Tuesday, May 7, 2013

Google Glass is missing one critical factor.


Google Glass has generated plenty of interest and excitement. But before we crown it an industry revolutionizer, let's not forget that Google Glass still doesn't have a clear response to the one big question that all revolutionary products must answer:
How does it make my life better?
Every game-changing product innovation over the past three decades had a very simple answer to that question. For example, the iPhone gave you the Internet in your pocket. The BlackBerry gave you e-mail on your phone. The Macintosh (and later Windows) gave you a computer you could use without typing in computer codes.
Those were game changers. They made big promises, and they delivered.
What's the big promise with Google Glass? We still don't have a good answer.
When Google talks about Glass it's totally focused on what it's like to experience information in a new way. The benefits are all implied. The only real improvement over the smartphone that you've already got in your pocket is that Glass can take photos and videos and share them a little bit faster. Pitching that as a futuristic experience doesn't make it any more useful. And, the current Glass camera is a step down from most smartphones.

I read Robert Scoble's 1,000-word Google+ post on how Glass has changed his life, which led him to proclaim: "I will never live a day of my life from now on without it." But, even after reading, I still didn't find any big promises for how Google Glass will make my life better. The stuff Scoble mentioned were all things that most smartphones can already do. Glass is a slightly new way to view information but it doesn't introduce any new capabilities. It doesn't make anything significantly better.
If you want further evidence that there's not a whole lot going on underneath the Google Glass hype, then all you have to do is look at the coverage from the tech press last week as Google put Glass into the hands of tech journalists. Most of the tech journalists spent a lot more time taking wonderfully narcissistic photos of themselves wearing Glass than they did telling us about how Glass was going to impact the lives of everyday people. And, while that is further proof that technology is integrating ever deeper with fashion, it's also a telling sign of how little Glass can actually do.
The most succinct compliment of what Glass has to offer came from my CNET colleague Lindsey Turrentine, who aptly called it a "handy monitor for my cell phone."
That's interesting, but not much of a game-changer.
In fact, it sounds like something that makes your technology experience more complicated rather than making it simpler. It's another device that you have manage. The functions of Glass overlap with the technologies that you're already carrying. And, with roughly 3 to 4 hours of battery life, it's another thing you have to jockey for a power charge.
That's too complicated. Today's winning technologies are the ones that make things simpler for our over-complicated lives. For example, Google Now automatically gives us uncanny reminders without us having to set up anything. The smartphone itself is a device that simplified our lives by typically replacing at least five or six other devices: iPod, cell phone, camera, GPS, notebook, etc. Even apps on smartphones give us a simple and uncluttered way to directly interact with the information and services that are most important to us. Simplicity wins.

If the simplicity factor for Google Glass is that it saves me from taking my smartphone out of my pocket, then that's not enough to outweigh the fact that it actually adds another device that I have to carry and forces me to wear glasses.
I'll admit that a big part of what makes Google Glass difficult for people like me and the ones who are most likely to read this article is that most of our technology time involves work. And there aren't many examples I can think of where Google Glass would help someone get more work done.
I'm not saying Google Glass is completely useless. I can think of a number of specialized uses where Glass could offer an improved experience:
  • Having access to information during activities where your hands are occupied, such as mountain climbing, biking, and other sports and recreation
  • Insurance agents recording video evidence and interviews on the scene of a claim
  • Travelers streaming their tourist experience home to family and/or close friends who couldn't join them on the trip
  • Museum visitors getting automatic information on the exhibits that they are viewing, without have to fiddle with a phone or tablet; the same could apply for walking tours in historic cities
However, it's important to remember that those are all specialized activities where Google Glass could provide an improved viewing experience in relatively short bursts. In other words, it's not something you wear all the time. That's a lot different than being an indispensable new product that changes how you live and work in the way that the smartphone and the point-and-click PC have.
Google Glass does not offer one of those life-changing promises. Without that, we can't expect it to be the next big thing. At best, right now it looks like it's going to be an expensive smartphone accessory.
This story originally posted as "The one big factor Google Glass is missing" on ZDNet.


Sunday, December 30, 2012

Apple drops patent claim against Samsung Galaxy S3 Mini




Apple has agreed to withdraw patent infringement allegations against Samsung's new Galaxy S3 Mini in exchange for assurances that the South Korean electronics giant will not market the smartphone in the U.S.
Apple disclosed the agreement today in a filing with the U.S. District Court for Northern California. The iPhone maker requested last month that the new smartphone and other Samsung products be added to the ongoing patent dispute between the two companies. Samsung countered that the S3 Mini was unavailable for purchase in the United States, however Apple noted that the new smartphone was listed on Amazon's U.S. storefront and had been purchased and delivered to multiple U.S. addresses.
"Apple will agree to withdraw without prejudice its request to include the Galaxy S III Mini in this case given Samsung's representation that it is not making, using, selling, offering to sell, or importing that product into the United States," Apple said in its filing.

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Google Zeitgeist 2012: Whitney, Gangnam, iPad 3 and more









The death of Whitney Houston in February led to Google's top search for 2012.
Looking at the world's most popular searches for the year, Google's Zeitgeist 2012 uncovered a variety of people, events, and even a couple of tech products.
In second place behind Houston was music video phenomGangnam Style. Hurricane Sandytook third place, followed by the iPad 3Diablo 3Kate Middleton, the 2012 Olympics, Amanda Todd, Michael Clarke Duncan, and BBB12.
The list also drilled down to the top searches among specific categories, including people, movies, TV shows, and consumer electronics.
The iPad 3 proved the most popular item in the consumer electronics area. Samsung's Galaxy 3 was next on the list, followed by the iPad Mini, Google's Nexus 7, the Galaxy Note 2, the Sony PlayStation, the iPad 4, Microsoft Surface, Kindle Fire, and Nokia's Lumia 920.
The iPhone 5 didn't make it on the top 10 list among consumer electronics but it did take third place in the image search category.

Apple TV is in 'early stage of testing,' report says

Apple has begun the early stages of television set testing, according to reports. The Wall Street Journal says that manufacturers Sharp and Hon Hai -- otherwise known as Foxconn -- are collaborating with the tech giant to test designs for a large-screen, high-resolution TV, according to unnamed officials connected to Apple's suppliers.
The Cupertino, Calif.-based company, which tests ideas internally before bringing products to external suppliers, has been testing television set prototypes "for a number of years," according to the Journal's unnamed sources. The iPad and iPhone maker has already infiltrated the living room with its Apple TV box, which connects online media to traditional television sets.
"It isn't a formal project yet. It is still in the early stage of testing," one of the sources told the Journal.
The idea of Apple producing a television set was brought back to the stage this month by Apple CEO Tim Cook, who hinted in aninterview with NBC that a new product offering may be on the horizon. "When I go into my living room and turn on the TV, I feel like I have gone backwards in time by 20 to 30 years," Cook said. "It's an area of intense interest. I can't say more than that."
 Although it remains to be seen how much impact Apple could have in the television and media industry, already entwined in long-standing broadcasting contracts and "smart TV" production by manufacturers, a survey from Morgan Stanley suggested that the brand name may be enough -- and consumers would be willing to pay a 20 percent premium for an Apple-branded set.
Meanwhile, famed technologist and venture capitalist Marc Andreessen speculated at the Dealbook conference this morning that an Apple TV is likely to arrive in 2014 or maybe 2015 at the latest, if it doesn't squeak out in 2013, according to Business Insider.