back to article Don't use Google+? Tough, Google Glass will inject it INTO YOUR EYES

Google's techno-specs Google Glass can now deliver Google+ notifications direct to the eyeball - while consuming less power and also reporting back to the Chocolate Factory when things go pear-shaped. The firmware update is being sent out to those selected by the advertising giant for early access to Glass, which still lacks a …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I can already see some idiot wearing this to a bar, maybe even trying to do a pick up....sad.

    I can see someone getting punched in the face for wearing them.

    1. JDX Gold badge

      I could see you getting the same treatment though without the need of a prosthetic.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        LOL. Trust me, anyone wearing something like this posing a threat....maybe in your neck of the woods.....here though.....again, LOL.

    2. Quxy
      Coat

      "Engendering"?

      Funny, I read that as "endangering"...

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "I can already see some idiot wearing this to a bar, maybe even trying to do a pick up....sad.

      I can see someone getting punched in the face for wearing them."

      Your down voters must live in la la land! If anyone wore that in my local, you'd definately be mocked before having to defend yourself. Thats the way life is. Small I know. But small all the same.

    4. DrXym Silver badge

      I think you would have to be talking loudly into a bluetooth handsfree ear piece and wearing an upskirt camera device on your shoes to come anywhere close to the chilling effect these things will have in social situations.

      They're probably more useful in a commercial setting - people fulfilling orders in large warehouses and so on where a HUD might be useful.

      1. Turtle

        @DrXym

        "They're probably more useful in a commercial setting - people fulfilling orders in large warehouses and so on where a HUD might be useful."

        That's a good point; that sort of use hadn't occurred to me at all.

        It will be interesting to see if their use is restricted to that, however: I personally would expect that there will be jurisdictions that will outlaw these things from being worn in public places, as being far too intrusive into people's lives and activities.And there will be any number of commercial establishments that will prohibit people from wearing them on premises.

        (But on a personal note, I need not concern myself with any of my friends wearing them while at my house, or when being with me at all. Because I don't have any friends who would be interested in this sort of shitty little gimmick.)

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: @DrXym

          There are already places restricting them.

          1. mmeier

            Re: @DrXym

            The only places where this stuff is restricted are the same typ of places that restrict cameras, camera phones etc. as well. And that is "disallowed because of privat / government property" not because of legal reasons

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: @DrXym

              So, so wrong....

      2. 142
        Meh

        meh...

        meh, I think people will just take them off when they're not appropriate, like most people do when they are wearing bluetooth headsets, ipod headphones, or sunglasses. It's not the big issue people are making it out to be...

        1. Mike Richards

          Re: meh...

          You have so much more faith in humanity than me.

          And it will get worse when they are available for prescription lenses because there is no way glasses wearers will carry around another pair of (expensive) lenses for the times when Glass is a social faux pas (that is most of the time).

          Glass is pretty much doomed the moment the MPAA finds out it is possible to take a flaky, shaky recording of some of a movie in a cinema - the lawyers will have a field day. And in Google versus Hollywood I find it hard to pick who I'd like to lose more.

    5. mmeier

      I definitly need a pair. Has been a decade since I was allowed to hurt someone and get away free by claiming self defence.

  2. Tim Parker

    Like it much ?

    "And - shock - it phones home to the cuddly ad giant" ? Well, as you later point out it's actually "reporting back to the Chocolate Factory when things go pear-shaped" by "reporting crash status codes back to Google".

    So which is it ? The headline grabbing hyperbole, the latter more intelligible statements about error reporting (something many OSes support for good reasons) or both ?

    You can just say you don't like them you know - many don't - without resorting to Daily Mail mode.

    1. diodesign (Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

      Re: Like it much ?

      "without resorting to Daily Mail mode"

      Och! Come on, now. Is there any need for that? It's not Daily Mail mode. I demand an apology and a correction.

      It's Register mode.

      C.

      1. Tim Parker

        Re: Like it much ?

        "Och! Come on, now. Is there any need for that? It's not Daily Mail mode. I demand an apology and a correction.

        It's Register mode.

        C."

        You are, of course, correct - I just didn't want to be quite that rude... ;)

    2. Ru
      Facepalm

      Re: Like it much ?

      as well as reporting crash status codes back to Google.

      Crashes, eh?

      Error code 0x00015502: user walked into door whilst checking email.

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

    3. sabroni Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      Re: headline grabbing hyperbole

      That's what I come here for. Judging by your upvotes it's had the desired effect of getting the phandroids all batey....

