What shoddy reporting!<p>...<p>"Reportedly the new version of Google Glass also sports improved battery life, partly because of the Intel Atom CPU. The specific clock speed is unknown, but this tiny SoC has proven itself by powering most Android Wear devices."<p>...<p>NONE of the current Wear devices run Atom chips. They all run ARM Cortex-A7 chips, except Moto360, which runs a Cortex-A8 !
Google Glass never died. I don't understand how people come to this conclusion when they're also aware that it was handed off to Tony Fadell of the Nest division to manage.<p>Going on a tangent, to this day I fail to understand why Apple didn't even make a bid on Nest. At the very least it would keep someone with both good taste and a strong enough force of personality to make it happen, away from Google's hands. Instead Apple spends over twice as much on Beats... Did Fadell hate his tenure at Apple so much that he wouldn't even consider a bid from them or vice versa?
"...aimed at the enterprise market"<p>A relative who is in a professional field (not in tech) uses Google Glass to record YouTube videos live on the job. He has probably 300 hours worth of videos published and is now at the point where anything he publishes gets 5k+ views on YouTube.<p>Just saying this because I see applications like this really taking off. Perhaps security guards could use these on the job or even cops (eventually) for their own safety.<p>Trying to stay positive about this.
At least this time it has a clearer target, the enterprise market. Nice try.<p>I think last time Google Glass failed because Google didn't demonstrate any practical scenario using this product. It's like, Google was telling us, "this is a cool product but nobody knows the application of it, so, use your imagination!" Users get lost when you define such a big scope.<p>This time Google should definitely learn from Hololens. Show some killer apps on Google Glass and let users feel excited about it, not only because it is cool, but also useful.
What happens inside google does not matter, what happens is when they release it next time and if they do as bad a job at this as they did with the previous roll-out then it might as well be dead. I'm curious how big a percentage of those who bought 'glass' the first time around are going to spend their money on the next round given what they know today.
Enterprise market is where this needs to grow first. Not the consumer. There are great use cases in various professions, from law enforcement to medicine. Imagine a surgeon that can get a HUD with patient vitals and/or send a live feed to a remote surgeon for feedback during the procedure. I don't think consumers are ready, but there are so many industries that would readily shell out $1500 a piece for these.
It's hardly a scoop that Glass is alive - I've been seeing recruiting adds for "Software Engineer, Google (Glass)" on LinkedIn for a while. They're not exactly making a secret of it.
One application of Google glass is lifelog which is described in Ted Chiang's story: The Truth of Fact, the Truth of Feeling <a href="https://subterraneanpress.com/magazine/fall_2013/the_truth_of_fact_the_truth_of_feeling_by_ted_chiang" rel="nofollow">https://subterraneanpress.com/magazine/fall_2013/the_truth_o...</a>
Being in the enterprise market requires that you actually know how to sell into an enterprise. What has Google done where they have been successful at that?<p>This feels like Google scrambling to catch up to the Hololens and sort of making it up as they go along. Nothing to see here.