Jacquard by Google
atap.google.com
atap.google.com
Note, it says the product can withstand light splashes, but can't withstand a wash in a machine. What that means is that these devices will get fried on a regular basis...since a device that small is easy to forget about as you toss in your laundry.
Some of the reviews about this product do say it stopped working after one season. But, it is not as bad you describe. Hopefully, it will improve over time.
For Google to succeed with a new hardware product, they will need to either give it away or price it below $10
A watch is a better match only for people wanting to wear a watch (I don’t, my kid doesn’t, given how the watch market dipped once cell phones reached their critical mass, a significant number of people don’t either if they have a choice)
Also keep in mind that it’s only bluetooth, so the phone is always at a reasonable distance to do engaging tasks (answering calls for instance).
Going from paper maps to Google maps? Huge.
Going from Google maps reading you directions through a phone speaker to Google maps reading you directions through a speaker woven into your clothes? Meh
Maybe somebody will eventually find something significant to do with it. Or maybe nobody will ever find anything useful to do with it, but inventing a whole lot of useless things is also part of the process.
Also, maybe health applications? Vital monitoring? Posture tracking? who knows. To me, any new platform like this opens up at least some interesting opportunities for niche use cases.
That's all I need from AR. It would significantly improve my life, and it seems very do-able with current tech (but outside my skillset so I don't know that).
Similarly being able to pull up metadata on anything by looking at it and gesturing or turning things on and off by looking.
I think an AR interface is the next big jump whenever the technology gets good enough. Everything we're dealing with now is laying the ground work for pieces of it, but we don't have the killer hardware to make the UI really great.
HUDs and HMDs have provided this specific usecase long before google maps existed (~1980s). Obviously it wasnt immersive AR (which we still don't have), but it was still an indicator in your field of vision
Disclaimer: flight-simming armchair pilot speaking ;)
Many comments here are correct. You're touching your wrist or sleeve to activate an assigned ding on your smartphone; some flashes a color when something happens; perhaps a voice tells you the time because you don't want to look at your watch [be it an analogue watch, that fancy proto-nokia digital watch in 1995, a Smart watch for your favourite walled garden, or the Dick Tracy watch I've wanted for decades]; and so forth.
The most I've ever washed this jacket is walking through the rain -- I wear almost daily, in northern California, and the electronics still work after several years. [I have good clothing hygiene, I swear].
On the other hand [ha ha], I'm still trying to use the electronics part in a significant fashion [ho ho] but I'm recently making an effort for some post-wallet giggles.
I have received some version of "cool jacket dude" a number of times though, which is nice.
I'll continue to see how the denim, electronics, pockets, &c hold up with continued almost-daily use. At least for my own sake.
WTF!? Sounds like the CEO of Google giving the intro to Google I/O. If it was Microsoft, it would have the word ‘empower’ instead of power. God I hate this BS lingo, Steve Jobs would fire the editors over this crap.
I have a pet peeve for company marketing people that say “We provide products and services to empower customers”. Well, no shit! It would be insane otherwise.
The "Technology" link is literally the third word visible on the page, after the Jacquard logo and a "Products" link.
> I have a pet peeve for company marketing people that say “We provide products and services to empower customers”. Well, no shit! It would be insane otherwise.
Companies manufacturing washing machines don't "empower customers" in that there aren't many differenciators between washing machine brands today. Nor does your average company selling toilet paper, that would be insane.
This project however aims to "empower customers" by introducing a paradigm change: make your clothes smarter (smart fibers woven in the base product) while deciding yourself how smart you want them to be (you choose what actions to take on what gestures).
Whether it succeeds is another thing entirely of course.
Might privileged to assume everyone can afford or has room for a washing machine, for the people who don't I'm sure it definitely would empower them to get more done if they could .
Also there's a lot of differentiation, I never knew how much better front-loaders were till we owned one.
This reminds me of the "futurism" movement in Italy that led to Mussolini's rise where they were so into fashion that they didn't know how but they just knew they wanted milk-based clothing and had to figure it out, and they actually did! It's kind of a cool story, without the fascist dictator throwing a wrench into the coolness.
This also seems like it's totally ripped from star trek, the insignia on their uniforms do exactly that and Jean Luc Picard sounds a lot like Jacquard....
