Google aims for Glass release by 2013, sub-$1,500 price

Google is hoping to release the consumer version of <a href="http://macnn.com/rd/279771==http://www.google.com/glass/start/" rel='nofollow'>Google Glass</a> before the end of this year. The head-mounted display will be a "fully-polished" version when it goes on sale, and will apparently be priced at or below $1,500, the price paid by <a href="http://macnn.com/rd/279772==http://www.electronista.com/articles/13/01/16/head.mounted.display.to.have.google.hosted.two.day .hackathons/" rel='nofollow'>software developers</a> registering to receive the Explorer edition before the general public. <br />
<br />
The target price and release schedule was revealed as part of a report <a href="http://macnn.com/rd/279774==http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/22/4013406/i-used-google-glass-its-the-future-with-monthly-updates" rel='nofollow' rel="nofollow" target="_self" title="">by</a> <em>The Verge</em>, where the wearable computing device was put through its paces. The version tested tethered to an Android device or iPhone via Bluetooth in order to gain a data connection, as it does not have its own cellular radio, though it is able to connect to Wi-Fi and find its GPS coordinates on its own.

Earlier this week, Google released a new <a href="http://macnn.com/rd/279773==http://www.electronista.com/articles/13/02/20/new.ui.uses.ok.google.as.command.keyword/" rel='nofollow' target="_self" title="">Glass experience video</a>, demonstrating how Glass can be navigated via voice or by touch-based controls. The company also opened up the pre-order process for Glass, by creating a competition where people had to explain how they would use the device. While a competition, winners will still have to pay for Google Glass, but will receive invitations to Glass experience events in the near future.


<div align="center"><iframe width="500" height="281" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/v1uyQZNg2vE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>

Google Glasses.... $1,500

Hoodie to hide your $1,500 Google Glasses.... $28
Seeing someone disappear into an open manhole while tweeting about their cold coffee? Priceless.

Gotta start saving!

I can't wait to pay extra money to let Google track my every move, show me unavoidable advertisements any time I look at anything, and rip away any pretense at privacy! Why, the only way this could be better would be if they gave Facebook the ability to capture video without my knowledge and upload it as public! The world just isn't complete to me if I can't be datamined 24-7!

comment title

$1500? Google should give these away. It's making us all Google mapwalkers.

I don't get it... this really isn't anything new. This technology has been around for like 15 years. Remember the glasses in True Lies...?

Andrej... True Lies was a Hollywood movie.

It wasn't real.

Like Goog-411...

Which IIRC was really a way for them to collect a huge speech database. Data collection is likely baked into this project. I don't have a problem with the data collection per se, as long as they're up front about it. But if they do the same thing - OK - we're full. Glasses are EOL. Thanks for playing... then there's no chance for trickle-down - these will be useful but likely not in the way the early adopters think. Just like YouTube started mostly as "Jackass- the Home Version" and then turned into something actually useful with Khan etc. I think Google has to get these into many hands at a price that makes sense. Then enough will be done with them to find the really useful part.

Doesn't matter, government had technology like that back then I'm sure.

Uh... Sure. And they had technology available to fake the moon landings in 1969, too.

...

"Catherine Brewster?"

So therefore these glasses really aren't anything new.

Readjust your sarcasmonometer. The bullshit is off the charts, but you're not registering it.

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instanc...x/29963615.jpg


:confused:

I am saying that the technology for something like Google Glasses DID NOT EXIST fifteen years ago, any more than the technology to fake the moon landing videos existed in 1969.

It simply wasn't possible, regardless of how paranoid your government-conspiracy fantasies may be.

Wow, Andrej - do consult your shrink, spouse

Best buddy, preacher, better half, or whomever. Spheric Harlot's comment made this troll laugh outloud, and provides the perfect argument (just as false) to yours; and he even had too explain it to you? Well maybe you were just way too tired trying to get that non-Apple branded SSD to work on your iComputer...

The desperation in the Jackie Chan image was wonderful, though, and the complete lack of irony in its use was delicious.

I laughed.

WTF? :confused: I'm not a troll. You're a troll. I spoke the truth.

Are you seriously denying that gov. didn't have "special glasses" with digital technology in them like Google's? Give me a break.

And I wasn't being desperate...?

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instanc...x/31978541.jpg

Wait, my argument is just as false as his? He didn't have to explain it to me, he's wrong. You mean he "had" to explain it to me?
Are you saying that I have some non-Apple branded SSD on an iComputer? I'm confused. Who are you talking to or about?

Yes. The United States government SERIOUSLY did not have the technology to make intelligent Internet-connected wearable glasses like Google's fifteen years ago.

Any more than they had the video technology to be able to fake an eight-hour video stream back in 1969.

We are seriously denying that.

Are you seriously claiming it because some Schwarzenegger movie showed it fifteen years ago?

No...
but my point is that in this day and age, Google's "Glass" doesn't do anything impressive - in retrospect it seems un-revolutionary. (Except the internet part but who cares)


I'll end on this note:

Just because full prototype robots have been around for 15 years doesn't mean that their technology also "didn't exist" back then.

ASIMO - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


And I am also not a conspiracy theorist... usually at least...

Ohhhh...I understand now. "If we ignore everything that defines this product, we can reduce it to something that looks vaguely similar to something that COULD HAVE been built fifteen years ago, but I'm basing that on a fictional Hollywood movie."

Except the fact that this thing actively parses your surroundings for context – its entire purpose hinges on that – and the fact that you can WEAR IT, rather than cart it around on a trolley or in an automobile stuffed with a 4500-watt power supply and a generator to power the 1998 computerS needed to run it, the technology was absolutely available fifteen years ago.

I apologize for missing your point. How silly of me.

I'm not sure i understand how linking to completely unrelated technology that WAS available fifteen (thirteen, actually) years ago is supposed to prove anything about technology available today, that WASN'T available fifteen years ago?

BTW, while ASIMO was a bit of a dead end, check out this thing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww
Which was NOT available fifteen years ago.