Does it really not matter whether Google Glass wins or loses?

It is undeniable that there have been many debates in the industry recently about whether Google Glass has failed. The reason for this is precisely because Google Glass, or more precisely, Google Glass represents a typical product form of future wearable devices (including products and applications), so it is understandable that the industry has paid attention to it.

However, some industry experts believe that it is meaningless to focus too much on Google Glass itself, because Google's real goal is to generate big data from smart glasses, and Google has already built a platform for wearable devices. If we understand correctly, what people who hold this view want to express is that the success or failure of Google Glass (the product itself) is irrelevant, and the Google Glass ecosystem and platform behind it are the most important.

In fact, at this point, the person first made a common sense mistake, that is, wearable devices are the same as the smartphone industry. To succeed, software and hardware are inseparable. Any negligence and deficiency in any aspect may lead to the failure of the entire ecosystem. Just in the smartphone industry, who can deny that the rise of Apple and Samsung and the fall of Nokia, Blackberry, and Palm (Note: these companies all have independent ecosystems) are not the result of the simultaneous action of software and hardware. Specifically in the same ecosystem, such as Google's Android, many manufacturers are in the Android camp (using the same ecosystem), why do some make a lot of money while others struggle on the brink of life and death? The design, material, configuration, comfort, price, etc. of the product itself are all closely related to the hardware. From these aspects, it is much more difficult for hardware to gain market and user recognition than the so-called software and applications, which is related to the healthy development of software and applications or the entire ecosystem.

Back to Google Glass itself, if its high price, short battery life, product form, privacy and other hardware or product form related defects cannot be solved well, it will be a wearable product for a niche market at best. Since it is a niche market, where does the big data that the expert said Google needs come from? As for the fact that developers stay away from Google Glass, we think it just reflects from one side that Google Glass itself lacks appeal to the market and users. If developers leave, how can the platform and ecosystem of Google Glass grow or even exist?

Speaking of system platforms, we believe that if we only look at the product itself, Google Glass is far from being ready as experts say. This is why Google Glass has been launched for more than two years but has few followers. It is also for this reason that the success of Google Glass itself is particularly important and precious. Because according to experts, the purpose of Google launching Google Glass is not to make smart glasses hardware itself, but to use the platform to let other manufacturers follow. However, the reality is that everyone is waiting to see whether Google Glass itself can attract the market and users. In other words, Google Glass is a benchmark, but if the benchmark is not successful, how many followers will there be? Another point that needs to be added is that if the Google Glass platform referred to by the expert is Android Wear, then there are only about 100 applications at present, and the slow growth of applications is precisely due to the low shipment volume of smart watches themselves, which leads to the lack of enthusiasm and investment of developers in the development of the platform.

In addition, when referring to Google Glass, the expert said that Google has not considered the commercialization prospects of Google Glass at all, proving that the success or failure of Google Glass itself is not important to Google. Then the question is, the expert also said that Google hopes to build platforms and applications, and let relevant partners promote their own smart glasses. However, according to the logic of Google's promotion of smart glasses speculated by the expert, the hardware is not commercialized (not expecting the hardware itself to make money), which is completely different from the original intention of most followers who still expect the hardware itself to make money. If the hardware cannot make money, why should they promote the smart glasses product? Isn't it just to make wedding clothes for Google?

Finally, the experts also proposed the theory that the ultimate user stickiness in the mobile Internet era is based on wearable devices. There is nothing wrong with this theory, and we agree with it, but the reality is that almost everyone is inseparable from mobile phones (experts also admit it), which makes Google Glass itself (hardware) particularly important. In other words, in the future, when everyone is inseparable from mobile phones (product form), how to make them even more inseparable from smart glasses (hardware). This undoubtedly requires Google Glass itself to give the market and users a reason that exceeds the current mobile phone user stickiness, or at least has the same stickiness. But from the current perspective, it is obvious that the market and users have not seen or accepted this reason. This is also something that Google Glass hardware itself needs to think about and improve in the future.

To sum up, we believe that as a benchmark product of smart glasses, one of the future wearable device forms, the success or failure of Google Glass is very important. If Google cannot overcome the shortcomings of the current hardware itself and cannot show the industry that the hardware itself can be commercialized, I believe that the so-called system and big data platform behind it are just illusions.

As a winner of Toutiao's Qingyun Plan and Baijiahao's Bai+ Plan, the 2019 Baidu Digital Author of the Year, the Baijiahao's Most Popular Author in the Technology Field, the 2019 Sogou Technology and Culture Author, and the 2021 Baijiahao Quarterly Influential Creator, he has won many awards, including the 2013 Sohu Best Industry Media Person, the 2015 China New Media Entrepreneurship Competition Beijing Third Place, the 2015 Guangmang Experience Award, the 2015 China New Media Entrepreneurship Competition Finals Third Place, and the 2018 Baidu Dynamic Annual Powerful Celebrity.