  3. Bernard

    The fact that

    noone is rushing out with a rival product tells you all you need to know about its mass-market appeal.

    I think Google will do okay on it just because enough geeks will want it that they'll just about cover costs and give their brand a boost as a high-profile innovator, but there's just not a market for this and that will soon become apparent.

    I'm sure I'll eat my words when the iPatch (TM) is released next week and people queue around the block to be first to look like a high-tech scourge of the high seas.

    1. MrXavia
      Trollface

      Re: The fact that

      No No, just wait for the eyePhone to come out!

      1. Rob
        Coat

        Re: The fact that

        Shouldn't that be the iEyePhone, so still pirate or popeye related ;-) (obviously this wink serves the traditional purpose and also acts as a small pun).

    2. kyza

      Re: The fact that

      but there's just not a market for this

      Really? You've conducted both in-depth consumer market research as well as talking to professional groups like surgeons & surveyors about the possible applications for Glass? You've investigated and rejected how this could be used in logistics if combined with say an RFID unit to assess visually the level of stock in a warehouse.

      I'm sure that's how you've come to your conclusions about whether there's a market for Glass and similar products or not.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: The fact that

        " but there's just not a market for this."

        Reminds me of a Company Engineering Conference in the 1990s. The youngsters were asked to perform an entertainment on the theme of "obstacles to innovation".

        There was "The Gameshow" - complete with a smiling host in a glitter jacket. The prize was funding for a project. The losing contestant was the one who had a pragmatic track record of good delivery and reasonable profit margins. The winner was the one who had a track record of under-estimating their development time/budget - and over-estimating the potential sales and margin.

        A trench-coated Private Investigator delivered a monologue about "who killed innovation" - complete with gunshot climax.

        A prescient "Smoking Room" was the place that non-smokers went to "network" with influential staff.

        There was the "Low hanging fruit" - with a tree containing two apples - one very big and one very small. Harvesting the new line in apples was delayed by a marketeer's persistent questions. Their final line was - "If none were sold last year - then there's obviously no market for them". Cue stereotypical French onion seller* wheeling his bike down the theatre aisle - and picking the largest apple.

        * the late Jack Houldsworth of X400 fame. He had commissioned the sketches - bravely giving the youngsters a free hand over content.

    3. mmeier

      Re: The fact that

      AugmentedReality glasses - sure they have applications. The industry has experimented with the tech for at least a decade. Deliver a set that is light weight, has good endurance, no need to use the GMail man / StJobs and interfaces with Windows/x86 and commercial Unix boxes(1) and you have a winner in the tech sector and designers ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_automatic_virtual_environment )

      Google Classes - no use. Tied to a toybreed OS and the GMail man. Not that SaintJobs version would be any better. GG has the same problem as Evernote since both force you to give your data to a non trustworthy, non government observed third party (Unlike say DATEV in germany)

  4. Marcelo Rodrigues
    Happy

    But there ARE uses for this!

    This one isn't pretty - but it's a prototype.

    Even ugly as it is now, I can think of one general use to it: using augmented reality to help in some jobs. Think a warehouse, with 2D barcodes on the creates. The glass could overlay significant information to the worker.

    Another (more controversial) use would be to sales people. A customer gets in. The glass does a facial recognition, and brings up the client's preferences/order. I know, I know. There are a lot of people who wouldn't want/like/accept this. I'm just showing practical uses to the tech.

    If we stop and think a little, there ARE professional activities wich could be enhanced by this.

    1. DJO Silver badge

      Re: But there ARE uses for this!

      Agreed, the augmented reality aspect will eventually become as pervasive as smartphones are now, it's all the other gubbins Google seem to think is necessary which may actually hinder the take up of the technology.

      There has been work on using lasers to paint directly onto the retina which when perfected would be a massive improvement as it could be directed from the side of the eye so it won't interfere with the victims users field of view.

      1. Sprismoid
        Thumb Up

        Re: But there ARE uses for this!

        Having tried a prototype Retinal Imaging system at the University of Washington back in 1995 (Last century, like!) and been totally blown away and in awe of the potential for "hyper-realistic" (i.e. images that appear more vivid than the real world, I am convinced it is the game changing technology that will take VR and AR into the true mainstream.

        It will then render(!) all other methods of HCI redundant, I think...

        Peter

      2. Paul Hovnanian Silver badge
        Boffin

        Re: But there ARE uses for this!

