×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Glass Is the Future — and the Future Has Awful Battery Life

Unknown Lamer posted about a year ago | from the shorten-length-of-day dept.

Google 473

zacharye writes "The concept of wearable tech is really buzzing right now as pundits tout smart eyewear, watches and other connected devices as the future of tech. It makes sense, of course — smartphone growth is slowing and people need something to hold on to — but the early 'Explorer' version of Google's highly anticipated Google Glass headset has major problem that could be a big barrier for widespread adoption: Awful battery life." Also, a review of the hardware. The current Glass hardware heads south in less than five hours, which doesn't seem too short relative to similarly powerful devices, but since it is meant to be worn all the time you'd think it would have a large enough battery to make it at least 8 or 10 hours.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

473 comments

Google glasses (-1, Flamebait)

Kludge (13653) | about a year ago | (#43601955)

I swear that if anyone approaches me wearing those things I'm going to punch him in the face.

Re:Google glasses (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43601977)

Great. That's where the camera is. I'll have some wonderful footage to provide the cops when assault charges are filed.

See you in court jackass.

Re:Google glasses (3, Insightful)

zlives (2009072) | about a year ago | (#43602007)

great just proves my point that I was being recorded without my permission?

Re:Google glasses (4, Informative)

0100010001010011 (652467) | about a year ago | (#43602045)

You have no reasonable expectation of privacy in public.

Re:Google glasses (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602111)

Actually, in many places in Europe, it's illegal to record other people in public places. There's some amount allowed if the person is "public person" (ie. celeb) but not otherwise.

Re:Google glasses (4, Interesting)

NecroPuppy (222648) | about a year ago | (#43602119)

Yes and no.

Depending on the location (nation, state, municipality, etc) there are laws about deliberately filming someone. ~Sometimes~ there are legal differences between casual recording (you walking past in the background) and deliberate recording, but sometimes not.

Sure, you're not going to be (normally) busted for filming your friends at the beach and getting some random people in the background, but it's still possible. (IIRC, there was an Australian case very recently about this.)

Re: Google glasses (1)

PuppiesAndGoats (2895817) | about a year ago | (#43602225)

Laws regarding filming children (usually more restrictive, sometimes very much so) add to the stickiness of this situation.

Re: Google glasses (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602247)

Laws regarding filming children (usually more restrictive, sometimes very much so) add to the stickiness of this situation.

Stickiness? Children? Really?

Re: Google glasses (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602271)

You're supposed to think of the children -- but not like that.

Re:Google glasses (2)

0100010001010011 (652467) | about a year ago | (#43602377)

Given Google is in the US, I'm going by US based laws:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photography_and_the_law#Public_property [wikipedia.org]

http://www.krages.com/ThePhotographersRight.pdf [krages.com]

It is legal to photograph or videotape anything and anyone on any public property.

Photographing private property from within the public domain is legal, with the exception of an area that is generally regarded as private, such as a bedroom, bathroom, or hotel room. In some states, there is no definition of "private," in which case, there is a general expectation of privacy. Should the subjects not attempt to conceal their private affairs, their actions immediately become public to a photographer using an average lens or video camera.

If you are in a city park for what ever reason, I can pop up a camera and video tape you as much as I want.

Re:Google glasses (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about a year ago | (#43602399)

Until I ask you to stop, at which point your continued persistence could be construed as harassment.

Re:Google glasses (1)

hedwards (940851) | about a year ago | (#43602431)

With an average lens or video camera, which means that it doesn't apply to super telephoto lenses and it doesn't apply to cameras that are concealed.

Glasshole (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602375)

There may not be an "expectation" of privacy in public, but being "in your face" photographed and/or recorded in public by someone wearing this device makes the wearer a "Glasshole".

Re:Google glasses (1)

hedwards (940851) | about a year ago | (#43602413)

That's true, however, there's a legal difference between hidden cameras and ones that are in full view when deciding how reasonable it is. If you've gone to the trouble of going someplace that's technically public, but where there are no cameras, you may very well still have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Re:Google glasses (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602461)

You have no reasonable expectation of privacy in public restrooms.

