The Verdict Is In: Nobody Likes Google Glass
These are the exact words for a product that is still under development from a person who has never tried them. And this person writes for BusinessInsider, a website that describes itself as a “fast-growing business site with deep financial, media, tech, and other industry verticals”. Right.
And there are slew of mixed reviews out there from various sorts of people. Some are loving Glass, hooked to them while some have stopped using them, finding its appearance ridiculous and creepy.
Which is okay. People have different opinions. But verdicts about a product that is currently only open for developers and not at all intended for daily use and is still no less than half a year away from a public release is what can be defined as ridiculous.
And Why So?
i) The battery life is terrible — Around 3.5 – 5 hours
ii) It’s disorienting, and gives you a headache.
iii) You can’t tweak any settings in Glass.
iv) The voice controls for Glass are buggy.
v) Responding to messages is tough.
Lovely, isn’t it? Complaining about a software that is still under development? And that too by someone who hasn’t personally tried Glass yet.
His dissatisfaction about the battery life is also invalid, considering the fact that Glass hasn’t been optimized for battery yet. A recent software update, delivered yesterday, has reportedly brought an improvement in the battery life. According to a Glass explorer, the improvement is pretty significant — 200%. This proves that the battery life of Glass will get a lot better when it is ready for a public release.
Original discussion can be found here.
BusinessInsider also finds the lack of built-in cellular data connection as a drawback:
You still need a smartphone to use Glass outdoors. Google Glass doesn’t have a built-in cellular data connection
So… they’re asking for a cellular radio in Glass. Which will emit electromagnet radiations, sitting right next to our head?
It is impossible to say with certainty that Google Glass will be a huge success that rivals rush to copy. It’s also far too early to predict a flop. If I was a betting man, however, I would bet that reality ends up being closer to the latter scenario than the former.
but without any reasons backing their opinion.
Thankfully, not everyone is inveighing Glass with silly reasons.
Jolie O’Dell of VentureBeat raises some valid arguments:
But the cumulative effects won’t amount to a societal change in how we consume information or deal with life away from our desktop screens. It’ll just be the same kind of impact smartphones have had — all the good and bad — but slightly accelerated and accentuated.
In my moral universe, Google Glass for consumers can only serve to distract us, not truly help us any more, better, or faster than the other tools we already use.
Thus, Google Glass. If you’re using it recreationally, not professionally to complete a task, don’t kid yourself — it’s not enhancing your life. It’s robbing you of the joy of actually experiencing your life.
This valid argument is perhaps the most important problem that Google needs to find a solution for — How is it going to make technology less distracting for us as compared to smartphones.
Various other reviewers are loving Glass. Tim Stevens of Engadget finds the future Glass incredibly bright, but has privacy concerns. Taylor Hatmaker of Entrepreneur looks forward to the “beginning of something cool”. Folks over at Phandroid say that they didn’t “really garner awkward stares and were easily able to blend in”.
But then, proving that Glass is indeed the future of mobile computing was not my intention at all. My point is rather a simple one — a message to all the Glass explorers and bloggers out there:
Reviewing a work-in-progress product is pointless. Please save your precious words until its public release.