Slashdot Mirror


Not Even Investors Know What Google Glass Is For

bdking writes "Google says it plans to ship its Google Glass Explorer Edition by the end of April to developers and consumers who paid $1,500 to test the computer-enabled eyewear, with vague plans for a general release (at a lower price) by year's end. But what will you really be able to do with Google Glass, beyond having information presented before your eyes? Even investors who are set to spend millions funding apps development for Google Glass have no clue. Is Google Glass being overhyped as a 'transformational' device?" I bet every real estate agent in the world would like one of these hooked up to a database of houses for sale, so they could instantly scan all the relevant information.

9 of 496 comments (clear)

  1. Re:If it really knew where it was... by swanzilla · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the thing had good enough heading and position information, it could overlay detailed information on the real world. But it's not that good. It's just a smartphone display.

    Too bad smartphones don't ship with GPS receivers, accelerometers, gyroscopes...

  2. Like the iPad? by Phasma+Felis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is gonna be like when we all scoffed about the iPad's potential market, isn't it?

    1. Re:Like the iPad? by mtb_ogre · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Apple was able to tell people all the cool things they could do with an iPad.

      Google: "You tell us what it's good for!"

      When the inventor can't easily explain what the best uses for their invention are, it's a safe bet there really aren't any.

    2. Re:Like the iPad? by geekoid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "When the inventor can't easily explain what the best uses for their invention are, "
      how naive.

      In the hardware industry, the best application seldom come from the company that developed it. Best game seldom come the the console makers, then best application for the iPad didn't come from Apple, and so on.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  3. Re:If it really knew where it was... by alexborges · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ok let me explain:

    It is not a phone, it has (or shouldnt or will evolve to) no comunications capabilities beyond connecting to your already existing phone. It is a display, a voice gatherer and an api for your phone.

    Its posibilities, if my assumptions are right, are endless and i do think that, done right, it could be a game changer. However, I also think nobody copies shit better than apple. If this works, you can be sure the iEyeEye (ay ay ay), will be simpler, stupider and more loved.

    --
    NO SIG
  4. Instructions by meta-monkey · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As a DIY kinda guy who does his own auto maintenance, fixes stuff around his house, cooks, assembles toys for his kid, etc, the immediate thing that would absolutely make me buy one of these is just the ability to present instructions in front of my face without me having to look away from what I'm doing.

    How many times have I been looking at my engine and gotten lost thinking, "Wait, was that bolt on the left side or the right side?" and had to stop and reach for the manual or the instructions I had loaded up on my tablet. Or been holding three pieces of baby furniture together with one hand while rummaging through my tool belt to get the right screws and then realized "crap, does this part take the long screw or the medium long screw?" and had to put the whole thing back down to reach for the instructions. If I had a hands-free display showing me the instructions it would be way easier.

    And the instructions don't even need to be digitized already and downloaded from the manufacturer's website. Glass has a camera, so before I get started, look at the instructions and snap a few high-res pics.

    Eventually, if such devices penetrate the market there might be a reason to use those QR codes. Companies could put out "Glass Enabled Instructions" where each part has a small code on it, so when you get to "Insert Rod A into Flange B" the instructions app would scan your visual field for the correct marker code on Rod A and give you a thumbs up. Which gives you all kinds of other applications for general education and training.

    Also, whenever I'm taking something apart, I find myself grabbing my phone to snap pictures during the disassembly, so when it comes time to stick all the color-coded but otherwise unmarked wires back into the posts on the PCB I have a quick reference for what it looked like when I started. With Glass, fuck, not only could I take stills without rummaging for my phone, I could just record a video of the whole process and then scrub back through it if I was unsure of how anything fit together during reassembly.

    Yeah, I'll buy one just for that.

    --
    We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  5. Oh dear God by sootman · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't know what the future holds for Google Glass, but I know one thing for sure: Marc Andreessen should not be bald. I'm pretty sure I saw him in a movie with Dan Aykroyd and Jane Curtain twenty years ago...

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  6. Re:If it really knew where it was... by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Funny

    I am not 80 nor a rapper, so I am not sure I am allowed to. I would not want to either, since I am not 80 or a rapper.

  7. Re:If it really knew where it was... by tibit · · Score: 5, Informative

    I don't know what kind of an idiot you are, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that our visual system does not support texting and driving. As in, you know, the central vision is the only thing with decent resolution -- the only thing that in fact support conscious processing of imagery that has meanings that have to be decoded. That's why you constantly relocate your central vision while you read. If it has meaning that has to be picked up, the central vision must get to it. So, in order to look at a cell phone you're moving the central vision smack onto the cellphone's display. The cellphone's display is likely to be in a location where the peripheral vision -- the realtime, absent-of-meaning parallel-processing vision of ours -- will not be targeted at the windows and windshield. Thus you make yourself effectively blind for the purposes of driving. That's why texting and driving is so bad -- when you text, you're a blind person driving the car. It's that easy. Things are perhaps a bit more acceptable if you have a tactile keyboard on your phone and know how to use it without looking at the phone *at all*, but you're still redirecting your conscious attention to processing of the text you're writing, and that's bad in and of itself as I'll explain in the last two paragraphs.

    As for talking on the cellphone while driving: well, most people, in the U.S. at least, have to hold their cell in their head, or support it with the shoulder, etc. Again it doesn't take a genius to figure out that you're altering your posture sufficiently so that your external field of view becomes crippled, and you're unable to execute head saccades. Saccades are the fast motions of the eye that redirect the gaze to a new point of interest. When a saccade is large enough, it gets executed in tandem by your neck muscles and your eye muscles. If it's even larger, your entire body participates in the motion -- and it's pretty damn cool that all those stacked motion stages can still execute a saccade that ends up at most a couple of visual degrees away from the intended target. All this goes to hell when you have a cellphone to deal with -- either between your head and your shoulder, or between your head and your hand. Again -- you're making yourself partially blind in the areas of peripheral vision that would normally elicit a shift of visual attention.

    Oh, so what about the hands-free sets? Again, it doesn't take a rocket scientist. You've got an extra thing on your head to worry about if you wear a headset. Any sort of an out-of-normal situation (slipping headset, change of settings, etc) will for a moment monopolize your conscious attention. If you're using the car hands-free set, those are the worst. The audio quality is worse, so more of your conscious attention needs to be redirected to what was an automated task: decoding the meaning of words. The worse the audio quality, the more conscious processing is required to deal with a task that in normal conditions is purely automatic once you're around age 5. I don't think I need to convince you that depriving yourself of serial conscious processing is good while driving. The conscious attention is a serial resource -- it can only do one thing at a time. Yes, arguably driving depends a lot on sub-conscious processing -- since this is the only kind of processing we have available that's fast and real time -- that's why you can't drive a bicycle just knowing the physics of it, your conscious processing is way too slow.

    But, in spite of most driving being done by the hugely parallel sub-conscious processing, you do need to do some ahead-planning to cope with changing weather and road conditions. If you completely redirect your conscious attention at the phone conversation, you may end up rear-ending someone -- for a simple reason. The conscious processing is used to keep the driving model up-to-date so that your learned sub-conscious "reflexes" keep you driving at a correct speed, in the correct lane, at a correct distance from the car(s) ahead of you. Once there

    --
    A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.