Why Google Glass May not Be Ready for Prime Time

The director of Intel Labs explains why products like Google Glass aren't quite ready for the mainstream

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

PROFILE

NAME
Justin R. Rattner

TITLE
Intel Senior Fellow and director and chief technology officer, Intel Labs


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


LOCATION
Hillsboro, Ore.

Why are wearable computers getting so much attention recently?
The sensor technology, the communications technology and the computer technology have all reached a point where, for the first time, the potential for highvolume consumer wearables is real. That’s what’s new. Today you can put essentially everything that’s in a smartphone into a set of eyeglasses, although they would be a bit heavy. That potentially becomes an interesting platform for communications.

Why do you say “potentially”?
We think there is a grand challenge when it comes to eyewear. No one’s been able to demonstrate a high-performance see-through display. This side-view display that you see in [Google’s smart glasses] Google Glass and in the Oakley Airwave snow goggles is, in some sense, a recognition of the fact that no one has solved the transparent display problem even though there are any number of people working on it. [Such a high-performance see-through display would have] an optical engine for the left and right eyes that would project images into the lenses. The display would be constructed in such a way that it keeps the virtual images in front of you, regardless of where you turn your head or your gaze. So if you’re walking in New York, you will see “Empire State Building” or “Statue of Liberty” hovering over those physical objects. That’s where everybody wants to be as soon as possible.

There have been a handful of companies, such as Lumus, that have had these kinds of technologies for a long time, but typically they’ve either been strictly in development or sold for research in augmented reality. Generally speaking, see-through displays have been too bulky and too dim to bring to market.

Why can’t these see-through augmented-reality glasses be made more like a regular pair of eyeglasses or sunglasses?
It really requires a very high level of optical engineering to do it right. [But] the people working on these technologies have mostly been small, underfunded startups or people who are interested only in the optics and not in actually building a complete [smartglasses] product.

Are there any wearable systems that are delivering what people want?
One of our favorite ones is Looxcie, a little clip-on video camera. That notion of continuously recording your life is a pretty interesting one. What you really want, though, is good face recognition so when you go to a cocktail party, a little thing in your ear says, “Hey, that’s Bob Jones, your high school buddy.” You can walk up to that person and say, “Oh, Bob, how are you doing? So good to see you.” I guarantee you’ll sell a million of those in about a week.

Larry Greenemeier is the associate editor of technology for Scientific American, covering a variety of tech-related topics, including biotech, computers, military tech, nanotech and robots.

More by Larry Greenemeier
Scientific American Magazine Vol 309 Issue 1This article was published with the title “The Future of Smart Glasses” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 309 No. 1 (), p. 21
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0713-21

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe