Google dropped a bunch of Glass related news today. First up are some high level specifications which posted in an FAQ document. There's still no word about SoC or platform beyond the rumors we've heard in the past that Glass is like a WiFi-only Galaxy Nexus. This is the first time we've seen official disclosure of some level of specifications however. From the spec page we get the following, which I've put in a table. 

Google Glass Specs
  Google Glass
SoC Unknown
Display 640x360 "Equivalent of a 25 inch high definition screen from eight feet away"
Camera 5 MP forward facing, with 720p video
Audio Bone Conduction Transducer
Connectivity 802.11b/g WiFi, Bluetooth
Storage 16 GB NAND total, 12 GB free
Battery Unknown mAh, "1 full day of typical use"
I/O microUSB
Requirements Android 4.0.3 or Higher with My Glass app

Google is very light on detail here, and doesn't give resolution directly although it's obvious looking at the UI Guidelines from the SDK that 640x360 is the native resolution of the projection system. There's no explicit callout of what SoC is inside (although OMAP4 continues to be a persistent rumor) or battery size in milliamp hours or watt-hours. In addition we see the inclusion of 802.11b/g and no 802.11n, which is a bit curious, although I suspect most of the time Google Glass will be tethered to a smartphone over Bluetooth for connectivity with the companion application. Google also released the Mirror API documentation and a few sample applications alongside.

The other news is the first official communication of something along the lines of a delivery date for Glass Explorers. In an email sent out today, Google announced that the first Google Glass Explorer models are rolling off production lines and will begin shipping to explorers in waves. I committed myself to getting a Google Glass Explorer at Google I/O 2012 and eagerly await getting hands on time with the $1,500 wearable device.

Source: Google Mirror API, Glass UI Guidelines, Glass Tech Specs

Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • Visual - Tuesday, April 16, 2013 - link

    Dude, were you born yesterday, or have you just forgotten the awesome 640x480 and even 320x240 DOS games? That is plenty of resolution for a start.
  • V-Money - Tuesday, April 16, 2013 - link

    You do realize that the screen is just a small portion of the right lens, meaning that it is a fairly small screen. If you are worried about resolution you shouldn't be. The intent I believe is to add an informational layer to your life so that you can easily perform tasks while living your daily routine, not watching movies. I would love something like this once it matures to the point where it can scan the surrounding environment and inform you of who or what everything is which shouldn't be too far off.
  • vnangia - Tuesday, April 16, 2013 - link

    You do realize that apparent density is a function of both distance from the eye as well as resolution? And that at <1" you're not going to be seeing jaggies?
  • tipoo - Tuesday, April 16, 2013 - link

    Resolution has little meaning without considering display size. This isn't a smartphone screen, it's a few mm diagonally.
  • designerfx - Tuesday, April 16, 2013 - link

    uh, you don't *want*/need too high of a resolution if this is right next to your face.
  • bobbozzo - Tuesday, April 16, 2013 - link

    Question: How is a screen this close to my eye going to work if I'm somewhat farsighted? (starting to need reading glasses)
  • uhuznaa - Wednesday, April 17, 2013 - link

    There's some optics integrated to make it appear much farther away. Nobody can focus on something half an inch away.
  • ET - Wednesday, April 17, 2013 - link

    If it had a higher resolution, how would you have used it?

    I agree that a nicer resolution would make it more appealing, I just don't think they're aiming this as an HD movie playback device.
  • versesuvius - Friday, April 19, 2013 - link

    That means that anybody wearing one of those things is filming you and everything that you do when in close proximity. Google was fined for having its cars filming streets and private property and showing it on the web. Now, it wants to put a camera on everyone. Welcome to 1984. Or was it 2001? No difference. Big money always gets its way. All it needs is a few enthusiastic early followers that take their own childish fantasies too seriously.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now