Slashdot Mirror


Google Heads Up Display Coming By the End of the Year

kodiaktau writes "Google is working to deliver a heads-up display allowing users access to email, maps and other tools through a wearable interface. According to the NY Times' sources, the device will be available later this year, and sell for prices comparable to smartphones. 'The people familiar with the Google glasses said they would be Android-based, and will include a small screen that will sit a few inches from someone’s eye. They will also have a 3G or 4G data connection and a number of sensors including motion and GPS. ... The glasses will have a low-resolution built-in camera that will be able to monitor the world in real time and overlay information about locations, surrounding buildings and friends who might be nearby, according to the Google employees. The glasses are not designed to be worn constantly — although Google expects some of the nerdiest users will wear them a lot — but will be more like smartphones, used when needed.'"

46 of 177 comments (clear)

  1. Googloid by Jmanamj · · Score: 5, Funny

    I will be plugged into the Google at all times. I will fear no evil for Google will be with me, and will guide me to safety. The Google provides divine inspiration, and is the light of the world. The Google protects. You should be plugged in to the Google. Otherwise you are a lesser bing. All hail the Google.

    1. Re:Googloid by game+kid · · Score: 5, Funny

      Otherwise you are a lesser bing.

      I see what you did there.

      --
      You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    2. Re:Googloid by Ihmhi · · Score: 2

      The Google protects.

      As long as the enemies of The Google still draw breath, there can be no peace.

    3. Re:Googloid by mitashki · · Score: 2

      THis deserves a proper inspirational marching song:

      All tilt their head - scroll,
      All tilt their head - click.
      We will follow our Big leader until death,
      Removing those who oppose us from our circles. ...and possible implications http://www.mohrs.org/snowpeaZ2A.jpg

      --
      "When all you have is a hammer, everything starts looking like a nail."
    4. Re:Googloid by g0bshiTe · · Score: 2

      Apparently the Google spellchecker is not strong with this one.

      --
      I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
    5. Re:Googloid by Jake73 · · Score: 2

      You may be surprised. With the advancements and push they're making on the self-driving car, they're making quite a case to get the captive in-car audience for billions of hours per day. Add HUDs and in-car popups and adverts and you have a whole lot of new advertising revenue.

      Top it off with a whole lot of patents because, as far as I know, they're the only ones working on the self-driving car with such ferocity. They'll be the only channel available.

    6. Re:Googloid by inKubus · · Score: 2

      And they shall be called, Googoyles.

      --
      Cool! Amazing Toys.
    7. Re:Googloid by TuringTest · · Score: 2

      You kidding? 'Lesser bing' is with no doubts recognized and allowed by the Google spellchecker.

      --
      Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
  2. Perspective by StripedCow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So now google is able to literally look through our eyes... great.

    --
    If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
    1. Re:Perspective by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My thoughts exactly. I got exited at the prospect of practical AR glasses finally arriving on the market ("practical" meaning more or less affordable, and well designed so that you can actually wear them in public), but got disappointed when reading that it is Google releasing them. Remember that they will not just be looking, but analysing and interpreting as well.

      Give them a few years to develop this further and combine it with their other data (face recognition for instance), and you get something like the following sitting in a Google server somewhere.
      SUBJECT: John Doe (Google ID 1312.11.552.874.5)
      EVENT: Observation of known person
      OBJECT: Jane Doe (Google ID 7823.14.461.551.6)
      Identified by tagged photo, 78 hits, average match 87%, confidence after cross-correlation 99.12%
      DURATION: 14 seconds total, eye motion analysis breaks down as follows:
      - face: 2 seconds
      - chest: 5 seconds
      - posterior: 4 seconds
      - legs: 3 seconds

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    2. Re:Perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So root it

    3. Re:Perspective by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Funny

      So now google is able to literally look through our eyes... great.

      Listen, troll - stop the mindless Google bashing. Google Interceptors aren't scheduled for beta release until Q2 2016.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    4. Re:Perspective by Captain+Hook · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You are assuming the device has enough horsepower locally to be useful, as opposed to doing the vast majority of the work on servers and just displaying the results.

      You could certainly do some stuff locally, maybe have heading and speed information, how much is left in your google wallet etc, but the vast majority of the work will have to be done on the server if only because of storage space.

      For example, asking for directions to the nearest ATM, there is no way to store a list of Points of Interest for the entire world, I doubt you could even store all the points of interest for a large city.

      Thats not to say it couldn't cache results when you go to a new city so you don't need a constant net connection to use it, but at some point it will have to connect back to a server to get more information and at that point stats can be uploaded as well.