Re:Google glasses (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602093)

Most of the time you don't need permission to record in public. You can't just change your point on a whim just because you were too stupid to make it right the first time.

Re:Google glasses (1)

Joreallean (969424) | about a year ago | (#43602467)

great just proves my point that I was being recorded without my permission?

People don't need your permission to record you in public.

If they turn around and publish it publically that is a different matter, but in general recording in a public place is not against the law.

Re:Google glasses (4, Funny)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year ago | (#43602297)

Great. That's where the camera is. I'll have some wonderful footage... ...or you would have if your battery had not run out about an hour ago.

Re:Google glasses (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43601991)

I swear that if anyone approaches me wearing those things I'm going to punch him in the face.

Awww. *pinches cheeks* Remember when you said that about people using cell phones in public? That was just as cute.

Re:Google glasses (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602013)

What if they approach you while riding a Segway?

Re:Google glasses (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602215)

Trip them from the side, stay out of the camera field of view, and laugh as they fall flat on their face.

Re:Google glasses (1)

cute_orc (2911555) | about a year ago | (#43602021)

Contact Lenses version is coming soon.

Re:Google glasses (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602035)

I will politely ask them to remove it and, if they don't, then punch them in the face.

Re:Google glasses (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602229)

Also great.
I'll have a video of telling you to go fuck yourself, shortly before you make an ass of yourself.

Because that's where the camera is.
Also, I'll be able to upload it to youtube in quite literally a blink of an eye, so everyone else can laugh as you make an ass of yourself.

I love technology.

Re:Google glasses (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602439)

All you're proving is that we need to punch you hard & repeatedly in the face until the Google Glasses break, nerd.

This is not a disincentive to punching you in the face. This is encouragement to KEEP punching you in the face.

Re:Google glasses (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602365)

no you won't

Re:Google glasses (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602073)

We will need a Google Glass version of WorldStarHipHop for this type of occurrence.

Re:Google glasses (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602143)

Why? According to TFA his battery is dead anyway and it is enough punishment that he looks like a dork wearing them.

Re:Google glasses (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602149)

Great. I'll secretly record you punching him/her with my smartphone.

Re:Google glasses (1)

cheekyjohnson (1873388) | about a year ago | (#43602151)

Apparently the future also has plenty of imbeciles...

Re:Google glasses (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602369)

Apparently the future also has plenty of imbeciles...

well of course, where do you think they come from? right now!

Re:Google glasses (1)

torgis (840592) | about a year ago | (#43602221)

Sounds like we need a Google Glass version of WorldStarHipHop to capture first-person violence on a low-res camera.

Re:Google glasses (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602323)

No you wont, because you are a fucking pussy.

Re:Google glasses (1)

mark-t (151149) | about a year ago | (#43602347)

Would the assault charge be worth it?

Bearing in mind that if you happened to do this to somebody who just happened to be an off-duty cop, you'd be facing a whole world of grief.

Re:Google glasses (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602435)

... or armed.

Sure, punch me in the face without cause or warning. See how that goes for you.

Re:Google glasses (1)

backslashdot (95548) | about a year ago | (#43602437)

So you rather be recorded discretely by a phone in a pocket or held in hands casually? At least with Google Glass you are able to tell you might be recorded as someone is staring at you or wearing one of those.

Rev. 1 hardware, people (4, Insightful)

Enry (630) | about a year ago | (#43601965)

This is what they were able to build. Rev 2. (probably when they get to mass producing it) will have better battery life

Re:Rev. 1 hardware, people (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602081)

I will hit anyone wearing Google Glass. You are stealing privacy from all of us. Get ready to get kicked and your Google Glasses destroyed.

I hope this becomes a trend, just like what happened to that guy who weared AR glasses in France. Break them and punch in the face.

Re:Rev. 1 hardware, people (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602253)

I will hit anyone wearing Google Glass. You are stealing privacy from all of us. Get ready to get kicked and your Google Glasses destroyed.

I hope this becomes a trend, just like what happened to that guy who weared AR glasses in France. Break them and punch in the face.

