Why Google Glass Isn't the Segway

Whenever I go out in public wearing Google Glass, inevitably somebody (sometimes several somebodies) asks me about it. Typically they already know what it is and are curious how I'm enjoying it. But sometimes it's just a curious person, like the chap in the elevator one morning who simply asked me what kind of glasses I was wearing.

Obviously, someone wearing Google Glass stands out. It really doesn't matter what else you're wearing, or if you don one of the "visors" that come with Glass, people are going to notice the computer hanging off of your face, no matter what. Some, including Neil Gaiman, think it looks just too damn silly to wear.

SEE ALSO: Beyond Barrel Roll: 10 Hidden Google Tricks

The ostentatiousness of Glass has led many to compare it to another conspicuous device: theSegway. 

The label "Segway for your face" has stuck to Glass like a stubborn suction cup

The label "Segway for your face" has stuck to Glass like a stubborn suction cup since the gadget was first unveiled in early 2012. This tweet might be the first time the connection was made, but it's repeated often — most recently by a venture capitalist at the Wearable Tech Expo in New York City, GigaOMreported.

The analogy feels apt: Device is announced — even hyped — to great praise from high-minded geeks, but the general public deems said device too dorky-looking to succeed. The product may indeed have incredible promise, but the mass market won't accept something that makes them look less hip than Steve Urkel.

The Trouble With Segway

The comparison is misguided, however, mainly because it gets wrong the reason — actually, reasons — for the Segway's failure. Certainly, the Segway had a strong goofball factor, but it was dependent on external factors to work properly, and the benefit to the customer was unclear. It also carried an obscenely high price.

In case you somehow missed the Segway saga, here's a primer: Invented by Dean Kamen, the Segway personal transporter (a.k.a. Project Ginger) promised a revolutionary new way to get around. Smaller than a bicycle, it let riders get from place to place on a powered device that took virtually no training to use. If you wanted to get somewhere faster than walking, and didn't want to sweat, it was a seemingly great option.

In practice, not so much. The Segway didn't really fit on sidewalks (indeed, it was banned from them in many cities), and it was too slow to really belong in the bicycle lane. To work as promised, it needed some kind of "Segway-only" surface, or just a lot of wide paths that aren't very common in urban areas.

In other words, the Segway required a shift in infrastructure to deliver on its potential, a shift most cities didn't want to make. It also didn't give the rider any exercise, and there was no way to transport passengers or cargo — so it did nothing to replace the bike or the car. On top of that, it was slower than both, so it wasn't really suitable for commutes, either. Finally, the price tag (about $5,000) ensured the Segway would never be a mass-market device.

A Flawed Mirror

It remains to be seen whether Google Glass will be a success, but the same factors don't apply. First of all, Glass doesn't depend on its environment in order to work. Sure, you need a wireless connection, but those are plentiful. And Google, being the all-encompassing Internet company it is, can use its own platform for all of Glass' core services (maps, sharing, cloud storage).

Concerns about privacy — many of them overblown, in my opinion — have led to some knee-jerk bans of the device in some bars, and even legislation against wearing it while driving (most notably in West Virgina). But since those places and situations are very specific and localized, they don't leave Glass owners completely at sea.

Second, there really is a value-add with Glass. As a parent who is continually trying to capture moments with my kids, the camera alone makes Glass a viable product, and others (such asGoPro) have found there's a sizable, if niche market for head-mounted photography.

With Glass, though, you get so much more

With Glass, though, you get so much more. There's instant sharing of any media you capture, there's voice-guided navigation directly in your field of view. There's email, news stories, sports scores — the wealth of information on the Internet, really — all ready for you to engage with as soon as you tap the touchpad. Over the last few months there have been several occasions where I turned to Glass for information that I wouldn't have bothered to look up on a smartphone.

Yes, price is a big unknown right now. The current "Explorer Edition" of Glass cost every developer and tech reporter who has one $1,500, but a teardown of the device revealed the cost of its components to be significantly lower, Forbes discovered. It's pure speculation right now, but Glass looks poised to cost somewhere in the sub-$500 range, or about as much as a good tablet.

So Glass doesn't depend on external factors to work, it really adds value to your life, and the price will likely be aimed at the mass market. Yep, it looks kinda nerdy — and that may play a strong role in whether or not it succeeds — but that's about the only thing it has in common with the Segway.