

Google Glass is Alive - brianchu
http://techcrunch.com/2015/07/09/google-glass-is-alive/

======
dmitrygr
What shoddy reporting!

...

"Reportedly the new version of Google Glass also sports improved battery life,
partly because of the Intel Atom CPU. The specific clock speed is unknown, but
this tiny SoC has proven itself by powering most Android Wear devices."

...

NONE of the current Wear devices run Atom chips. They all run ARM Cortex-A7
chips, except Moto360, which runs a Cortex-A8 !

~~~
ekianjo
Its techcrunch, expectations are low to begin with.

~~~
zbyte64
If you follow the link they cite:

"The chip is reportedly clocked somewhere moderately faster than current top-
of-the-line Android Wear smartwatches."

So the "writer" is performing worst then a summary bot.

~~~
ekianjo
> So the "writer" is performing worst then a summary bot.

That's a pretty good business opportunity for TC then. Fire the "writers",
replace by bots, nobody notices any difference (or actually an IMPROVEMENT!).

------
chaostheory
Google Glass never died. I don't understand how people come to this conclusion
when they're also aware that it was handed off to Tony Fadell of the Nest
division to manage.

Going on a tangent, to this day I fail to understand why Apple didn't even
make a bid on Nest. At the very least it would keep someone with both good
taste and a strong enough force of personality to make it happen, away from
Google's hands. Instead Apple spends over twice as much on Beats... Did Fadell
hate his tenure at Apple so much that he wouldn't even consider a bid from
them or vice versa?

~~~
lnanek2
It's dead as a door nail to any owner who wants an update after paying $1500.
It's dead for any developer who wants to write a consumer app since consumers
can't buy them. It's dead for any startup that wants investment to write
something consumer facing.

B2B, well, there already are HMDs for B2B, so Google isn't really bringing
anything innovative there. Hell, there are already HMDs made for specific uses
like firemen and policemen vs. HMDs made for other things, so Google can't
even beat all of them with one product.

After the poor support the original received, I can't really in good
conscience even recommend a company go with Google, although I admit TI end of
life-ing the OMAP and firing everyone didn't leave them much choice. I've
worked on OMAP solutions after that and it is a nightmare, the only solution
often being hiring an expensive consultancy that has some of the original
employees who know things the manuals are light on.

~~~
stickfigure
This is not really a fair characterization. Glass was "dead" as a consumer
product even before it was released. I'm old enough to remember the blowback
that the first generation of cellphone users got ("coke-snorting 80s
douchebags"). I remember people explaining how they didn't _want_ to be
reachable. It took a while for cellphones to seep into our collective
consciousness, and glass will be the same.

After glass gains acceptance as a work tool, it will creep back into the
consumer space. And people that threw around the term "glassholes" are going
to look shortsighted and pathetic in retrospect.

~~~
thaumaturgy
I'm in my late thirties and was among the first generation of daily cell phone
owners once the bulky bricks were replaced by flip phones. I don't recall the
same reactions that you do.

There are still a lot of people who don't own or regularly use a cell phone
and others who prefer not to be reachable all the time, that hasn't really
changed.

Glass's popularity in the consumer market at some point in the possible future
will hinge on whatever conversation a future generation has about the
expectations of privacy in public spaces. Until that conversation happens,
Glass isn't really viable as a consumer product.

~~~
ghshephard
Re: "There are still a lot of people who don't own or regularly use a cell
phone and others who prefer not to be reachable all the time"

Well, I'll grant you that there are _still some people_ \- but I think it's a
stretch to say, _a lot of people_.

For example, in Singapore, it's inconceivable to not have a cell phone.
Indeed, a ton of the businesses, banking, etc.. _presume_ you have a cell
phone for their two-factor authentication.

~~~
thaumaturgy
I was thinking primarily of older people; the odds of owning a smartphone
decrease as you go into the 50+ age brackets, and cell phone ownership in
general falls off as you go into 65+ ([http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-
sheets/mobile-technology-fac...](http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-
sheets/mobile-technology-fact-sheet/)).

That Pew page states that 10% of American adults still don't own a cell phone,
but of those who do, I would expect there's a healthy percentage for whom the
cell phone is infrequently used as an emergency contact system, or just-in-
case for road trips, or for the occasional phone call. (They don't have
numbers on usage patterns though.)

I couldn't hazard a guess at what worldwide usage looks like. I'm surprised
every time I hear about the creative ways that countries I would least expect
to be heavy cell phone users are using cheap cells for things like currency
exchange ([http://www.cnbc.com/2013/11/11/cashless-africa-kenyas-
smash-...](http://www.cnbc.com/2013/11/11/cashless-africa-kenyas-smash-
success-with-mobile-money.html)).

------
BorisMelnik
"...aimed at the enterprise market"

A relative who is in a professional field (not in tech) uses Google Glass to
record YouTube videos live on the job. He has probably 300 hours worth of
videos published and is now at the point where anything he publishes gets 5k+
views on YouTube.

Just saying this because I see applications like this really taking off.
Perhaps security guards could use these on the job or even cops (eventually)
for their own safety.