        My thoughts exactly. It might be worth picking up a pair of these if the API is open and one could write a custom app for them. I'm thinking of viewing maintenance/repair documents while fiddling with some gadgets. Plus the ability to snap disassembly photos.

        As to their wear out on public, why didn't Google go with a symmetrical look? Like the trendy nerd glasses already mentioned, this would be less noticable at a distance. Plus, the left side frame could hold a second battery.

    2. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: But there ARE uses for this!

      Sales people could work.

      I go into PC-World-R-us and the glasses on the spotty 17year old would recognise me, check my MS-MVP and stackoverflow score and tell them to leave me alone because I'm only in there while the wife is looking at curtains next door

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: But there ARE uses for this!

        stack overflow score...lol... do you put it on your CV too?

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: But there ARE uses for this!

      I suppose that while walking down the high street, your Google Glass could overlay icons over the various shops to indicate their purpose, contact details, what they stock, prices, and customer reviews. Though for most of those you could just step through their door.

      But you could have the local burger joint come up with its last food hygiene rating from the council. Don't know about walking directions, would rather have them discretely in an ear piece.

    4. kyza

      Re: But there ARE uses for this!

      Just as I posted my rant to Bernard and his 'there's no market for this' including the example of logistics, I read your post suggesting exactly the same thing!

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Another (more controversial) use would be

      to sell people.

      There, fixed it forya

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: But there ARE uses for this!

      Now i can watch porn on the bus and no one will know!

      1. Thorne

        Re: But there ARE uses for this!

        "Now i can watch porn on the bus and no one will know!"

        Yes they will...

    7. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

      Re: But there ARE uses for this!

      And in other news, Reg readers recite all the same applications for augmented-reality technology that have been tried or mooted for the past couple of decades. Oh, wait, they seem to have left out "virtual tour guide".

      In other words, yawn. This has all been done before. Yes, there are vertical markets for AR in the workplace. No, there's no reason at this point to believe Google Glass or knockoffs thereof will significantly increase demand outside those vertical markets.

      Have a day.

      1. mmeier

        Re: But there ARE uses for this!

        The older AR solutions where less mobile since they typically required a workstation level computer. Glasses or a less Google-specific follow up are no longer tied to that since mobile computing has made big advances over the last years.

        The same can be seen in other areas. Smartphones have been along for almost a decade but only recently have they become "mass market" items. Notebooks took a decade of development before reaching the homes.

  5. DaLo

    Strange reporting from Bill Ray..

    He's normally a bit more down to earth. I mean "DON'T USE GOOGLE+? TOUGH, GOOGLE GLASS WILL INJECT IT INTO YOUR EYES", "It phones home" etc..

    It's hard to tell if it was sarcasm moaning about the blogs and news reports talking about Glass in an article about Glass?

    However, in my opinion, it is a pretty cool product, well packaged and the first of it's kind that has enough backing, marketing and hype and a decent UX to have the chance of mass market appeal.

    Remember when everyone (me included) was saying that the Apple Tablet was ridiculous, no-one would want one. It had been done before and it was less use to have an iPhone as a tablet than PC which had failed? Then it took the market by storm.

    Go back even further to mobile phones. Ridiculously expensive, not practical, not needed by anyone and anyone with one was just a tw@t who deserved a "punch in the face". And now?

    So I think the major hurdle will be the price and social acceptance. If it becomes normal and okay to walk around wearing them and they are cheap enough then they could well be a massive hit.

    One thing, I bet if Apple had 'invented' it then there would be a ton more hype, reporting and queuing around the block to get them. It would be hailed as the most innovative thing on earth ever and a sure fire hit.

    It's good that Google are in a position to try out projects that may just fail as it generally enhances technology and you aren't sat on a history of "What Ifs" and "if only someone had the guts to make it".

    1. Mark .

      Re: Strange reporting from Bill Ray..

      "Remember when everyone (me included) was saying that the Apple Tablet was ridiculous, no-one would want one. ... One thing, I bet if Apple had 'invented' it then there would be a ton more hype, reporting and queuing around the block to get them. It would be hailed as the most innovative thing on earth ever and a sure fire hit."

      Well this is the thing - if we look at the 2010 Apple tablet coverage, most of the media coverage wasn't being critical. Instead, the entirely of the media were giving it vast amounts of positive coverage even before it was officially announced, whilst the Android tablets (actually released first, initially called "media players" in 2009) were ignored, and surprise surprise apple did better. Tablets were already mainstream by 2010, we just called them other names like smartphones, PDAs or media players.