I could see this as a gimmick from Nike, Reebok, or someone already in fashion but from Google it seems... like some weird B-project team endeavor like Google Glass that probably won't go anywhere long-term.
Please take 12 minutes of you life to watch this Hans Rosling talk, may he rest in peace.
Hans Rosling: The magic washing machine https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_the_magic_washing_mac...
As I wrote, there aren't much differenciation between washing machine brands today. Of course one is empowered by getting a washing machine, any washing machine. That much is obvious. It doesn't mean however that washing machine manufacturers are in the business of empowering their customers , although they certainly were in the mid 1930s.
Nowadays though, the folks who are getting their first washing machines right now are simply catching up with the times, which is precisely what Rosling is saying in that talk. In fact, there hasn't been much innovation in washing machine technology over the last few decades, it's all mostly come down to gradual improvements in their general efficiency. For people who already owned washing machines, those improvements are very small in nature.
This is why this Jacquard project is a different thing altogether: we're currently in the mid-1930s of the smart cloth. Whether it's a fad or a complete paradigm shift won't be apparent for a few years.
I agree with you however that wether smart clothes company are empowering anyone is yet to be evaluated.
If that is your definition of empowering, so is a company that produces toilet paper.
Please watch the video because I guess from you answer that you haven't...
Beside my point was just that you choose a particularly bad exemple this is not a thread about washing machine vs smart clothes... (even though washing machine probably win against jacquard which is not water proof)
I raised my hand and asked how this could be a competitive advantage since every single consulting company has the same brand. Their response was that our people were better.
It’s weird how people think these meaningless statements are useful. I expect that there’s some psychology that shows that while bullshit to me, they are perfectly fine to enough people to work.
All in all, as someone who might want to use this product one day, I'd rather Google not spend their project's resources on never-buyers like yourself and instead spend those adding features and driving cost down for people that could be genuinely interested.
Sure. And drop all open protocols and support only the proprietary ones while they're at it?
Seems like they're trying to do too much with this instead of niching down. I have no use for a device I can touch that triggers some tiny subset of things I might want to trigger.
Every thing
is extraordinary.
Every thing
is extraordinary
with ZombocomIt's so ordinary, it's extra ordinary! :D
> What if Technology helped us focus on what matters most? Keeping our lives free from distractions. To help us be more present.
Laughable, coming from Google. Or Apple, or Microsoft, or Facebook.
> This thing, we really think it'll help you focus and live free from the distractions of all the other things that we make. We're not going to stop making those things, though. Or change them in any meaningful way, because no one here actually believes anything we say.
This is in particular useful if you’ve already filtered down your notifications significantly, you’ll be able to go stretches of hours without looking at your devices, because you’re mostly sure nothing important happened.
The main problem is that it's just that - a touch sensor. You still need a separate device that will contain all the other pieces - processor, battery, IMU, connectivity, etc. Once you make that device and wear it - you might as well integrate the input mechanism into it, why bother with using the fabric?
Better yet - integrate a screen into it as well, do you don't just have an odd, input only device, but you can actually see what you are interacting with. Oh wait - at that point you've just re-invented the smartwatch.
Can someone enlighten me on what is a killer use case that is actually better served with the Jacquard technology?
I don't think it's impossible that there's an even better solution hiding in this product, but it really does seem to address a solved problem, to my mind.
That device already exists - your smartphone
In 1999 maybe; not in 2021
Life is really totally fine when lived without carrying a smartphone around all the time.
It also gives my 6 years old an example of someone she can definitely relates to who doesn't use a smartphone all the time.
I'm not a luddite: but between the 38" monitor at home and the car's navi system, I simply honestly don't have much need for a smartphone.
Now I gotta say this: the demographic that owns a smartphone but doesn't feel the love to the point of living 24/7 with it is probably not the demographic that is going to fancy a tiny electronic device in their shoes and underwear ; )
I wonder how that "tap the button and take a picture" works. How do you point the camera to the subject, where is the camera? Not on the phone in my pocket or in a locker at the soccer field.
https://www.supermarketnews.com/consumer-trends/nine-10-groc...
It shows 89% of those survey use the phone in the grocery store. Separately pew estimates 81% smartphone ownership rates in the US. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/mobile/
The product page is unclear on how much information is cached on the device before you need to re-connect to your phone.
