Saying over and over that Google F'd up doesn't mean it is true. Your assumptions and biases are at fault, because you insist that the product is even intended to have a mass market appeal. But of course it isn't, and insisting that it should is a bit like insisting that the average person should want to go buy a stethoscope. So you are essentially leveling the argument that a manufacturer of stethoscopes has failed because you don't see half the crowd on the subway wearing them. And that sort of argument is rubbish, lets be honest.
Glass is an experiment. So are Google's self driving cars. They are efforts to build 'version 1' of an entirely new category of things, and to work toward consumer uses of these technologies. Arguing that they are failures because the entire category as a consumer grade phenomenon is nascent at this time is, in my opinion, an absurd position to take.
You're "Google doesn't want it to be a successful product" argument is a whole new level of the sour grapes argument.
It's like when a cat jumps down and loses it's footing for a second so it decides to lay down for a minute but then looks around to see who saw him miss his landing while hoping you think that he meant to do that. (Does anyone know what I'm talking about?)
You're "Google doesn't want it to be a successful product" argument is a whole new level of the sour grapes argument.
PS: Now you've fucked up!
Actually I know that Google isn't aiming at some sort of mass market phenomenon with the device because they have stated so.
Off topic - are you going out of your way to be an abrasive arse, or is that just your personal style?
You are being willfully obnoxious. You cling to your own definition of what 'success' would mean for a product, and you refuse to recognize how basically flawed and absurd that definition is.
I think I need to let this go, now, because it is just a tremendously unproductive waste of time - I have much better things to do with my time than debate you on a topic where you are willfully clinging to your biases and where your core problem is the simple bias that Glass doesn't have an Apple logo on it. And you don't even have the intellectual honesty (or perhaps capacity) to recognize that you are biased - tremendously so. But I can tell you this - if Steve Jobs had unveiled something like Glass and called it a 'hobby' where we 'think there is something there', we wouldn't even be having this conversation, because you and the rest of the fanzis here would be lauding it for the sheer vision, despite its practical limitations.
Oh wait - that was Apple TV.
Apple insider is, in general, a den of irrationality, and from my conversation with you, I see that extends directly from the staff. For the most part it isn't possible to have an open or honest conversation here, and I recognize that I should have remained silent because this is a gigantic waste of time.
PS - Being the biggest douche in the room, or swinging your dick around harder than the rest of the monkeys, doesn't establish your superiority or make you an endearing human - might want to consider that.
Maybe I should edit my message too, and remove the abrasive response?
How is this any different then the first iteration of Google Glass that came out? The technology is obvious it is just on a different frame. It doesn't flow with the design of the glasses.
Actually I know that Google isn't aiming at some sort of mass market phenomenon with the device because they have stated so.
Off topic - are you going out of your way to be an abrasive arse, or is that just your personal style?
You are being willfully obnoxious. You cling to your own definition of what 'success' would mean for a product, and you refuse to recognize how basically flawed and absurd that definition is.
I think I need to let this go, now, because it is just a tremendously unproductive waste of time - I have much better things to do with my time than debate you on a topic where you are willfully clinging to your biases and where your core problem is the simple bias that Glass doesn't have an Apple logo on it. And you don't even have the intellectual honesty (or perhaps capacity) to recognize that you are biased - tremendously so. But I can tell you this - if Steve Jobs had unveiled something like Glass and called it a 'hobby' where we 'think there is something there', we wouldn't even be having this conversation, because you and the rest of the fanzis here would be lauding it for the sheer vision, despite its practical limitations.
Oh wait - that was Apple TV.
Apple insider is, in general, a den of irrationality, and from my conversation with you, I see that extends directly from the staff. For the most part it isn't possible to have an open or honest conversation here, and I recognize that I should have remained silent because this is a gigantic waste of time.
1) Wrong, nope, yes, why not, wrong again, and probably for the best.
2) The Apple TV is a great example of Apple fucking up in much the same manner as Google did with Glass, although not to the same extent. Apple announced the Apple about 4 months before the iPhone was announced. They did something unusual for Apple; they demoed it yet not only had a release date or price but also no name. Its codenamed with iTV back then.
