×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Anyone Can Buy Google Glass April 15

samzenpus posted about 7 months ago | from the all-the-better-to-see-you-with dept.

Google 167

An anonymous reader writes "Starting at 9 a.m. ET on April 15 anyone in the US will be able to buy Google Glass for one day. From the article: 'This is the first time the device has been available to the general public. So far, the face-mounted computers have been sold only to Google "Explorers," the company's name for early adopters. At first only developers could buy Glass, but Google slowly expanded the program to include regular people. Some were hand-picked, others applied to be Explorers through Google contests by sharing what cool projects they would do if they had Glass.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

And there was much rejoicing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46740557)

Not.

Re:And there was much rejoicing (4, Insightful)

houstonbofh (602064) | about 7 months ago | (#46740603)

Hooray for artificial scarcity!

Not artificial scarcity -- clearing of inventory (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46741427)

You have it wrong. Soon(ish) there's probably going to be the actual market version -- maybe early next year.
They probably just want to clear inventory while still making it clear that "it's not a real product yet, so caveat emptor."

Meet me at Molotov's! (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 7 months ago | (#46742115)

I'm sure you'll have something interesting, worth recording!

Re:And there was much rejoicing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46740619)

Not.

Oh, I dunno.

A first-person perspective of a self-important Glasshole getting a beatdown would be downright hilarious.

And you know some clueless Glasshole is going to post his lame attempts at picking up women and getting bitch-slapped once they notice what he's wearing.

Those are going to be hilarious. We need more Glassholes.

A fight with a bunch of Chowdaheads in Glass (2)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 7 months ago | (#46741725)

Would that be a hassle with a passle of Masshole Glassholes? Asking for a poet.

Re:And there was much rejoicing (1)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | about 7 months ago | (#46742387)

"And you know some clueless Glasshole is going to post his lame attempts at picking up women and getting bitch-slapped once they notice what he's wearing."

You really don't understand how the real world works, do you? The more likely scenario is that she wasn't going to give him the time of day until she noticed the Glass(es?), at which point she'll be at least interested enough to try to find out if he has millions or is just in the wealthy category. Seriously, the number of people who take issue with Glass elsewhere (i.e. not Slashdot) is exceedingly low. Here people like to paint it as a universally despised technology, but it's not. Also, I'm not entirely certain from your post, but: You do know that Glass doesn't magically render the capability to see women's underwear, right?

Re:And there was much rejoicing (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46742533)

You do know that Glass doesn't magically render the capability to see women's underwear, right?

Glad you brought this up. You just saved me from spending $1,500.

Re:And there was much rejoicing (0)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about 7 months ago | (#46740699)

How many product launches exactly inspired "much rejoicing?" When the iphone was launched, most of us were like "Huh? No keyboard?!?" Same with the tablet. The ipod of course launched with a dismissal from slashdot.

How about we not call this one before it's even tossed. And how about we quit acting like this is the end of privacy and not CCTVs or the NSA.

Re:And there was much rejoicing (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46740731)

And how about we quit acting like this is the end of privacy and not CCTVs or the NSA.

Google Glass may not bring about the end of privacy, but it's part of the problem. This is proprietary garbage, so you don't even know what it's doing. Anyone who buys it is a damn fool.

Re:And there was much rejoicing (2)

fiziko (97143) | about 7 months ago | (#46741107)

Google Glass may not bring about the end of privacy, but it's part of the problem. This is proprietary garbage, so you don't even know what it's doing. Anyone who buys it is a damn fool.

You aren't a damn fool just because you've bought one. Buying one just means you are curious and somewhat affluent. The "damn fool" part only kicks in if the thing is on and being worn while, say, doing Internet banking. As a teacher, I could see this being very beneficial to something like distance instruction, as it would be much more liberating than either teaching on a single whiteboard or depending on a third party camera person.

Re:And there was much rejoicing (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 7 months ago | (#46741489)

There is no SIM in it. It can't send anything to Google without going through the attached phone. If you don't know what your phone is doing, the glasses don't make a difference.

Re:And there was much rejoicing (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 7 months ago | (#46741975)

Well, that depends. If Glass is cheaper than buying the relevant parts themselves and if taking them apart is doable by the average tinkerer...

Re:And there was much rejoicing (1)

kelemvor4 (1980226) | about 7 months ago | (#46740753)

And how about we quit acting like this is the end of privacy and not CCTVs or the NSA.

