Shawn Blanc

Episode 55 of The B&B Podcast, Ben and I talk about the clickety clackety Das Keyboard I received this week, as well as Google’s Project Glass, and UI-less UI design in iOS apps (such as Clear and Paper).

Apple filed a patent application in 2008, entitled “Head-Mounted Display Apparatus for Retaining a Portable Electronic Device with Display”.

In the patent description it talks about the glasses being like a remote viewer and controller for the iPhone. In Neil Hughes’s post on Apple Insider about the patent, he summarizes that “the form factor, the application states, would allow the user to ‘relax while viewing image based content on the head-mounted device because he does not have to hold onto the portable electronic device.'”

Suppose that Google’s Project Glass were not a stand-alone device, but rather a remote control that connects to your smartphone.

For one, that would answer some of Viticci’s questions about if the glasses will be “PC-free” and how would enter passwords onto them. But moreover, that could give some resolution to the juxtaposition about this technology that is supposedly there when you need it and out of your way when you don’t.

Say Project Glass were a remote control for your phone. If so, you could surely configure it to only display certain types of incoming messages, and maybe even only from certain types of people / networks. In that type of scenario, Glass would be more like a very advanced, visual version of a Bluetooth headset.

These are some good questions from Federico Viticci.

What I am most curious about — if not even somewhat befuddled by — is the juxtaposition between the project’s vision statement and the actual product shown in the concept video. I think the video and the idea, in and of itself, is cool. But that’s not my point of befuddlement. Rather, it’s that not one iota of Project Glass comes across to me as demonstrating a technology which is out of your way when you don’t need it.

How are a pair of 24/7-connected glasses, that you wear, and that pop up notifications before your eyes, more out of your way than a smartphone that’s hidden away in your pocket?

Why doesn’t Google just say it like it is? Putting it nicely, something like:

We think people want to be even more connected to their social networks. We know that you get incoming texts and tweets all the time and that you are always coming across things you want to share. And so why should the device you do this from — your smartphone — be kept always at arms distance, and hidden in your pocket?

Therefore we’ve thought up a product that we believe is more convenient to use than a smartphone.

Our idea behind Google Glass is that you can text and tweet and send emails 24/7 while keeping your hands free and not having to take a break from what you do throughout the day. No longer will you have to tediously pull your phone out of your pocket when you get an incoming text message. No longer will you have to waste time by pausing to launch the camera app, snap a photo, and then launch the Google+ app just to share a memory with your Circles.

We want to invent a pair of glasses that lets you do all this and more while walking to your favorite coffee shop and using our maps and location services to get there.

Putting it not as nicely, Google Glass doesn’t strike me as a product which gets out of the way but instead as a product which would only give more fuel that “always connected addiction“.

Looks like a clever solution to the MacBook’s power-adapter-cable-wrap-up conundrum. Sure beats using Gorilla Glue.

Federico Viticci:

Whilst apps have evolved in the past five years, the “excuse” has remained the same. Developers want us to ditch old, analog ways of managing our information to embrace the digital era. They want us to get rid of the post-it notes to buy a $0.99 todo manager.

But the digital era has already started. And it’s been one giant, massive boom. So wouldn’t it be more appropriate for these new, innovative apps to tell us that we should ditch old, PC-like complicated apps instead?

It used to be that the biggest free account you could have was 10GB (8GB max of referrals added to the 2GB free account). But as of yesterday Dropbox has doubled the referral limit, and you can now get up to 16GB free storage added to your 2GB plan. If you’re a paying user, the referral limit is double-doubled to 32GB (!).

On top of all that, the referral bonuses are retroactive. So check your storage because you may have some extra space that wasn’t there yesterday.

Joe Stracci:

I fail to see how wearing this technology on your face means it’s out of the way.

Same here. (Via DF.)

In his article about Project Glass for The New York Times, Nick Bilton, addresses the idea that the glasses could actually be a greater interference in people’s lives:

People I have spoken with who have have seen Project Glass said there is a misconception that the glasses will interfere with people’s daily life too much, constantly streaming information to them and distracting from the real world. But these people said the glasses actually free people up from technology.

One person who had used the glasses said: “They let technology get out of your way. If I want to take a picture I don’t have to reach into my pocket and take out my phone; I just press a button at the top of the glasses and that’s it.”

So, the glasses free you up from technology because you’re conveniently wearing them all the time?

Only difference is that Project Glass can be used while walking.

There’s no question that Chris Ware’s cover for The New Yorker from a few Octobers ago is just as relevant in 2009 as it is today (if not more so). And but so, if this New Yorker cover depicts an image of our culture where we’re stuck using technology that doesn’t help us explore our world and then put us back in the moment, how does Google’s Project Glass intend to solve that?

From the Google+ page:

We think technology should work for you—to be there when you need it and get out of your way when you don’t.

A group of us from Google[x] started Project Glass to build this kind of technology, one that helps you explore and share your world, putting you back in the moment. We’re sharing this information now because we want to start a conversation and learn from your valuable input. So we took a few design photos to show what this technology could look like and created a video to demonstrate what it might enable you to do.

The concept video is clever and cool, but riddle me this: how is it that a device which is more invasive and more ubiquitous within every moment of our day is better at being out of the way when we don’t need it?

Maybe I’m jumping to conclusions here and the intention of the Google[x] team is not to help solve the “smartphone / notifications / always connected addiction”. But the above blockquote sounds exactly like the same sentiment that was in Windows Phone 7’s Season of the Witch commercial.

The tagline in that Windows Phone commercial was: “It’s time for a phone to save us from our phones.”

Seems like the tagline for Google’s Project Glass could easily be a slightly modified version of what Windows used: “It’s time for some glasses to save us from our phones.”

And yet, with such a small user base, they’re somehow able to run a profitable service.

I sure wish AT&T would offer a plan like nTelos is: less minutes, more data. Anna and I share 700 voice minutes but only use about 200 — we have rollover minutes coming out our ears.

In short, Gabe doesn’t like it. I agree with most of his critiques — Paper’s rendering engine is great (and it looks absolutely fantastic on a Retina display), but there are a few areas the app feels lacking and at times frustrating.

As far as Paper’s lack of chrome, John Gruber described it as the tension between simplicity and obviousness. In his link to Paper last week, he wrote:

Note the complete lack of persistent on-screen UI chrome — there is a fork in this regard between Apple and third-party iOS developers. Cf. Clear for another recent example.

The tension is between simplicity and obviousness. Eliminating on-screen chrome is simpler, more elegant and beautiful. But Apple’s use of minimal but persistent on-screen chrome makes things more obvious. Big differences can result from a slight shift in priorities: simple and obvious vs. obvious and simple.

I don’t mind apps that lean towards the simple approach. People often relate gestures to the keyboard shortcuts of iOS. I am a keyboard shortcut junkie, and so if an app that I use has some clever and useful gestures as a replacement of UI chrome, then I’m fine with that.

And, as Sebastiaan de With points out, after 5 years of iOS, Apple is now starting to gradually move in that direction as well. And I’m glad — the new Lock Screen camera functionality is now one of my favorite things about iOS 5.