      Rooting it would allow you to use some server other than Googles' (maybe) but who else runs a server capable of that sort of detailed information and who wouldn't also be interested in collecting the same sort of information as Google.

      --
      These comments are my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the other voices in my head.
    5. Re:Perspective by somersault · · Score: 2

      For example, asking for directions to the nearest ATM, there is no way to store a list of Points of Interest for the entire world, I doubt you could even store all the points of interest for a large city.

      What kind of information are you expecting to store? I'd think even if you stored the coordinates of every ATM, shop, trashcan, etc, you'd have a few hundred MB at most. Detailed satellite imagery for a city would only be a few GB too.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    6. Re:Perspective by Tharsman · · Score: 4, Funny

      SUBJECT: John Doe (Google ID 1312.11.552.874.5)
      SUBJECT AGE: 24
      EVENT: Observation of known person
      OBJECT: Jael Bate (Google ID 7823.14.461.551.6)
      Identified by tagged photo, 1,264,243,452 hits, average match 87%, confidence after cross-correlation 99.12%
      OBJECT AGE: 17 and 11 months
      DURATION: 2 minutes and 9 seconds total, eye motion analysis breaks down as follows:
      - face: 2 seconds
      - posterior: 4 seconds
      - legs: 3 seconds
      - chest: 2 minutes

      PEDOPHILE BEHAVIOR DETECTED, CONTACTING POLICE DEPARTMENT, ELECTRICALLY STUNNING SUBJECT UNTIL POLICE ARRIVAL.

    7. Re:Perspective by icebraining · · Score: 2

      It's actually not as simple as that. This thing has a camera and (probably) GPS. How much time 'till they start facial recognizing the people you pass by and logging their location?

      Sure, smartphones have cameras, but you don't walk around all day with one glued to your forehead.

  3. Sounds interesting by pseudofrog · · Score: 4, Funny

    And six months after Google releases it, Apple will invent it.

    1. Re:Sounds interesting by Sqr(twg) · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And everyone will buy from Apple, because "wearing iGlasses" sounds so much more plesant than "wearing a Galaxy HUD".

    2. Re:Sounds interesting by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 4, Funny

      And three years after Apple pre-invents it, Microsoft will re-invent it poorly, call it "innovation", completely botch the marketing and end up having to pull the product within a couple months.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    3. Re:Sounds interesting by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, to be fair, Microsoft Research probably had it 5 years ago but the monkeyboy is always too busy exhibiting Tourette's syndrome about Google to notice.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    4. Re:Sounds interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      And everyone will buy from Apple, because "wearing iGlasses" sounds so much more plesant than "wearing a Galaxy HUD".

      Apple iGlass users will be happy with their purchase, willing to pay a premium for simpler interfaces, unified experience, and first-rate hardware.

      Google Android HUD users will be happy with their purchase, opting for complex interaction, platform openness, and a variety of hardware.

      The telling difference is that Android users will sneer at Apple users for being fashion slaves and clueless n00bs, while most Apple users will hardly even know what Android is and, when informed by an evangelizing Android user, will continue not to care.

      A message to evangelizing Android users: you can stop your religious war because nobody fucking cares.

  4. IANAL by Cornwallis · · Score: 2

    but I imagine they will be lining up to take the Google-glasses-induced automobile accident cases.

    1. Re:IANAL by deburg · · Score: 2

      I can just imagine the Police investigating the accident playing back the video from the glasses with the crash trajectory information overlay-ed ... cool

  5. First design image leaked by Rhaban · · Score: 5, Funny
    1. Re:First design image leaked by mikael_j · · Score: 2

      You jest but imagine the day that we get good brain-machine interfaces (cue the jokes about fingers and keyboards). You don't think people will start linking their minds in various ways? Just imagine sex or drug use while linked in such a fashion (or for the more boring types, imagine working on a project with ha bunch of other developers, all linked directly to each other, no more boring meetings, you'll know instantly that Joe needs that database dump and what changes Steve want made to the invoice module). Sure, initially it's likely to be fairly primitive but eventually I suspect it'll be like cellphones, a few people will absolutely refuse to use them but for most people the advantages will outweigh the disadvantages.

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    2. Re:First design image leaked by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Funny

      In-the-link-must-control-thoughts-must-not-think-about-hot-porn-with-that-oh-shit-did-he-hear-that-act-cool-focus-on-the-work...

