Google Glass gets detailed at IO, costs $1500

After Google's exciting Glass demonstration at the I/O conference earlier Wednesday, which featured skydiving, stunt biking and rappelling all streamed through a Google+ Hangouts video conferencing session, some details on the futuristic device have begun to emerge; Engadget compiled a list of some of the information they heard at the conference.

Currently, the existing prototypes of Google Glass do not include any sort of built-in WWAN connectivity, even the ones used in the skydiving stunt. 3G and/or 4G connectivity has not been ruled out for when the devices hit production, but the general idea is that Glass will connect to nearby WiFi hotspots or tether to a smartphone to connect to the Internet, rather than doing it directly through the device itself.

Glass will receive input via voice commands and a touch-sensitive pad that can understand gestures, and remote control through smartphones is also a possibility. Glass has an accelerometer and gyroscope built in, which will allow users to nod or shake their heads to give commands.

At least some amount of local storage will be included, but in practice the device will stream "most everything" live to the Internet; the local storage will be available for capturing video in areas where wireless data isn't available.

Engadget also confirmed that the internal battery sits just behind the right ear, although capacity and battery life was not confirmed. The Google Glass team is also experimenting with different colors for the wearable technology. Orange, white, black and blue models were spotted at the I/O conference, though that doesn't mean that the production models will include or be limited to that palette.

Finally, for those at I/O, a prototype of the product can be purchased for $1500.00.

Source: Engadget

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Interview: We chat with Runic about Torchlight II

Next Story

Team Fortress 2 Pyromania update goes live

35 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

...wondering how many fools will walk into poles, fall into holes, trip into fountains or down a flight of stairs because their focus is on the lens instead of what is beyond it.

Rohdekill said,
...wondering how many fools will walk into poles, fall into holes, trip into fountains or down a flight of stairs because their focus is on the lens instead of what is beyond it.

Not different from all the fools that do that already when walking around looking at their smartphones.

este said,
I will pass on the glasses version and wait until they can implement this technology via lasik surgery

Yeah, that when things start getting creepy...

este said,
I will pass on the glasses version and wait until they can implement this technology via lasik surgery

Dating a hot girl? I'm hacking into your eyeball to see some sexy time.

Not a bad price for a prototype version. If it goes in to mass production the price will drop dramatically.

Even if you forget the fact it's built in to glasses, it's a decent camera with auto cloud sync and voice (possibly gesture) control. You'd be paying a hefty price for that right now.

I don't see the widespread draw for this. I guess if you're doing the types of stuff like skydiving or movie filming or something of the sort where you can't use your hands then yeah, why not use this and stream it live online. But for the general public? Why would your average consumer think about getting something like this?

GP007 said,
I don't see the widespread draw for this. I guess if you're doing the types of stuff like skydiving or movie filming or something of the sort where you can't use your hands then yeah, why not use this and stream it live online. But for the general public? Why would your average consumer think about getting something like this?

Not so sure about this........ Ten years ago nobody was thinking to publish all their life details...... Then came the plague, AKA "Social networks" and advertisers wet dreams became reality.
TBH as you said, and only after thoroughly checking privacy policies, I could see myself wearing them while skying or doing other fun activities; everyday? No way.
Furthermore if these devices will go for sale it will be mainly an US thing. In Europe you cold not go around filming people, it is against the law.

Fritzly said,

Not so sure about this........ Ten years ago nobody was thinking to publish all their life details...... Then came the plague, AKA "Social networks" and advertisers wet dreams became reality.
TBH as you said, and only after thoroughly checking privacy policies, I could see myself wearing them while skying or doing other fun activities; everyday? No way.
Furthermore if these devices will go for sale it will be mainly an US thing. In Europe you cold not go around filming people, it is against the law.

Yeah, that's why this seems like a niche thing, it makes sense to film some event where you can't use your hands and it replaces the traditional helmet cameras which are just huge and balky. But as far as a mass market consumer item? I just don't see it.

