元器件交易网讯  4月18日消息，据外媒报道，一年前，谷歌眼镜是最热门的科技项目。而今年谷歌眼镜似乎失去吸引力，频遭到攻击和禁止。前几天谷歌眼镜的公开发售也并未带来轰动。外媒Business Insider记者分析称，谷歌眼镜最大的错误在于限量发售。

　　原文翻译如下：

　　一年前，谷歌眼镜是最热门的科技项目。

　　这是自iPad以来消费电子领域最大的事情。

　　风险投资家宣布计划投资眼镜专门初创公司。谷歌推出谷歌眼镜抽奖活动，人们提交申请。记者们爱上这款眼镜，认为它是未来的计算。

　　而今年，大家的情绪翻转180度，现在绝大多数是负面的。

　　当谷歌首次向公众出售眼镜，《赫芬顿邮报》比安卡博斯克（Bianca Bosker）写了一篇谷歌眼镜的拆解文章。

　　我们都知道谷歌眼镜销售会比较艰难。自从该设备首次出现在美国的13个月以来，谷歌已经失势。让人们拥抱互联网头部相机已经变得更加艰难。

　　起初，谷歌眼镜最大的缺点在于看起来很奇怪。现在，谷歌眼镜不仅失去了吸引力而且遭受道德质疑。

　　博斯克不是唯一一个对谷歌眼镜不感兴趣的。谷歌眼镜的首个传播者，他坦言，今年眼镜今年在劫难逃。

　　杰夫•贾维斯，谷歌最大的捍卫者之一，“痛恨”谷歌眼镜。他称其为“昂贵的噩梦”。

　　这一年发生了什么让人们队这款产品如此讨厌？

　　有好多事情：戴谷歌眼镜的人被攻击，酒吧禁止戴谷歌眼镜，产品改进有限，开发人员还没有做出任何突破性的应用程序。

　　所有的这些都可以追溯到谷歌的一个错误：限量发行。

　　谷歌去年允许一群通过精挑细选的“开发者”以1500美元的价格购买。最初，这是一个伟大的营销手段。每个人都想要它，它有很多争议。但谷歌眼镜想要成功需要一次性广泛部署产品。

　　原因如下：

　　1、谷歌眼镜是一个新的怪异的科技品。如果很多人购买它，就会减少一些怪异的色彩。今天戴谷歌眼镜的人被攻击，因为只有一群富裕的科技行业的混蛋佩戴。

　　2、谷歌并没有真正知道为什么要存在这款眼镜。最好的猜测是，它更容易发送电子邮件通知和照片。不知道你的产品为什么伟大并没有错。甚至苹果也不能完全理解为什么推出iPad时它这么酷。谷歌希望向一些用户推出这款眼镜，来断定这款眼镜最佳用途。但如果它向更多的人推出，将需要解决更多用户产品问题。

　　谷歌没有马上向公众出售谷歌眼镜是因为它并不准备大规模推广。但如果是这样,那么为什么不等待？为什么提前公开一个不成熟的产品？

　　起初，谷歌似乎选择了一个聪明的做法：慢慢推出并产生影响。现在却事与愿违，今天谷歌眼镜已经失去了吸引力。

　　（元器件交易网董蕾 译）

　　外媒原文如下：

　　A year ago Google Glass was the hottest item in tech.

　　It was the biggest thing in consumer technology since the iPad. (Mostly because nothing had come out since the iPad.)

　　Venture capitalists were announcing plans to invest in Glass-specific startups. Google held a contest to raffle off the rights to own Glass, and people were submitting applications. Journalists were in love with Glass, and thought it was going to be the future of computing.

　　This year, the sentiment has swung 180 degrees and is now overwhelmingly negative.

　　When Google was selling Glass to the public for the first time, Bianca Bosker at Huffington Post wrote a thorough takedown of Glass:

　　We always knew Glass, with its vaguely orthodontic design, would be a tough sell. Yet in the thirteen months since the device first appeared on American brows, Google has actually lost ground: Getting people to embrace the Internet-connected head camera has become more difficult, not less. And this is after an extended PR blitz ...

　　In the beginning, Glass’ biggest sin was looking weird. Now, Glass is both physically unattractive and morally suspect.

　　Bosker isn't the only person underwhelmed by Glass. Robert Scoble, Google's first major Glass evangelist, confessed that Google Glass is doomed for this year. (He's optimistic that Google fixes problems with Glass by 2016, which is an eternity in technology.)

　　Jeff Jarvis, one of the biggest Google defenders in the world, "hates" Glass. He calls it an "expensive nightmare."

　　What happened in a year that made so many people sour on the product?

　　A bunch of stuff. People have been attacked for wearing Glass. Glass is getting banned in bars. The product has seen limited improvements. Developers haven't made any breakthrough applications. 

　　All of this can be traced back to one crucial mistake with the launch of Glass: It limited the release of Glass.

　　Google allowed only a select group of "Explorers" to get Glass for $1,500 last year. Initially, it was a great marketing ploy. Everyone wanted it; it got lots of buzz. But Glass needed to be widely deployed all at once for the product to succeed.  

　　It needed to be widely deployed for two reasons: 

　　1. Google Glass was a new, weird-looking technology. If lots of people bought it all at once, it would be less weird. Today, people with Glass on their faces are attacked unfairly because it's assumed that only elitist rich tech jerks wear Glass. If this was always for the masses, that might not be the assumption. 

　　2. Google didn't really know why Glass existed. Its best guess was that it made it easier to get email notifications and it took photos quickly. There's nothing wrong with not really knowing why your product is great. Even Apple didn't have a 100% understanding of why the iPad was cool when it launched the iPad. Google was hoping that by sending out Glass to a select group of users it would figure out Glass's best usage. But if it had sent it out to more people, it would have more users figuring the product out. 

　　I would guess the reason Google didn't sell Glass to the public right away is that it wasn't ready for a mass rollout. But if that was the case, then why not just wait? Why pre-announce a half-baked product? 

　　At first, Google seemed clever for doing a slow rollout and generating buzz. Instead, it backfired, and today Glass has lost its appeal.