Many great scientists and technology aficionados have claimed the theory that in a non-distant future the range and power of technology will exceed humanity. Many of the emerging technologies in twenty first are substantiating this claim by bridging the gap between definition of machines and humans, i.e., physical world and virtual world.
The contemporary world is advancing at a very fast pace in the avenues related to artificial intelligence, augmented reality and virtual reality. The concept of ‘smart’ technologies primarily originates from the aforementioned concepts. The major products in the ‘smart’, categories include smartphones and wearable devices like smartwatches, smart rings etc. with smart glasses being one of the latest entrants to this category.
The following section differentiates the conceptual difference between augmented reality and virtual reality. This differentiation is necessary to be drawn out to illustrate concepts in following parts of the project.
Virtual reality: in this the device in question generates a virtual world for the user to interact in. The users are immersed into the virtual world, where their movements and action create stimulus and consequently response in the virtual world with minimum to zero interaction with the real world. Ideally, the user is not affected by any other external light source from the real world. A completely apt but fictional example of fully developed virtual reality would be ‘Holodeck’ from the famous movie ‘Star Trek’.
Augmented reality: it is similar to virtual reality but with some major inherent differences. In this the real world is augmented or enhanced by the device in use. Essentially, the device provides supplementary light source that does not limit real world perception but gives additional visuals, features and functions that the user can view and interact with. Basically, it establishes a communication link between user and the computing device.
Diminished reality: this is novel and nascent concept that is used to describe the control of device over the users’ reality and the capability to mask or alter the real or digital information.
This paper emphasizes on the product Google Glass that is based and developed on the concept of augmented reality, virtual reality and diminished reality primarily undertaken by the company Google. Although the product was conceptually superior, the product failed to become a commercial success in the present tech-market.
The objective of the report is to study and analyze the reasons for failure of the product and why the product could not create the expected repercussions. The first model of Google Glass can be regarded as a complete failure, whereas the upgraded version, i.e. Google Glass 2.0, can be regarded as partial success as it is used quite extensively in industrial applications.
Two major reasons are attributed to failure of the product in the market. The first one is privacy issues. Privacy violation was posing to be a big problem as the product has capability to breach the privacy of non-users without their consent. The regulations and clauses regarding such issues does not exist now, which makes the use of the product commercially very cumbersome. The other reason that is attributed to the failure is its physical design as it is extremely fragile and not robust for the users. Another contributing reason is the market price for the glass was quite higher than what the general demography of potential users could afford. These reasons along with other factors will be scrutinized in the following part of the report to arrive at a suitable conclusion.
Business Background
X-the Moonshot factory was created by google in 2010 as an American semi-secret research and development facility. It operates as a branch of Alphabet Inc. “Google Glass is created by Google X Lab, which operated in Google on other forward-looking innovations. In 2011, the press published the first reports about Google's ambitious project to create a wearable computing system. On 18 August 2011, Google submitted a patent application to the United States Patent and Mark Office, issued on 21 February 2013 under the number 20130044042” (Klein et al., 2015).
Google Glass was developed with the intention of providing omnipresent computing goods. It is estimated to be $200 USD to manufacture one glass, but it was about $1500 USD on the market to buy one glass. Google Glass could take pictures, record videos, run specific android apps, and use them to make video calls. It could also retain information that a user receives and show results that are relevant to the user experience this instantly. Users gave the commands through voice and some through hand motion-based actions to run certain actions through the window. Google Glass has been a product that can't fit into any market. Designers and venture stakeholders felt the innovation will take a big step in as a commodity that users would have to see and believe in, but the project failed as holders of Google Glass never wanted to wear the glass in public forum as the product's design itself became a confidentiality issue and people were also reluctant to wear the glass in social life.
The Glass proved to be completely unreliable as a technology made by a tech giant like google with the finest engineers in the world.