So passionate about this, yet you're constantly being filmed wherever you go and have no problem with it? Is the difference between this and a guy with a smartphone that you can tell the guy with the smartphone is recording you from his awkward hold of the phone? What if a "recording" indicator were placed on them (like a red light)? Would you still be so angry about this?

And, just so you know, it's not recording all the time, only when you tell it to record. Not all that much different than an underpowered smartphone with voice commands, strapped to your head.

Re:Rev. 1 hardware, people (4, Insightful)

RoknrolZombie (2504888) | about a year ago | (#43602275)

I will hit anyone wearing Google Glass. You are stealing privacy from all of us. Get ready to get kicked and your Google Glasses destroyed.

I hope this becomes a trend, just like what happened to that guy who weared AR glasses in France. Break them and punch in the face.

So passionate about this, yet you're constantly being filmed wherever you go and have no problem with it? Is the difference between this and a guy with a smartphone that you can tell the guy with the smartphone is recording you from his awkward hold of the phone? What if a "recording" indicator were placed on them (like a red light)? Would you still be so angry about this?

And, just so you know, it's not recording all the time, only when you tell it to record. Not all that much different than an underpowered smartphone with voice commands, strapped to your head.

The parent is full of shit anyway - posting as AC? And you expect us to believe that your balls will be big enough to walk up to a random stranger in a public place and punch them? Because of what they're wearing? Right. You'll do what the rest of us do: Mutter under our breath and turn our backs to them.

Re:Rev. 1 hardware, people (2)

Americano (920576) | about a year ago | (#43602473)

Not all that much different than an underpowered smartphone with voice commands, strapped to your head.

Well when you put it like that, it's hard to see any way that Google Glasses could possibly be a failure in the market!

I'm sold.

Re:Rev. 1 hardware, people (3, Funny)

jeffmeden (135043) | about a year ago | (#43602187)

This is what they were able to build. Rev 2. (probably when they get to mass producing it) will have better battery life

You have half of it right. Rev 1 has bad battery life because it was a prototype. Think outside the box about the need for better batteries, though; Rev 2 will simply plug into neural probes and power itself from your brain. What battery life problem?

Re:Rev. 1 hardware, people (0, Flamebait)

MugenEJ8 (1788490) | about a year ago | (#43602331)

While I agree... and I know people will down-mod me as trolling, but Apple will actually come to the rescue with iHUD or something similar and will put Google to shame.

Doesn't Matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43601973)

Early adopters are going to eat it up. Give it a few generations and it might be usable.

But I think the real problem is it is ugly and goes on your face.

Re:Doesn't Matter (3, Insightful)

HornWumpus (783565) | about a year ago | (#43602019)

Give it a few generations to shrink and it will hide in glasses frames.

For now the dorks that will buy it will want you to notice.

Re:Doesn't Matter (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602219)

I'd wear a prosthetic face wart with a camera.

"A couple to five hours" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43601989)

There, don't have to click it now.

Poor Battery Life? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43601995)

The size of that battery is very small, especially for what this device is supposed to deliver to the user. Who didn't see this one coming?

Re:Poor Battery Life? (3, Interesting)

pigiron (104729) | about a year ago | (#43602071)

So why not a version with a Ray Charles type sunglasses frame. Plenty of room for extra battery size in the arms and the oversize dark lenses could completely camouflage the fact that there is a camera and display behind the lenses.

"it is meant to be worn all the time" (1)

pigiron (104729) | about a year ago | (#43601997)

ORLY? Who made that rule?

Re: "it is meant to be worn all the time" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602041)

Common sense. Jeez. This isn't underwear.

Re: "it is meant to be worn all the time" (-1, Troll)

pigiron (104729) | about a year ago | (#43602129)

Moron gamer fanboi. You would probably not take yours off in the shower and then complain that it short circuited while you were watching your shriveled up dick.

Re: "it is meant to be worn all the time" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602161)

It's not a rule, it's just common sense. Just like a smartphone is generally worn 'all the time'.

