# Google Glass Goes on Sale to Public (For a Single Day)



## Tom Bombadildo (Apr 11, 2014)

Google Glass, Google's answer to wearable technology, is going to go on sale to the public for a single day on April 15th, 2014 in the US only as a part of their "explorer program". For a mere $1,500 you too could become what the internet affectionately calls a "Glasshole"! 




> In a blog post about the launch, Google said that it originally planned to announce the one-day sale next week, "but it looks like the cat's out of the bag now." Google explains that there are a "limited" number of spots in the program. While it's not really clear what Google hopes to gain from its expansion of the "explorer" program in this manner (besides publicity), they did provide this on the demand for the product:
> 
> _"Our Explorers are moms, bakers, surgeons, rockers, and each new Explorer has brought a new perspective that is making Glass better. But every day we get requests from those of you who haven’t found a way into the program yet, and we want your feedback too. So in typical Explorer Program fashion, we’re trying something new."_


 
Saucy


----------



## Crisp Cookie (Apr 11, 2014)

Unfortunately not in EU


----------



## matpower (Apr 11, 2014)

So I need to travel to USA and get $1.500 in 4 days... I will pass.
I am pretty sure there will be some crazy guys there fighting to get their own Glass, after all, I don't think Google made a lot of Glasses for a limited public.


----------



## chavosaur (Apr 11, 2014)

I know Jack from RoosterTeeth has Google Glass and he says it's a pretty cool experience. The problem is that they're not prescription though so there isn't much point to wearing them if you can't even see out of them.


----------



## Taleweaver (Apr 11, 2014)

Yeah, that's one way to solve production that's not up to par with the demand: high prices and total exclusivity.

Nice name, that "explorers". But who really wants to be known as an "internet explorer"? (Christ...I ALREADY want to punch the guys buying those things)


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Apr 11, 2014)

chavosaur said:


> I know Jack from RoosterTeeth has Google Glass and he says it's a pretty cool experience. The problem is that they're not prescription though so there isn't much point to wearing them if you can't even see out of them.


 
Last I knew you could easily get prescription lenses for them, so I don't think that's much of an issue really. I mean, if you have $1,500 to waste on Google Glass you'll probably have a bit more for some lenses


----------



## frogboy (Apr 11, 2014)

I want a pair of 'dem glasses


----------



## ResleyZ (Apr 11, 2014)

Already got one thanks to the company I'm a intern at  Currently have a orange (Tangerine) one, while we also have a grey one. I'm doing all sorts of stuff on it, like GBC emulators (Pokemon Yellow, controlled with a Bluetooth keyboard) and Netflix, which all work surprisingly well. When they are available for 'normal' purchase, I'll definitely get one for myself. I'm absolutely in love with it.



Spoiler


----------



## nando (Apr 11, 2014)

great. more glass holes all around.


----------



## Gahars (Apr 11, 2014)

Something tells me they won't be shattering any records.

I really can't wait to buy these... in 10 years, when they're affordable and the tech is improved.


----------



## Hells Malice (Apr 11, 2014)

$1500 is a joke, right?
You missed April Fools by a bit there Google.


----------



## Zetta_x (Apr 11, 2014)

I have a invite code which lets you purchase google glass for $1500 anytime.

in the US


----------



## CathyRina (Apr 11, 2014)

Remember how everyone freaked out when they found out the PS3 is gonna be 300€ at launch?
well google sure doesn't.


----------



## tbgtbg (Apr 11, 2014)

XrosBlader821 said:


> Remember how everyone freaked out when they found out the PS3 is gonna be 300€ at launch?
> well google sure doesn't.



300? I don't think that price would have freaked anyone out. 599, on the other hand...


----------



## CathyRina (Apr 12, 2014)

tbgtbg said:


> 300? I don't think that price would have freaked anyone out. 599, on the other hand...


 
woops, never mind then.


----------



## Enigma Hall (Apr 12, 2014)

Assholes everywere...


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 12, 2014)

ResleyZ said:


> I'm doing all sorts of stuff on it, like GBC emulators (Pokemon Yellow, controlled with a Bluetooth keyboard) and Netflix, which all work surprisingly well.