  6. HouseView by Dave+Whiteside · · Score: 2

    so now you can virtually walk round other peoples houses.
    I need never leave the comfort of my panic room

    --
    who where what when now?
  7. Re:Another unnecessary data plan... by Mabhatter · · Score: 2

    Because it replaces a smartphone... Why add unnecessary 48 types of networking?

    Cell data IS the Internet now!!!

  8. Cue the brain tumor posts... by rbrightwell · · Score: 3, Funny

    I guess cell phones just weren't radiating close enough to our heads.

  9. I'd rather have the glasses only ... by Lazy+Jones · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... connected to my smartphone. Perhaps even one without maximum privacy impact. Existing designs: terminally-incoherent.com blog

    --
    "I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
  10. Missing an important feature. by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Funny

    I don't see where they turn completely black when they sense danger.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  11. One step closer to the Darknet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daemon_(technothriller_series)

  12. Re:ReconInstruments MOD Live by Lumpy · · Score: 2

    Why the hell is this not sold to motorcyclists? Instead they sell it to a far smaller group, ski and snow board.

    Having GPS, speed, and engine data, radar detector, and a REAR FACING CAMERA view in that on a bike would be invaluable instead of looking down at the display or having to turn my head and look completely away from the road to see if some idiot in a SUV is riding 12 inches from me in my blind spot.

    That company needs to pair with a helmet maker and make more money than they ever dreamed of by selling to motorcyclists.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  13. Interesting by lucian1900 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I've often wished for a HUD to allow me to read while walking around.

    But why would this be an Android device of its own, rather than just an input/output device for my existing Android phone?

  14. Lenses by Bensam123 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm actually quite interested in when these will be available as normal prescription glasses lenses. I think this is a lot of geeks wet dream. Heck you could even possibly replace the lenses themselves with a modified display that uses a camera and alters the image to your prescription. Given the imaging resolution would have to be high enough and it would have to have a fast enough response time. This is like the holy grail of all technology beyond being directly connected to your computer via your brain.

    Honestly, just using a modified pair of prescription lenses would work... for now.

  15. Re:AR Glasses by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 2

    Sure, your concern is very real, but let's try our hand at sidestepping a marketing trap.

    One of the most profound concepts of marketing is to try to convince people that "X Corp's Subset is the only desirable Subset of the overall Set of Products/Services."

    So right now we're unnerved at both Google and Apple and maybe even Microsoft if they decide to issue one of these glasses. But it's the Set of AR glasses that I absolutely believe is (part of) the future of computing. So I think I'd trust a company like maybe Samsung, who isn't on my radar of Evil Companies (correct me if they need to be) just making an platform-agnostic set of hardware AR glasses with adaptors to all the phones.

    So then for me the question becomes "knowing the very real data sales issues of Google and Apple, if it takes that kind of money to kick this into top gear, then social fashion progress (avoiding the laugh-at-the-nerd factor because "oh, it's okay NOW that *I* do it" might be the TRUE trade off that personal data. Then we just use the Linux mentality and go off the Google-Apple grid.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  16. Re:BT connection to the headset by newcastlejon · · Score: 2

    You can go to a coffee shop and get your beverage, send an email/social post or three, without even changing your expression.

    You'll still need to write the message, which means one of the following:

    ~A keyboard, which you'll either look at (defeating the point of the glasses, since you might as well have a phone) or keep in your pocket and use blind.

    ~Voice recognition

    ~Gaze direction or blink sensing.

    So, that would mean you look like you're either wanking through your pockets, talking to yourself, blinking madly or making furtive glances everywhere (or all of the above...)

    The Future is Here!

    --
    If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
  17. Re:Amusing gadget by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Amusing? Like how cell phones were amusing when they first hit the streets and we saw people talking into a phone while walking down the block, or even funnier, when dorks started wearing the ear pieces and looked like crazy people talking into thin air?

    I almost shit myself the first time I saw a teenager talking on a cell while riding a bike. Now it's common.

    Yeah, the unusual and novel, that sure is funny.

  18. I see what you did there by e.coli · · Score: 3, Funny

    "The glasses are not designed to be worn constantly — although Google expects some of the nerdiest users will wear them a lot — but will be more like smartphones, used when needed.'"

    Great, now there will be idiots driving AND wearing these. And at restaurants, theaters, and everywhere else cell phone users abusers currently annoy people.

    Still, I would love to have one, or two.

  19. Re:BT connection to the headset by Lumpy · · Score: 2

    Chording keyboards work great.

    Some of us have had this technology for well over a decade. MIT Steve Mann(Now Prof at U of Toronto) and Thad Starner invented wearable computing and they have been using this tech for10+ years already. Many of their grad students as well as interested techies also have.

