Fall of the Google Glass
I heard so many people talking about it before it was accessible. This project seemed as a leap into future and fast information access way.
Unfortunately this hyped and promising project flopped hard. Product failed because creators failed to define and validate the users and what problems it was solving for them. Instead they assumed the product would sell itself even without real
solutions or value, that its hype would be enough to appeal to everyone.
Lack of scenarios when product can be used
There was no consensus among the creators about the core use cases of Google Glass. One group argued that it could be worn all day as a fashionable device while another thought it should be worn for specific utilitarian functions. Either way, both believed that Glass promising features would speak for themself and users would define the use cases entirely not caring about users needs and concerns.
Product with questionable value
Once Google Glass was released, it did not provide meaningful benefits to its first users, a select group who paid to be early adopters. Its two main functions allowed you to quickly take pictures or scroll through the internet but with a two to three hour battery life there was no way Google Glass could compete with faster processors and superior cameras that did not seem socially unacceptable to use and wear in public.
Rise of Microsoft HoloLens
Augmented and virtual reality (AR & VR) are starting to enter mainstream use in a way they haven’t before. Neither concept is new, but advances in both fields have long been confined primarily to the game-play space. Until recently, both AR & VR were thought of as little more than novelty tech an interesting thing to play around with, but unlikely to have any real value for day-to-day applications.
Why is it better?
The technology, HoloLens, is Microsoft's biggest bet in the area of mixed or virtual reality. It is helping ground-level engineers and doctors to
not just access real-time assistance during an emergency situation, but
gets expansive real-life-like training as well. Headset recognizes the wearer's vocal communication, eye movement, and
hand gestures to help facilitate interaction between the virtual world
and the real world. While HoloLens is designed to project images in midair and on
surrounding objects, Glass was designed to perform the functions of a
smartphone. Like a phone, Glass could support apps, provide directions,
take photos and videos, and perform Internet searches. It didn't offer
much functionality that a smartphone doesn't, and as a result consumers
perceived Glass as a redundant, more expensive version of their handheld
devices. HoloLens, in contrast, seems to have been designed with the enterprise in mind. It's unlikely that Windows Holographic will face the same social stigma
that Google Glass did. Right now, Microsoft appears to be focusing more
on business-related functionality and gaming with its new creation. It
isn't marketing holographic technology as something people will wear in
daily life -- nobody will be concerned that a HoloLens is recording him
in the local coffee shop.
Comments
Post a Comment