Considering you have to look up to play the emulator and watch Netflix, can you explain that experience? Sounds tiring on the eyes.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Apr 12, 2014)

nice idea but for people who already wear glasses they will never be able to use these. unless they want to keep constantly swapping glasses...but they'll still be blind when they have the google glasses on


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Apr 12, 2014)

Bladexdsl said:


> nice idea but for people who already wear glasses they will never be able to use these. unless they want to keep constantly swapping glasses...but they'll still be blind when they have the google glasses on


 


Tom Bombadildo said:


> Last I knew you could easily get prescription lenses for them, so I don't think that's much of an issue really. I mean, if you have $1,500 to waste on Google Glass you'll probably have a bit more for some lenses


----------



## Bladexdsl (Apr 12, 2014)

so $1500 for the glasses and i'd say another $1000 for the prescription lenses....


----------



## Gahars (Apr 12, 2014)

Google's a company run almost entirely by poindexters. It's a bit silly to assume they don't have _some_ solution worked out for people with poor eyesight.


----------



## The Real Jdbye (Apr 12, 2014)

I want one, but that is way too expensive.


----------



## ResleyZ (Apr 12, 2014)

KingVamp said:


> Considering you have to look up to play the emulator and watch Netflix, can you explain that experience? Sounds tiring on the eyes.


 
Well, in the beginning I needed to get used to it, but after that it didn't 'annoy' me anymore. If you look right in front of you, you won't even notice you're wearing Glass after a while.
Google did that very well. They made sure it won't be in your field of vision so that it would distract you.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Apr 12, 2014)

call me when this is ready and you don't have to wear anything (as long as appl$ doesn't make it )


----------



## gabriel1073 (Apr 12, 2014)

Still 500 dollars cheaper than a Ps4 here in Brazil.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Apr 12, 2014)

Bladexdsl said:


> so $1500 for the glasses and i'd say another $1000 for the prescription lenses....


 

You could buy contacts unless you have a condition that doesn't work with them.


----------



## The Catboy (Apr 12, 2014)

"For a mere $1,500"
"mere *$1,500"*
_*$1,500*_
How about no


----------



## computarman (Apr 12, 2014)

One day only huh. I think they are trying to create a sense of scarcity or something, because at that price if they just simply released the product, I think it would fail for sure. The google glasses will be another distraction for everyone involved anyway. It's kinda like the smart watch. It begs the question can't you just pull out your phone and be done with it. The people wearing the Google glasses will be looking all goofy IMO.


----------



## Jan1tor (Apr 12, 2014)

The price really isn't that obscure. Hell I still have one of the first SCSI cdrom burners 4x with a caddy. We paid $5000 for it when they first came out. Now you can get them for $35 bucks and they do a lot more, faster, re-writable, usb. It all depends on time & demand.


----------



## Zetta_x (Apr 12, 2014)

Jan1tor said:


> The price really isn't that obscure. Hell I still have one of the first SCSI cdrom burners 4x with a caddy. We paid $5000 for it when they first came out. Now you can get them for $35 bucks and they do a lot more, faster, re-writable, usb. It all depends on time & demand.


 

True, but a number of electronics back in the day were expensive. Relative to now, $1500 is expensive. I can buy an laptop and convert it into google glass at a third of the price.


----------



## spotanjo3 (Apr 12, 2014)

Its the only beginning which is great. By the way, I will skip it for a greater improvement in the future. Right now, it is worthless to me.


----------



## Deleted User (Apr 12, 2014)

Man, don't you hate it when a company offers you a chance to test their, what seems to be, revolutionary technology. Like, I can't believe they'd put it at a high price, are they expecting us basement dwellers to pay that amount of cash? For shame google, I thought you'd know better that we deserve this amazing unfinished hardware at a finished product selling price, if not free.

_(You don't have to buy the god damn thing, you're not the target audience for this beta, that and the price is reasonable. How much do you think they have to pay the employees/how many employees work at google?)_


----------



## ViDeOmAnCiNi (Apr 13, 2014)

I would much rather buy the Laster SeeThru: http://laster.fr/products/seethru/?lg=en

They had an (unfortunately) failed kickstarter, but they are taking pre-orders on their site now.  Laster is taking a different approach to it and I like it. Having no camera on it is a plus. Eliminates the social stigma of the thing. (The "why are you taking a picture of me?" confrontation..)