Google Glass's price was highly-priced and even the normal tech users struggled to buy one from the field. The functions behind a glass were a major failure for both the product and the project involving a variety of staff. In reality, sometimes in the public forum buyers are ridiculed when they saw wearing Google Glass.
The following four factors were the cause of glass failure: functionality, cost, design and privacy.
Technical Description
The Google Glass consist of the following hardware specification:
Micro-USB: used for Glass charging. This port can also be used for connecting USB accessories like headphones.
Compatibility: it is compatible with both phones and tablet. Needs phone to have Google Glass App with GPS and SMS messaging facility.
Connectivity: Wi-Fi -802.1b/g Bluetooth.
Camera: photos -5Mb and video 720p.
Storage: 12GB with cloud storage.
Standard Criteria
A business' metrics for success and failure depend on how quickly a company meets the end-user client. A plan may fail if the project manager fails to meet any of the above criteria for success. “Success at the same time is, overall, seen as a collaborative achievement involving joint-team action to identify problems and solutions to these problems and taking action to effectively deliver action, while learning from the process and fine-tuning strategy and tactics employed in a constructive and reflective way” (Steinfort & H.T. Walker, 2007). Google Glass struggled because none of its clients could be pleased with the venture and the service became rejected on the market. The data privacy was another major problem that the project team didn’t think about the consequences. Another major issue is information protection that the project team didn't care about the consequences.
Success Criteria
A design success depends on the following factors with which the venture could last longer, such as pre-or post-project selling duration, value deliverables, spent cash and financials, and customer satisfaction.
Quality: work quality depends on the successful completion of the project.
Time: a plan should be delivered on time and should be reviewed on schedule upon completion of the project.
Money: funding for any plan is an important issue. Finance requires one money for making the work in two different ways, such as good use of cash for asset and then the money involved upon completion of the project. The money that comes to the company as a benefit.
Customer satisfaction: the main goal of any successful project relies on consumer satisfaction at the end when the consumer gets it on schedule with what is needed.
Failure Factors
Technology/ technical domain. The use of inappropriate technology or the application of incorrect technical expertise will lead a plan to collapse, and even at the deployment point the project would crash. External structure was another reason for failure in Google Glass. “Broken or damaged chances are more. Though Google is expecting these glasses to be as modest as achievable, they are kind of breakable. Users will have to handle it with care” (S. Mankar, 2015).
Customer rejection. The underlying variable in the loss of a plan is the amount of negative feedback from consumers/clients that are contrasted with the acceptance rate. After the release of Google Glass, consumers assumed the apps might create a problem in social circumstances as there were data privacy concerns and customers started to oppose the item culminating in the collapse of the venture.
Communication. Incorrect interaction is also important when considering task failure. The interaction with customers, customers, shareholders and both internal and external project units must be clear from the beginning to the end.
Project management and preparation. Plan planning involves appropriate plan scheduling and prompt implementation.
Cost factor. The project cost is yet another factor of project performance and the cost of the project covers both within and outside the organization. Goods such as Google Glass are known to be produced of high standard material and assumed to be manufactured for long-lasting in high-end products, but the cost involved was varying and product quality could not suit the marked costs. “The current price for Google glasses is somewhere between US$500 and US$1500. But mostly they are made with commonly available parts or that are easy to manufacture” (Garg, Bhardwaj & Gupta, 2015).
Conclusion
The project's reliability and performance are of primary importance. The project must be made sure that it is developed in accordance with the project's prerequisite and performance, efficiency and usability. The plan should be managed and adequately controlled. During the design phase, the stakeholders and consumers involved in the project should be clear as they are the viable market for the organization's company. The project's context is critical and needs to be properly described and understood. A small change in specification variance would have a dramatic impact on the design. The company should also have a highly skilled technical team as well as business team and operate hand-in-hand within the venture to prevent any threats or problems during the design.
Google Glass has become a disaster venture, and google has re-initiated the campaign and rendered glasses with higher end quality for business applications. Google Glass version 2.0 has now seen a significant growth in the consumer software industry.