'iPod Father' Tony Fadell to Take Charge of Google Glass

[V.K.]

Google Glass will never become mainstream. Who is going to go around wearing a pair of these? Societal perceptions matter, now whether that is a good or bad thing may be up for debate, but it does.

Now, a contact lens, yes, that is a breakthrough product that appeals to everyone. Who knows how far away from that we are though.. Probably years and years.

it doesn't even have to be something as unobtrusive as contact lenses.
in a few years miniaturization will likely make it possible to make Google Glasses which would be indistinguishable from regular glasses in appearance. that would change things in terms of public acceptance. I still think this is the future. It's just that Google jumped on this years before the tech was ready. They like doing such futuristic things. they create a lot of buzz but don't go anywhere commercially.

 

[IJ Reilly]

The Google Glass thing is just not ready yet, the camera alone makes me think of creepy men near playgrounds. Also the safety when driving a car, riding a bike, walking is not fully explored. It will happen one day, but there are many things to be sorted out first. The glass thing will happen AFTER we find it acceptable to talk to our wrist.

The success this product is less about technical than social acceptability issues. The social acceptability scale is quite malleable. Lots of creepy stuff becomes mainstream. If Google could talk some hip celebrities into wearing them in public you'd quickly see a lot of hipster wannabes wearing them.

----------

It's just that Google jumped on this years before the tech was ready. They like doing such futuristic things. they create a lot of buzz but don't go anywhere commercially.

Funny how Apple can't get away with that. Every one of their products have to be instant successes.

 

[MH01]

Agreed. Letting Google acquire Nest was a strategic mistake that'll have long term repercussions. Nest could've been the centre hub for HomeKit. I understand that Apple doesn't want to grow to having a large product matrix but they could've kept Nest running as an independent company making homekit devices.

Google not only got the product, they got Fadell.

But Apple got Beats! Take that Google !!!

 

[fluchtpunkt]

they could've kept Nest running as an independent company making homekit devices.

That would make Homekit less attractive to third parties. Apple would be a direct competitor, they would define the plattform, and they would dictate the conditions you are allowed to work in. They do the latter two already, but their current interest is to get as much Homekit Support as possible.
If they would be selling homekit devices themselves there would be an incentive to hinder third parties. Either directly by changing the rules to their liking, or by allowing their own products to use features that third parties can't use.

We already have this problem in Apples software world. Their apps are generally not bound to any of the rules that third party developers have to abide by. The software Apple releases in the Mac App Store can do things that third parties can't do if they want to be in the Mac App Store. Which gives an unfair advantage to Apple.

And some developers already cut back their support by leaving the Mac App Store.


A level playing field is the best thing for third party support. Being a direct competitor does not help to get HomeKit support from companies.

 

[Trapezoid]

This Glass thing is still around? Google needs to move on.

 

[69650]

Flawed concept. It'll never achieve mass market adoption.

 

[A MacBook lover]

You really struggled to come back with that inaccurate rejoinder. Try again.

It's been all over the news that those who don these specs are called glass holes. Are you one of them?

It was an observation, not a jab at you. Don't take it personal.

There are plenty of people who view anyone who uses an Apple product as 'douchy'. A fair comparison.

Nice try at compartmentalizing me in an effort to set up a straw man, though.

 

[yadmonkey]

Most would not go for a product that labels them an instant douche.

People used to say the same thing about cell phones and (later) bluetooth headset back in the day.

 

[Gameboy70]

Seeing someone with a product you can't get / out of your price range makes them a douche?

Nah, it's more about seeing someone wearing a camera on their face, ostensibly recording their surroundings full-time, with or without the permission of those in their line of sight. That would be true at any price range.

 

[A MacBook lover]

Nah, it's more about seeing someone wearing a camera on their face, ostensibly recording their surroundings full-time, with or without the permission of those in their line of sight. That would be true at any price range.

True, I stand corrected.

 

[needfx]

I'm still shocked that apple dropped the ball and failed to snag Nest when they had the chance.

I think with Fadell heading up google glass, it can only improve things.

Look for a great design coming out of this. Apple was a fool for not acquiring Nest.

I think Apple played it right by not acquiring nest

can you imagine the class action suits for who-knows-what-they-will-come-up-with?

 

[Lucky736]

Look for a great design coming out of this. Apple was a fool for not acquiring Nest.

Fadell left Apple to work on a side project.
Fadell would have left Apple again to work on another side project.

Part of this is exactly right. Apple NEVER had the chance to acquire Nest. Don't believe everything you read where anyone said they did.

 

[Rogifan]

Funny how Apple can't get away with that. Every one of their products have to be instant successes.

Ha, just today on CNBC the talking heads were saying Apple is doomed because they'll never have another product as successful as iPhone.

 

[blahblah100]

Most would not go for a product that labels them an instant douche.

We won't know until the Apple Watch is released... :roll eyes:


_______
Clearly sarcasm, but trying to make a point that making such blanket statements about a group of people based on device selection is really immature...

 

[alexgowers]

I'm still shocked that apple dropped the ball and failed to snag Nest when they had the chance.

I think with Fadell heading up google glass, it can only improve things.