On the kickstarter you could get a kit to assemble (no solder, easy screw together) for $349 and pre-assembled for $399.  Sure beats $1500.  The $399 included the SDK as well.  Nice.

I might pre-order one as long as I can get black frames.  The white are just not speaking to me.

-Vm


----------



## PityOnU (Apr 13, 2014)

Not sure why on Earth these things are still a big deal.

Pretty much all of the "exciting experiences" I've seen involving Google Glass were just using it as a mini-GoPro. Not sure how that's so life changing.

Especially when you consider there are VR headsets coming which cost way less and do way more.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Apr 13, 2014)

ViDeOmAnCiNi said:


> I would much rather buy the Laster SeeThru: http://laster.fr/products/seethru/?lg=en


that looks even stupider!


----------



## The Real Jdbye (Apr 13, 2014)

ViDeOmAnCiNi said:


> I would much rather buy the Laster SeeThru: http://laster.fr/products/seethru/?lg=en
> 
> They had an (unfortunately) failed kickstarter, but they are taking pre-orders on their site now. Laster is taking a different approach to it and I like it. Having no camera on it is a plus. Eliminates the social stigma of the thing. (The "why are you taking a picture of me?" confrontation..)
> 
> ...


Those seem nice, I wonder how they work.
One step further towards perfect Augmented Reality implementations


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 13, 2014)

ResleyZ said:


> Well, in the beginning I needed to get used to it, but after that it didn't 'annoy' me anymore. If you look right in front of you, you won't even notice you're wearing Glass after a while.
> Google did that very well. They made sure it won't be in your field of vision so that it would distract you.


Well, figured that. I meant entertainment wise. Personally, I think it should cover a large field of vision
and give you the choice what to take up.



computarman said:


> One day only huh. I think they are trying to create a sense of scarcity or something, because at that price if they just simply released the product, I think it would fail for sure. The google glasses will be another distraction for everyone involved anyway. It's kinda like the smart watch. It begs the question can't you just pull out your phone and be done with it. The people wearing the Google glasses will be looking all goofy IMO.


Well, of course. It's still in beta. That's for the price and the looks.

For people who already wear watches, it wouldn't be "another distraction". Why take your phone out just for quick glances and replies? There are watches that can even replace the phone altogether.


I'm sure we'll get something that look like regular glasses and can even standalone.




ViDeOmAnCiNi said:


> I would much rather buy the Laster SeeThru: http://laster.fr/products/seethru/?lg=en
> 
> They had an (unfortunately) failed kickstarter, but they are taking pre-orders on their site now. Laster is taking a different approach to it and I like it. Having no camera on it is a plus. Eliminates the social stigma of the thing. (The "why are you taking a picture of me?" confrontation..)
> 
> ...


It's like a bigger Google Glass. Having no camera takes away a lot of functionality. Something they could have solve by just putting on a cap, not taking away the camera.



PityOnU said:


> Not sure why on Earth these things are still a big deal.
> 
> Pretty much all of the "exciting experiences" I've seen involving Google Glass were just using it as a mini-GoPro. Not sure how that's so life changing.
> 
> Especially when you consider there are VR headsets coming which cost way less and do way more.


Well, it's new and still in development.

One, they can do more than that and two, that's like telling someone content with a camera smartphone to get a point-and-shoot camera. Google Glass is still lighter, more from your POV and as said, do more things.

VR is much bigger hardware and is meant to take up your whole vision away from the world. AR glasses are the opposite in that they are meant to add.

We going to get something between Laster SeeThru,Google Glass and Atheer Labs,Metapro.


----------



## grossaffe (Apr 13, 2014)

Zetta_x said:


> True, but a number of electronics back in the day were expensive. Relative to now, $1500 is expensive. I can buy an laptop and convert it into google glass at a third of the price.


Then do it.


----------



## TyBlood13 (Apr 13, 2014)

I still think of these when Google Glass is brought up 



Spoiler










 
Anyway, I'd totally buy a pair if I had the money


----------



## Zetta_x (Apr 13, 2014)

grossaffe said:


> Then do it.


 


Did you seriously take me seriously?

