Hacker News Reader

Comment by cromwellian | Hacker News Reader

Except like the Google Car and unlike the Microsoft future video with transparency, flexible, credit card computer displays, and unlike Apple's Knowledge Navigator, Google has functioning devices.

Self-drivable cars hade been around for years. What's different about the Google Prius versions is that they look almost practical, if you squint just a little bit, just minimized the sensors a little bit more it could even fit within a car's stylish exterior. In contrast, some of the past versions were very slow driving and had a truck's worth of equipment in them.

I really think this is a false comparison (to other corporate future videos). Google may release a product that fails to gain adoption, but they will release something.

BTW, go search youtube for AT&T's "You Will" campaign with Tom Selleck. They got a lot of stuff right.

View on HN

Apple can test new phones and new phone prototypes pretty easily. Hardware can be hidden in new cases, software can just not be shown to other people.

Google tested self-driving cars for quite a while; it was only when the NYTimes was about to write a story about it anyway that they publicly released information.

I would assume these glasses are going to be pretty difficult to hide from the general public when the team is out testing them. If I were them I'd rather release information they want to the public instead of a random blogger getting a photo and kicking up a firestorm of interest.

Yeah you never want a firestorm of interest around new products.

But it doesn't look like it's a new product at all; it's just a prototype they want to test in public.

I think they are just trying to influence the spin right now. Try to give the less imaginative (or too imaginative) journalists something to write.

The "firestorm of interest" can wait until they actually have a product.

> If I were them I'd rather release information they want to the public instead of a random blogger getting a photo and kicking up a firestorm of interest.

There were rumours of these glasses in the NYT last December: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/18/wearing-your-comput...

They did their best to conceal it then. It's not in Google's DNA to hide disruptive products for a long period of time.

> If I were them I'd rather release information they want to the public instead of a random blogger getting a photo and kicking up a firestorm of interest.

No, you would announce the product 6 months before launching it and you would show it. Otherwise, it means that you don't have a prototype good enough to demo --> waporware. It might exist in the future but today it doesn't exists.

This is why the original iPhone launch was such a great event. They showed the damn working thing, no videos like Nokia used to do at the time (iirc about bendable phones that could produce scents?!?!).

Early reports said Google's planning on releasing these later this year (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/technology/google-glasses-...); as far as I've seen, nothing's changed on that front. No, they're not showing you actual prototype UI yet, but that seems to be more difficult in this case than anyone's giving them credit for.

How exactly do you demonstrate eyeglass computer output in a video? Already it's disconcerting to look a video of someone's POV; for one, there's no peripheral vision at all. It seems to me that a concept video's the best way to get the general idea into people's heads. Then, they can see for themselves in 6-8 months.

Just saw the AT&T's "You Will" campaign. Wow, it's amazing how far we moved in such a small amount of time. Almost everything in that commercial was spot on and only a few was a little off (who uses a fax machine or a pay phone?). I'm pretty sure when those commercials were running (I was about 8) that they seemed impossible or expense. Now that it reality, not only did it seemed the logical step, but impossible to live without. I mean, can you really imagine a world without inexpensive wireless technology?

This is the reason why these futuristic videos are so important. To get everyone an inspiring glimpse into the future be it AT&T or Google. Of course AT&T didn't deliver all of these products. They did spur up the debate and got folks working towards that direction.

Technology is great that way. We are a global community and open source is a godsend. I'm sure the first iteration of the glasses will not be that great but it does get better. That's the great thing about building things, you can always learn from your mistakes (or in a lot of cases, lack of knowledge).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com