      People like us may have been criticising it - I think that 10" tablets aren't very useful for my needs, and would much rather have an ultra-portable laptop at that size. But then, I *still* think that, and our arguments aren't invalidated by what other people buy. By that reasoning, no one could criticise Windows, Apple fans couldn't criticise the overwhelmingly popular Android ;) I've also said that 7" is a much better size, as well as tablets being something that make more sense at a lower cost, and it looks like the market is turning out to agree with me on both points.

      When people say than Apple popularised something, it's almost always a false perception based on them getting far more media coverage, which typically happens *before* the release. Given that Google - unlike the companies like Archos releasing the first Android tablets - do get at least some media coverage, I'm glad that they are doing things like this, so that alternative products get some awareness too.

      (Oddly the media *now* say that no one wants tablets when it comes to Windows 8, and say people would much rather have separate smartphones and laptops... the bias is painful to watch.)

  6. JDX Gold badge

    Move with the times

    To all those who think nobody would ever wear anything like this... modern sunglasses would once have been very bizarre, as would a baseball cap or shorts. Fashions change so it's only a matter of time before this is seen as normal.

    Plus of course, thick-frame glasses are cool right now so simply add another thick arm and some plain glass lenses and it will barely be noticeable, especially as the tech shrinks.

    1. Slartybardfast

      Re: Move with the times

      I still think a baseball cap is naff and bizarre, -10 Internets for wearing one, -10000 internets for wearing one backwards

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Move with the times

      Plus of course, thick-frame glasses are cool right now

      When I need new glasses last year my optician tried to suggest some of these to me ... I resisted and went for my standard style of thin metal frames (though daringly I switch from bronze to metalic grey!). However, I was amused to see that the ranges of thick-framed glass were described as "geek glasses"!

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Move with the times

      "modern sunglasses would once have been very bizarre, as would a baseball cap or shorts."

      Short bottom coverings were the first clothes people wore. For a hunter gatherer in a warm climate they were protective without getting in the way.

      If you mean the below-the-knee ones beloved of modern youth. Their football shorts remind me of the old footballer players like Stanley Matthews - a style going back to at least the 1890s. About 1960 there was a rapid shortening - culminating in the classic 1966 World Cup "continental" style. My school football shorts followed that fashion too - just by wearing the same pair from 11 to 18.

      http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Articles/History.htm

      The current long shorts leisure fashion harks back to Baden Powell and the Boy Scouts. They were considered very old fashioned in England even in the late 1950s. During the 1960s even the Scouts followed the "continental" short shorts fashion that peaked in England in the 1970/80s.

      However there is a slow change in men's leisure shorts going back above the knee. Women are already adopting the "hot pants" of the early 1970s. With my Fred Perry 1970s short shorts from Oxfam I'll soon be back in the height of fashion. The 50 year cycle will be complete when Speedo swim briefs become the leisure fashion - and not just for high divers.

  7. xyz
    Big Brother

    C'mon, this is going to be great!

    Just think of all those twitter celebs not having to tweet, followers will be able literally **OMG** to follow their idols 24/7/365 via live "life" streaming feeds. Advertisers paying to be on those feeds, fashions changing in an instant as celebs A goes "they're nice shoes" and a million followers buy them. Rampant consummerism causing chaos with logistics. No CCTV anymore as all citizens will have a legal requirement to view any incidents happening in their view range. Real time, instant perv sharing with your mates of similar persuasions, complete voyourism at its best.

    I could go on but I wont. These things are game changers and make owning an iPhone look so last century.

    1. JDX Gold badge

      Re: C'mon, this is going to be great!

      Good point. A new Twitter will arise that lets you literally follow someone as they walk about (or TWitter/FB/G+ will do it)... thounsands of people sitting inside watching Stephen Fry try on shoes...

  8. graeme leggett

    wrong comparison

    the iPhone delivered what Apple thought people already wanted to do (make phone calls) with what they also wanted to do (listen to music, watch videos, play games) in a better combination than existing phones. And now most all smartphones do something similar.

    Google glass delivers what Google think people might want to do but aren't doing at the moment. And people aren't doing it or asking for it because it's a rubbish idea for the vast majority of the populace.

    1. sandman

      Re: wrong comparison

      Might be a rubbish idea for the majority of the population but I can think of many niche uses for this type of tech. I'd suggest that Google make the sdk open source (like Microsoft eventually did with the Kinect) and see what other folk come up with.

      On the other hand, the downsides could be a little "challenging" if widely adopted. It's bad enough on the streets with both drivers and pedestrians being constantly distracted by their phones, this could add a whole new level to the usual lack of situational awareness.