Im intrigued, but this seems more like an early teaser.
A few of my older friends just got their first smartphones this year. Most of my old coworkers left their phones either at home or in lockers. I was helping on a farm once (~30 people) and had to ask 10-15 people to borrow a phone before someone actually had a CAT in his truck.
Even in bigger cities, it's become "cool" over the past few years to get dumb phones and/or limited-use phones. Hell, even Google itself designed something [1] to turn your smartphone into a dumbphone (which was basically a joke, but reflects a larger goal toward "breaking smartphone addiction").
[1] https://experiments.withgoogle.com/envelope
That said, I doubt any of these people would overlap with Jacquard's target audience, so I guess we're ultimately irrelevant here.
Under the projects section the first thing is jacquard.
The second thing is the soli miniature radar-on-phone thing which was on the pixel 4 and cut from the pixel 5.
The third thing is "Spotlight Stories" which looks like a VR fiction project. It says "Winner emmy". Maybe I'm not finding the right thing but it seems like they were a nominee in 2017 and 2018. https://www.emmys.com/bios/google-spotlight-stories
The 'News & Updates' section starts with links that date from 2019.
Maybe they're all heads-down on something not yet announced and no one looks at the page above so it doesn't matter. But if you _do_ look, it seems like a ghost town.
The only stories I’ve read about them recently is how they would pretend to be interested in buying a startup or tech. They would end up interrogating founders everything about their tech, have them sign NDAs, and then show them out the door with the veiled threat of lawsuits and patents.
EDIT It was on HN https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18566929
Looking back, it’s funny how much I loved Google before when their “don’t be evil” slogan was in effect. I’m pretty sure the turning point was when they cancelled Google Fiber.
What I really love is the gesture interface. The swipe on the sleeve feels natural. Comparatively tapping on AirPods looks more awkward. It is especially useful while riding my motorbike.
I found the jacket in the SF Levi’s store as I was shopping for a jacket. I had no idea that Google made them. I wonder why Google doesn’t do more to promote the device.
The gamification of training with adidas and FIFA is the most interesting, but this seems like a lot of extra tech to basically count reps.
All their marketing is out of touch with the world's current status. Everyone's going places in these videos, running, in contact with each other.
https://www.blog.google/products/atap/smarter-wardrobe-jacqu...
But really it's an incremental improvement in useless things the MIT Media Lab (and others) have been tinkering with since the 90s.
I can't believe this is actually real.
Plus, it just seems unecessary. Another comment here explained more eloquently than I did with their concept of "diminishing returns."
jacquard has been discontinued. We want to thank all our loyal fans. We understand you may not agree with this decision, but we hope you'll come to love these alternatives as much as you loved jacquard.
To me this is the selling point of the Apple Watch, and it's hard to see what this does that a watch does not.
How? The only way this device will indicate anything to the user is by vibrating, just like your phone (or watch) already can do.
I guess that means you don't have to plug in your jacket or your backpack, and helps to amortize the cost across a wardrobe? Maybe it's purely to get the battery close to a wall socket.
They've trademarked a term that long (centuries) predates their use of it in textile industries.
It's the Motorola ROKR all over again.
Reasons I would never buy this:
1. It's from Google, so privacy issues are a big problem. Also they will probably discontinue it any day now.
2. I guess you'll have to charge it all the time. I hate charging my phone and watch already so the utility of this is not good enough to warrant that issue.
3. It doesn't solve any problem for me. It is a solution seeking a problem. Fiddle with this only to turn of my lamps which I can do from my phone? Nah thanks. I already have automation on many of my lights to follow the day/night cycle and I never even have to think of switching it manually so this is kind of a step back. I don't really see that many other features to be actually useful.
Why? What makes them cool? What do they do that normal clothes don't?
None of these are compelling use-cases at all. Who cares? There is an interesting idea behind wearable tech, but we shouldn't want the protocols to be locked behind specific-company technology, and I certainly have no interest in giving Google even more of my data.
The game-changing wearable tech will be related to specific problem-domains, particularly with elder-care and (to a lesser extent) infant/young child assets for their parents.
Hard pass on Jacquard.