Re: "it is meant to be worn all the time" (1)

pigiron (104729) | about a year ago | (#43602261)

Wrong again. I leave my smartphone at home lots of the time. That's what voicemail is for. BTW unless you are a total pimply faced geek, you carry a smartphone in your pocket, you don't wear it unless you work in an Indian call center.

Re: "it is meant to be worn all the time" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602281)

Such a low id, and such a stupid comment.

The intent is to make something useful enough that it will want to be worn all the time. Rule? WTF are you talking about?

Re: "it is meant to be worn all the time" (1)

pigiron (104729) | about a year ago | (#43602433)

Such a low id

Au contraire, my id is quite active and often in control.

Google made that rule (2)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year ago | (#43602379)

ORLY? Who made that rule?

Google did, through design choices.

Look at it [bing.net]. When not wearing, are you going to:

1) Put in pocket with keys
2) Put in pocket with phone.
3) Put in backpack with books.

Look at any image showing the whole thing. It doesn't even fold up like sunglasses so you cannot use a case. It would not fit in a pocket, and you'd be an idiot to do so anyway as it looks really fragile.

Borg is now powering down... (1)

oxnyx (653869) | about a year ago | (#43602023)

What Star Terk Captions didn't know was that Zapp Brannigan means of dealing with Robot Wars would have worked for them too. Kept seen waves of men until the batteries are drained. Also I wonder how long until people deaths are put down not see the real world but only at their screen. Headphones are bad but visual distraction is worst.

Google glass makes me think of "The Jerk" (0)

eagee (1308589) | about a year ago | (#43602025)

Which is probably an old guy way of thinking of it, but I can't get the image of thousands of irreparably cross eyed consumers filing a class action lawsuit...

but its so awesome (1)

alen (225700) | about a year ago | (#43602043)

i got data flashing in front of me all the time. i know the news before anyone else. i'm so cool.

Re:but its so awesome (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | about a year ago | (#43602223)

I hope they come out with an HD versoin soon. Why should I have to go through life only seeing standard definition reality?! ;)

reality shows... sports... porn... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602047)

everything will be the same, but with a new point of view

Rocky road ahead (1)

TrollstonButtersbean (2890693) | about a year ago | (#43602075)

This is an experimental technology.

Steep obstacles: comfort, perception that you will be a privacy-invader, eye health, battery life .. these have an uphill battle.

Or easily replacable... (1)

NecroPuppy (222648) | about a year ago | (#43602077)

Batteries.

Since it's, effectively, a pair of glasses, make each of the temples or temple tips be a rechargable battery, with a good enough connector to handle connecting/disconnecting and plugging / unplugging hundreds of times.

Design them so that it won't shut down if even one of the two power sources is present, and ship with two+, allowing people to buy additional. Power temple #L1 is low? Disconnect and plug in power temple #L2. Power temple #R1 is recharged, replace power temple #R2 that are on the glasses.

Since google has been better at design (lately) than Apple (who came up with craptacular earphone jacks for the latest iPods), this should be easy.

You mean easily lost (0)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year ago | (#43602277)

Since it's, effectively, a pair of glasses, make each of the temples or temple tips be a rechargable battery

That is a really, really REALLY REALLY bad idea.

People are supposed to put on the glasses (even if they don't wear glasses) and then also remember to bring three or four handfuls of batteries, and not lose them also? And you also have to remember to charge three or four sets of these tiny things every day?

At that point the whole thing is only slightly more practical than just wearing an Occulus with a motorcycle battery in a backpack!

Since google has been better at design (lately) than Apple (who came up with craptacular earphone jacks for the latest iPods)

The latest iPod earbuds are the only ones ever made I can stand to wear more than an hour. That includes the custom shaped ones.... I spent a few hundred on a nice set of earbuds but after I got the newer Apple earbuds, the Apple buds are the ones I use on planes simply because I can leave them in. The sounds is not as good but the shape is far, far better.

Apple also apparently understands that most people hate recharging batteries, a fact that seems lost on Slashdot.

Battery life is directly proportional to dorkiness (5, Funny)

Control-Z (321144) | about a year ago | (#43602083)

You could probably have a 48-hour battery life if you wanted to wrap the sides and back of your head with batteries. Go for it.

