Google Glass For Work Is Sleeker, Tougher and Foldable (engadget.com) 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."
Re:Glasholes (Score:4, Insightful)
What company is going to let its employees bring in spyware?
Any company that allows cellphones.
Re: (Score:1)
"We have immortality within our grasp and it's like nobody cares."
Probably because this statement is blatantly false and we all know it. Immortality is not within our grasp, and if you knew even a little of the science in that area you would not be saying such dim-witted things.
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.gizmag.com/telomere... [gizmag.com]
http://blogs.scientificamerica... [scientificamerican.com]
Re: (Score:2)
It is very obvious when someone is using the phone to take pictures/video.
Only if they're concerned about framing. If you're using a phone to spy, you don't have to be obvious about it at all. For example, just get a cellphone that is large enough that it protrudes from a shirt pocket. Start recording, slip it into the pocket with the camera protruding and facing forward, then walk around.
Of course, if someone really wants to record without being noticed there are other options which are much less obvious than Google Glass (old design or new). And cheaper. For example: http://w [brickhousesecurity.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Any company that supplies and manages that spyware themselves...
another predictably failed product (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:another predictably failed product (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:1)
"only fails one specific use case"?! ... eyes?
phone is equivalent and comparable to glass, in your
if what you say is true, glass would be successful product already. it isn't and wont be.
Re: (Score:3)
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
Re: (Score:1)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:1)
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
Re: (Score:2)
I'm still on the original line but whatever you think you read, by all means go ahead thinking it.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Have they solved the washroom problem? (Score:1, Funny)
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
Re: (Score:1)
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."
Re: (Score:2)
1. You referred specifically to someone in the washroom "trying to catch a glimpse of my cock." Unless you're not standing face front at the urinal, you're doing it wrong, and the people around you would like you to stop pissing on the floor.
2. Transsexuals use washrooms for the same reason anyone else does - when you've gotta go, you've gotta go. Remember - we're everywhere, and there's no "trans-dar" that will let you spot us 100% of the time. You've probably unknowingly thought of some of us you didn't
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
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
A workplace tool for the minimum-wage class (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can easily find several news stories about glassholes being beaten and even sent to hospitals. However, I cannot find a single story about someone being arrested for assaulting a glasshole.
You are sadly correct that most assholes who break laws are never caught. Especially for minor crimes like muggings and robberies. The good thing is most people are not assholes, which is why the vast majority of Google Glass wearers were never assaulted.
Tougher (Score:1, Troll)
Can it survive a punch in the face?
Re: (Score:2)
Can they survive being sat on?
Re: (Score:2)
Gee, I don't know. Can you survive being punched, stabbed or shot in retaliation?
Sometimes random tough guy violence has consequences.
Just saying.
Oh great (Score:1)
Oh great, now I can be a more stylish Glasshole.
a speedier Atom processor? (Score:2)
what indicates that they have put in an Intel Atom processor? i looked through the pictures and didn't see anything from Intel.
What, Glass is back? (Score:2)
I guess there's someone new over there willing to fuck Sergey.
Still overkill (Score:2)
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.