It was a joke that I can take a laptop, attach it to my head with a bungee cord, Take a webcam so I can see what's in front of me. Use bluetooth to connect to my phone


----------



## grossaffe (Apr 13, 2014)

Zetta_x said:


> Did you seriously take me seriously?


Apparently so.  Then again, I've come from a modding forum where we've seen quite a few extraordinary claims that apparently make yours seem serious.


----------



## Chary (Apr 13, 2014)

It's certainly fancy. A glimpse at technology people in the 1960's said we would have by 1990.


----------



## Enigma Hall (Apr 13, 2014)

TyBlood13 said:


> I still think of these when Google Glass is brought up
> 
> 
> 
> ...


WRONG! Will Be This!!!


----------



## grossaffe (Apr 13, 2014)

Enigma Hall said:


> WRONG! Will Be This!!!


But Google Glass doesn't cost over $9000


----------



## Enigma Hall (Apr 13, 2014)

Wait until the Sayans dominate the market.


----------



## xxNathanxx (Apr 13, 2014)

I don't think the wearables market will ever take off. No matter how you look at it (ha see what I did there [ha see what I did there]), when you wear a screen on your body, you look like a fucking idiot. That, and they don't offer anything you can't already do with other devices.

Look, here's a prototype of the new Google Belly:


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 14, 2014)

Enigma Hall said:


> WRONG! Will Be This!!!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler





Spoiler










 


xxNathanxx said:


> I don't think the wearables market will ever take off. No matter how you look at it (ha see what I did there [ha see what I did there]), when you wear a screen on your body, you look like a fucking idiot. That, and they don't offer anything you can't already do with other devices.


I guess you are a bit... shortsighted.  For watches, if you watch that Neptune Pine video, you can see that it frees up your pockets.

I can envision a future with standalone devices that look like regular glasses that project a huge screen, that can correct vision, be your phone and tablet, and free up pockets.


----------



## ResleyZ (Apr 14, 2014)

The thing with smart watches, is that they currently advertise them as mainly standalone devices, which (imo) won't work. While smart watches introduced a lot of people to the idea of Wearable Technology (like my father), the screen is too small to use it efficiently.

I would recommend my father to use a Bluetooth keyboard, but that won't work with smart watches.
With Google Glass on the other hand, you have both your hands free, and you can (easily with some sideloaded apps) connect a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse to it.

I'm pretty much a glasshole, especially to the people that I know. There are only ~30 people in Netherlands who have Google Glass, so it isn't as well known as it is in America.
I think the price will go down a lot ($400~$ 500), especially considering the hardware that's in it. Might need to save some money for it, but I'll definitely get one.


----------



## Hells Malice (Apr 14, 2014)

xxNathanxx said:


> I don't think the wearables market will ever take off. No matter how you look at it (ha see what I did there [ha see what I did there]), when you wear a screen on your body, you look like a fucking idiot. That, and they don't offer anything you can't already do with other devices


 
How it looks doesn't mean shit. If it was mainstream then no one would bat an eyelash if you wore one. Even if it was stupid looking, if it was ACTUALLY useful/functional, then people wouldn't care. You need some more confidence in yourself if you're scared to wear something because of what others might say.

I'm sure it _will_ become mainstream. Just not now. Google Glass seems like it's going to be absurdly priced and no one in their right mind will buy the thing except to say they've got one.
Plus the technology just isn't there. Google glass does practically nothing useful. But yeah, it will take off once the technology IS actually there to back it up.

Though with that said, making it less ugly would help a bit. Whoever designed the look of the Google Glass should probably be fired.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Apr 14, 2014)

until it projects a screen hovering in front of you in mid air and you can interact with that screen with your hands than only than will it be WORTH getting!


----------



## DunnoBro (Apr 14, 2014)

This is a good marketing strategy.

What this will do, is create a sense of scarcity and fake demand. 

They will most likely be put up on ebay for a much higher price somewhere down the road, and this will give google the ability to overprice because they'll at least be cheaper than those. 

It'd probably also be worth it to actually buy these 1500 monstrosities to just resell them down the road. 

As for me though, my get-rich-quick scheme is about making a DBz power level reader app. Should get me at least a few grand, maybe even 10. Probably somewhere between 9-10 thousand though.