Re:Battery life is directly proportional to dorkin (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602417)

Don't worry! With this "Green Power" hat, you can harness the power of the sun with it's 12 mini solar panels, spoken so much about in science! But wait, we didn't stop there! You can harness the power of the wind the 5 inch turbine attachment to give you glasses that desperately needed charge: on a windy day, while you dodge the punches from the "stop recording me" crowd, or while you run from those pesky muggers who are always trying to take your glasses.

Order within the next 15 minutes and get a free "green" extended battery pack made from reclaimed, glittered, car batteries, sourced from our supplier, Etsy.

Order yours today!

Has Apple taught us nothing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602099)

This model merely sets the baseline to be surpassed by Google Glass HD Maxx. Followed by Google Glass Mini. Next comes Google glass Hydro. Finally the product line peters out with the New Google Glass.

Of Course Battery Life Will Be Short (2)

American AC in Paris (230456) | about a year ago | (#43602101)

...of course battery life on these is going to be low; they're designed to attach to one side of your glasses! Even if they had the space to put more battery in, they wouldn't, because then you'd have a device that was always pulling your glasses down one side of your face, to say nothing of the extra weight on your nose and ear.

Batteries are heavy. If you create a face-mounted computer, you're going to want to make it as light as humanly possible. This should not come as anything remotely close to a surprise or shock to geeks.

Re:Of Course Battery Life Will Be Short (1)

American AC in Paris (230456) | about a year ago | (#43602155)

Following up on my own post after RT second FM--I see they're using the battery as a counterweight, so the imbalance issue is moot. The weight issue, however, remains.

Re:Of Course Battery Life Will Be Short (2)

RabidReindeer (2625839) | about a year ago | (#43602173)

The battery life of almost EVERYTHING is low. About the only electronics that can be charged at my leisure and not that of the device are my eReaders.

This isn't new. I bought a portfolio case for my Newton because it offered an AA battery pack instead of having to rely on the pitiful amount of juice that the Newton's internal AAA batteries could provide.

Re:Of Course Battery Life Will Be Short (1)

jeffmeden (135043) | about a year ago | (#43602207)

...of course battery life on these is going to be low; they're designed to attach to one side of your glasses! Even if they had the space to put more battery in, they wouldn't, because then you'd have a device that was always pulling your glasses down one side of your face, to say nothing of the extra weight on your nose and ear.

Batteries are heavy. If you create a face-mounted computer, you're going to want to make it as light as humanly possible. This should not come as anything remotely close to a surprise or shock to geeks.

The current design *is* a pair of glasses, it doesn't attach to them. So, there is a bit of real estate but grow the batteries too much and you start to look ridiculous. Unless that was what you were going for...

Re:Of Course Battery Life Will Be Short (2)

Jamu (852752) | about a year ago | (#43602343)

I would prefer a power cable. Put the battery in my pocket.

The future I fear. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602131)

If GGlass is the future, I fear it. I don't want a world with padded utility poles, increasingly distracted drivers, and a society moving away from face-to-face confrontations for friendly interactions.

For real... if I ever see someone with one of these get punched in the face, I will cheer on the perpetrator. I will also frequent places where they are banned outright. I already go to events which have an unwritten "no phones on the dance floor" rules, which interestingly enough, are frequented by young positive people who actually understand the value of in-person interactions and only use tech where it makes sense.

Unbelievable (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602137)

It's almost like this is a working prototype or something

External battery pack. (5, Interesting)

Maxo-Texas (864189) | about a year ago | (#43602141)

Would look like stereo headphone cords. Could have an arbitrarily large battery in your pocket or purse. They sell them now for cell phones-- basically double the life.

Can we stop talking about this vaparware? (-1, Troll)

Karmashock (2415832) | about a year ago | (#43602159)

This thing is crap. No one cares about it. Change the subject. Google Glass news is about as interesting as Segway news.

Re:Can we stop talking about this vaparware? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602251)

You clearly care enough to post.

