similar to ATV) and just have a whole lot more "hobbies"?

 

For everything Google has failed at, they've succeeded at alot more.  Maps, Documents, Android, Cloud services, advertising, search are all successes.  The self-driving cars are probably still years away, but the prototypes have been mostly successful.  Google gets away with all this because of their approach - they advise users of the 'beta' status of things, people get used to their experimentation, and because most of their services are free users can forgive the gaffes.  

 

Apple doesn't get away with the same things because of the premium pricing, and their lofty claims.  

post #227 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikeb85 View Post

 

For everything Google has failed at, they've succeeded at alot more.  Maps, Documents, Android, Cloud services, advertising, search are all successes.  The self-driving cars are probably still years away, but the prototypes have been mostly successful.  Google gets away with all this because of their approach - they advise users of the 'beta' status of things, people get used to their experimentation, and because most of their services are free users can forgive the gaffes.  

 

Apple doesn't get away with the same things because of the premium pricing, and their lofty claims.  

 

One more reason why programs like Maps will remain beta for years to come is to try to avoid frivolous lawsuits like the one below.

 

"A Utah woman used Google Maps' walking directions on her Blackberry and was given directions to walk onto a highway. She got hit and is now suing Google for damages."

post #228 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by DroidFTW View Post

 

One more reason why programs like Maps will remain beta for years to come is to try to avoid frivolous lawsuits like the one below.

 

"A Utah woman used Google Maps' walking directions on her Blackberry and was given directions to walk onto a highway. She got hit and is now suing Google for damages."

 

The stupidity of people never ceases to amaze me.  

post #229 of 231

Do you believe this WSJ article?  The author said he can use GG without any other electronics.

Lost in the Woods With Glass

Earlier this month, my colleagues kidnapped me, dumped me in the woods, confiscated my electronics and — before speeding away — challenged me to find them.

My coworkers gave me one tool. Not a compass or a map; it was Google Glass.

Google gave us a prototype of Glass, the smartphone designed to be worn like a pair of eyeglasses. By now the features are well documented. A small piece of glass in front of my right eye displayed what I’d normally see on a phone screen: time, maps, websites. I controlled it with my voice, telling it to do things like “take a picture” and asking it to find out what poison ivy looks like.

 

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2013/07/22/lost-in-the-woods-with-glass/?mod=yahoo_hs


Edited by tzeshan - 7/22/13 at 10:46am
post #230 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post

Do you believe this WSJ article?  The author said he can use GG without any other electronics.

Lost in the Woods With Glass

Earlier this month, my colleagues kidnapped me, dumped me in the woods, confiscated my electronics and — before speeding away — challenged me to find them.

My coworkers gave me one tool. Not a compass or a map; it was Google Glass.

Google gave us a prototype of Glass, the smartphone designed to be worn like a pair of eyeglasses. By now the features are well documented. A small piece of glass in front of my right eye displayed what I’d normally see on a phone screen: time, maps, websites. I controlled it with my voice, telling it to do things like “take a picture” and asking it to find out what poison ivy looks like.

 

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2013/07/22/lost-in-the-woods-with-glass/?mod=yahoo_hs

 

It doesn't make sense. Glass needs to get a data connection from somewhere via Bluetooth or Wi-Fi. 

 

They had to have given him a cellular->Wi-Fi hotspot at least. Without an Android device with GPS in it running the MyGlass app, "...get directions to..." won't work. It needs the GPS of the Android device to know which way to route. 

post #231 of 231

It was clearly a comedic report, but yes, you could write them and complain that it's misleading, and that they should add a disclaimer.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Using Google Glass: A series of awkward encounters