So, ignore it and maybe it will go away? I don't think that's going to be effective.

Re:And there was much rejoicing (1)

Stickerboy (61554) | about 7 months ago | (#46741061)

And how about we quit acting like this is the end of privacy and not CCTVs or the NSA.

That's weird. I didn't realize because X and Y are worse on a continuum of bad things, it means Z is somehow A-OK!

I hate the NSA and it's intrusions. I hate CCTV and the casual police state. Oh, and I hate Google Glass and its commercialization of the surveillance state.

See? Is that so hard?

Re:And there was much rejoicing (0)

AK Marc (707885) | about 7 months ago | (#46741501)

I hate Google Glass and its commercialization of the surveillance state.

And I hate shoes and their commercialization of the surveillance state.

See, just because someone states an opinion as fact doesn't make it true. You hate progress and tech. Go feed you horse and work on your wooden buggie.

Re:And there was much rejoicing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46741793)

What "progress" is it bringing? Google fangirls claim this in every post about Glass but never actually provide a single example of anything that it provides to society except more ways for attention whores to attention whore in more annoying ways.

Re:And there was much rejoicing (4, Insightful)

AK Marc (707885) | about 7 months ago | (#46741963)

Progress as in change, not necessarily as in "moving forward", as that is only defined later, as "forward" is the path to a destination, and until you get to that destination, you don't know if you were going forward or backward at any point in time.

I am old enough to remember the same sorts of arguments against PCs. They were toys for the elite yuppies, and would never be useful for the poorer people.

You are just jealous. Why all the hate?

Re:And there was much rejoicing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46742013)

You are just jealous. Why all the hate?

What an i jealous of? Looking like a hipster douche? Nah, not really.

Re:And there was much rejoicing (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46742237)

You are just jealous. Why all the hate?

What an i jealous of? Looking like a hipster douche? Nah, not really.

Then leave them alone. They aren't asking to be harassed or insulted.

You could be wearing a jacket with hidden cameras or have it full of spiders or bees. I don't know and I don't care. No reason to get yourself involved with others over things you don't know or want to know.

Re:And there was much rejoicing (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46742717)

> "Then leave them alone. They aren't asking to be harassed or insulted."

Ummmm... strapping a camera to your face and pointing it at people IS asking for hate. Why leave them alone and not harass them? They are NOT leaving YOU alone. They are harassing YOU by pointing a camera at your face without your consent!

You really don't care? You should.

Re:And there was much rejoicing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46742699)

Yes, because by "hipster douche" you really mean "someone I resent for having something I want", as does everyone else who has ever used that pretentious teenybopper phrase.

Re:And there was much rejoicing (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 7 months ago | (#46742993)

Like the people all jealous of the hipster douches in the '80s with those PCs. Only a hipster douche would have one.Since you have a computer of some kind to post, you are what you hate. I guess that explains all the hate. You hate yourself, so you have to hate everyone else.

Re:And there was much rejoicing (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46741151)

It depends. Some of us on /. had a clue. However, Apple caters to the stylish, the people that matter, people who won't care about the presence/absence of a physical keyboard since they have never owned a smartphone before.

When the iPhone was announced, there were people on Slashdot saying that people would be making their websites friendly to it, or else they wouldn't have a website due to traffic going other places. The device fundamentally changed the smartphone market with Android being developed and agreed upon just because the other guys had to have -something- even remotely competitive or else they would be swept aside. Before the iPhone, the most popular phone was the RAZR v3, so all the featurephone makers were in danger of being put in the dustbin of history like non-Apple MP3 player makers.

Google Glass isn't Apple, and that is why it will have troubles. Apple could make something, and the guys driving the Priuses or Volkswagens, with the curly mustaches, poor looking clothing and listening to bands that not even the band members have heard the music before will be all over it, camping for days at an Apple store.

The ironic thing is that Google can put out a product that will cure cancer, and people will spurn it because they think the NSA wants to observe cells.

In general, Apple can launch something, and it might not be a star of the show like the AppleTV, but people will take notice. Car makers are dealing with the Apple rep to get CarPlay ready to go, because if they don't, the next person they will be dealing with will be the bankruptcy attorney due to people not buying their vehicles.

The irony of it all is that Google products actually innovate, but the difference is that Apple went for the image-conscious crowd, and Google went for the people who know what they are doing... and there are far more hipsters than geeks in this world.

