This may be the worst, least informative technology website I've ever seen – and that is a high (low?) bar. It fails the "what is it?" test with spectacular aplomb. And never have I learned less from a "learn more" page. “Music should keep you moving, not make you look at your phone.” Um, yeah, ok, thanks for that helpful information.
I feel like we are pushing this wearable tech thing too hard. Pushing all the cool ways we can put stuff into things (ordering pizza from your shoes, snapchatting from your glasses) but they ALWAYS boil down to "You can touch XYZ instead of your phone to pause your music".<p>When we will get some decent applications, instead of enhancing the form
C: That'll be $9.99<p>A: Sorry, I forgot my jacket<p>C: Oh, we have some convenience nike bio-gloves if you want ...<p>A: Not biosynced to me.<p>C: Oh. Uhmm ... face scan?<p>A: I'm not American, I'm not in your DB.<p>C: Bitcoin?<p>D: No jacket.<p>C: What do we do then?<p>D: Do you take cash young robot?<p>C: You mean like paper? No, it's 2040. Paper cash is unhygienic.<p>D: So no coffee?<p>C: I guess not. Sorry. Next.
I dig it. Ever since 'smart watches' started I've felt like grown men wearing digital watches is a bit awkward. I'd prefer more subtle things like Google Glass or tech woven into clothing fabrics.<p>We definitely need to get beyond smartphones and into more ubiquitous form factors so we don't evolve into creatures with our upper backs and necks contorted downwards.<p>I always liked this UI from Mission Impossible 5: <a href="https://imgur.com/6H1dJ2n" rel="nofollow">https://imgur.com/6H1dJ2n</a>
Why get this denim jacket when you can get an iPhone and an Apple Watch?<p>Jacquard only puts limits on you as it's stuck on that specific denim jacket. Apple Watch on the other hand works with any jacket. You don't even need a jacket with Apple watch, you can wear whatever you want, whenever you want, and it would still work compared to Jacquard which wouldn't.
And Project Soli.<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QNiZfSsPc0" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QNiZfSsPc0</a>
If you're listening to music on the go, you're probably wearing headphones or earbuds, right? Why not just build the controls into that and then you don't need an expensive jacket to handle input?<p>To answer my own question: because then you can't sell an expensive jacket that does what's already possible without it.
> Jacquard enabled/You empowered<p>> Jacquard by Google transforms clothing. It’s an entirely new take on wearables that lets you do more than ever with the things that you love and wear every day. With Jacquard technology woven into the very fabric of your clothes, you can connect to your digital life instantly and effortlessly. With a literal brush of your cuff, you can navigate your life while living it.<p>I can't tell — is this some sort of late or early April Fool's joke? Or have I finally just become such an old fogey that I'm yelling at those goshdurn kids to quit sequencing their nanites on my lawn?
The video gives a lot more detail than the website: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9ADVeNpypk" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9ADVeNpypk</a><p>No clue how to pronouce Jacquard btw. :(
Wondering about privacy issues though, seeing as google collects "location information", isn't this just another step to surveillance, etc.<p>I'm kind of more interested in clothing that doesn't collect my data.
"The Jacket is designed to withstand up to 10 washes with the Jacquard snap tag removed but your experience may vary by usage and wash conditions"<p>"Note: You can wear the Jacket in the rain, but if the Jacket becomes too wet it may not reliably detect gestures. Allow the Jacket to dry and resume using. The snap tag is resistant to rain and splashing, but it is not fully waterproof"<p>Sure it's really "Specifically tailored with the urban cyclist in mind"...that's one wet, smelly, denim jacket after a few rides in the UK.