Why did they do this? My guess — remember this was 2006 — is to appeal to the content owners to get them to be OK with digital downloads by seeing the reactions of those that wanted an "iPod for the living room." It didn't work. Apple had Disney/MGM and it was pulling teeth to get all the others on board with any decent content.
Even after some agreed it was still purchases, not rentals, and then there was the failed attempt at giving codes if you bought Blu-ray — remember the Blu-ray v HD-DVD wars. Perhaps they were scared (of downloads and/or how Apple controlled the music industry in short order) and/or perhaps they didn't like Apple's terms. Regardless, it was a failed attempt in late-2006
Then Apple re-announced and demoed the Apple TV with its proper name and price and shipping date that I think came in March or April of that year. They fucked up again because they did right before the iPhone announcements and demo. It was overshadowed to the point I doubt most here even remember that being part of the iPhone event in January 2007.
It was also too expensive therefore not appealing to enough of the base, while being too slow and too hot and not offering enough features. It was then left to rot for away too long before being updated to a proper iOS-based ARM device that cost under $100 with it's 4th(?) UI look. The original Apple TV is nothing like the current one in either HW, UI, or even fundamental logistics as there is no local HDD storage.
It was only after they had the content, the HW, the SW, the logistics, and pricing did it actually take off and did you hear Apple talk about it with pride in their quarterly reports and get frequent updates. Perhaps in 6 more years Google Glass won't be such a **** up, but right now and for over two years running it's a piece of shit.
So... tt92618 is back again. I guess he wasn't lying when he said he worked for all platforms. I apologize for suggesting he was just an Amazon shill. Apparently he's simply a universal contrarian.
Actually I know that Google isn't aiming at some sort of mass market phenomenon with the device because they have stated so.
Off topic - are you going out of your way to be an abrasive arse, or is that just your personal style?
You are being willfully obnoxious. You cling to your own definition of what 'success' would mean for a product, and you refuse to recognize how basically flawed and absurd that definition is.
I think I need to let this go, now, because it is just a tremendously unproductive waste of time - I have much better things to do with my time than debate you on a topic where you are willfully clinging to your biases and where your core problem is the simple bias that Glass doesn't have an Apple logo on it. And you don't even have the intellectual honesty (or perhaps capacity) to recognize that you are biased - tremendously so. But I can tell you this - if Steve Jobs had unveiled something like Glass and called it a 'hobby' where we 'think there is something there', we wouldn't even be having this conversation, because you and the rest of the fanzis here would be lauding it for the sheer vision, despite its practical limitations.
Oh wait - that was Apple TV.
Apple insider is, in general, a den of irrationality, and from my conversation with you, I see that extends directly from the staff. For the most part it isn't possible to have an open or honest conversation here, and I recognize that I should have remained silent because this is a gigantic waste of time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
So... tt92618 is back again. I guess he wasn't lying when he said he worked for all platforms. I apologize for suggesting he was just an Amazon shill. Apparently he's simply a universal contrarian.
No I'm a technologist and yes, a developer, and unlike youI don't have an agenda with respect to any particular platform - I simply like cool technology, and I'm happy to recognize it wherever it comes from, and regardless of the logo affixed to it.
By the way, I was really irked by your personal attacks on me, mostly because you have no basis for them at all; they are purely bias driven, are not substantive, and serve no purpose whatsoever. They are juvenile. Your sarcastic commentary questioning the veracity of my statements about development (because I cite so many different platforms) were particularly oafish because you clearly know nothing about actually doing development work. I say that because if you did, you would recognize that there are many development platforms that allow deployment to many targets. Unity, for example, allows a game developer to write a single code base and deploy it to iOS, Windows, Windows Phone 8, Android, Blackberry 10, Windows App Store apps, Mac OS, Linux, Web browsers (via unity web player), Playstation, XBox, and Wii. And oh yeah, Amazon provides plugins so you can target their stuff too. It's EASY to be a multi-platform developer in this day and age, and having an irrational bias towards any one is a true liability as a developer. You mocking me for it simply shows what an ignoramus you are.
You are irrational - you and the rest of the fanzis here. You are truly irrational in your absolute hatred, mockery, and dismissive attitudes towards anything non-Apple. And it is sad for you. There is so much cool stuff out here in the rest of the world. Some of it is built by Apple, and some of it isn't. It is really sad the way you willingly lobotomize yourselves and render yourselves incapable of gaining value of benefit from non-Apple products. You can't even bring yourselves to admit it when someone else does something neat.