I get that it's trying to 'pay homage' or something, but Jacquard machines are still used today.
When tech companies overload terms like this it creates confusion. Are you talking about the machine or the Google product.
Another example of the same behaviour is Peloton.
It's a cliché by now, but still: It's you.
This is peak Google.
(It's sensors/triggers sewn into clothing, connected to your Google identity.)
This is probably a project for some engineers to get promoted and go and work on more interesting stuff.
Concepts and prototypes are typically created based on the company's overall vision. Of course very few people will interact with this particular iteration.
Really, do you think anyone here was concerned about how many Google employees were "subjected" to this internally?
From an opportunity cost standpoint it just does not make sense.
> Really, do you think anyone here was concerned about how many Google employees were "subjected" to this internally?
Strawman. I'm trying to point out how this is not part of some grand vision, but just a hardware research project from a lab designed to build out novel concepts for their hardware teams. You can't build a good project without a few failures first, so why not release what they make along the way?
You haven't replied to my counterpoint on why focusing on how many googlers used this prototype is irrelevant.
Because the goal is to extend the reach into every nook and cranny of our lives. Collect more data to serve more ads, better.
Edit: Think of this as step 10 or so, after all of their previous device categories. I'm sure we'll be up to at least 100 device categories within the next decade.
Maybe it can't differentiate between soccer and ultimate frisbee, but even just recognizing active vs sedentary lifestyle is valuable information for an advertising profile.
That doesn't seem so hard to do. I think they'll be able separate your sports activities into at last 50-80 separate categories, with a pretty good level of precision.
There's also the timing of your activities. So much to learn about you as a consumer.
I straw man your straw man! Nobody said anything about a “grand vision”. Merely that this would be used to gather data on those who use it. Experiment, or grand design, google has shown that more often than not, new technology will be used to further serve their customers. Advertisers.
Because if this is like chromecast (needs internet and access to Google servers, to stream locally), then I don't even want to read about it.
Ah yes. As if I'm not stuck with it enough.
I saw an ad for a device that goes underneath the sole of your ski boots and measures how well you are skiing. That's where this tech belongs, not swiping your cuff to raise the volume and missing one out of three times.
Google doesn't know how to use their tech. to create good products
I'm intrigued that Google presumably thinks working with developers from a few big brands is the best path to success. If they'd given away as many as they could to the maker community, for instance, I'd hazard a guess that there would be far more exciting applications on their home page.
Turns out it's just gaming nonsense:
> A first of its kind gaming technology from adidas, EA SPORTS FIFA Mobile and Jacquard™ by Google, that creates a new experience by connecting physical football and digital gaming.
[1]: http://mypico.org/
https://www.blog.google/products/atap/smarter-wardrobe-jacqu...
But not cancelled yet!
Bring the bits you need for the journey you're taking. Leave the brick at home.
Any other company and I'd consider it.
No, not you Facebook. Never you.
> What if technology helped us focus on what matters most?
> Keeping our lives free from distractions.
> To help us be more present, more engaged, and more connected with the people surrounding us.
Somehow, I am dubious that the way to solve these problems with not only more technology, but also with technology made by the largest advertising firm on the planet. I am deeply skeptical that a company whose primary business is distracting people and keeping them engaged with advertisements is also going to solve these problems for us... problems they created... with a new product you have to buy.
Ok, sure, that aside, let's look at it...
> Our ambition is simple: to make life easier. By staying connected to your digital world, your things can do so much more. Skip a song by swiping your sleeve. Take a picture by tapping on a shoulder strap. Get reminded about the phone you left behind with a blink of light or a haptic buzz on your cuff.
Yes, I definitely want touching my clothes have second-order effects. And I'm sure mapping all these different "gestures" to actions will be smooth and straightforward. And having a haptic buzzer in my cuff is definitely what I need to keep my life free from distractions.
Having a look through the three sample products - a backpack, a shoe insert, and a jacket... this looks pretty pointless. I guess maybe the shoe thing could be handy for people that want a fitness tracker. But I'm not really sure what this is buying in the backpack or jacket. You get one or two gestures which you have to set up, remember, and not trigger accidentally. You get some kind of haptic notification, which I guess might be useful if you don't keep your phone in your pocket.
Who is the target audience for this? Who would pay money for this?
"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."