Google Glass Invite

As you probably know, you have to be INVITED to become a Google Glass beta tester. There's a website where you sign up, and then you wait. I had heard the wait was long and the chances were slim, so -- after recent discussions here about Google Glass and "iyz" -- I signed up, not expecting much.

Yesterday I was notified I was eligible. There was a link to begin the process. With great anticipation I began filling out the forms.

First they asked for a bunch of the usual personal data. Then they gave the disclaimers -- you can't sell the Glasses or they'll be disabled. No liability. Do not use while driving, playing sports or doing anything dangerous. Limit one pair per invitation. Google reserves the rightto deactivate at any time if they feel you're misusing them.

Yes, yes, but what is the cost??? I barreled ahead to the end of the process, several pages in - $1500. Yikes! Fifteen hundred dollars for a pair of glasses?!?!

Still, I thought, it would be cool to be "on the development team," to be able to influence the product's direction.

I started Googling "How many beta testers are there for Google Glass." Answers were squirrelly. Apparently that information is not shared. One person (unofficial) thought the answer was 8,000.

A news article about them mentioned a user forum, and gave a link. I went there and started reading comments. Several people were trying to sell theirs. The forum membership was over 24,000. I created a login and asked, point blank, how many beta testers are there. Does purchase of a Google Glass get you access to the developers? How much influence do you get?

The answers came back. One person thought there were about 24K sold so far (hence the forum membership). Another person said the only "access to developers" is posting in this forum. Google sometimes reads the forum and comments. Somebody said you have to look at the $1500 as a premium to become an early adopter.

A couple news articles I read said the beta-tesing program had been doubled or tripled since Christmas. It was being thrown wide open (hence my invite!) Sources indicate the Glass will probably go on sale to the general public sometime in 2014 -- and the price will be well below $1500.

So I decided not to do it.

As excited as I am about the product -- as much as I like gizmos -- it just doesn't seem like a club I want to join.

The real (software) development will come when the Glass is available to the public anyway.

"Google reserves the right to deactivate at any time if they feel you're misusing them."

I find this a bit troubling. The fact that Google would be able to know that you are "misusing" them.

Beta testers are commonplace in the software industry, but I've never heard of charging the testers for their work. No wonder the people currently using them are sometimes referred to as glassholes.

_Howard wrote:

glassholes

Several comments in the forum talk about how people stare at you, or glare at you, or if they're friendly they'll stop you and ask questions about your glasses. They say it takes some getting used to drawing that much attention in public. Some people who think they know a lot about the glasses will actually freak out, thinking they're being filmed all the time (movie theatre owners too). It takes a particular type of person to be willing submit yourself to that kind of scrutiny.

It's the same with early adopters of any technology, including Apple products. Until they become a trend and become "cool" people just look at early adopters as some kind of technogeek assholes. There are a lot of haters out there who feel threatened (for some reason) by anybody who deviates from the norm. Self-appointed normalcy police.

_Howard wrote:

The fact that Google would be able to know that you are "misusing" them

I guess the only way they'd know is if you started posted porn taken with the glasses. That isn't the type of publicity they're seeking.

_Howard wrote:

I've never heard of the software industry charging beta testers for their work

I guess I wish the program was a little more "beta testing" than it actually is. It sounds like the product development may actually be pretty far along, pretty set in cement. There are developers still working on apps but the Google Explorers, as they're called, are less beta testers than just product evangelists, out there breaking the ice so eventually people will be able to walk down the street, talking to themselves and watching something only they can see, without being sent downtown.

NoCoPilot wrote:

_Howard wrote:

glassholes

Several comments in the forum talk about how people stare at you, or glare at you, or if they're friendly they'll stop you and ask questions about your glasses.  They say it takes some getting used to drawing that much attention in public.  Some people who think they know a lot about the glasses will actually freak out, thinking they're being filmed all the time (movie theatre owners too).  It takes a particular type of person to be willing submit yourself to that kind of scrutiny.

