Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Google Displays Upgrades

Google Glass For Work Is Sleeker, Tougher and Foldable ( 71

An anonymous reader writes: FCC filings published today are offering a glimpse of the "Enterprise Edition" of Google Glass. According to Engadget: "...The work-focused eyepiece touts a much slicker (and likely more durable) design with both a larger display prism and a hinge that lets you fold it up for travel. The test photos also reveal a spot for a magnetic battery attachment and what looks to be a speedier Atom processor. There's still no word on when Google will announce this headset, although the FCC presence hints that it might not take long."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Glass For Work Is Sleeker, Tougher and Foldable

Comments Filter:
  • by sittingnut ( 88521 ) <{moc.liamg} {ta} {tungnittis}> on Monday December 28, 2015 @06:27PM (#51198203) Homepage

    really?! seems throwing money at product development seems to make developers ever more blind to the obvious defects in the whole concept of this device.

    • by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Tuesday December 29, 2015 @06:06AM (#51200681)

      Every device has defects in it's concept. The only question is does the defects outweigh the benefits?

      Social acceptance of someone wearing some tech in a bar would indicate no even if the reasons for it are absurd.
      Benefits of real time HUD and augmented reality when performing functions that require on the fly information on the other hand would indicate yes.

      Why shouldn't developers continue working on a device if it only fails one specific use case? I can't use my phone in the cinema without getting the crap kicked out of me does that mean they shouldn't exist or be developed at all? After all it's an obvious defect in the concept of the device.

      • "only fails one specific use case"?!
        phone is equivalent and comparable to glass, in your ... eyes?
        if what you say is true, glass would be successful product already. it isn't and wont be.

        • No I'm using the phone is equivalent. Put down the pedantry and actually try and comprehend the post. I'll sum it up for you:
          Just because it doesn't fit YOUR specific use case doesn't mean all development should be abandoned on it and doesn't make the concept broken.

          Also if you want to suggest I'm comparing glass to a phone then I will: How successful do you think the mobile phone was in it's first year? Hell I'll make this easy on you, how successful do you think it was in it's first 5 years? What about t

          • some points since you seem to be confused.
            there are successful products and unsuccessful products.
            success does not depend on whether a product fits MY(your shouting echoed), or any one individual's, needs and ideas.
            it is absurd to hope for eventual success of a product based on alleged analogies with alleged history of development and alleged past criticism of a successful product.
            nor does success have much to do with length of development.
            glass's main functions are already developed, only incremental enhan

            • it failed in the main concept.

              I think you missed the entire premise that your view of the concept is just plain and simply wrong.

              The concept is HUD information and augmented relativity, neither of which are failed concepts, both of which are actively being worked on by hundreds of companies, and while you have a personal view that can be summarised as a fear of "Glassholes" the concepts which Glass is trying to implement solve real world problems and have the potential to help in a LOT of industries.

              Google could abandon development, an

              • 1/ perhaps you should study logic, before making arguments.
                2/ it is a bad habit to drop one line of arguments and launch another without acknowledging defeat in the 1st lines(involving length and alleged analogies)
                3/ i did not bring up individuals, you did . see above.

                4/ number of companies allegedly working on a product does not have much to do with product's success or failure, or alleged need for product, any more than amount of money thrown at it, alleged analogies with other product developments, leng

                • I'm still on the original line but whatever you think you read, by all means go ahead thinking it.

        • Glass won't be a successful product unti the price is reasonable.

          There are plenty of reasons that something like Glass would be useful. I want one and I'm not even interested in taking your picture.

          It's anoying though that so many people are so offended by a wearable computer because all they can see is a camera. I used to have friends that really liked to fight. If I ever get Glass maybe I'll look them back up. I can be their bait. I'll sit on my bar stool enjoying my drink and minding my own business.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Have they solved the problem of perverts using devices like these in public washrooms? Like do the devices detect when they're being used in a washroom, and automatically shut themselves down to prevent any recording from taking place?

    Let's say I get stuck going to a database conference. The venue also happens to be hosting a Ruby on Rails conference at the same time. Well, I would not be surprised if some of the Rubyists had glasses like these. I would also not be surprised if they wore them while going to

    • Then use one of the stalls. Problem solved.It will also help with your paruresis [].

      I can just picture them leering over the top of the urinal divider, trying to catch a glimpse of my cock. It disgusts me that people could try stuff like that.

      I think most people would be alarmed that you think this is a problem. You must be one of those supporters of "bathroom laws" because "everyone knows transsexuals just want an excuse to spy on women."

    • You just need to buy the Apple-OLED-Cock-Ring and set it to ultra-bright mode to blind any potential perverts, Glass enabled or otherwise.
    • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      I'd say have they solved the glasshole problem - a problem that's more social than technological. I mean, the original Google Glass suffered from that problem.

      The technology has its uses, but the problem is the humans behind it seek to use it in ways considered socially unacceptable. Hence the term "glasshole" which basically soured the technology to the public - it turned a good technology into an antisocial pervert tool.

      And when that happened, it's too late. When Google themselves had to issue an etiquett

  • What irony! Once touted as the must-have toy for hipsters, Google Glass is now actually becoming a tool to steer and control human minimum-wage working drones in warehouses. Feel a pity for all who'll be obliged to wear such at work.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      Vannevar Bush's original conception of computers augmenting human cognition involved us wearing glasses that we could intuitively use while working on a project. Google Glass is almost a direct descendant of that idea.

      This is the same place we got the idea of hypertext information retrieval systems, and basically the seeds of what became the internet and modern PC's.

    • Why? If it frees up my hands from the heavy barcode scanner I already need to carry?

      It's a strange concept to feel pity for someone who has to use a device that makes their life easier.

    • maybe a little irony, but not much. Anybody who needs data while remaining situationally aware is going to benefit from AR technology -- SAR, EMT, firefighters can all benefit from AR, and they are hardly minimum wage jobs. A google glass competitor called Recon Instruments may have found a pretty nice niche market for their retasked snow sports HUD. Its called the Recon Jet, and I have a first generation pair. It came out around the same time as GG, but cost less than half ($700 vs. $1500 for GG) and de
  • Tougher (Score:1, Troll)

    by penguinoid ( 724646 )

    Can it survive a punch in the face?

  • Oh great, now I can be a more stylish Glasshole.

  • what indicates that they have put in an Intel Atom processor? i looked through the pictures and didn't see anything from Intel.

  • I guess there's someone new over there willing to fuck Sergey.

  • Dammit, why is this v2? All I wanted was the cheapest possible ultralight head-mounted HUD. Basically, a Glass with no processor and no fancy gadgets. I already have a wireless mobile computing device.

I'm still waiting for the advent of the computer science groupie.