    I had a 386 based belt PC, HUD and Handeykey chording keyboard back in 1997 I had a 5 hour run time using pc104 low power useage computer boards and a Nicad pack that was actually a bandolier of batteries designed to run a video light for a camera operator.

    when my coat was on, you could only see the hud. Steve Mann made his into funky glasses.

    https://www.google.com/webhp?rlz=1C1PRFA_enUS419US419&sourceid=chrome-instant&ix=sea&ie=UTF-8&ion=1#hl=en&rlz=1C1PRFA_enUS419US419&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=wearable%20computing&pbx=1&oq=&aq=&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&fp=4bd463be09dc681c&ix=sea&ion=1&ix=sea&ion=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=4bd463be09dc681c&biw=1626&bih=777&ix=sea&ion=1

    for more info into how google did not come up with this but built upon what others have been doing for a while.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  20. Accessibility by Deorus · · Score: 2

    How many people wanna bet that they'll have ZERO accessibility utility and require people with near perfect sight to use? This is the ONE place where Google could actually beat Apple at something related to human interfaces (Apple is in a league of their own when it comes to accessibility right now), and I bet they won't even give it any thought, which is common of them.

    Let us hope that someone out there actually reads this and thinks: Hey we could actually use this to help people see while at the same augmenting the abilities of people who already have perfect sight!

    I am 95.2% disabled thanks to a congenital open angle glaucoma, and my iPhone 4S' 8MP camera as well as iOS' accessibility options have exceeded all my expectations to the point where now anything that's not Apple feels clunky and obsolete to me. My cell phone can literally see better than me, especially in the distance, and Apple makes that kind of use even more convenient with subtle changes to the way apps work such as by increasing the zoom cap in the Pictures app when accessibility Zoom is enabled, even if it's not active, because they actually KNOW that SOME people have a use case for this kind of thing, and yet this has absolutely no impact in the way normal people use their iPhones, most are completely oblivious to these details.

  21. Re:sporting by realityimpaired · · Score: 2

    Hart rate? Are deer really that much of a problem on your bike rides?

  22. Head bobbing by michaelmalak · · Score: 3, Funny

    "The navigation system currently used is a head tilting to scroll and click," Mr. Weintraub wrote this month. "We are told it is very quick to learn and once the user is adept at navigation, it becomes second nature and almost indistinguishable to outside users."

    Like this?

  23. No thanks, Google by mcgrew · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I wore glasses (thick ones) for 45 years until medical technology came to my rescue. I'm not going back. Sunglasses, maybe, but a headsup display at all times with your email and such?

    You know, there are some things that should not be invented and this is one of them. You think people talking on their phones while driving are dangerous, wait until they're wearing these glasses! It will be bad enough on the sidewalk with idiots paying attention to the HUD and not where they're going, running into you... better than driving with them, though.

    What's worse It's a completely unnecessary device. Doesn't your phone beep when you get a message?

    However, this will probably go over big with the hipsters. Kind of like the Segway was so popular. It does have one good feature -- nopbody wearing these will EVER get laid, so their genes will no longer pollute the pool. And the ones who wear them driving (and they will, you know they will) may kill themselves, but unfortunately take an innocent or two with them.

    1. Re:No thanks, Google by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Insightful
      It's inevitable, as I predicted here last August. But don't worry, you won't have to look nerdy.

      Pretty much every electronic device can interact with your video SPEKZ, which can be anything from a pair of plain-jane NokiaSofts to the latest cool shades from Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL). Cars, streetlight surveillance cams, water meters, televisions, and even your clock radio are all talking to each other -- and your SPEKZ are piggybacking on their data streams. There's not a single laptop, desktop, smartphone or tablet computer in sight.

      It's an amazingly seamless experience. The tiny twin cams on your SPEKZ let you share what you see with your friends and stream a copy to your home server. Your watch and charm bracelet contain sensors to detect your wrist movements and the muscles and tendons of your fingers flexing, all descended from Nintendo WiiMote technology.

      As for driving with the future versions, it will be safer, since:they will give the driver full night vision, as well as the ability to display an enhanced view of traffic despite road glare, sun in the eyes, torrential rain, etc. It would be nice to see that deer well before it goes through your windshield.

    2. Re:No thanks, Google by icebraining · · Score: 2

      Frankly, sir, you seem a Luddite if the only application you can see for an HUD with a camera is "checking your messages".

      Just integrating it with something like word lens coupled with a navigation system would make it a fantastic device for traveling.