      Tip to Google - do as you did with the Nexus and outsource the design and build, only this time to Oakley...

    2. Mephistro
      Meh

      Re: wrong comparison (@ graeme legget)

      "And now most all smartphones do something similar."

      As they were already doing long before the iPhone was even designed.

      Good marketing != Innovation.

    3. Mark .

      Re: wrong comparison

      "make phone calls" and "listen to music, watch videos, play games"?

      Smartphones were doing "something similar" around 2000, and bog standard mainstream "feature" phones were doing "something similar" around 2005. "Better combination" is just a matter of opinion, which people clearly disagree on (as seen by endless debates on forums like these). A particular flaw in your argument is that a 2007 iphone couldn't actually do "play games" anyway (or do any apps in general), that came in 2008 by which time the competition had moved on even further. Not that I'd consider it a smartphone anyway until at least 2010, unless you count all feature phones as smartphones.

  9. Jon Green

    "Google Glass seems much more reminiscent of the Sinclair C5"

    Odd really, because the people who've actually used it, like Rob Scoble, have been absolutely raving over it - and I don't think that's because they're still justifying the $1500 outlay to their spouses! The rest of us will have to sit and wait until we can test it for ourselves.

    Will it be the Next Big Thing? Assuredly yes. Will it be a Google world? I don't think so. I think there will be a backlash against Google's monopoly on (and accumulation of) personal information through Glass: once Google has established a consumer need, rival products will flood the market. It will be interesting to see whether they overtake Google, or whether Google succeeds in "owning" the heads-up wearable computing space. It's all going to come down to quality of product, fit to market, and pricing.

    1. sabroni Silver badge

      Re: I don't think that's because they're still justifying the $1500 outlay to their spouses

      You single by any chance?

  10. Ian K
    Headmaster

    transcription of spoken messages "wicked-fast" [sic]

    Yeah, these weird tech kid-types and their crazy speak, eh?

    Without the "[sic]" I would have taken that as a typo for sure.

  11. Oldskater

    go pro

    the owners for Go Pro cameras have become gazillionairs lately through small wearable camera tech. google glass could easily pick up a chunk of that market.

  12. Lord Elpuss Silver badge

    "The iPhone was similarly revolutionary; existing technology packaged in an appealing way by a big corporation. However, it owes a good deal of its success to mobile operators who subsidised the hardware and financed the advertising..."

    Uh, no; the iPhone owes a good deal of it's success to the fact that it was a damn good phone. Subsidies may have helped shift the first few thousand units, but after that it was simple market forces (read: knocking the competition out of the park) that assured success for Apple.

    In fact it would be more accurate to argue that the iPhone succeeded despite the operator subsidy - which invariably meant locking it to a carrier. John Hodulik from UBS even said as much right before the iPhone launch; and he was speaking on behalf of AT&T.

    1. John Riddoch

      Possibly - I avoided the iPhone at the start because it was tied to O2/Cellnet which I'd moved from due to crap reception. If it had been unlocked/available on Vodafone I'd have snapped one up and probably been a convert from the get-go. As it is, by the time it was available all over, the hype had died down and I wound up on Android.

    2. Mark .

      Which era of "success" are we talking about? The use of the singular suggests the original 2007 iphone, yet this only sold one million in 76 days (a stat that's counted as a flop for products like the Surface RT or Lumia 800, but a success for Apple)?

      "knocking the competition out of the park"? Which competition and which park?

      Certainly nothing of the sort is true of the original iphone, which was massively outsold by the competition - by Symbian, Blackberry and even Windows Mobile. Even if we go by single models, the best selling smartphone of all time is the Nokia 5230, released in 2009, with a staggering 150 million sales. The iphone came nowhere near close.

      Over many years and more releases, Apple's total phone sales have increased, but still such claims are not true. The phone leaders in 2007 were Nokia and Samsung. The phone leaders in 2013 are Samsung then Nokia. By platform, the dominant platform in 2007 was Symbian, which remained so until 2011 when it was overtaken by Android, not iphone. In fact, Symbian outsold iphone for the duration of its lifetime, and only fell behind when it was replaced with WP by Nokia. Iphone only claims 2nd place behind due to Symbian being ditched, and Blackberry losing share, which was more likely from Android, which now sells many times that of iphone - who's knocked who out of the park?

      Okay, true they overtook Windows Mobile. Eventually. Must have been a damn good (series of) phone(s).

