Google Glass: SWOT Analysis

GOOGLE GLASS: SWOT ANALYSIS

Strengths of Google glass come easily. The Google Glass has many of the qualities in many of todays devices such as computers, smartphones, tablets, iPads, navigation devices, and even cameras in a small piece of glass you can wear. What makes the Google Glass truly unique is the speed at which it can pull up information while keeping it invisible to others. Google Glass offers a truly hands free experience. There is no need to pull out your smartphone, it is simply controlled by voice commands. It makes life easier when sending texts, drafting emails, searching the internet, and taking pictures. Google Glass is designed for people on the move and easily incorperated with apps such as Google Maps. It allows you to focus on the environment around you instead of focusing on the directions on your iPhone screen. 

Weaknesses include possible vision impairment, distraction, and implementation according to blog.newegg.com. Not only does Google disclose their product make cause eye strain and headaches, it has also been thought to distract users while limiting their peripheral vision. This is incredibly dangerous when driving or doing physical activity as it creates blind spots for users. Additionally, not everyone is on board. It has the potential for large law suits because people and businesses are unsure when they are bring recorded. For this reason the movie industry recently banned the product from theaters and this has created greater skepticism moving forward. 

Opportunity within Google Glass is incredible and has triggered software entrepreneurs an avenue to develop and innovate many new mobile tech apps. These new apps, called "Glassware", are not only a large opportunity for the application developers, but also for Google who benefits from the increasing number and uses and applications to their product. 

To give an example of the opportunity and job creation the Google Glass provides, I would like to reiterate an example USA Today wrote on regarding a man named Tim Moore. Tim, a social media strategist, was one of the first adapters of the Google Glass, however noticed one of its main problem. He couldn't wear them with his prescription glasses. This led to his partnering with Rochester Optical and his production of the first prescription lenses and designer frames for the Google Glass. 

This is just one example of the many opportunities this new technology creates. 

Threat to our privacy? With this new technology users are able to simply say "OK Glass, record a video" or "OK Glass take a picture". One of the main and most discussed threats of the Google Glass is its possible intrusion on personal privacy. You are unable to know is someone is filming you at any point and whether or not they are uploading it to Google servers (a Google+ page). This is an interesting topic due to the company it is associated with. It isn't some random technology company, but "this is the company that has repeatedly breached the boundaries of what we think is 'private'". Google could easily sell much of the data they collect through the glass putting much of users privacy at stake. 

Another argument against the glass and possible threat is the possibility of an increased amount of accountability for "easily pardonable activities". Google Glass would dramatically increase the amount of pictures on social media sites that would harm peoples reputations. Employers often look to social media sites to see if there is any alcohol or drug related pictures. Most of the US community uses or has used one of these two and with increase use of Google Glass, it would be much easier for other people to record, capture, and post incriminating images and videos. 

In my opinion the privacy and ethical issues out weight the upside with Google Glass. It would be interesting to try for a day, but I am skeptical with the information it collects and what Google then does with this information.  

Sources: 

http://blog.newegg.com/the-pros-and-cons-of-google-glass/

https://sites.google.com/a/cortland.edu/google-glasses/advantages

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/12/15/baverman-entrepreneurs-and-startups-google-glass/3642973/

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/mar/06/google-glass-threat-to-our-privacy

http://www.edrants.com/thirty-five-arguments-against-google-glass/

Teddy: Early Majority Tech. Adopter

Among the five different types of technology adopters, I would classify myself among the 34% of the "Early Majority". Although I love new technology and love to see its influence and impact on society, I am not an innovator or early adopter purely due to the risk involved. In my opinion, those first two stages are much too risky to be involved. Instead, I find myself adopting new technology once it has been proven successful by the Innovators and Early Adopters, so I feel safe with my investment of time and money.

For example, with the release of the Apple watch I obviously wasn't an Innovator and I wasn't an early adopter of the new technology. Although it seemed hi-tech and savvy, the risk original risk involved was too great for me to pull the trigger on buying one. The steep price influenced my decision to not be an early adopter of it. I did not have the money to risk on a product that I did not know how often I would use it, how many people would use it, if it worked well, and many other uncertainties. Instead, I consider myself an Early Majority because after seeing the success of the Apple watch, how many people have it and use it, and know of all the cool features it has, I am now in the market to purchase one in the near future and believe I am still ahead of the Late Majority and Laggers. 

I do not consider myself to be in the late majority or laggers due to my belief of how technology has a great impact and influence over the progression, efficiency, and success of society. Technology is created and used to make everyday tasks easier for the user and I will always want to be a part of the progression once the amount of risk involved has been assessed by the Innovators and Early Adopters. 

The Help and Harm of Technology on Society

Throughout history there have been countless examples in which technology has played a key role in both the positive and negative effects on society. I do not believe we are able to simply choose whether technology benefits or harms society because there are countless examples in for both cases that happen every day. Technology is a very broad term and has had both a positive and negative impact on harassment, politics, and even security to name a few of its unlimited applications.

With regard to harassment, it is easy to conclude that the use of social media and other technological outlets have had a negative impact on harassment. Yes, it has made it much easier for people to communicate their harmful or hurtful ideas. Yes, technology makes these negative opinions much more pubic and easy to speak. And yes, there are apps and ways people are able to communicate anonymously. These anonymous social media accounts have triggered a dramatic increase in bullying and harassment which is a blatant negative effect on society. However, an argument can be made that the advancement in technology has also made it much easier for people to share and spread the word on the fight against harassment. I have seen countless videos, posts, blogs, articles, etc. that takes a strong stance against harassment in society and the use of technology will be the main tool in the fight against harassment.

Secondly, the political world has also been both positively and negatively impacted by the use of technology. Similarly to harassment, people are now able to voice their political opinion much more freely and often leads to a harsh environment. Although technology has negative effects on political events, it is often viewed incredibly positively. Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Youtube, etc. have made it possible for the ordinary person to voice their opinion and create a true democracy. In the past, most political advertisement has been made by big money. The use of social media and the free technology allows the common public to share their opinion freely and create a much more open democracy.

Finally, technology has proven to have both positive and negative effects on security. The use of technology has contributed negatively to society because it is also available to people who do not have society's best interest in mind. With advancing technology it is becoming easier to harm society both physically and technologically. Physically, the increase in technology has lead to an increased complexity of terrorist attacks, while technologically, the advancement has made it easier to hack into databases, bank accounts, tap telephone wires, and do other illegal activity. The use of technology also has made personal information much more public and easy to access. Although the advancement in technology brings setbacks, the advantages are often equal or greater. We are now able to have more complex security systems (even cyber security) as well as more complex/technologically advanced physical defense systems. Although personal information is more accessible, the advancement has also had positive impacts on personal security.

In conclusion, it is impossible to say whether technology and the advancement of technology has been harmful or helpful to society because it does both in countless examples. Societies harassment, politics, security, and many other things have been forever changed by technology and we are unable to bluntly distinguish whether it has had a positive or negative impact.