----------



## xxNathanxx (Apr 14, 2014)

Hells Malice said:


> How it looks doesn't mean shit. If it was mainstream then no one would bat an eyelash if you wore one. Even if it was stupid looking, if it was ACTUALLY useful/functional, then people wouldn't care. You need some more confidence in yourself if you're scared to wear something because of what others might say.


I think you grossly underestimate the power of fashion. Please give me an example of something that looks really stupid but is used by many people.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Apr 14, 2014)

xxNathanxx said:


> I think you grossly underestimate the power of fashion. Please give me an example of something that looks really stupid but is used by many people.


 






EDIT: It should be noted (in case anyone isn't aware) these are the lense-less hipster glasses, AKA something that looks really stupid.


----------



## Hop2089 (Apr 14, 2014)

The wearables market could be successful and accepted if they had some type of auto disable feature for the camera, you know some sensors so it could disable the camera automatically if the person wearing the device is in a public or government building.  People would feel more at ease if there was such a feature on these devices.


----------



## Wisenheimer (Apr 14, 2014)

I see a lot of people wearing Google glasses around here. I really think this type of technology is going to catch on big time, but it is still in its infancy.  Google Glasses are basically the Apple Newton of wearable computing.  I think I am going to wait at least until version 3.0.  Like early PDA's that evolved into ubiquitous smartphones, the day when everyone is walking around looking at a screen is probably at least a decade away.


----------



## Gahars (Apr 14, 2014)

xxNathanxx said:


> I think you grossly underestimate the power of fashion. Please give me an example of something that looks really stupid but is used by many people.


 






Fashion's all about context. What is seen as dumb today might've been seen as dope yesterday, or may yet become the bizomb tomorrow.


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 15, 2014)

ResleyZ said:


> The thing with smart watches, is that they currently advertise them as mainly standalone devices, which (imo) won't work. While smart watches introduced a lot of people to the idea of Wearable Technology (like my father), the screen is too small to use it efficiently.
> 
> I would recommend my father to use a Bluetooth keyboard, but that won't work with smart watches.
> 
> With Google Glass on the other hand, you have both your hands free, and you can (easily with some sideloaded apps) connect a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse to it.


Neptune pine is just big enough to be pretty efficient for entertainment even if not as efficient as a bigger screens.




Of course you not going to get that much production work on it.



ResleyZ said:


> I think the price will go down a lot ($400~$ 500), especially considering the hardware that's in it. Might need to save some money for it, but I'll definitely get one.


I actually think it will be lower than that. Unless they are adding more and/or stronger hardware, I see going for ~$230-$300.




Hop2089 said:


> The wearables market could be successful and accepted if they had some type of auto disable feature for the camera, you know some sensors so it could disable the camera automatically if the person wearing the device is in a public or government building. People would feel more at ease if there was such a feature on these devices.


 
Just like how phones and tablets cameras are disable for them to have become successful and accepted.

Seriously tho, I don't think people want their devices messed with,especially just because of the camera(s). Disabling hardware is extreme when it can just be solved by a cap or physical shutter.



Well, this is interesting.


----------



## Enigma Hall (Apr 15, 2014)

xxNathanxx said:


> I think you grossly underestimate the power of fashion. Please give me an example of something that looks really stupid but is used by many people.


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 16, 2014)

So, has anyone here bought one recently?


----------



## Nyancat (May 11, 2014)

Wearing the google glasses in public? No thanks. They would make you look so nerdy like you want to die they would be more of a home thing for me but then what's the point of having them at home? That's what an iPad is for.


----------



## Arras (May 11, 2014)

DarkCarbink said:


> Wearing the google glasses in public? No thanks. They would make you look so nerdy like you want to die they would be more of a home thing for me but then what's the point of having them at home? That's what an iPad is for.


 


Hells Malice said:


> How it looks doesn't mean shit. If it was mainstream then no one would bat an eyelash if you wore one. Even if it was stupid looking, if it was ACTUALLY useful/functional, then people wouldn't care. You need some more confidence in yourself if you're scared to wear something because of what others might say.
> 
> I'm sure it _will_ become mainstream. Just not now. Google Glass seems like it's going to be absurdly priced and no one in their right mind will buy the thing except to say they've got one.
> Plus the technology just isn't there. Google glass does practically nothing useful. But yeah, it will take off once the technology IS actually there to back it up.
> ...


----------