      "which invariably meant locking it to a carrier."

      Just like loads of other phones.

  13. dz-015

    Oh dear, I see all the Google fandroids were first into the forum today.

    Everyone's talking about what Google Glass can supposedly do for the user whilst missing the far more important point, i.e. how this will enable Google to turn far more of us into products for its advertising business. Combining this with GPS, face recognition and visual recognition of other objects will enable Google to accumulate location and product data on hundreds of people per day against their will, just from the visual/location data supplied from one user wearing these damned things.

    Paranoid? I hope so. But if anyone wears a Google Glass anywhere near me I'll be politely asking them to remove it.

    1. Ian Yates
      Black Helicopters

      The camera isn't always on; the battery is actually quite weak.

      The only location data the big G is getting is something they could already get from Android phones.

      I'm still not sure what I'd use Glass for, but I'm very interested to try it out.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        @Ian Yates - Not from my Android phone!

        On my shiny mobe there's no Google account at all, location services are turned off unless I (rarely) need them and I don't do any Internet. Of course they can tell the place I'm calling from via cell tower triangulation but that doesn't help Google much because they can't push any targeted ads based on that.

        How do I manage to do all this ? Easy! Poor eyesight combined with laziness when it comes to fetch my regular prescription glasses from my back pack to read my mail or browse the Internet on a tiny screen.

        1. mmeier

          Re: @Ian Yates - Not from my Android phone!

          Okay Mr. Tinfoil-Head tell us: Why did you BUY a smartphone in the first place? And no, reading mails I do not believe since mail connections surely can be tracked so THEY know where you are.

          After all http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/They_Live they are among us (and GG might show them!)

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            @mmeier - Re: @Ian Yates - Not from my Android phone!

            Easy answer: because it has a large screen and because I can enlarge fonts so I can read callerID without my glasses on. Of course they know where I am, at home or at the office but not in between, unless Google contacts me to find my phone number. And even after they do this, they will have to push ads only to my PC which I hope is rather inconvenient to them.

            Oh, and I did not quite buy the phone, the mobile service provider subsidized it 100% hoping that I will consume enough data services, you know, Facebook, Twitter, G+, gaming, video and stuff.

        2. Ian Yates

          Re: @Ian Yates - Not from my Android phone!

          Good for you, although I don't see the relevance here.

          In order to use Glass you will need a Google account, so my point stands. I wasn't trying to say that Google can trace all Android phones, I'm well aware of how to remove Google from Android.

          Honestly, I don't trust Google any more than the others, but they have no need for covert ways of harvesting your data, most people are happily giving away enough to keep the advertisers happy.

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    World Travel...

    #1. I cannot even begin to speak about how useful this product could be for WORLD TRAVEL! Or anything related to travel from documentaries to guided trips to just recording your own personal travel diaries. When you are in the moment it can be challenging to capture memories. You often wish you could go back and re-shoot, but its too late as you're now in a different city. I've test-driven some 360 lens set-ups, but often there is a loss of resolution, and you capture too much unwanted info in every frame.

    #2. Focus and clarity would be the main drawbacks I see to Glass. Currently I use a first-generation Lumix. The focus on the pancake lens when you give it the time it deserves is phenomenal. Basically you can capture TV quality video from anywhere from the Great Wall of China to Machu Picchu. The quality is unforgettable even for an amateur enthusiast like myself. But I'm thinking the lens on this Glass device is probably not going to knock anyone out as its probably focused to infinity. Anyone know for sure?

    #3. Privacy! I'm not a fan of this device phoning home. Is it possible to copy the recorded video off Glass via USB or Bluetooth etc whilst blocking the device phoning home? For instance can you block the MAC address or something like that? Anyone know for sure?

    1. QuinnDexter

      Re: World Travel...

      #1 As it will need cellualr coverage make sure you buy a suitable roaming tarif in advance. On that note, why would operators not want to subsidise this kit? They would be properly data hungry...

      #2 I'd tend to agree that you are not likely going to use this as the primary source for holiday snaps, unless you are uploading them directly to Google+ or FaceBook. Dont know what storage they've got so this will probably be the standard.

      #3 I don't think anyone knows, including those morons ready to "punch someone in the face if they are wearing these near me" (who assume that Google will happily force a FUCKING MASSIVE phone bill on you by having every second of every day of your life uploaded to their servers. Next their complaint will be "won't someone think of the children - bans these in public places"). Myself, I'm not sure. Before it was realeased I wanted an iPad because the same morons targetting this said "Why would you want one? It's just like a big iPod". Yes. It's just like a big iPod. That's why I want one! Glass - I'm not sure what I would use it for, and the scaremongering privacy concerns aren't actually a concern.

