Google Glass Killed: For Now - InformationWeek

InformationWeek is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

IoT
IoT
Mobile // Mobile Devices
News
1/16/2015
04:23 PM
Connect Directly
Google+
LinkedIn
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
100%
0%

Google Glass Killed: For Now

The Google Glass Explorer Program is shutting down for now, but this isn't the end of the company's plans for Glass or wearable computing.

 8 Biggest Tech Disappointments Of 2014
8 Biggest Tech Disappointments Of 2014
(Click image for larger view and slideshow.)

On Monday, January 19, 2015, Google plans to pull the plug on Google Glass Explorer Edition, its first attempt at Android-powered eyewear.

Google is celebrating what looks like a mercy killing as the technology's graduation from Google [x], the company's "moonshot" research group. The Glass team now will report to Tony Fadell's Nest home automation group within Google proper. And it will continue to work on the next incarnation of Glass.

"We're continuing to build for the future, and you'll start to see future versions of Glass when they're ready," the Glass team said in a blog post.

But the Glass group's migration from the lab to the mothership also means the conclusion of the Google Glass Explorer Program and the discontinuation of the $1,500 Google Glass Explorer Edition headset.

It's an ignominious end to a product introduced with unprecedented daring and flair: the Glass-streamed skydive from an airship over San Francisco onto the stage of Google's 2012 developers' conference.

[Is your company ready for flying drones? Read Enterprise Drones: What CIOs Should Know.]

If only Glass's childhood had been as inspiring as its birth. Skewered on Saturday Night Live, banned in bars, bait for political grandstanding, Glass was used and abused by people with grievances against the company and those just looking for a laugh at Google's expense. Widespread ignorance about the capabilities of the device and simmering suspicion about the motives of its maker made Glass a crown for the clueless.

Interest in computerized eyewear -- at Google and many other technology companies -- remains. Google plans to continue Glass At Work, its business-oriented program for its wearable technology. Samsung is said to be working on its own augmented eyewear, Gear Blink. Epson and Vuzix continue to sell smart glasses. The list goes on because businesses see value in hands-free computing and information presentation.

Jon B. Fisher, co-founder and CEO of CrowdOptic, a company that provides live video streaming for Glass, insisted in an email that Glass is alive and well. "Glass didn't fail," he said. "Glass needed to start off the reservation in skunkworks and now it is being placed in a specific product category (IoT). We have seen unprecedented enterprise adoption in our own company in the last 2 quarters and we're now in 50+ hospitals and dozens of sports stadiums with 7 Fortune 500 wins."

In an emailed statement, Forrester analyst J.P. Gownder observed that Glass remained in beta for more than two years and never really became a product. "This organizational move will help to clarify the go to market strategy for both consumer and for enterprise customers," he said. "Forrester's data shows that 43% of consumers have interest in Glass -- but 50% also have privacy concerns. So Google needs to construct a consumer image for the product, and deal with privacy concerns if they want it to be mass market."

Glass didn't fail as technology -- there's a place for computerized eyewear in certain industries -- but it did fail to become a socially acceptable consumer product. Fisher contends Google's biggest misstep was "allowing the consumer press cycle to manifest without comment."

Yet there's more to it than that. It's not just a matter of muddled messaging. No amount of pushback can transform social sentiment in a matter of months. For many, pointing a camera represents an act of rudeness or aggression. Glass broke longstanding social contracts and did so boldly. It was in your face, in the figurative and literal senses of that phrase.

Beyond that, Google failed to present a convincing consumer use case. The company tried to encourage developers to create apps that took advantage of its hardware and there were some promising ones, like Word Lens, an optical character translation app that Google bought last year and integrated into its Translate app. But Google focused too heavily on Glass as a way to capture activities.

This is evident in the photo collection the company distributed to participants in its Glass Explorer Program as a remembrance. There are few shots of Glass presenting information to the wearer -- shots that attest to the device's usefulness as a network-connected computer. Most of the images are photographs taken by Glass users, as if photography from a head-mounted camera were somehow remarkable. Cameras come in many forms these days, and the images could just as easily have come from a GoPro camera or a mobile phone in many cases.

In short, what set Glass apart -- being a hands-free, head-mounted smartphone -- only seldom came into play for most consumers. Typically, other tools already available, a smartphone or camera, could provide the same functionality without the limitations, the social stigma, or the unfamiliar interface.

Glass will return some day, Google says. Perhaps it will have the missing features that would have made its first incarnation wonderful, such as augmented reality overlays, or with fewer but better executed features, such as the ability to easily stream live video to a device, from it, or both. But Google will have to hurry because one company's mistakes teach every company in the industry.

Apply now for the 2015 InformationWeek Elite 100, which recognizes the most innovative users of technology to advance a company's business goals. Winners will be recognized at the InformationWeek Conference, April 27-28, 2015, at the Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas. Application period ends Jan. 16, 2015.

