Google Glass chief leaves position

“Chris O’Neill, the business chief for Google Glass, is leaving the position after thirteen months,” Mark Bergen reports for Re/code. “O’Neill was named head of global business operations at Google X, the company’s moonshot division, in May 2014, the same month Google hired design and marketing exec Ivy Ross as its maiden chief executive.”

“In January, Google shut down its Explorer Program, which sold the headset for $1,500,” Bergen reports. “Although Glass shut down consumer sales, it has kept its enterprise operation open, selling the headgear to companies like automotive and medical equipment manufacturers.”

a glasshole
A Glasshole
“O’Neill came to Glass after four years as managing director for Google Canada,” Bergen reports. “Earlier, he was the director of retail for the company and held finance and sales roles at Google, which he joined in 2005.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: The difference between Apple and Google is the difference between Apple Watch and Google Glass.

SEE ALSO:

Tim Bajarin: Apple Watch vs. the Google Glass debacle – May 12, 2015
Unsold Google Glass units to be donated to assholes in Africa – January 20, 2015
Google Glass is no more, if it ever was – January 15, 2015

26 Comments

  1. Could you imagine what the reaction would be if Apple closed down sales of the watch to the public. Maybe people just don’t take Google seriously and treat their antics all as a game, a strange disconection thats for sure

  2. Guess what–the Apple watch is every bit as geeky as Google Glass. After early adopters (ppl who read this blog), the Watch will not see widespread adoption. Watch and see.

    1. That would be plausible, had the professional tech press not been unanimous with praise. With the exception of an occasional troll such as yourself, everyone else agrees that the watch is a success.

      1. Unanimous with praise? Not so much. BTW, I am not trolling. I WANT the Apple Watch to be wildly successful, as a ridiculously high proportion of my portfolio is Apple. Wearables are the future. Google Glass and the Apple Watch are both first attempts to embrace that Borg future. They both happen to be very geeky. Apple Watch reminds me of the Casio calculator watch nerd Walter White wore until he got his Monoco. I think the vast majority of people will see it the same way. The Apple Watch will not “fail,” in the way of Newton or Cube. But, it will not be all that. Watch and see.

        1. Look, this is not an unreasonable view at this stage in the game. Many reviewers have stated that they don’t “need” the Watch, but they do want it. Desire is a funny thing. And, I think, desire is even a better motivator than need.

          I hope to get my 42mm space gray Watch next week. I am definitely in the minority at this stage in the game (7 million out of half a billion?). But this can change. Must it change? Will a majority of iPhone 5/5s/6/6+ owners buy one? Probably not. But that’s not necessary. Even if “only” 30% buy one, that’s an AMAZING success. And don’t forget that this is a FIRST gen device. Compare the iPhone 6 to the original iPhone and then imagine what the  Watch 6 will be like! Success of the Watch is by no means guaranteed, but it is highly likely (I, for one, would never bet against Apple)…

          Let’s just all Watch and See…

          1. I agree that, even if a relatively small number of iPhone users buy an Apple watch, it will be a financial success. I will buy one, if only as a toy. My prediction, though, is that the Apple Watch will eventually become an object of ridicule in the popular conscious, as black socks and sandals, mom/dad jeans, and Google Glass. I hope I’m wrong, but fear I’m right. Watch and see.

          2. re “And, I think, desire is even a better motivator than need.”

            Yes. One of the core marketing clichés is that people buy from want — not from need.

        2. I am seeing Apple Watch on the subway in NYC. While your definition of geeky may be different from mine, the people I’m seeing wearing it would never fall into either of them; not even close. Some are (judging by appearance) urban hipsters, some are uptight professionals, a few doctors (and nurses), a priest (!?), a public bus driver… In other words, people I see wearing Apple Watch are ordinary people, not all that geeky.

          I’m sorry, but there is a profound difference between Google “Glassholes” (as MDN likes to call them) and people buying (and wearing) Apple Watch.

          If the estimated ten million watches already sold is anywhere near accurate, it is obvious that the user population is way greater than nerds; after all, nerd population is much smaller than 10 million…

          1. I agree…you can’t compare apple watch to google glass…the watch is a useful personal device that enhances the apple experience. Glass was a personal device that threatened other people’s privacy (enhancing the Google experience for the user and everyone around him). You can let Google have your own info if you want, but most people are turned off by the idea of being filmed. That’s why it failed.

          2. I think of the Watch not as a device but as an adornment. It integrates well with everyday attire.Thus, it can function as a favorite bracelet, an enhancement to one’s ensemble. In contrast, Glass is blatantly an instrument, a conspicuous probe, violating social instincts. It is not an adornment but a device.

            The intent of the designer behind each piece is clearly felt. The Watch simplifies my life. Glass acquires me.