Re:And there was much rejoicing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46741847)

The irony of it all is that Google products actually innovate, but the difference is that Apple went for the image-conscious crowd, and Google went for the people who know what they are doing... and there are far more hipsters than geeks in this world.

Except the only people wearing Glass are hipsters. Oh and Android was not innovative either. First it was a Blackberry clone and once the iPhone was shown it became an iOS clone. Oh and lets ignore that they didn't create Google Earth, Maps, Blogger, Adsense/Adwords, Android, Picasa; SketchUp, etc. themselves. Those were all acquisitions. That sorta blows your whole theory of how "innovative" they are out of the water.

Catering to real people (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 7 months ago | (#46742287)

Apple caters to the stylish, the people that matter, people who won't care about the presence/absence of a physical keyboard since they have never owned a smartphone before.

I don't know about the stylish, since that never applied to me. But it did cater to people who mattered - real people.

For you see, for real people the small physical keyboards SUCKED. They had very tiny hit areas, were sometimes hard to press. They took up a lot of space which meant tiny screens, and if you started typing anything not a-z you were totally screwed buy whatever whacky shifting mechanism that keyboard designed had chased to introduce.

I had use blackberries and a variety of Palm/Windows phone devices before I got the first iPhone, and I was REJOICING that at last a mobile keyboard had reasonably sized keys, and I could type really fast - and also type pure numbers the way God intended, with a giant keypad.

Just because you and a few of your kind didn't like virtual keyboards, does not mean the rest of the world agreed with you - including many very technically astute [penny-arcade.com] people.

As they say:

If you find such things unpleasant, then I suggest you develop a taste for forced labor because by the year twenty-twenty all that sneer is going to get you is a slot in the underclass boiling corpses.

Re:Catering to real people (1)

scarboni888 (1122993) | about 7 months ago | (#46742777)

With a slide-out keyboard like the Sidekick had you can have a screen-sized keyboard AND a full-sized screen that isn't half-filled with a virtual keyboard that effectively makes the visible screen area smaller anyway. I just don't understand why we slide-outs aren't made anymore. They're superior to both the other options, in my opinion.

Re:And there was much rejoicing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46741767)

The major difference is that you are using examples of nerds who live in bubbles who have been consistently wrong about the future of technology. Glassholes are rejected by society at large.

No thanks (4, Interesting)

dreamchaser (49529) | about 7 months ago | (#46740559)

I'm often an early adopter of technology, but I'm not interested in this type of product until it's far more unobtrusive and obvious. I can perhaps see a time when having a HUD built into my glasses might be useful, and sure there are times when I wish I could snap a picture of something more quickly than I can by pulling out my phone, but I'm not about to pay $1500 for what amounts to a barely beta product. I won't even go into my concerns about all the data Google already gets from us.

This one day sale stunt is just that, a stunt. They are testing the waters and trying to stimulate demand.

Re:No thanks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46740613)

More likely they are trying to expand the developer pool. If the developers believe they stand a chance to make a lot more than $1500 selling Glass apps, but weren't already part of the Explorer program, they'll buy in on the 15th...

Re:No thanks (3, Interesting)

houstonbofh (602064) | about 7 months ago | (#46740623)

It also crams the numbers of everyone with an interest into "first day sales" figures. Be ready for the April 17th "Google sells a bazillion Google Glass in one day!" articles.

Re:No thanks (1)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | about 7 months ago | (#46740627)

I'd have gone the opposite direction, rather than the lame Geordi LaForge effort, make it an ostentatious monocle, cyberpunk or even steampunk style. Offer a variety of skins to suit the early adopter market (mostly nerds) and bling that tech out.

Monopoly guy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46741691)

... make it an ostentatious monocle, cyberpunk or even steampunk style.

Like a high tech Monopoly guy [youtube.com] ?

Re:No thanks (1)

Ash-Fox (726320) | about 7 months ago | (#46740661)

I'm often an early adopter of technology, but I'm not interested in this type of product until it's far more unobtrusive and obvious.

Do you see yourself adopting the Nabu [razerzone.com] and if not, why?

Re:No thanks (1)

dreamchaser (49529) | about 7 months ago | (#46741321)

I've looked at Nabu but I really don't see any value in it for me. I can get the same functionality from my smartphone if I want it, and I don't really.

Re:No thanks (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46740851)

It should cost $100 maximum. $1500 for something that isn't even as good as my phone is ridiculous and only a complete idiot would buy one.

