Comment by potatolicious | Hacker News Reader

Comment by potatolicious | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> "there's still 2 years in which a competitor can come out and take the market before they do"

Like someone else has brought up already, the existing applications we've seen of Glass are all fairly obvious from years of sci-fi.

The real magic sauce is execution.

More than that, the number of people who can pull off Glass in this world, other than Google, is close to zero. Nobody has the combination of hardware expertise, UX expertise (questionable in this respect, perhaps), and sheer big-data chops.

> "Someone like Apple could probably do it if they really wanted to take on Google in this market."

I don't think so. In fact I think Google is already outrunning Apple in many ways. Look at Google Now that ships with the latest Android, predictive tasking where your phone realizes what you want without you having to go get it.

While Apple is running around with the voice-recognition toy known as Siri. Heck, I'm a loyal iOS user and I never use Siri. It's a gimmick to demo to your friends, it's not smart or wide enough for any real practical use.

See also the looming, gigantic failure of iOS6 maps - a horrifically broken data set and search tech wrapped in excellent UX.

Or, if you're an iOS dev, take a look at iCloud, whose API is still horrifically broken a year after launch and notoriously difficult to work with.

I think Apple has more than amply proven that, when it comes to big data, machine learning, and AI, they have nothing on Google.

Fun anecdote: I was standing in Manhattan today and typed in "24 Orchard" (expecting to call up the address at 24 Orchard St) on iOS6 Maps. It took me to another state. This is asinine behavior I've never experienced with Google on any platform.

IMO the only company that stands a real chance at tackling Glass is Facebook. They're the only ones with the proven big data expertise, but they are also dramatically lacking in building devices and associated software.

>>Fun anecdote: I was standing in Manhattan today and typed in "24 Orchard" (expecting to call up the address at 24 Orchard St) on iOS6 Maps. It took me to another state. This is asinine behavior I've never experienced with Google on any platform.

This happens to me very regularly on Google Maps. I'll enter an address like "45 Tree Lane" and at worst it will take me to another state, and at best it will ask "did you mean 45 Tree Lane in California, or 45 Tree Lane in New York". I am located in California, you silly thing. Why would I need 45 Tree Lane, New York?

This happens to me on Google maps all of the time since I switched to Android. It has gotten quite annoying.

Whilst I would agree the Apple has not proven itself in the Big Data field.

I would argue that Microsoft is a worthy competitor. They have an excellent Research department and have hardware experience (more so than facebook). They do have the big data chops - enough to put up a search engine, and they have a cloud infrastructure to go with it.

I agree Microsoft is a strong contender given their resources and the fact that they've probably been working on some kind of VR/AR for use with XBox for some time.

And also there's Amazon maybe going at it as the next gen reader or video viewer.

It's certainly not just Google. In fact the list of companies that can pull off wearable computing is far greater then just the small group of major smartphone makers that are ever considered.

You assume that predictive software is the only UI for AR glasses.

No, predictive software is only one of many applications - but any reasonably compelling application for AR glasses would involve a tremendous amount of contextual and user-specific information, and Apple is horribly bad at it, while Google is very good at it. Facebook is the only other (major, giant) company that has shown themselves to be capable of this kind of "smart" software.

Google is good at it by our current low standards. There's a lot of room for improvement in the area, and that could come from many companies, known and unknown.

any reasonably compelling application ...

Why isn't the same true of touch screens?

There's fewer affordances for interaction, yet the screen is always visible. Huge win if the software guess correctly that you want to see something, potentially quite annoying if not. I've never used a Glass though, this is just based on watching videos of it.

> Like someone else has brought up already, the existing applications we've seen of Glass are all fairly obvious from years of sci-fi.

Like the years of Star Trek:TNG and the IPad? ;)

All the rest I totally agree with.

Could you explain why Google has the hardware expertise? Besides their Nexus Q, what consumer hardware has Google made?

While Google reasonably enough outsources the hardware portion of job, it has an OS for mobile devices (Android) which cannot be successfully developed without significant hardware expertise.

While not on consumer hardware front, Google also develops (but not builds) its own quite customized servers. Facebook also does so, BTW, and in a nicer way (see opencompute.org).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com