Google Glass & Apple Vision Pro: Why AR Headset UX Keeps Failing Users

This week, Eve and Brian talk about the biggest UX scam in tech right now, wearable 'innovation' that no one asked for. From Apple Vision Pro's $3,500 ski-mask aesthetic to Meta's mind-reading wristband, they uncover how the race for futuristic hardware keeps ignoring one thing: real humans. Google Glass failed in 2014. Apple Vision Pro launched in 2024 to lukewarm reception. We investigate why AR headset UX keeps repeating the same mistakes, what both companies got wrong about spatial computing, and why the promise of augmented reality never matches reality. Discussed in this episode: - Why Google Glass's "Glassholes" problem was fundamentally a design failure - How Apple Vision Pro's isolation design contradicts its own marketing - What both products misunderstood about social acceptance and public use - Why AR/VR UX hasn't learned from past failures despite a decade between products - The persistent gap between spatial computing demos and daily use reality - What successful wearable computing would actually require Sources: Google Glass postmortem analysis, Apple Vision Pro user reviews, AR/VR industry research, spatial computing UX studies Perfect for: UX designers, product managers, AR/VR developers, tech enthusiasts, Apple fans, spatial computing designers, hardware designers, wearable tech developers  UX MURDER MYSTERY HOSTED BY Brian J. Crowley Eve Eden EDITED BY Kelsey Smith INTRO ANIMATION & LOGO DESIGN Brian J. Crowley MUSIC BY Nicolas Lee A JOINT PRODUCTION OF EVE | User Experience Design Agency and CrowleyUX | Where Systems Meet Stories ©2025 Brian J. Crowley and Eve Eden Email us at: questions @UXmurdermystery  .com Thank you for watching and or listening! Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. The views and opinions expressed by the hosts are commentary and speculation, not statements of fact. All discussions about real companies, individuals, or organizations are based on publicly available information, media reports, and personal opinions offered for the purpose of critique, education, and storytelling. We make no representations or warranties about the accuracy or completeness of any information discussed. Nothing in this podcast should be interpreted as a factual assertion about the actions, motives, or intentions of any individual or corporate entity. Listeners should conduct their own research before drawing conclusions. The creators and guests of this podcast disclaim all liability for any loss, harm, or damages arising from reliance on any information or opinions presented. Names, characters, and events may occasionally be dramatized or fictionalized for illustrative purposes. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, or to actual events, is purely coincidental.