Like someone else has brought up already, the existing applications we've seen of Glass are all fairly obvious from years of sci-fi.

The real magic sauce is execution.

More than that, the number of people who can pull off Glass in this world, other than Google, is close to zero. Nobody has the combination of hardware expertise, UX expertise (questionable in this respect, perhaps), and sheer big-data chops.

> "Someone like Apple could probably do it if they really wanted to take on Google in this market."

I don't think so. In fact I think Google is already outrunning Apple in many ways. Look at Google Now that ships with the latest Android, predictive tasking where your phone realizes what you want without you having to go get it.

While Apple is running around with the voice-recognition toy known as Siri. Heck, I'm a loyal iOS user and I never use Siri. It's a gimmick to demo to your friends, it's not smart or wide enough for any real practical use.

See also the looming, gigantic failure of iOS6 maps - a horrifically broken data set and search tech wrapped in excellent UX.

Or, if you're an iOS dev, take a look at iCloud, whose API is still horrifically broken a year after launch and notoriously difficult to work with.

I think Apple has more than amply proven that, when it comes to big data, machine learning, and AI, they have nothing on Google.

Fun anecdote: I was standing in Manhattan today and typed in "24 Orchard" (expecting to call up the address at 24 Orchard St) on iOS6 Maps. It took me to another state. This is asinine behavior I've never experienced with Google on any platform.

IMO the only company that stands a real chance at tackling Glass is Facebook. They're the only ones with the proven big data expertise, but they are also dramatically lacking in building devices and associated software.

This happens to me very regularly on Google Maps. I'll enter an address like "45 Tree Lane" and at worst it will take me to another state, and at best it will ask "did you mean 45 Tree Lane in California, or 45 Tree Lane in New York". I am located in California, you silly thing. Why would I need 45 Tree Lane, New York?

I would argue that Microsoft is a worthy competitor. They have an excellent Research department and have hardware experience (more so than facebook). They do have the big data chops - enough to put up a search engine, and they have a cloud infrastructure to go with it.

And also there's Amazon maybe going at it as the next gen reader or video viewer.

Why isn't the same true of touch screens?

Like the years of Star Trek:TNG and the IPad? ;)

All the rest I totally agree with.

While not on consumer hardware front, Google also develops (but not builds) its own quite customized servers. Facebook also does so, BTW, and in a nicer way (see opencompute.org).

They don't really give a shit whether they make the glasses or someone else does. So long as you allow open and unrestricted access to the internet Google makes money.

Google wants to make internet access ubiquitous and in doing so make everything else a commodity.

I think the early release and slow building up is how Google does new products. Most of the technology in their existing products we've seen slowly develop over time and this is one of their first entrances to a new market.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Lean-Startup-Entrepreneurs-ebook/d...