Re:No thanks (1)

ganjadude (952775) | about 7 months ago | (#46741329)

id pay 200 max, and will when it can be had for that

Re:No thanks (3, Interesting)

Wycliffe (116160) | about 7 months ago | (#46741807)

I'm often an early adopter of technology, but I'm not interested in this type of product until it's far more unobtrusive and obvious.

I'm the exact opposite. I would be more likely to buy it if it was more obtrusive. More to the point, I see little function in a side monitor
while on the other hand allowing sunglasses with full overlay I think has alot more potential. For instance being able to enhance the
center line on the highway on dark rainy nights or show outlines of constellations at night. I can think of lots of cool uses for a full
wraparound wearable HUD but that's not what google glasses is.

deneme (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46740577)

cok güzel cok iyi fena oo plastik dorama [unalpenyapi.com]

Re:deneme (1)

kdawson (3715) (1344097) | about 7 months ago | (#46742847)

Do y'all ship to KoÅice?

TERMS AND CONDITIONS (3, Interesting)

Rhymoid (3568547) | about 7 months ago | (#46740581)

  1. You can "buy" Google Glass for one day only.
  2. Anyone can "buy" Google Glass, provided that they live in the United States of America.

confused (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46740605)

Went to glass.com and gglass.com and have to say I am surprised for this product they purchased neither domain.

Re:confused (2)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | about 7 months ago | (#46742419)

You should have gone with glass.google.com, since google.com is the only domain any sane person would expect to find google products.

Cue the speculators (1)

frooddude (148993) | about 7 months ago | (#46740621)

How many of these land on ebay? Does Google have a way to prevent that? (not interested, so no I didn't read the bloody linked article)

Re:Cue the speculators (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 7 months ago | (#46740799)

I don't know if they care; but a uniquely serialized and network connected device running Google's software doesn't really change hands unless suitably disarmed. "Oh, software is licensed not sold, license agreement not transferable, remote wipe. Do enjoy the hardware you purchased."

Speculators already queued (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 7 months ago | (#46742229)

How many of these land on ebay?

Anyone planning to sell them on eBay would presumably check the ebay prices first to see how much they can make.

As far as I can tell, Glass is not selling period. I offered a guy $20 to buy one but they didn't bite, so I guess people are not super desperate to discard them yet - but I don't think many in the open period will be buying to resell, there's just no market.

The real reason.... (1)

Raxxon (6291) | about 7 months ago | (#46740629)

"Oh crap, we're running low on cash! We need more monies! Quick, let people spend $1500 for some tech from us!"

Yeah, I'm interested, but at that cost (plus more for me since I wear regular glasses and need special frames and new lenses, etc) it's not really worth it. :|

Re:The real reason.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46740711)

I loathe Google but, low on cash? Unlikely.

The Real Real Reason (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 7 months ago | (#46742319)

Perhaps they wanted to clear the decks of all the people selling Explorer invites on eBay (or trying to).

Re:The real reason.... (1)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | about 7 months ago | (#46742427)

""Oh crap, we're running low on cash! We need more monies! Quick, let people spend $1500 for some tech from us!""

You are evidently unaware that Google Glass is made by Google?

Re:The real reason.... (1)

Raxxon (6291) | about 7 months ago | (#46743031)

What, Google has "enough money"? No one has "enough money"... ever.

You can become a glasshole (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46740641)

All you need is money to join a small exclusive group of Google worshipers which spend time collecting data to do the secret will of the almighty Google. You may want to make porn, or perhaps just stalk random people, but remember to choose Google when you do.

how many Glassholes will get mugged? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46740645)

10s?
100s?
1000s?

Right to privacy may not be a formal law but the majority of people do have a problem witb their privacy being invaded. I absolutely cannot wait to see the videos of glassholes getting the shit kicked out of them. Pass me the popcorn. :-)

Re:how many Glassholes will get mugged? (1)

mark-t (151149) | about 7 months ago | (#46740803)

And I cannot wait to see people who kick the shift out of glassholes facing legal consequences for thinking that they somehow have a right to enforce what they believe on others through violence.

Re:how many Glassholes will get mugged? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46740943)

but violence is fun. there aren't any laws against being an asshole so too many fucks can go around legally bullying everyone and there's nothing you can do about it legally. the only recourse these days is to kick someone's teeth in and wipe the smug look off their face.