        3. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Google’s Borg wear was universally panned since day 2 (after the parachuting Glass unveil). In contrast, the majority of the press has praised the elegance of the Apple Watch. Some have even said that the device is more beautiful than any other Apple product. The criticism has been slow third-party apps (which will be addressed at WWDC and software updates), but definitely not the design.

          When the Apple Watch gains more functionality like the ability to detect disease such as cancer and warn of impending heart attacks, and when Apple Pay is ubiquitous there will be more Apple Watches sold than iPhones. Until that time, more and more consumers will discover the quick glance features, physical activity tracking and home automation control, which is encompassed into a beautifully crafted product.

          1. Indeed, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. And, yes, Google Glass is an offensive monstrosity, rightfully loathed. Apple Watch is nowhere near that geeky. Still, Apple Watch is fundamentally geek wear. It is beautifully built, with options for band, case material, and size, but you are left with a nerdy computer screen on your wrist. It will never be fashionable, despite the attempts of Angela Ahrendts. I completely agree with your points about the utility of wearable tech, which will only increase in ways we can not imagine. But, if something is uncool, people will not wear it. In the not too distant future, Apple Watch will be perceived as uncool in the popular conscious, at least in the United States. Watch and see.

            1. Many things new and not understood seem uncool, especially to the younger generations. This is why celebrity placement is used, which, by design nor not, Apple Watch has been a beneficiary. It will be interesting to see how many first editions are sold during the “back to school” time frame. My guess is sales will be okay, but after students have discovered the utility and the new communication methods sales will substantially increase during the holiday time period. By the end of next year the Apple Watch could be a runaway hit with this demographic.

              The older generation adoption will be a tougher call. As a utility it is a must for the business person and it seems many fitness oriented people are enjoying it, but couch potatoes and grandparents might be a more difficult sell, unless they have grandkids that like to send heartbeats and doodles.

            2. Nerdy…yes. But it won’t be forever. There is no doubt that future versions of the watch will be more sleek and fashionable. We will look at this one the same way we look at the first iPod…”wow that thing was huge and clunky.” That being said…the apple watch already is a hit and by the time the hype settles down, the new one will be out (thinner? round? built in GPS? better battery/) at which point I will plunk down my money for a new one and my current one will go to gazelle or become a dedicated work out watch.

        4. Those of us who live in the real world don’t see the Watch as “geeky”. It is NOT a piece a plastic trash like every other company who’s selling a smartwatch.

          Want vs. need: as far as needing the Watch — it’s technically not “needed” for anything. But then you don’t need a remote control for your TV (because you can actually get up and change the channel) and you don’t need a microwave oven (because you can use your conventional oven). So here’s my challenge to you, Franklin: give up your remote control and microwave for one month, if you can. You may then be able to possibly comprehend the difference between “need” and “want”. The sheer convenience of my Watch has, for me, already paid back the cost of purchasing it.

          Regarding sales numbers: with an installed base of 450 million+ iPhones currently in use, if only 5% of that number buy an Watch, that’s 22.5 million in unit sales. At an average selling price of $550, that equates to more than US$12 billion in additional revenue. I don’t know what business you work for where US$12 billion would be considered a failure.

    2. Geeks are the worse people to determine something that is geeky, you really should do a geek test to test your prediction.

      We’ve seen what happens when a glasshole geek walks into a bar wearing google glasses, they are asked to leave, people don’t like it and in fact some bars have banned them. Google glasses are geek nerdom.

      Now you should be observing what happens when you go into a bar wearing your watch. Someone will ask you about it, or you can so it off to others. No bars have banned them and it’s a great way to make that connection with the hot babe who will take you home later to, well you probably don’t know yet.

      It was the same with the iPod when it first came out, chick magnets.

      The watch is a geek’s aphrodisiac, well to those geeks who know how to use cool tech to get laid.

      1. Geeks have proliferated over the years to the point where they’re mainstream. I remember when owning a home computer made a person a geek.

        Glassholes and their ilk are a new thing, so much worse than the geek of 30 years ago that there;s not even a word for them. The germans are geniuses at coming up with great descriptive terms. Something like ûbergeekenschmuckenheimer.

        1. Great post mpias3785, I love it. Of course geek proliferation would not be possible without all those great geek devices that are essentially are chick magnets. The mac family, ipods, iphones and now the watch have replaced big cars and trucks along with beer as aphrodisiacs for hot babes.

          Editorial note: Previously changing the above post to “you can show it off to others.”

  3. How many samdung watches have been sold? Not many.

    It is funny though, at my local Costco last week they brought in a pallet of Moto 360 watches. The initial price was $149. A week later the price is $249. I’d say Costco is gouging customers hoping they think the Moto actually does something.

Add Your Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.