Joseph Marie Jacquard was a genius [1]. Google should not use his name and implicitly appropriate his invention <i>without proper acknowledgement.</i> It bothers me that Google hijacked Jacquard's name for their own project, especially with such emphasis on looming.<p>With decency, they could at a minimum have acknowledged his creations, influence, and inspiration. Their about page [2] does not acknowledge Jacquard's existence. Even worse, Google has trademarked the name "Jacquard", to appropriate that name in relation to tech-infused weaving [3].<p>Contrast with the Pascal programming language -- Blaise Pascal was honored explicitly when this language was named after him; the creator, Niklaus Wirth, never dreamed of using this name without explicit tribute, since the naming was <i>intended</i> as a tribute.<p>[1] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Marie_Jacquard" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Marie_Jacquard</a><p>[2] <a href="https://atap.google.com/jacquard/about/" rel="nofollow">https://atap.google.com/jacquard/about/</a><p>[3] <a href="https://www.trademarkia.com/jacquard-86643715.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.trademarkia.com/jacquard-86643715.html</a>
I'm not seeing the use case here, and that's probably why the marketing is so vague. There just isn't a solid one.<p>There's really no need for this to control music. AirPods now have touch and voice controls built in. Smart earbuds are a much better solution for audio control than smart clothing that controls dumb earbuds.<p>And if you're getting turn-by-turn directions you'll probably have your AirPods in as well, and you can just ask Siri for updates. That's so much more flexible -- you can ask for so much more than you could via preprogrammed swipes.<p>That pretty much just leaves the use case of haptic notifications for people who don't want to wear a watch / wristband. I think if you care about this you'll at least put on a fitbit during your commute. And that works with all clothing.
I find the gesture choices interesting and suggestive of future directions for interaction with wearable devices. Their help article on gestures lists the four supported gestures with GIFs. One detail worth noting: "We recommend using four fingers when performing gestures. Note: To avoid unintentional activation, the jacket will not respond to gestures performed with a single finger."<p><a href="https://support.google.com/jacquard/answer/7537511?hl=en&ref_topic=7516780" rel="nofollow">https://support.google.com/jacquard/answer/7537511?hl=en&ref...</a>
How disposable is this product?<p>Many products create a waste burden that is an after thought. Clothing has a good disposal path - reuse, recycle or just throw out.<p>But what about wearable clothing? Since it is fashion it will have a short life cycle.
I'd be curious what the plan for recycling these fabrics is going to be. Microfibers from artificial fabrics are really a problem in watersupplies now. What will this bring?
If they can't even make the product good enough for people to want to buy it without making the sensors stand out as a conversation piece, then what's the point?
This is the definition of a gimmick. How is this superior to the various existing bluetooth-based solutions. Need to navigate without looking at a screen? Bluetooth headphones or a bluetooth connection to your car. Need to skip a track when listening to music? Bluetooth headphones or a bluetooth connection to.... Need to "handle a call"? Bluetooth head-
So, this is a smart watch that is worn on your jacket. What happens when you step into a climate-'controlled' space, where its too warm to wear a jacket? Or when you go out in the summer, where it's too warm to wear a jacket? Or when you go out in the winter, where you wear a coat, instead of a jacket?
A lot of hate going on in the comments here, but as somebody who doesn't really like wearing watches - I'd take the idea of "Subtly vibrate on text/notification received" being built into my jacket over it being built into a smartwatch. Would love to know how much this costs though.
When you can't tell the difference between a joke and reality it can't be good.<p>In this case, I guess this is a real thing, but reading the website it seems like it could just as easily be a joke.<p>Kinda like the Antifa spoof pages on Facebook, which were hilarious if you knew what they were spoofs.
This comes to mind: <a href="https://hackernoon.com/for-the-love-of-god-please-tell-me-what-your-company-does-c2f0b835ab92" rel="nofollow">https://hackernoon.com/for-the-love-of-god-please-tell-me-wh...</a>
Looking at their video for the jacket, all the gesturing was done around the wrist area, where my Android wear watch already sits.<p>They need a "killer" use case for this, but everyday jacket wearing folks can pass on this without missing much
If there is 1 high tech feature that I want from a clothing (I am willing to ignore everything else) is the ability to charge all of our gadgets wirelessly.<p>I don’t care about controlling music player from my shirt, my phone already dies that.
So basically after reading the comments I should make my own sensor people can hold in their hands or pin to their sleeves then market it? Who wears Jean jackets? Lol
So the exact same haptics tricks that homebrew folks have been using for years, but with more micronization?<p>Okay. Sure. But they'd better not cut corners in the security of the handshaking and integration or someone's going to be able to hack your pants and make them buzz forever.
<a href="http://www.levi.com/US/en_US/category/men/collections/levi-collections-commuter" rel="nofollow">http://www.levi.com/US/en_US/category/men/collections/levi-c...</a>
Why is this only in skinny hipster sizes like Slim Fit Levi's 511s.<p>Damn you malnourished SF hipsters (I guess you cant afford to eat with Bay Area prices, also you keep buying new phones instead of food).