Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Google Displays Hardware Hacking Build Hardware

Google Releases Glass Factory System Image, Rooted Bootloader 74

Posted by timothy from the wait-till-the-glass-morphs-to-your-prescription dept.
Krystalo writes "In a nod towards the modding community and hackers in general, Google has released the first factory system image and rooted bootloader for the latest version, XE5, of Google Glass. Nevertheless, the company is at the same time warning that using these downloads will result in a voided warranty for the experimental device."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Releases Glass Factory System Image, Rooted Bootloader More

Google Releases Glass Factory System Image, Rooted Bootloader

Comments Filter:

  • With as much hype as Google is trying to create for an existing product by another manufacturer, you'd think they'd give a little more leeway for innovation.

    • Re:That's a really odd position to take. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by DragonWriter ( 970822 ) on Friday May 24, 2013 @05:59PM (#43817579)

      With as much hype as Google is trying to create for an existing product by another manufacturer, you'd think they'd give a little more leeway for innovation.

      More than giving you complete freedom to mess with it, but saying that, if you break it in the process, they aren't going to assume responsibility?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Molochi ( 555357 )

        Full Disclosure: I didn't buy one.

        They want few people who paid ~3x as much as an existing competing android product (that is really cool and works) to void their warrantee to make new stuff for them. They want to OWN this segment. It's just stupid.

        • You've said that twice now and still haven't provided a link...

          • FU (Score:1)

            by Molochi ( 555357 )

            I'll give you a clue. People who venture outside and go skiing wear goggles... oh fuckit.

            http://developers.reconinstruments.com/ [reconinstruments.com]

            http://www.reconinstruments.com/ [reconinstruments.com]

            The HUD is ~$500 from them. Oakley, Scott, Smith, etc... all had Recon hardware (with a markup) last year.

            • Your source is a single eye version of the as-seen-on-tv home theater glasses with some basic modern sensors and X-TREME rebranding? And you want to compare this to an actual look-through heads up display? Seriously? The obligatory car analogy is comparing an actual HUD on the windshield (glass) with classic instrumentation that you can look down at.

              You're trying to play up a screen on a hands free mount like it's an Eyetap.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by Molochi ( 555357 )

                GG is an actual look-through heads up display? I thought it was classic instrumentation that you can look up at and powered by an ARM computer. Is looking up better?

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8lScHO2mM0 [youtube.com]

                There is a hardware difference of course, the Recon doesn't have a $1000 webcam. Some people might consider that a plus.

                My main reason for mentioning the Recon unit was to point out the extreme price of GG and their attitude of "you broke it so fuck off" compared to another android powered HUD that coul

                • Here's [imgur.com] what the view THROUGH google glass looks like as opposed to the Recon which is nothing more than one of these [bigboxsave.com] cut in half with a modern set of sensors bolted onto it.

        • They want few people who paid ~3x as much as an existing competing android product (that is really cool and works) to void their warrantee to make new stuff for them.

          I think they want people to build stuff to the stock Glass APIs. They are willing to allow users who want to do additional experimentation to do so freely (as long as those users, not Google, are responsible if they make the device unusable in the process). There is a crucial distinction there.

    • It is pretty much the standard "Use as intended or warranty is void" you get with any product. Compare Google Glass to a lawnmower. As long as you use it as intended and don't modify it in any way the manufacturer has to maintain some responsibility for damages caused by it if it malfunctions. If, however, you modify it, say by removing all the safety features, and it goes on to chop your hand off, the fault is on you. While not nearly as dangerous as the lawnmower, Google Glass is still a delicate piece
  • nekkid pics previously posted. For extra credit: action pics.

  • Rooted? (Score:1, Troll)

    by Jimbookis ( 517778 )
    Australian and New Zealand ./ers will understand this as "Google Releases Glass Factory System Image, Completely Fucking Broken Bootloader"

    • I'm guessing that living in those countries does not render you unable to determine the meaning of a technical term when used in context. I could be wrong, as there are rumours of unusual activities with sheep.

      • Unusual?

        You mean usual activities with sheep and the wayward kangaroo...

        Ah! Yes, I see you're American, mate!

  • It it just me, or does this make no sense. Isn't Open Source suppose to ALLOW you to run the SW in any form, as you like on a piece of HW?
    Ok, so this only runs on Google's HW... and they are within their right to set terms of what they're going to support. But this sure sounds really screwed up...
    and at least doesn't seem to follow the "spirit" of Open Source, though it does follow the "letter-of-the-law"...