Google Glass will be an epic fail (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602169)

That's my call. In a billion years I just can't fathom the general public being OK with cameras recording them constantly. It will destroy society.

Re:Google Glass will be an epic fail (1)

babywhiz (781786) | about a year ago | (#43602465)

Last night when I was playing with the Grandson, every time I attempted to use my phone to record, he was too busy looking at his reflection in the phone in my hand than he was at my eyes and face in which he was babbling at just prior to me trying to record him.

So far, that is the only use I have personally witnessed a use for.... besides maybe a handful of tech troubleshooting issues that could not be seen unless the picture was taken at the right height.

My problem with the whole thing is the same reason I have padded around in life without glasses at all....anything sitting on my nose will be endlessly adjusted until the screw for the ear piece falls out and the glasses fall apart.

I wouldn't mind them for watching Netflix/Hulu, but I would have the same problem I have now with my tablet..unless I'm laying flat on my back I won't be able to properly view the screen and still be comfortable. (in the case of the tablet, my arms get sore holding the darn thing up..so then I do this stacking of pillows and blankets on my bed to prop the tablet up so I can watch The Daily Show laying on my side...woops...it fell face down again and paused the show...and look, now it skipped to commercial just because it fell face down....ugh....)

Basic Engineering Constraints Google dreaming (1)

ShooterNeo (555040) | about a year ago | (#43602171)

Google glass has to have a powerful ARM processor and a high resolution display to implement it's specs. 2013 technology can only reduce the power consumption for that to a certain extent. And glass is supposed to be a wearable pair of glasses, so the battery mass can only be so high before it causes pain for the wearer.

A wire trailing down from the user's neck to a battery pack elsewhere is a potential solution...but wires like that get tangled up.

Maybe a bleeding edge higher density experimental battery? There are a few like that with more power density (about double) than the best standard lithium ion packs. Of course, such batteries are more likely to fail by catching fire, and this would be in the worst possible place.

Offload more computation to the android smartphone that goes with the glass? Still have to run the radios at a high bitrate to get things like the camera feed. Also this would make the smartphone mandatory.

Ideas? The concept here is awesome, but it de fact REQUIRES a powerful machine that can do image recognition in realtime, monitor gps and heading, read street signs, etc etc etc. This in turn means many millions of active transistors.

The only thing I can think of that just might work is a custom ASIC that provides hardware implementation of the most common mathematical functions performed by the most common glass application. You can get 10 :1 better power efficiency using a custom ASIC to implement the logic instead of a general purpose chip. The catch is, the cost to create such a chip is exorbitant.

Re:Basic Engineering Constraints Google dreaming (1)

Nidi62 (1525137) | about a year ago | (#43602395)

A wire trailing down from the user's neck to a battery pack elsewhere is a potential solution...but wires like that get tangled up.

Why not a battery that hangs around your neck? If you make it flat and thin enough and hang it from a lanyard it could be worn under the shirt with comfort and would also be discreet. It could easily hold a battery twice the size of that found in a cellphone. If the battery is built into the lanyard you can have a wire take the charge from the battery up through the lanyard to the back of the neck where the glasses can plug in. Get's the weight of the head and onto a part of the body than can handle the weight for a significant period of time and eliminates the need for a long wire going to a battery pack in your pocket.

Who's Ready for.... (4, Funny)

PortHaven (242123) | about a year ago | (#43602197)

Blink Blink Revolution...

***

Blink Right Eye

Now Left,

Right again,

Left twice....

You did it!!!!

"I am glassholio" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602217)

"I am glassholio"!

GOOGIE GLASS !! FUTURE NOT SO BRIGHT !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602259)

Don't gotta wear shades !!

It's not a launch product! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43602325)

The Google Glass version being handed out to people is meant as a field test. It was produced in limited quantities and I would guess the hardware and software will both undergo significant changes before being released. Reviewing this as if it's something you're able to buy today is ridiculous!

Has anyone noticed ... (1)

briancox2 (2417470) | about a year ago | (#43602359)

... that Google's core competency is in cloud computing services? And not in hardware design.

News release: company with no previous hardware sales success can't resolve real world energy problem. Yawn.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...