What? Nest are you kidding me? Why would you want to buy them. It's a fad area that will never catch on ever. Tech and bricks and motar rarely play nice in the long run as incompatible systems mean if you move home all your tech is left behind and you inherit another system from someone else. It's such a wasted investment. I can understand entertainment systems but not home thermostats and fire detectors etc, Nest will be worthless in 10 years time.

Google glass will likely never improve into a successful product if it retains a camera. People don't want you with something like that. I'm being down on this kind of tech because it's reaching the limits of social and logistical norms. It's tech that most people with empathy or 2 brain cells sees as moronic and inappropriate.

 

[filmantopia]

I am a Google Glass form factor enthusiast. I figured for a long time now that the iteration they've advertised was not going to work out. However I think people are just going to get over the camera on face thing and eventually they devices will be inconspicuous, fashionable, cheap and functional enough for people to adopt the form factor.

But honestly by that time I suspect Apple may have beaten them to the hardware/software model that everyone wants. The Apple Watch interface (i.e. Apple's wearable OS) especially after a few more years of growth, would make a great face-worn interface, for example.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Ha, just today on CNBC the talking heads were saying Apple is doomed because they'll never have another product as successful as iPhone.

And Google will never have a product as successful as Glass.

 

[CartoonCat]

What? Nest are you kidding me? Why would you want to buy them. It's a fad area that will never catch on ever. Tech and bricks and motar rarely play nice in the long run as incompatible systems mean if you move home all your tech is left behind and you inherit another system from someone else. It's such a wasted investment. I can understand entertainment systems but not home thermostats and fire detectors etc, Nest will be worthless in 10 years time.

Google glass will likely never improve into a successful product if it retains a camera. People don't want you with something like that. I'm being down on this kind of tech because it's reaching the limits of social and logistical norms. It's tech that most people with empathy or 2 brain cells sees as moronic and inappropriate.

Well... you are right about Google Glass, but totally wrong about Nest. I live in an older Condo and the Thermostat was terrible. I bought a Nest and installed it myself in about 10 minutes. I can change the settings from any room in the house upstairs or down using my iPhone or iPad, Mac, iPod, etc. Also can change the setting from anywhere in the world using the Nest website. This kind of Tech will only become more widespread in the future, not become obsolete. In fact all new houses will be built with this Tech. Not just from Nest but many competitors also.

 

[manu chao]

I imagine that it would be hard to work with Jony and the probable clash of development/design ideas would be uncomfortable and unpleasant.

To be creative you must follow your own path.

You mean because Nest is particularly known for their hardware and software design and look and feel, including the packaging, and Jony Ive doesn't care about those things?

 

[Analog Kid]

The concept is inherently creepy. The way to overcome the creep factor is to figure out how make it hip to be creepy. This isn't as difficult as it sounds.

Personally, I find it creepy to try to be hip, so I think we're on the same page...

That said, I think the core concept was basically a HUD for your phone so people can go back to looking at the world rather than stare at their hand. I think that's solid. The camera bit just took the concept of never having to take the phone from your pocket a bit too far and, I think, hijacked the entire discussion about how we interact with out tech.

Ironically, I think taking the camera off of Glass and keeping it on the handset would better suit people-- instead of making picture taking even stealthier than it already is on a phone, it would make it more deliberate. When someone takes their handset out of their pocket to take a picture, we become more aware of the action because Glass would otherwise make the handset less necessary.

 

[WardC]

I would not be interested in this until they make a version for LEFT EYE DOMINANT people!!!

 

[FieldingMellish]

It was an observation, not a jab at you. Don't take it personal.

There are plenty of people who view anyone who uses an Apple product as 'douchy'. A fair comparison.

Nice try at compartmentalizing me in an effort to set up a straw man, though.

But are you one of them?

----------

We won't know until the Apple Watch is released... :roll eyes:


_______
Clearly sarcasm, but trying to make a point that making such blanket statements about a group of people based on device selection is really immature...

It's hilarious, so just suck it up.

 

[MacAddict1978]

You seem to be unaware of the fact that Glass has been around for a few years and nobody cares. I knew a grand total of one person with a pair, and that was amoungst everyone in CE or CS at my university last year.

You seem to be unaware that they were $1500 and not at all priced for consumers. Def not a cheap affordable device for a college student!

That's also why no one has them.

I'm not really sure about the doom and gloom declaring glass a failure.

Developer interest is a problem, but if these were $300 I think we would see a lot more people going for it. The sport camera market alone would dive in. It just needs developers to bring out the potential.

 

[A MacBook lover]

But are you one of them?

One of what?

 

[lowercaseperson]

it doesn't even have to be something as unobtrusive as contact lenses.
in a few years miniaturization will likely make it possible to make Google Glasses which would be indistinguishable from regular glasses in appearance. that would change things in terms of public acceptance. I still think this is the future. It's just that Google jumped on this years before the tech was ready. They like doing such futuristic things. they create a lot of buzz but don't go anywhere commercially.

On point! The main difference I see here between Apple and Google is that (I think) Apple would have waited until it was miniaturized enough to look at least half way normal to release it (Who knows maybe that's still a possibility). And to be fair, it's not like Google is trying to make Glass *totally* mainstream yet.

Back to the miniaturization point though. That's why I'm holding my tongue on Glass as of yet. No I wouldn't wear it now, but I DO wear glasses every day - if I could have that tech in my glasses...and they look the same way they do now - why not?