As a developer, I just think the whole thing is laughable. I see no reason to slavishly tie myself to any particular company. I don't need to invest a fragile ego into feeling superior about a stupid product and my support of it. Quite the opposite - I get value from being willing to evaluate technologies on the benefit of the technologies alone. Because ultimately I have more opportunities doing so.
Anyway, I have real things, of actual benefit, to accomplish. So I'll leave you for now.
In 31 months you've posted 17,202 comments. Which means you average more than 18 a day. Which begs the question "how many of those could have been thoughtful or had any merit?"
Answer: not many.
You are a mocker - as your responses to me make abundantly clear. And that, plus your incredible volume of doing so, makes you little more than a tiny minnow swimming around a fetid pool congratulating itself on how much crap it has managed to excrete that day.
10 years from now no one will find it unusual, anymore than few seriously worry about surreptitious recording from someone's smartphone today (unless you're a dress-wearing woman in Wal-mart :rolleyes: .) If anything it's probably easier to take a sneak pic or video with one of those than Google Glass. Do a search for something like "Take a sneaky picture with iOS7" to see how easy it is.
Seriously, how far up Google ass are you? This "people can take sneaky photos of you in other ways" argument is so damn weak. Why is it so difficult for Google evangelists like you to understand that someone with a camera/computer strapped on their damn face makes people uncomfortable, and justifiably so? If I was talking to someone wearing Google Glass, that monstrosity would be all that I could focus on, and nothing else.
Also, we're today, not "10 years from now". Making an asinine prediction of how you think things will change in the future is such a cowardly way of avoiding responding to arguments made about the product today. Also, that's quite the assumptions- that "noone" will find it unsual 10 years from now- you don't know that, and I find that prediction very difficult to believe. The face is a sacred part of the body, and there's no indication that looking like a cyborg and having a camera permanently strapped to your face will be the norm in a few years, as much as you and google would love it to be. Glass is a PR disaster, I don't see the mainstream clamoring for such a product, and there's no reason social norms are suddenly going to change so suddenly. Don't use smartphones and tablets as a comparison, because that example is not even in the same universe.
Glorious comment, Slurpy.
All these people comparing taking a video on a phone to Google Glasses-so dumb. When we hold a phone up to our face, it is an honest act that signifies to everyone what we are doing. Wearing Glass? Who knows what you are doing?
So... tt92618 is back again. I guess he wasn't lying when he said he worked for all platforms. I apologize for suggesting he was just an Amazon shill. Apparently he's simply a universal contrarian.
No I'm a technologist and yes, a developer, and unlike youI don't have an agenda with respect to any particular platform - I simply like cool technology, and I'm happy to recognize it wherever it comes from, and regardless of the logo affixed to it.
I'm not sure I have an agenda. What did I say that gave you that impression? I have a preference, but not an agenda. I use all sort of Google services like Gmail, Analytics, Search, News, Translation, Drive and Maps, to name a few. I never said anything against Glass although I know I am not interested in buying it. Sure, I prefer Apple devices and computers, although I have both Windows and Linux. I haven't had the pleasure of trying Android yet. Let's just say I haven't gotten around to it. I've been busy.
Comments
You're "Google doesn't want it to be a successful product" argument is a whole new level of the sour grapes argument.
It's like when a cat jumps down and loses it's footing for a second so it decides to lay down for a minute but then looks around to see who saw him miss his landing while hoping you think that he meant to do that. (Does anyone know what I'm talking about?)
You're "Google doesn't want it to be a successful product" argument is a whole new level of the sour grapes argument.
PS: Now you've fucked up!
Actually I know that Google isn't aiming at some sort of mass market phenomenon with the device because they have stated so.
Off topic - are you going out of your way to be an abrasive arse, or is that just your personal style?
You are being willfully obnoxious. You cling to your own definition of what 'success' would mean for a product, and you refuse to recognize how basically flawed and absurd that definition is.