As others have said, the price for consumers has not been even hinted at yet, this is for devs for a very early dev release version - its not in mass production and this is available so people can start to see what apps can be made. Its usual for non production/prototype items to cost a lot of money.

*disclaimer - I' not a fanboy of Google, just someone with common sense, I use a Lumia and windows 8, but I think glass look good - I also think iOS is nice and apple hardware is of top quality but overpriced. Please don't bring fan boyism into this in reply to my comment, if you do your a retard.

this thing is probably exaggerated, why? why would people want to wear a glass ? They can do it better without any glass. Pricing is even more deserve applause. WOW!

Master of Earth said,
this thing is probably exaggerated, why? why would people want to wear a glass ? They can do it better without any glass. Pricing is even more deserve applause. WOW!

Wow at your ignorance. As others have mentioned the price is not for the consumer. It's not even for the developer. it is for the US Google I|O Attendees who happen to be developers. You see how limited the audience is now?

You posted this nonsense on Facebook too, It's NOT $1500, the DEVELOPMENT version cost $1500 to a very select few, people who don't mind stuff going wrong with it, people who want to develop things with it. When it actually is released to the public, WHICH IS HAS NOT BEEN, it will cost a lot less because it will have a large scale production, at the moment it does not, that's why it costs so much for the units they do have.

oh you people are sad.
you make a big deal saying the price is too much for this yet its the first product of its kind yet you would buy a new mac just because its apple.
grow up

Yes because not liking this instantly means you're an apple fan. It can't just be because it is overpriced for what it does, regardless of it being the first device. If it did everything the videos showed then yeah I'd say $1,500 is steep but since its a first device of its kind I can understand it. But paying that much for a camera that can stream stuff? I'll stick with my phone (which isn't an iPhone btw).

Maybe you should take your own advice and grow up?

ambient3 said,
oh you people are sad.
you make a big deal saying the price is too much for this yet its the first product of its kind yet you would buy a new mac just because its apple.
grow up

the $1,500 is for the prototype, do you people read? This is in no way a retail cost, the thing isnt even in production, and who knows if it EVER will go into mass production.

ambient3 said,
oh you people are sad.
you make a big deal saying the price is too much for this yet its the first product of its kind yet you would buy a new mac just because its apple.
grow up

Hmmm... not sure if you're serious...

ambient3 said,
oh you people are sad.
you make a big deal saying the price is too much for this yet its the first product of its kind yet you would buy a new mac just because its apple.
grow up

You've been registered here 4 days and have 25 posts.. and you decide that's appropriate to go around insulting other forum users. You're a keeper!

Chicane-UK said,

You've been registered here 4 days and have 25 posts.. and you decide that's appropriate to go around insulting other forum users. You're a keeper!


I have been registered for 9 months and had my first account back in 2001.
I

While the concept has a lot of potential, at the moment you're basically paying $1500 for a pair of glasses with a camera built-in that can stream video. Meanwhile - in the real world - everyone else can just stick to a mobile phone, which has exactly the same functionality for a fraction of the price.

kcbworth said,
How's that horse and carriage going for you?

It's great. I've got a device that has more functionality, is way cheaper, and doesn't make me look like a total douche.

THolman said,

It's great. I've got a device that has more functionality, is way cheaper, and doesn't make me look like a total douche.

The article is misleading: the offer is for $1,500 for the I/O attendees/developers, not for the general public.

Fritzly said,

The article is misleading: the offer is for $1,500 for the I/O attendees/developers, not for the general public.

Still makes you look like a douche

Fritzly said,

TBH your reply is a perfect example of what characterized a douche....

I'm just a friendly neighborhood troll, you've hurt my feelings

Singh400 said,
Amend the title please. It's $1,500 for the I/O attendees/devs. It is NOT for general public consumption.
Does the title say anything about the public consumer?