Trying to stay positive about this.

~~~
pjbrunet
I've been saying that for a while. I bet Google could dominate the enterprise
market with HUD data while everyone else is playing around with Unity3D gaming
apps. Of course AR gaming will be huge but data doesn't need to be 3D to be
useful, or we would already have 3D displays. 2d info is more useful than 3D
info, focus on that. We all watched Johnny Mnemonic browse file systems in 3D
(long time ago) and that never came to pass, because it's pretty much useless
to see a file system in 3D.

~~~
path411
Glass seems like it's far away from becoming a HUD. From my understanding,
it's essentially just a mini-screen in your peripheral vision.

(This is also a big complaint I have of Google Glass. I don't think I've ever
actually seen a single image from Google talking about how it looks from a
wearer's point of view.)

[http://i.ytimg.com/vi/d-y3bEjEVV8/maxresdefault.jpg](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/d-y3bEjEVV8/maxresdefault.jpg)

Is the type of pictures I typically see. This is portion of your vision
blocked by a semi-transparent area so it can reflect the very small and basic
text projection.

When I think of HUD, I think of something that is able to overlay my vision
like so:

[http://www.niemanlab.org/images/behavio_hud.png](http://www.niemanlab.org/images/behavio_hud.png)
(Just first image in google search)

Since neural manipulation or a screen being able to be on a contact lens are
probably far away technology wise, that essentially leaves us with having to
create something that can either draw or project a screen on a normal pair of
glasses.

Once you can wear a prescription or prescription-less pair of fairly normal
looking glasses that can draw/display image/shapes/text/color anywhere on the
lens, then I think the actual "revolution" will take place and everyone will
quickly buy and use them constantly.

------
zaiwu
At least this time it has a clearer target, the enterprise market. Nice try.

I think last time Google Glass failed because Google didn't demonstrate any
practical scenario using this product. It's like, Google was telling us, "this
is a cool product but nobody knows the application of it, so, use your
imagination!" Users get lost when you define such a big scope.

This time Google should definitely learn from Hololens. Show some killer apps
on Google Glass and let users feel excited about it, not only because it is
cool, but also useful.

~~~
Steko
It failed because it was designed backwards by starting with the most
impressive screen/camera/chipset possible and then unsurprisingly ended up
with shit battery life. That is a deal breaker on a wearable who's killer apps
are things like lifecasting and personal security.

The correct way to design a device like this is to start with battery life
required and work forward with that as your primary constraint. If what you
end up with isn't good enough you don't release the product and wait until
more power efficient chips or better battery tech comes out.

~~~
tracker1
I would have loved to try it, but I'm far sighted and anything closer than 2'
from my face is blurry, I don't wear corrective lenses most of the time, and
even if I did, google didn't have a solution for this.

I can think of a _lot_ of scenarios where glass would have been a fit (if they
got the cost down to even $500/pair)... the ability to have a context aware
helper screen would work in a lot of scenarios... from parts pickers, to
manufacturing, to presentations. Most of the ideas I have around google glass
are pretty boring, but could really boost productivity in a lot of areas
commercially, and this is probably where they should have started.

If you are paying someone $35k/year to do a job, and they could be 5-10% more
effective with a given tool, that tool would be well worth $1000-1500. And I
can think of a _lot_ of jobs that pay over $12-15/hr that could be
assisted/improved with this.

------
jacquesm
What happens inside google does not matter, what happens is when they release
it next time and if they do as bad a job at this as they did with the previous
roll-out then it might as well be dead. I'm curious how big a percentage of
those who bought 'glass' the first time around are going to spend their money
on the next round given what they know today.

------
kendallpark
Enterprise market is where this needs to grow first. Not the consumer. There
are great use cases in various professions, from law enforcement to medicine.
Imagine a surgeon that can get a HUD with patient vitals and/or send a live
feed to a remote surgeon for feedback during the procedure. I don't think
consumers are ready, but there are so many industries that would readily shell
out $1500 a piece for these.

~~~
tracker1
Not just enterprise, but mechanical assembly, live training/retraining...
deliver services (a step above typical gps), hell, making sure your order is
correct.

For that matter it would make a great sales tool... you can check inventory
while interacting with a customer, not having to look away or turn your back.
Presenters being able to have notes on screen while talking...

There are definitely commercial applications.. but not for a product you can't
actually buy.

------
vosper
It's hardly a scoop that Glass is alive - I've been seeing recruiting adds for
"Software Engineer, Google (Glass)" on LinkedIn for a while. They're not
exactly making a secret of it.

------
yzh
One application of Google glass is lifelog which is described in Ted Chiang's
story: The Truth of Fact, the Truth of Feeling
[https://subterraneanpress.com/magazine/fall_2013/the_truth_o...](https://subterraneanpress.com/magazine/fall_2013/the_truth_of_fact_the_truth_of_feeling_by_ted_chiang)

~~~
pavedwalden
I've enjoyed a lot of Ted Chiang's other work, but I didn't know about this.
Thanks.

------
outside1234
Being in the enterprise market requires that you actually know how to sell
into an enterprise. What has Google done where they have been successful at
that?

This feels like Google scrambling to catch up to the Hololens and sort of
making it up as they go along. Nothing to see here.

~~~
blhack
>What has Google done where they have been successful at that?

Google apps.