Re:how many Glassholes will get mugged? (4, Insightful)

mark-t (151149) | about 7 months ago | (#46741779)

but violence is fun. there aren't any laws against being an asshole so too many fucks can go around legally bullying everyone and there's nothing you can do about it legally.

You can ask them to stop... or you can go somewhere that the owner can tell the glasshole to get lost or be charged with trespassing.

the only recourse these days is to kick someone's teeth in and wipe the smug look off their face.

When violence becomes the "only recourse" to something that is not, by itself, physically threatening in any way, one may want to consider whether or not there is something already seriously wrong with their own world view.

It's absolutely no different than those who have gone around killing nonbelievers in the name of religion.

Re:how many Glassholes will get mugged? (1)

Stickerboy (61554) | about 7 months ago | (#46741163)

And I cannot wait to see people who kick the shift out of glassholes facing legal consequences for thinking that they somehow have a right to enforce what they believe on others through violence.

And honestly, you may be waiting a while! For there are surely legal consequences for such things, but the police and judges are human and tend to view unexciting assault and battery cases as exactly that.

I mean, seriously, how many people as a percentage actually serve jail time for bar fights? Not many, and there are some serious injuries from those. And let's not forget extenuation - if Peter gets up in the face of the elderly mother of Paul and starts screaming at her for road rage and Paul punches his lights out, Paul may be congratulated by the arresting police officer after he's let off with probation. If Paul claims Peter was harassing him with his Glassholeness Sarah Slocum-style, Paul likely walks with community service.

And let's not forget, the police only have so much manpower and funding. Hell, they can't even muster up enough time here at my hometown to shut down any of the massage parlors for blatant sex trafficking of illegal immigrants. Robberies may take a while to investigate. Do you think police officers, who most likely already view Glassholes in a dim light, are going to be spending much time about finding out who Random Guy A was who punched the Glasshole recording him at a local bar?

Re:how many Glassholes will get mugged? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46741199)

Seems more affordable to simply act like a regular asshole, rather than a full blown glasshole. No need for expensive upgrades.

Re:how many Glassholes will get mugged? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46741559)

being legally right will be a small consolation as you slowly die in an alley somewhere from the internal injuries you sustained while smugly proclaiming your right to shove a camera in my face.

Re:how many Glassholes will get mugged? (1)

mark-t (151149) | about 7 months ago | (#46741715)

And a person smugly proclaiming that it is their right to become physically violent in retaliation is any better?

Re:how many Glassholes will get mugged? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46742715)

it's not a good idea to enrage people in person.

Re:how many Glassholes will get mugged? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46742725)

Wearing a glass is not "smugly proclaiming your right to shove a camera in my face". Nor do you believe that it is, that's just an excuse made up by idiots who throw temper tantrums at the thought of having to respect others' rights.

Sad to see that they gave-in to the Republicans... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46740671)

I guess they just got tired of their whining. It's sad how much those people whine. Just like they whine so much to defend rapists and often get them off, they're getting what they want out of Google. That is a huge mistake to give-in to them because they'll just keep attacking them with more whining to get even more out of them. It's sad how businesses can no longer operate in the country unmolested by the Republicans.

Cool (2, Interesting)

kruach aum (1934852) | about 7 months ago | (#46740767)

Google glass seems like a really cool technology to me. It's weird that I have to qualify that statement with "and I mean this unironically."

Re:Cool (2)

Opportunist (166417) | about 7 months ago | (#46742001)

10 years ago, I guess everyone here would have chimed in.

But, ya know, in the meantime we had NSA, Snowden and Web 3.0 (2.0 was "you make the content, we make the profit", 3.0 is now "you ARE the content, we sell your soul"), stuff like that tends to make wary.

Re:Cool (0)

kruach aum (1934852) | about 7 months ago | (#46742041)

The Glass hate started a couple of months before the Snowden leaks, so I don't think that's it.

Re:Cool (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 7 months ago | (#46742205)

Well, people don't like the idea to be under constant surveillance. IIRC there was even a lab experiment with rats that showed that we're not the only species who thinks so.

An be subject of assult ? (0)

jacekm (895699) | about 7 months ago | (#46740779)

Buy Google glass and become victim of liberal assult in San Francisco.

Re:An be subject of assult ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46741059)

Buy Google glass and become victim of liberal assult in San Francisco.