Thomas Claburn has been writing about business and technology since 1996, for publications such as New Architect, PC Computing, InformationWeek, Salon, Wired, and Ziff Davis Smart Business. Before that, he worked in film and television, having earned a not particularly useful ... View Full Bio

We welcome your comments on this topic on our social media channels, or [contact us directly] with questions about the site.
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Technocrati
50%
50%
Technocrati,
User Rank: Ninja
1/27/2015 | 11:59:54 AM
Re: Not Really Surprising

@nomil   You bring up an interesting aspect that I had not thought about much - that cost of $1000 !    Seriously ?   How many have that laying around for some glasses ?   The only people who can afford them without a second thought are Google employees.

 

Just shows that Google is great at ideas; however the ugly aspects of cost reduction doesn't  seem to be their forte.

Technocrati
50%
50%
Technocrati,
User Rank: Ninja
1/27/2015 | 11:54:53 AM
Re: Re-launching

@nomil    Good point regarding the relauch, which is what I would think most would assume Google is planning to do.   They spent plenty of time and effort ( aka expense ) on these glasses, so I find it hard to believe they will just close the door completely. 

 

We will probably see the technology in a different form somehow.

nomii
50%
50%
nomii,
User Rank: Ninja
1/27/2015 | 5:50:28 AM
Re-launching
Currently it is considered that glasses are ahead of their time but after few years if these glasses are re-launched they will be thought as the same old glasses and will be labeled as an already failed product. Halting a product would have been a tough decision but re-launching it would be even tougher.
nomii
50%
50%
nomii,
User Rank: Ninja
1/27/2015 | 5:44:31 AM
Re: Not Really Surprising
@Technocrati: launching it ahead of time is of course a reason but I would also think that it cost around a thousand bucks more than the people would have been willing to pay right now. Revolution comes with the number, which google failed to generate.
Gary_EL
50%
50%
Gary_EL,
User Rank: Ninja
1/26/2015 | 3:27:28 PM
Re: On Second Thought .....
I spent a few happy years doing prior art research, and I'm convinced that there has never been a completely original idea - everyone stands on his/her predecessors' shoulders. As to the other point, back during the Cold War, that happy time for engineers of all sorts, the gov't had a much bigger role in tech than they do now. They used to set standards, now, the "invisible hand" does.
Technocrati
50%
50%
Technocrati,
User Rank: Ninja
1/26/2015 | 12:11:16 PM
Re: On Second Thought .....

@GarY_EL      Good catch.  How could we forget the effect government efforts have had on tech ?  

I won't hold it against Google, thanks to Microsoft I am used to companies calming things they did not create -  just make a mental note to check the government's underlying role with regard to every "tech breakthrough" we hear about.  

Gary_EL
50%
50%
Gary_EL,
User Rank: Ninja
1/20/2015 | 12:48:55 AM
On Second Thought .....
Maybe not ahead of its time at all. I was watching a documentary about the F-15 fighter the other day. Way back in the 1980's, it had what was then called a "heads up display". Esssentially, the cockpit itself provded a display of critical flying information, so the pilot never had to take his eyes off the sky (and his adversary) while getting up-to-the-moment flight information. Sound familiar? An embryonic Google Glass!
kylesamani
50%
50%
kylesamani,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/19/2015 | 7:59:56 AM
Enterprise before consumer
Like desktops and cellphones before it, Glass will see adoption in the enterprise before it sees adoption among consumers. Glass is being adopted today in droves by enterprises looking to improve operational efficiencies. See companies like Pristine (www.pristine.io) that are making strong progress there. It's funny in that sense; Steve Jobs in 1978 and the motorola guys in 1992 both wanted their babies to be adopted by the public at large, but both of them ended up being business-first revolutions before consumer revolutions. I suspect we'll see the same with Glass
BillB031
50%
50%
BillB031,
User Rank: Moderator
1/18/2015 | 11:02:28 AM
Re: Not Really Surprising
Darn it, canceled,  just when I wanted to look and act like a professional douchebag in Public
PedroGonzales
50%
50%
PedroGonzales,
User Rank: Ninja
1/18/2015 | 10:20:58 AM
Re: Not Really Surprising
Yeah, may be glass was ahead of its time.  I think like all companies Google would learn from their mistake which will better help them launch new technologies in the future.  The problem with many companies is that they can't anticipate all the challenges a new technology will face when release to the market, as glass did.

For some industries, Glass is really and indispendisble tool 
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Slideshows
Reflections on Tech in 2019
James M. Connolly, Editorial Director, InformationWeek and Network Computing,  12/9/2019
Slideshows
What Digital Transformation Is (And Isn't)
Cynthia Harvey, Freelance Journalist, InformationWeek,  12/4/2019
Commentary
Watch Out for New Barriers to Faster Software Development
Lisa Morgan, Freelance Writer,  12/3/2019
White Papers
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
Video
Current Issue
The Cloud Gets Ready for the 20's
This IT Trend Report explores how cloud computing is being shaped for the next phase in its maturation. It will help enterprise IT decision makers and business leaders understand some of the key trends reflected emerging cloud concepts and technologies, and in enterprise cloud usage patterns. Get it today!
Slideshows
Flash Poll