There are a series of hellacious Glass myths currently spreading like high school gossip. After quickly becoming a cultish symbol of fanboy affluence, the wearable technology has most recently earned an ugly stigma—partly political, partly not—that may doom the technology before it even reaches a wider consumer stage. So in an effort to combat this growing opinion of disdain, the search giant has opened up Glass sales to every U.S. resident, as if to say, This isn’t some elite club. Come, join the future. All you need is $1,500.
By inviting more members to participate, Google is attempting to preach the Glass gospel by showing “haters” that the conspicuous technology is no longer a privilege of society’s vanguard. Now, everyday people—teachers, neighbors, parents—can adorn their faces with the market’s most controversial beta technology, and experience what it’s like to “engage with the world.” But who is going to buy Glass that hasn’t already? Pay rent, or buy Glass is a dilemma I hope never crosses a person’s mind.
It’s not hard to see why Google opened its program up. The more people that purchase Glass now, the more evangelists the company has at its disposal in the future. More people like social media guru, Sarah Slocum, who has since proclaimed she’ll never take Glass off, even if it comes at the price of perpetual antagonism. That’s some endorsement. Imagine what it’ll be like in five, ten years from today, walking down a busy city street among a sea of similar “tech-worshipping geeks.” If you were scared of what Facebook might do with Oculus, the possibility of more humans with Glass is even more frightening.
Since Glass was unleashed to Explorers, news surrounding the technology has been predominantly negative. And part of that is Google’s fault, whether it be the astronomical beta price or endless reports about issues of privacy. But its wide denomination of users have also contributed to this perception of contempt by behaving like antisocial lunatics. Maybe with the help of a larger userbase, Google can clean up Glass’s image, and eventually generate hype when a final consumer model does arrive.
Sure, Glass is amazingly cool, and certainly possesses plenty of potential. As it stands, however, there doesn’t appear to be any immediate advantage to turning oneself into an automated cyborg. You might be able to pull down the five-day forecast faster, or reply to a text with your voice. But why get it if you already have a superphone capable of much more? If you do have the extra $1,500 lying around, what about Glass to you is worth the money? I would truly like to know.
Now that enrollment is open to anyone in the U.S.—and going quite swimmingly thus far—maybe you’ll convince me to join Google’s face army. That’s the whole idea here anyway.