Bullshit. Those are CONservatives by definition. They use violence to solve problems. They're also the reason this city has such horrific mass transit. Their decades long stand against the poor and minorities has created a situation where only the people that can afford to not work can afford to work. That is the type of life they want for everyone everywhere. Also, they know that the liberals that buy Glass will film them doing what they do every day. We will embarrass them so they hate Glass and the people who wear them. They will attack us.

Re:An be subject of assult ? (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 7 months ago | (#46741653)

the anti-change liberals? Those are "conservatives". That the political area has co-opted and corrupted them doesn't change the non-political meaning. Unless you are bashing Democrats specifically. Unless you are saying you'll be assaulted liberally.

Re:An be subject of assult ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46742749)

the anti-change liberals? Those are "conservatives".

And therefore, they are liberals.

To little, too late. (5, Interesting)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 7 months ago | (#46740805)

Translation: "This is how you advertise a product as elitist." or "Shh, mobile enabled VR & AR gear does not exist yet!" [vuzix.com]

Sorry, don't care Google. I'll just keep developing for the 3D VR and AR gear I already use daily with my smart-phone, rather than pay for the over-priced less capable system Google's selling. When Google finally gets around to pushing out a run of hardware that is publicly accessible then I might port some software I personally use in my business to the platform it if it's not completely shit, and there is a market share to warrant the expenditure. I'm not holding my breath for something that is little more than vapor-ware.

Besides, that initial rejection of 3rd party apps for glass really turned me off, it seems they got the message but it doesn't bode well. Will I be able to use Glass apps with the Oculus Rift, or MS or Sony's offering, or Vuzix or True Player Gear [trueplayergear.com] , or the other umpteen hundred VR and AR headsets, many of which I've been using since the 90's when Quake and Descent came out, which STILL didn't attract a market? I don't think hardware should be tied to software, or that software should be tied to hardware needlessly. If that's the route Google wants then they can go fuck themselves. I already have AR and VR headsets for Android, and they work with iOS, Linux and Windows too.

Release a product or don't. This carrot dangling makes the Glass team seem like a bunch of incompetent self-important elitist sperglords.

Re:To little, too late. (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 7 months ago | (#46741673)

Google Glass is not AR. Also, the apps I would use aren't available, and I'm not skilled enough to make them (and every app I'd thought up uses only the internal-facing camera). So it holds no utility to me, even if it is interesting.

Hey look what I bought (5, Funny)

istartedi (132515) | about 7 months ago | (#46740931)

"Hey, look what I bought. I used my tax refu--"

And the next thing he knew, he woke up in an alley. His wallet, keys, phone and shoes were missing. For the life of him, he could not figure out why they didn't take his cool new toy.

Re:Hey look what I bought (1)

Kjella (173770) | about 7 months ago | (#46742559)

And the next thing he knew, he woke up in an alley. His wallet, keys, phone and shoes were missing. For the life of him, he could not figure out why they didn't take his cool new toy.

It's a photo/video camera that might have been on, not even stupid crooks would leave that potential evidence behind.

Who followed through? (1)

petes_PoV (912422) | about 7 months ago | (#46740955)

... others applied to be Explorers through Google contests by sharing what cool projects they would do if they had Glass

So I wonder if any of these people actually did any of the "cool projects" they claimed, or did they just pose around, with their newly aquired status (or otherwise) symbols.

May the beatings commence (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46741073)

May the beatings commence, lets collect Beating Google Glass wearers points today!

I *can* buy it but why would I? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46741087)

Being an anonymous coward is bad enough but I don't want to be a glasshole.

Cool and Glasshole (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46741089)

are a contradiction in terms.

"Explorers" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46741099)

"Explorers". That's what Google calls them, because they explore for Google. Google Glass essentially transforms people into data-gathering drones-

And speaking of data gathering, did you know that after every time you post a comment on Slashdot or dice or whatever the hell the name is these days, you get PORTSCANNED? Yea, I thought you didn't.

Re:"Explorers" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46741115)

Which ports?

Can I NOT buy it on April 15? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46741157)

.. and every other day?

Google is breeding glassholes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46741165)

Looks like they are trying to repeat Apple with "massive exclusivity". That's when everyone has the same iPhone and thinks he is special ;)

I'm under impression that google's bosses are out of touch with the reality. That's the reason they "innovate" by creating new snoopware, people don't like it, isn't that obvious? But, having billions in hands, they are still trying to push it. The result is that Google becomes associated with something snoopy and nasty.