In making my my remark concerning other people who sometimes refer to the glass users as glassholes, I was expressing my disgust at Google's marketing under the guise of testing, and their apparent control of the devices: "You can't sell them," "you can't misuse them," or they will be disabled. Why can't you sell them? My guess would be that the current device is not considered close enough to being ready for the mass market, and they don't want them in the hands of normal consumers, as the negative feedback might be extensive.

NoCoPilot wrote:

It's the same with early adopters of any technology, including Apple products.  Until they become a trend and become "cool" people just look at early adopters as some kind of technogeek assholes.  There are a lot of haters out there who feel threatened (for some reason) by anybody who deviates from the norm.  Self-appointed normalcy police.

Bit defensive here, aren't we? I've never known any of these "haters" you speak of, and I've been here for all of the computer devices (including my old Apple II and micro-computers that preceded the Apple). The glasses are a special case, I think, because they are right out there on your face all the time. Imagine if you wore a beany-propellor hat to generate wind energy for your glasses. You would get a lot of well-deserved glances for that.

_Howard wrote:

Bit defensive here, aren't we?

Under the circumstances, and given our shared history, I thought my response was very measured.

Glad I didn't bite the bait.

New version is out now and will be in general release by year's end.

This weekend I decided I'm really anxious for video glasses to hit the market. There are some already out there but they're pretty limited utility and get low ratings. What I want to see is the future, right now:

• Play movies inside your glasses, so only you see
  
• Record what you see
  
• Augmented reality, where you can look down a street and see websites and phone numbers for all the stores you see, or drive down a street and see maps superimposed, or walk down the street and have people identified via facial recognition
  
• Virtual reality, where you're playing a game in a 3D immersive environment. You turn your head and the scene you're looking at turns, look up and see sky, duck and your viewpoint drops down. The sound in your headphones follows too. This would be cool enough for games but would really come into its own with things like 3D tours of museums, or concerts, or exotic locations -- or porn.
  
• Enhanced reality -- you're in a grocery store, you call up your grocery list on the glasses and it gives you a line to follow to each product on your list. Or you're in a bookstore, you get reviews of each book you pick up. Go to a used car dealer and get competing prices.

NoCoPilot wrote:

New version is out now and will be in general release by year's end.

As predicted Google Glass is in general release now.

NoCoPilot wrote:

Sources indicate the Glass will probably go on sale to the general public sometime in 2014 -- and the price will be well below $1500.

No price break yet!  Gotta squeeze the last juice out of the lemon first.

While it's obviously a cool gadget, I still can't see any real value in these things.

Next generation "Google Glass" are in development.

Much less obvious.

Soon(?) to include AR (augmented reality).  Could be something?

Next generation Google Glass are "postponed indefinitely."
https://www.macrumors.com/2023/01/17/apple-glasses-postponed/

I guess nobody wants to be a glasshole.

David Gerrold wrote:

I could be wrong. I've been wrong about a lot of things. So take this with a grain of salt. Or a whole salt lick.

I don't think VR headsets are going to be a major product. Yes, there will be enthusiasts. Yes, VR headsets will get better. They will evolve the same way every other product niche has evolved.

Certainly there's a lot to be said for total immersion in a virtual reality. I've experienced a few games and videos that have demonstrated just how effective it can be.

But ... I have my doubts.

Now, it could be that I'm of a generation that doesn't want/need/understand/grok the VR experience. It could be that there is a younger demographic that is more receptive.

Or it could be just another niche for geeks and gamers — like 3D. (I admit I'm a 3D geek, but I also recognize that not everybody has the same passion for it that I do.)

I am well aware that the word "can't" is wrong more often than the word "can," so it's possible that VR could become something more than it is today.

Perhaps someday VR will be available in a very lightweight pair of glasses, enough that augmented reality will be its best function. Certainly that's what Apple is aiming for.

But I regard VR as a kind of self-isolation. I'm more excited about looking into the eyes of another person than I will ever be about seeing a screen full of data about them.

The future is an avalanche. There is no escape.

This is quite thought-provoking.

I tried out an Apple Vision Pro. It frightened me