Here’s how you knew the first-generation Google Glass had problems: Many of its early adopters were extremely vocal about brutally trashing it. This was particularly damning because the kind of people who were willing to shell out $1,500 for Glass in the first place were generally well-off tech enthusiasts who love trying out new technology and incorporating it into their lives. When these people stated in no uncertain terms that they “*hate*” Google Glass, it was a really bad sign.
With this in mind, we found Tim Bajarin’s essay in Re/code about the Google Glass “debacle” to be a particularly damning obituary for Google’s first wearable computer. Bajarin shelled out $1,500 to be a Google Glass “explorer” and he says that it was the single worst use of $1,500 he’s ever seen in his life.
“I was a Google Glass Explorer, and the experience was horrible from the start,” he writes. “Google Glass now sits in my office museum of failed products. The UI was terrible, the connection unreliable, and the info it delivered had little use to me… as a researcher, it was a great tool to help me understand what not to do when creating a product for the consumer.”
It should be noted that Bajarin was skeptical of Google Glass from the start but he’s hardly alone in his assessment, as one early adopter went so far as to call it “the worst product of all time.” And in fact, even Google has openly admitted that it should have done more to emphasize that Glass wasn’t even close to being a finished product when it was first released.
At any rate, Bajarin’s takedown of Glass is a good description of the exact wrong way to launch a new product. Read the whole thing here.