Re:Google is breeding glassholes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46742583)

Exactly nobody buys an iPhone for exclusivity. But you go right ahead being completely wrong and retarded.

And this is why I won't get Glass (3, Informative)

Khyber (864651) | about 7 months ago | (#46741227)

This Masonic exclusivity bullshit is the exact reason I got turned off of Glass in the first place.

Re:And this is why I won't get Glass (1)

mspohr (589790) | about 7 months ago | (#46741481)

Google (and many other companies) do this with their beta products... you know... because they are "beta" and they want to limit the number of users to something they can handle.
For instance, Gmail was limited access at first and you had to be invited to join. I see that you are using a gmail account.

Re:And this is why I won't get Glass (2)

Goody (23843) | about 7 months ago | (#46741955)

Making people pay $1500 to be their beta tester is a bit ballsy, though. Of course if you have customers who are dumb enough to pay for a half-baked and potentially buggy beta product that will be superseded by a new model in six months, have at it.

Re:And this is why I won't get Glass (1)

mspohr (589790) | about 7 months ago | (#46742031)

They don't seem to have any problem finding customers at that price.
I personally am not interested. I just don't see myself walking around wearing this thing. Not sure what I would do with it. It seems really nerdy and creepy. However, if I had a specific application in mind... something like recording surgery, automobile repair (or service and repair in many industries) then I could see it.
I do have a Google Chromecast which is really a beta device and has been a disappointment due to very limited functionality. They are slowly adding applications but still very much a walled garden. Hopefully it will be more useful some day. I only spent $35 on it so not much risk there.

gmail (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | about 7 months ago | (#46742215)

> I see that you are using a gmail account.

Yeah, me too. Didn't pay 1500 bucks for it, though...

Meh (1)

Moof123 (1292134) | about 7 months ago | (#46741471)

Just meh.

Testing...testing...testing...1...2...3 (1)

LoRdTAW (99712) | about 7 months ago | (#46741607)

Sounds like Google is testing the waters of demand for glass. It would be interesting to see the actual number of glass units sold. My guess it they are using this as an indicator if they should continue to push glass in its current form, abandon the project or make a big change.

I have an idea (1)

bitt3n (941736) | about 7 months ago | (#46741811)

Cut out the middleman! Pay me $1499 and I'll punch you in the face direct from the source.

Psychological trick (1)

gwstuff (2067112) | about 7 months ago | (#46741873)

"I worked day and night on my taxes. Now that they're done I'm going to give myself the gift of Google Glasses. I deserve it."

Google Ass (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46741903)

All of my inner circle refers to this product as "google ass"

do not want.

Good to know... (0)

Grismar (840501) | about 7 months ago | (#46741905)

... that /. is still mostly a local US site. "Anyone" of course refers to "anyone in the US".

Re:Good to know... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46742239)

What? Is there anything outside the US :-? But the earth is still flat and GOD still lives about US, isn't is?

Re:Good to know... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46742897)

... that /. is still mostly a local US site. "Anyone" of course refers to "anyone in the US".

/. has never pretended to be otherwise.

Less than you expect (1)

Jumunquo (2988827) | about 7 months ago | (#46742259)

Reading the reviews from developers who bought and used Google Glass, most of them say the same thing - it's not ready. You need an Android phone, and it's sort of an awkward extension of the phone. There aren't any killer apps for it because the APIs are not ready (it's mostly just popping text messages on the glass). I don't have Google Glass, but that's what I gleamed from the descriptions. The major reasons to get it seem to be for: 1) developers to get a head start on developer (on the belief that it will hit it big on a future rev) 2) journalists so that they can write about it 3) people with $1500 burning a hole in their pocket 4) people who want to brag to their friends (or brag to anonymous people on the Internet because we all know what a great satisfaction that is)

sUAhit (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46742369)

Gig in fro8t of arithmetic, that *BSD 0wned. study. [rice.edu]

Anyone can buy Google Glasses right now, cheap. (2)

Animats (122034) | about 7 months ago | (#46742721)

Anyone can buy Google Glasses right now [ebay.com] on eBay. The going rate is about $1100. Google Glass "invitations" have been for sale on eBay for months. The going rate is about $50.

As an "exclusive launch", this is a flop. There have been XBox and Sony PSn launches where pre-order prices exceeded list price. Google Glasses are already selling at a discount before the launch. This thing is overpriced. It needs to launch at $995, and that will only hold until Samsung starts shipping.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?