I think I need to let this go, now, because it is just a tremendously unproductive waste of time - I have much better things to do with my time than debate you on a topic where you are willfully clinging to your biases and where your core problem is the simple bias that Glass doesn't have an Apple logo on it. And you don't even have the intellectual honesty (or perhaps capacity) to recognize that you are biased - tremendously so. But I can tell you this - if Steve Jobs had unveiled something like Glass and called it a 'hobby' where we 'think there is something there', we wouldn't even be having this conversation, because you and the rest of the fanzis here would be lauding it for the sheer vision, despite its practical limitations.
Oh wait - that was Apple TV.
Apple insider is, in general, a den of irrationality, and from my conversation with you, I see that extends directly from the staff. For the most part it isn't possible to have an open or honest conversation here, and I recognize that I should have remained silent because this is a gigantic waste of time.
PS - Being the biggest douche in the room, or swinging your dick around harder than the rest of the monkeys, doesn't establish your superiority or make you an endearing human - might want to consider that.
Maybe I should edit my message too, and remove the abrasive response?
I accept your apology
How is this any different then the first iteration of Google Glass that came out? The technology is obvious it is just on a different frame. It doesn't flow with the design of the glasses.
1) Wrong, nope, yes, why not, wrong again, and probably for the best.
2) The Apple TV is a great example of Apple fucking up in much the same manner as Google did with Glass, although not to the same extent. Apple announced the Apple about 4 months before the iPhone was announced. They did something unusual for Apple; they demoed it yet not only had a release date or price but also no name. Its codenamed with iTV back then.
Why did they do this? My guess — remember this was 2006 — is to appeal to the content owners to get them to be OK with digital downloads by seeing the reactions of those that wanted an "iPod for the living room." It didn't work. Apple had Disney/MGM and it was pulling teeth to get all the others on board with any decent content.
Even after some agreed it was still purchases, not rentals, and then there was the failed attempt at giving codes if you bought Blu-ray — remember the Blu-ray v HD-DVD wars. Perhaps they were scared (of downloads and/or how Apple controlled the music industry in short order) and/or perhaps they didn't like Apple's terms. Regardless, it was a failed attempt in late-2006
Then Apple re-announced and demoed the Apple TV with its proper name and price and shipping date that I think came in March or April of that year. They fucked up again because they did right before the iPhone announcements and demo. It was overshadowed to the point I doubt most here even remember that being part of the iPhone event in January 2007.
It was also too expensive therefore not appealing to enough of the base, while being too slow and too hot and not offering enough features. It was then left to rot for away too long before being updated to a proper iOS-based ARM device that cost under $100 with it's 4th(?) UI look. The original Apple TV is nothing like the current one in either HW, UI, or even fundamental logistics as there is no local HDD storage.
It was only after they had the content, the HW, the SW, the logistics, and pricing did it actually take off and did you hear Apple talk about it with pride in their quarterly reports and get frequent updates. Perhaps in 6 more years Google Glass won't be such a **** up, but right now and for over two years running it's a piece of shit.
So... tt92618 is back again. I guess he wasn't lying when he said he worked for all platforms. I apologize for suggesting he was just an Amazon shill. Apparently he's simply a universal contrarian.
Actually I know that Google isn't aiming at some sort of mass market phenomenon with the device because they have stated so.
Off topic - are you going out of your way to be an abrasive arse, or is that just your personal style?
You are being willfully obnoxious. You cling to your own definition of what 'success' would mean for a product, and you refuse to recognize how basically flawed and absurd that definition is.
I think I need to let this go, now, because it is just a tremendously unproductive waste of time - I have much better things to do with my time than debate you on a topic where you are willfully clinging to your biases and where your core problem is the simple bias that Glass doesn't have an Apple logo on it. And you don't even have the intellectual honesty (or perhaps capacity) to recognize that you are biased - tremendously so. But I can tell you this - if Steve Jobs had unveiled something like Glass and called it a 'hobby' where we 'think there is something there', we wouldn't even be having this conversation, because you and the rest of the fanzis here would be lauding it for the sheer vision, despite its practical limitations.
Oh wait - that was Apple TV.
Apple insider is, in general, a den of irrationality, and from my conversation with you, I see that extends directly from the staff. For the most part it isn't possible to have an open or honest conversation here, and I recognize that I should have remained silent because this is a gigantic waste of time.
So... tt92618 is back again. I guess he wasn't lying when he said he worked for all platforms. I apologize for suggesting he was just an Amazon shill. Apparently he's simply a universal contrarian.