    2. Ian Yates

      Re: World Travel...

      From what I've seen, the camera (pictures and video) is pretty poor, especially in low light. It's possible this is to allay some privacy concerns.

      Other than that, it's an Android device, so (eventually) you'll be able to be in complete control of the device and how it behaves. I can imagine a lot of XDA et al. focus on this.

    3. dajames Silver badge

      Re: World Travel...

      Photography apart, there are some potentially useful applications for travellers.

      #4. The Glass could detect that the wearer was looking at something containing writing (in the local language) and overlay a translation into the wearer's own language.

  15. RichieB
    WTF?

    Count as 'hands free'?

    How long after it becomes widely available will someone drive into someone or something whilst wearing one? And what about people who already wear glasses, haven't seen how that would work.

    1. kyza

      Re: Count as 'hands free'?

      Google have said they're working on a Glass build that can work with prescription glasses.

      As someone mentioned above, they should give that one to Oakley.

  16. James Hughes 1

    Surprising...

    ...the hatred that Glass seems to have engendered (Bad here, much much worst on Slashdot). Most upsetting are the number of people who seem to be willing to punch the first person they see wearing them in the face.

    Now where I come from, if you are in a public place, using a camera is perfectly legal at any time. Whereas punching people in the face without provocation is most certainly not.

    I can only assume these people are quite happy to say they will do these things, but actually bothering to leave the parents basement probably means they won't be able to.

    That notwithstanding, this is prototype tech, and quite interesting tech at that. I have a feeling it may well become mainstream - there certainly seem to be a lot of possible applications it could be put to, some mentioned above. Battery life is the killer, esp. when using camera as those really soak up the juice, but I think its going to be an interesting couple of years for Glass.

    1. mmeier

      Re: Surprising...

      Actually the prototypes of this tech where from the late 1990s and offered more options than this rather restricted kit. Don't get me wrong a good set of AR glasses would be something I sell my neighbours grandma for. But these are not.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Not so surprising...

      Given the problems street photographers have had in recent years from both police and public, what makes you think someone wandering round with a camera on their head wouldn't be risking arrest or assault? It may be perfectly legal but that doesn't mean it'll be accepted. You need to fix the camera to a wall or stick it on a pole for that.

      1. mmeier

        Re: Not so surprising...

        What problems? Some "screaming minorities" and "building picture scramblers"? Sorry but I never took Timmy Tinfoil serious.

        Was out with a full sized DSLR last weekend and nobody gave a damn. And we are not a "tourist town", I was just taking building shots for my hobby.

        1. sabroni Silver badge
          Facepalm

          Re: Was out with a full sized DSLR last weekend and nobody gave a damn

          Sweet! The police have obviously stopped harrasing people for taking photos then!

          1. mmeier

            Re: Was out with a full sized DSLR last weekend and nobody gave a damn

            They never did in Germany. As long as you stay in public space and do not target a person without consent shooting photos is legal, actually written in the law (Panoramafreiheit)

            So say shooting the Ulmer Munster and having Timmy Tinfoil in the picture because he was just walking around there is legal. If Timmy disagrees - tell him to FO. If he gets agressiv - punch him, call the police, sue him and win

  17. tgm
    Meh

    I thought I saw an ad for glass

    ..there were people taking photos of sunsets through their phone (instead of actually looking at the sunset), people watching rock-concerts through the back of their phone (instead of actually experiencing the concert), proud parents watching their kids on a trampoline through their phone (instead of actually watching them).

    I thought "this has to be an ad for Google Glass...look at all these idiots"

    But it was an advert for the iPhone....(more photos taken each day using the iPhone than any other camera..blah blah blah).

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Holmes

    meh

    I neither like nor dislike... but...

    They do follow the growing idea that everyone, everywhere has a constant and reliable mobile internet connection... this is not even the case in the great US of A... so i think its likely to held back not due to public opinion but due to other factors.

    1. mmeier

      Re: meh

      Well here in the 1st world (Most of Western Europe) and even the second world (Germany) we do have good high speed wireless.

      1. Don Jefe
        Happy

        Re: meh

        Yeah, but your first world & second world combined is tiny compared to the U.S.

        1. mmeier

          Re: meh

          503 million citizens in the EU

          314 million in the colonies

          Customer-wise the EU wins easily. And Japan, South Korea etc. have similar network densities.

