

Google Glass code hints at spatial gestures - vimarshk
http://thenextweb.com/google/2013/04/22/google-glass-code-hints-at-spatial-gestures-including-two-finger-browser-zoom-and-winking-to-take-a-photo/?fromcat=mobile

======
turing
Do we have any indication that these are actually Leap Motion style gestures?
When I read this I assumed it was merely a two-finger gesture on the trackpad
on the side of the device. In a recent TED video, a Google UX designer said
that they looked into such gestures for Glass and decided not to include them
in the product [1].

1\. [http://ed.ted.com/lessons/rapid-prototyping-google-glass-
tom...](http://ed.ted.com/lessons/rapid-prototyping-google-glass-tom-chi)

~~~
dchichkov
With the current tech there is no way Google can put in computer-vision based
two-finger gesture into Glass. There isn't enough processing power in the cell
phone linked to the Glass. And there isn't enough space in the Glass for a
custom computer vision chip. So it is likely that you are right, and it is
merely a two-finger touchpad gesture.

------
ryanac
Great, as if people walking around talking to "no one" wasn't bad enough, now
people will be randomly grabbing at air and twitching their eyes. How are we
supposed to separate the crazy people from the sane?! And the real question
here, who's going to be the first person to accidentally pinch their friends
nose when trying to zoom? How will we recover from such embarrassment? Is it
in the warranty?!

On the other hand this does look interesting, I wonder if you could use this
to "select" things in the world like "click/point to" a restaurant sign to
learn more.

~~~
psbp
Great, whenever anyone uses this new technology they'll be warped into a
bizarro Charlie Chaplin style universe where everyone is a buffoonish clutz.

------
zalew
> Glass will be made by a third party but feature support from Google

I hope in the future it will be made only by 3rd parties. Say, you buy nicely
looking designer shades and they have google glass. Right now it's ugly,
vulgar, creepy and has a high douchebaggery factor, I wonder how they want to
convince people to walk around with this thing on their faces.

~~~
raldi
It wasn't so long ago that you were a douche if you walked around in public
talking into a cell phone.

Or if you drove around showing off your crazy automobile contraption instead
of riding a horse like a normal person.

Or if you wore a timepiece strapped to your wrist, instead of on a chain in
your pocket like a proper gentleman. (And later, if the watch on your wrist
had some kind of ugly LCD thing, instead of a handsome analog face.)

Then again, there was a time when you were a douche if you rode around on a
Segway... and _that_ period never ended.

So I guess this could go either way.

~~~
gfodor
Unlike these other things, owning Glass is an "all-in" proposition. You can
put the cell phone away. You can park the car. Hell, you can get off the
Segway even.

Glass? It is on your face. It is part of your identity. Having met a few
people wearing it, it is hard to imagine a more in-your-face device to own.
It's one step shy of a tattoo on your forehead. When you meet someone wearing
these things while they are not commonplace, the _first thing_ you will notice
when you meet them is Glass. If the perception is that Glass = douche, guess
what, your first impression everywhere you go is going to be "douche" before
you even get to introduce yourself.

You can take it off, sure, but if people are wearing them around their neck
all the time they will eventually start just leaving them at home.

It's a huge, huge problem. I wish Google luck but also at the same time worry
they are going to set back wearables for some time by pushing a Segway-like
device onto the public before it's ready.

~~~
dannyr
How is putting your cellphone/Segway away different than putting your Glass
away?

When would you know if the public is ready for wearables without releasing a
product?

If Google sells hundred of thousands of these, the public is ready.

~~~
gfodor
If you put your cell phone away, it goes in your pocket. If you put your
Segway away, it goes in the garage (or something?) It's still useful there
since you can access it when you need it.

If you put Glass away, you basically invalidate the purpose of Glass itself,
which is to be an always-available HUD for your life. (At least as far as I
understand it.)

And yes, I agree the only way to know if the public is ready is to release a
product. I'm not saying they shouldn't do it but I'm pretty bearish on them
being able to pull it off. My gut is that there is a product that exists
between "cell phone" and "heads up display you wear on your face" that would
have reduced the risk of colossal failure. (Similar to how there is probably a
product between "E-Mail" and "Google Wave" that would have worked better too.)
There are just too many things that have to go right that have nothing to do
with technical prowess. If it was just about algorithms and data I'd be
cheering them on, but it's not, it's mostly about stupid fuzzy human being
stuff, and Google has always struggled with that. (Though they're learning
quickly!)

If I was going to make a prediction I think Glass will flop. The only way I
could see it not flopping is if they get something out there quickly that
genuinely looks cool and doesn't have a huge pricetag. (Not because price will
inhibit purchasing it, but because if it is high priced it will immediately be
known as showing off, ie douchey, to own one.)

I think the next step towards pervasive always-available computing is going to
be wristband/watch type stuff with flexible displays which provides a nice
step forward ubiquitous-computing wise, leaves room for creative design that
can spawn a array of fashions, will be affordable, and will not require
forging of new social norms on the way. (I'm 99% sure this is where Apple is
headed.) And lets face it, a slick-designed slap bracelet that you can post to
Facebook on is going to be _fucking cool_ , whereas a cyborg-like eye-piece is
at the very least going to get mixed reviews.

~~~
dannyr
I actually do not have any idea if Glass will flop or not.

Personally, I'd only wear it indoors for the meantime. Maybe when I'm climbing
or biking too.

I'm part of a Glass User Study since last year. Google is very careful to not
make it a distraction device but rather a device to assist you by having
information available with just a tap or voice command. This is the main
reason that the API is only a Mirror API, just a notifications service.

What's compelling is it being a camera. Glass wearers take way more photos and
videos.

I believe that will be the main use-case. Smartphones need several actions to
take a picture. With Glass, two voice commands or just push a button.

I'm giving Glass the benefit of the doubt.

When people used to ride horses, I bet those who drove the first cars looked
weird. Riding horses were the social norm and not riding oversized machines.

------
zkirill
I find "BROWSER_TWO_FINGER_ZOOM" the most interesting - was just thinking the
other day of what a Google Glass + Leap Motion mashup would look like.