No I'm a technologist and yes, a developer, and unlike you I don't have an agenda with respect to any particular platform - I simply like cool technology, and I'm happy to recognize it wherever it comes from, and regardless of the logo affixed to it.
By the way, I was really irked by your personal attacks on me, mostly because you have no basis for them at all; they are purely bias driven, are not substantive, and serve no purpose whatsoever. They are juvenile. Your sarcastic commentary questioning the veracity of my statements about development (because I cite so many different platforms) were particularly oafish because you clearly know nothing about actually doing development work. I say that because if you did, you would recognize that there are many development platforms that allow deployment to many targets. Unity, for example, allows a game developer to write a single code base and deploy it to iOS, Windows, Windows Phone 8, Android, Blackberry 10, Windows App Store apps, Mac OS, Linux, Web browsers (via unity web player), Playstation, XBox, and Wii. And oh yeah, Amazon provides plugins so you can target their stuff too. It's EASY to be a multi-platform developer in this day and age, and having an irrational bias towards any one is a true liability as a developer. You mocking me for it simply shows what an ignoramus you are.
You are irrational - you and the rest of the fanzis here. You are truly irrational in your absolute hatred, mockery, and dismissive attitudes towards anything non-Apple. And it is sad for you. There is so much cool stuff out here in the rest of the world. Some of it is built by Apple, and some of it isn't. It is really sad the way you willingly lobotomize yourselves and render yourselves incapable of gaining value of benefit from non-Apple products. You can't even bring yourselves to admit it when someone else does something neat.
As a developer, I just think the whole thing is laughable. I see no reason to slavishly tie myself to any particular company. I don't need to invest a fragile ego into feeling superior about a stupid product and my support of it. Quite the opposite - I get value from being willing to evaluate technologies on the benefit of the technologies alone. Because ultimately I have more opportunities doing so.
Anyway, I have real things, of actual benefit, to accomplish. So I'll leave you for now.
I accept your apology ;-)
You say that a lot but keep posting.
You say that a lot but keep posting.
You are nothing but a mocker.
You are nothing but a mocker.
I thought you were leaving.
Then that makes you a mockmuncher?
I thought you were leaving.
I might just hang around just to make you unhappy.
Ah, Naked Gun. I have yet to watch the third one; the trailer looks good. He sadly died recently.
Ah, Naked Gun. I have yet to watch the third one; the trailer looks good. He sadly died recently.
Four years ago.
Funny!
Dare I say it, apparently, one of the perks of being a guy is that I can throw on the next shirt that is at the end of my wardrobe.
I might just hang around just to make you unhappy.
Oh, that’s rich. Making me unhappy.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
What’s even worse is that last I heard they’re going to keep making the 4th one without him.
Then that makes you a mockmuncher?
In 31 months you've posted 17,202 comments. Which means you average more than 18 a day. Which begs the question "how many of those could have been thoughtful or had any merit?"
Answer: not many.
You are a mocker - as your responses to me make abundantly clear. And that, plus your incredible volume of doing so, makes you little more than a tiny minnow swimming around a fetid pool congratulating itself on how much crap it has managed to excrete that day.
Good for you - keep up the 'work'.
Glorious comment, Slurpy.
All these people comparing taking a video on a phone to Google Glasses-so dumb. When we hold a phone up to our face, it is an honest act that signifies to everyone what we are doing. Wearing Glass? Who knows what you are doing?
So... tt92618 is back again. I guess he wasn't lying when he said he worked for all platforms. I apologize for suggesting he was just an Amazon shill. Apparently he's simply a universal contrarian.
No I'm a technologist and yes, a developer, and unlike you I don't have an agenda with respect to any particular platform - I simply like cool technology, and I'm happy to recognize it wherever it comes from, and regardless of the logo affixed to it.
I'm not sure I have an agenda. What did I say that gave you that impression? I have a preference, but not an agenda. I use all sort of Google services like Gmail, Analytics, Search, News, Translation, Drive and Maps, to name a few. I never said anything against Glass although I know I am not interested in buying it. Sure, I prefer Apple devices and computers, although I have both Windows and Linux. I haven't had the pleasure of trying Android yet. Let's just say I haven't gotten around to it. I've been busy.