          1. Don Jefe
            Meh

            Re: meh

            Geographically the continental US is approx the same size as the EU & with Alaska & Hawaii thrown in the States are larger with nearly half the population.

            1. sabroni Silver badge
              WTF?

              Re: meh

              Ner ner ne ner ner! My country's bigger than yours!!!

              For fucks sake, they said this place was getting juvenile....

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Forget Glass...

    The implant version will be with us in a few years - by which time the Big G will be renamed Cybus Industries...

  20. Nanners

    I have no idea

    Why on earth amyone would wear these clown goggles. No, most people will laugh at people who do wear them. Those that do won't have the sense to take them off when it's not appropriate. Because it will never be appropriate. As soon as kids start wearing them to concerts, movies, sporting events, school exams...they will be squashed.

  21. Anonymous C0ward
    Boffin

    It's f*cking cool. And I want a C5.

    1. Anonymous C0ward

      Also, those who think it's evil- maybe someone will make something similar without a camera?

      1. mmeier

        VR glasses are already out and have been for a while. Same for HUD systems that clip to a glasses frame or headband. Prices are similar. And if you take away the camera that is all that is left when you take the camera out.

        The camera would allow Augmented Reality on a new level. Not with the Google version since that has a low capacity computing platform as an achilles heel but the general tech is there. Look into an cars engine, have the AR camera and image reconing do the magic and get the components highlighted. Can't do that kind of stuff without the camera OR a static setop with tons of fixed sensors and "place car exactly so and so".

        The same works for recognizing people or locations. GPS is of limited use/precision in a city but GPS+ImageRegoc and "This is the oldest still occupied house in the citie. It was build in...." tourist guides work. Indoor museum guides are even better. No more tracking down the warden to ask, the AR glasses can do.

        So the camera is a must be there equipment.

  22. Mitoo Bobsworth
    Happy

    Social stigma?

    Remember when bluetooth headsets were introduced? I loved watching some proud owner talking to themselves in the middle of a city street or cafe, looking for all the world like a psychiatric outpatient. Really looking forward to seeing someone with a set of these & what kind of stand-alone behaviour they engender - should be very entertaining.

    Bloke in pub: "What the f**k are you staring at?"

    GG wearer: "Nothing, I was just checking my Gmail and..."

    POW.

    Can't wat!

  23. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Paranoid?

    "Paranoid? I hope so. But if anyone wears a Google Glass anywhere near me I'll be politely asking them to remove it."

    Then, assuming I'm in a public place, expect me to politely tell you to get f***ed.

  24. Persona non grata

    Remind me to quote you on that in a couple of years o' tech gurus...

    " and El Reg reckons Glass is going to have a tough time appealing to the general public. ®"

    I think you will have been proven to be very, very, very, very wrong. Again.

    1. Piro Silver badge

      Re: Remind me to quote you on that in a couple of years o' tech gurus...

      What was the "again" referring to exactly?

  25. Nameless Faceless Computer User
    Thumb Down

    do not want

  26. Theodrake
    Devil

    Will only provide proof...

    that a lot of men spend their work day looking down co-workers blouses.

    1. mmeier

      Re: Will only provide proof...

      Where I work we do not employ Kölner citizens or Catholic priests so that does not happen...

    2. Anonymous C0ward
      Happy

      Re: Will only provide proof...

      And now they'll have the pictures to fap to later!

  27. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I'm sorry but there are going to be some proper horror stories from this technology in it's current encarnation. It's one thing a mugger grabbing an iPhone from someone's hand - but a thousand pounds worth of cutting edge electronics balanced on a pair of ears and a nose is going to make easy pickings and is likely to result in a head injury for the wearer. Even worse if the victim is short sighted - they won't even be able to see which way the mugger hot tailed it down the road.

    That said, it might get even worse once people get similar technology screwed into their skull.

    This type of technology is inevitable - but smart people will leave it in the lab until it's pretty much invisible.

    I can just imagine the Chav's walking around my local super market with their bluetooth headset, google glass and shell suit.

  28. gfrevivus

    Given my car driving experiences of individuals walking out into the road almost under my car wheels without looking when wearing mp3 players or using their mobile or cellphone or looking at their screen I hope this isn't literally going to be a killer app or end up featuring in the Darwin awards. I do agree with other comments that say that within a closed context e.g warehousing stock control and research it could be very useful. I certainly wouldn't want somebody wearing them when driving or out in a normal street environment.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022