<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"Whenever I go out in public wearing Google Glass, inevitably somebody (sometimes several somebodies) asks me about it. Typically they already know what it is and are curious how I'm enjoying it. But sometimes it's just a curious person, like the chap in the elevator one morning who simply asked me what kind of glasses I was wearing.\nObviously, someone wearing Google Glass stands out. It really doesn't matter what else you're wearing, or if you don one of the \"visors\" that come with Glass, people are going to notice the computer hanging off of your face, no matter what. Some, including Neil Gaiman, think it looks just too damn silly to wear.\nSee also: Beyond Barrel Roll: 10 Hidden Google Tricks\nThe ostentatiousness of Glass has led many to compare it to another conspicuous device: the Segway. The label \"Segway for your face\" has stuck to Glass like a stubborn suction cup since the gadget was first unveiled in early 2012. This tweet might be the first time the connection was made, but it's repeated often \u2014 most recently by a venture capitalist at the Wearable Tech Expo in New York City, GigaOM reported.\nThe analogy feels apt: Device is announced \u2014 even hyped \u2014 to great praise from high-minded geeks, but the general public deems said device too dorky-looking to succeed. The product may indeed have incredible promise, but the mass market won't accept something that makes them look less hip than Steve Urkel.\nThe Trouble With Segway\nThe comparison is misguided, however, mainly because it gets wrong the reason \u2014 actually, reasons \u2014 for the Segway's failure. Certainly, the Segway had a strong goofball factor, but it was dependent on external factors to work properly, and the benefit to the customer was unclear. It also carried an obscenely high price.\nIn case you somehow missed the Segway saga, here's a primer: Invented by Dean Kamen, the Segway personal transporter (a.k.a. Project Ginger) promised a revolutionary new way to get around. Smaller than a bicycle, it let riders get from place to place on a powered device that took virtually no training to use. If you wanted to get somewhere faster than walking, and didn't want to sweat, it was a seemingly great option.\nIn practice, not so much. The Segway didn't really fit on sidewalks (indeed, it was banned from them in many cities), and it was too slow to really belong in the bicycle lane. To work as promised, it needed some kind of \"Segway-only\" surface, or just a lot of wide paths that aren't very common in urban areas.\nIn other words, the Segway required a shift in infrastructure to deliver on its potential, a shift most cities didn't want to make. It also didn't give the rider any exercise, and there was no way to transport passengers or cargo \u2014 so it did nothing to replace the bike or the car. On top of that, it was slower than both, so it wasn't really suitable for commutes, either. Finally, the price tag (about $5,000) ensured the Segway would never be a mass-market device.\nA Flawed Mirror\nIt remains to be seen whether Google Glass will be a success, but the same factors don't apply. First of all, Glass doesn't depend on its environment in order to work. Sure, you need a wireless connection, but those are plentiful. And Google, being the all-encompassing Internet company it is, can use its own platform for all of Glass' core services (maps, sharing, cloud storage).\nConcerns about privacy \u2014 many of them overblown, in my opinion \u2014 have led to some knee-jerk bans of the device in some bars, and even legislation against wearing it while driving (most notably in West Virgina). But since those places and situations are very specific and localized, they don't leave Glass owners completely at sea.\nSecond, there really is a value-add with Glass. As a parent who is continually trying to capture moments with my kids, the camera alone makes Glass a viable product, and others (such as GoPro) have found there's a sizable, if niche market for head-mounted photography.\nWith Glass, though, you get so much more. There's instant sharing of any media you capture, there's voice-guided navigation directly in your field of view. There's email, news stories, sports scores \u2014 the wealth of information on the Internet, really \u2014 all ready for you to engage with as soon as you tap the touchpad. Over the last few months there have been several occasions where I turned to Glass for information that I wouldn't have bothered to look up on a smartphone.\nYes, price is a big unknown right now. The current \"Explorer Edition\" of Glass cost every developer and tech reporter who has one $1,500, but a teardown of the device revealed the cost of its components to be significantly lower, Forbes discovered. It's pure speculation right now, but Glass looks poised to cost somewhere in the sub-$500 range, or about as much as a good tablet.\nSo Glass doesn't depend on external factors to work, it really adds value to your life, and the price will likely be aimed at the mass market. Yep, it looks kinda nerdy \u2014 and that may play a strong role in whether or not it succeeds \u2014 but that's about the only thing it has in common with the Segway.\n\n\nThe World Through Google Glass\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nGoogle Glass POV\n\nThe virtual screen that Google Glass shows you through the prism appears to be a display floating a few feet in front of you. Although it's obviously very tiny, Google says it's the equivalent of a 25-inch screen seen from 8 feet away.\nThe message screen \"ok glass\" is the most common one you see, since it activates whenever you tap the side or tilt your head up. The screen lets you know Glass is on and actively listening to your voice.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSports Scores\nThe most recent sports scores are just a single swipe away.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSearch Results\nThe screen is big enough to display a single sentence or simple text feedback extremely well. The font gets smaller for longer results, although it maxes out at about two sentences.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nPhoto\nAlthough photos don't look great on Glass, you can easily discern the content, and they look much better when exported to other displays.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nReddit Notification\n\nMost notifications involve both a headline and a photo, as with this one from Reddit.\nThe multicolor \"spectrum\" effect isn't visible to the eye -- it appears in this photo because it was taken outside and some sunlight was refracted.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nNew York Times Notification\nThe New York Times' notifications tell you how many articles are waiting. You can see them in a manner similar to the Reddit headlines by tapping the touchpad on the temple.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTwitter App\nHere's what you see when you want to share something via Twitter. GlassTweet is a third-party app.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDirections\nWhen you ask for directions, Glass first confirms the address.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nActive Navigation\nHere's the UI for navigating with maps. The arrow moves as you turn your head.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n2D Navigation\nNavigation in 2D gives you a bird's-eye view of the map.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSpeech Error\nError messages are very clear.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSettings Screen\nThe main settings screen lets you know if you're connected to Wi-Fi and how much battery power is left.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSettings, Alternate View\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nImage: Mashable composite, iStockphoto, Tomacco and pringletta"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://mashable.com/2013/07/29/why-google-glass-isnt-the-segway/>