    Google continues to slide on my score sheet. Use to seem to be taking a new exciting path, now j

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by AuMatar ( 183847 )

      You're going to be installing software that they don't know that has low level access to the hardware and could potentially harm it. Voiding the warranty makes sense to me- they can't be responsible for harm done by software they can't control. It doesn't apply to apps, because the apps don't allow direct hardware access except through the APIs Google has written and tested.

      • They also have a reputation for being pretty forgiving if it's obviously not a firmware problem, although I haven't had the need to try it myself.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gl4ss ( 559668 )

        yeah that's why if you buy a cpu it has no warranty?

        this doesn't affect mandatory hw responsibilities they have by the way.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gl4ss ( 559668 )

      It it just me, or does this make no sense. Isn't Open Source suppose to ALLOW you to run the SW in any form, as you like on a piece of HW?
      Ok, so this only runs on Google's HW... and they are within their right to set terms of what they're going to support. But this sure sounds really screwed up...
      and at least doesn't seem to follow the "spirit" of Open Source, though it does follow the "letter-of-the-law"...

      Google continues to slide on my score sheet. Use to seem to be taking a new exciting path, now just turning into yet another huge corp, with a similar mental model as any other. (Granted they all have their own tweaks, but they're not anything special any more). Nothing to see here, move along there...

      it has no practical software warranty to begin with.

      and in most areas it wouldn't change the mandatory guarantee towards the hardware...

  • Would you hit a man with glasses? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) on Friday May 24, 2013 @07:00PM (#43818039) Journal

    It won't be long before the Google Glass tech will be put into glasses that don't look obvious and a little ridiculous. For those of you who think you're always going to be able to tell who's recording video of you with wearable Google Glass tech: think again.

    Right now they look like "nerds" and "geeks" according to the people who are angry about losing their privacy (or who can't afford them). Pretty soon, they'll look like anyone with eyeglasses. I've seen people here talk about punching anyone they see wearing Google Glass looking at them. What are you going to do when this technology is so ubiquitous that anyone with glasses might be recording you?

    Maybe the best we can hope for is that the tech is so widely-available, and moddable, that it's a level playing field (a very exposed playing field). But like it or not, it's coming.

    • Anyone who is panicking about a theoretical future where someone might be recording them with a pair of eyeglasses is out of touch. Cameras that are the size of shirt buttons have been readily available for years. Every person you walk past on the street might be recording you right now and you would never know. What makes Google Glass so special?
      • Ah, but those folks are already on the fringes of society. The "punching" reaction is a form of intimidation in the hopes that this will not become a mainstream activity.
        • But how many dash mounted cameras are there? Helmet cams for bikers. Someone pointed to snowboarding goggles with them. I can see there frustration with privacy, but I don't think it is all that fringe anymore.

        • Ah, but those folks are already on the fringes of society. The "punching" reaction is a form of intimidation in the hopes that this will not become a mainstream activity.

          It's already a "mainstream activity" but one that's only now becoming available to all of us.

    • Have a look at a british series called "Black Mirror", season 1, episode 3.

  • <sigh> (Score:3, Informative)

    by thestudio_bob ( 894258 ) on Friday May 24, 2013 @07:03PM (#43818057)

    You better not hack* out stuff!! <wink> <wink> <nudge> <nudge>

    * Please make our stuff seem cool.

    • akin to "puleease don't trow me in da brai patch"
      You're just not allowed to make it a device quality issue.
      Hack on.

      no word on if they're waterproof ...

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      No, they don't care if you do hack them, its just that if you break your toy don't come crying.

      A perfectly acceptable way to do business.

  • Before any content is transmitted from the gGlasses, it is first copywriten? Ownership is cleary definied, and licensing fees would apply, to Google.
    • copyright law applies to the creator.
      nominally that means the owner of the device. software bullshit aside, the person taking the pictures is the owner.
      now that gets us into another interesting legal mess.
      let the fun begin
      • Then the issue to resolve is the ownership of the object creating the copywritable content? And another issue is emerging, that of "ownership of gGlasses when gGlasses is sold to another party?"

        Another emerging issue is that others are currently selling their personal recording devices, and are not having any of the problems that Google is having. One has to wonder if Google is, "protesting a little to much?"

        • Nope.
          Copyright belongs to whoever recorded it, unless it's a work for hire with a contract and everything.
          Every time you hand your camera to someone for them to take a picture of you, they own the copyright NOT you. I will agree that copyright is screwed up because of this, but nothing needs to be resolved as far as glass is concerned.

  • Is there any kind of recovery mode if you install a kernel or bootloader that crashes? As I understand there is nothing like a serial port or an alternative storage, which means that a bad update and the device is bricked.
  • Google Discontinues Glass Factory System Image in 5 ...4...3...2..

Slashdot Top Deals

A Fortran compiler is the hobgoblin of little minis.

Close