Slashdot Mirror
This is IT?
Dave (picked at random) and 8000 other slashdot readers wrote in to tell us that they too had been overcome by the relentless hype machine that is IT, Ginger, Segway, whatever. Read about IT in your favorite hype-dispensing media outlet, each of which thinks that it has an exclusive on the story of IT. Flash diagram of IT. Time. NY Times. Reuters. And don't forget to watch the advertisement, errr, "demonstration" of IT on Good Morning Consumers tomorrow. Update: 12/03 13:37 GMT by T : Segway's webmaster John Grohol points out the segway website as well.
It may be hyped but it could be a breakthrough. At any rate it is something that interests us as geeks. Stories about this broke on friday or maybe before and you have been getting thousands of submissions on the subject. It took you until tonight to actually post it. Hi, I don't know if you know tons of people think things are neat that you may not, but it is true. So if you get lots of posts on something then maybe it is worth posting.
This thing is not for rich suburban white guys who hang out on internet all day. Its for postmen and chinamen. Ever been to a crowded asian city? What a nightmare. The elites will definitaly prefer a Segway to other vehicles. The american consumer is probably the last market for this thing.
You say it is "just a scooter". That is like calling the automobile just a "horseless carriage." It's just the closest concept you have to fit. As far as hype, Kamen tried to downplay the "hype" none of which was advertisement, but statements "taken out of context" from the likes of Jobs and Metcalfe (you know the guy who said linux would "fade away"). Can't you see that a vehicle which uses Dynamic Stability to be driven as an extension of your own body movements is a great innovation? What the hell happened to Slashdot, where putting linux on the dreamcast is cool, just because it can be done, yet the Segway is "just a scooter." What the hell?
Actually, I'm really surprised.
I would have expected a lot more acceptance from the other readers of Slashdot. Or maybe it is simply a case of the "Slashdot Syndrome". (that would be not reading the entire article before you post.)
This is amazing technology!
From the Time article:
"Lean forward, go forward; lean back, go back; turn by twisting your wrist. The experience is the same going uphill, downhill or across any kind of terrain--even ice. It is nothing like riding a bike or a motorcycle. Instead, in the words of Vern Loucks, the former chairman of Baxter International and a Segway board member, "it's like skiing without the snow."
I don't know how many of you have ever been snow skiing, but it is amazing! There is a reason it's so popular.
Also from the article:
"Cars are great for going long distances," Kamen says, "but it makes no sense at all for people in cities to use a 4,000-lb. piece of metal to haul their 150-lb. asses around town."
This is so true! We are so wasteful as a nation in this way. It makes absolutely no sense!
Again, from the article:
"...Dean Kamen...The 50-year-old son of a comic-book artist, he is a college dropout, a self-taught physicist and mechanical engineer with a handful of honorary doctorates, a multimillionaire who wears the same outfit for every occasion: blue jeans, a blue work shirt and a pair of Timberland boots." and "But if Kamen's personality is half Willy Wonka, the other half is closer to Thomas Edison. While he was still struggling in college, Kamen invented the first drug-infusion pump, which enabled doctors to deliver steady, reliable doses to patients. In the years that followed, he invented the first portable insulin pump, the first portable dialysis machine and an array of heart stents, one of which now resides inside Vice President Dick Cheney."
This guy is a hackers hacker! Give the guy a break. I'll be the first to say it (on Slashdot anyway) I think it's going to be a huge hit!
Co-founder and designer at Music Nearby: http://musicnearby.com
I think all the people who are saying "electric scooter, big whoop. $3,000, yeah right" are slightly missing the point. Yeah, it's kind of wimpy for the price tag. Yeah, it's kind of expensive, and it's questionable who would want to use it.
But this is just the first model. It's more sort of a proof of concept--a demonstration that the scooter can work, and looks as neat as all get-out in motion. As time goes on, the performance will improve and the price will fall.
Look at the Palm (Pilot). The first model was, what, 128K? With no backlight, no infra-red, or anything? And how high was the price tag? And now the Visor Deluxe, which was at one time the wet dream of anybody who even looked at a Palm, is only $130 brand new.
Look at the DVD player. The original models were expensive enough, the first bunch of discs were glitchy enough, that a lot of people scoffed and made snide remarks. But the DVD went on to become the fastest-adopted new consumer technology ever.
So here we have a relatively slow, electric-powered self-stabilizing scooter, for $3,000. Are very many of us going to buy it? Do very many of us have the money to sink into that sort of gee-gaw? No and no. I know I'm not going to be spending three grand on something like that myself, either. Nor would I be likely to spend two grand, or even one grand.
But by the time it gets to about $500, sign me up.
Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
I used to be a Rocket Scientist (for real.... well, actually a Guidance, Navigation, and Control Flight Software Engineer for rockets) and this confused me a bit too.
If you look at the flash diagram, it actually has two small electric motors. (these aren't "engines"?).
The gyroscopes are used to provide torques to help the rider balance. The accelerometers detect the command motions (leaning forward or back or straight up). The small motors propel the Segway forward. (or backwards).
The fancy trick here is getting the control system software to tell the difference between a rider falling forward and 'commanding' forward by leaning forward. (amoung other fancy tricks). Overall the concept is simple, but the implentation is not as easy as it looks.
Being a bicyclist, I am partial to light, fast, cheap transportation. The Segway appears to be none of these. It is expensive, a brute-force solution to a non-problem IMHO. That's why I, at least, am underwhelmed.
Then again, I dislocated my shoulder last week on my bicycle while avoiding traffic. Maybe I can ride it again tomorrow, maybe not, but it has been quite painful and made it much harder to run errands around town (take the time to run an errand on a bike and double it; you've just arrived at the time to complete it, driving, if it's in downtown DC and you have to park). This device would make such injuries irrelevant. I'm sure it would be wonderful for elderly or infirm people who can't drive. So perhaps I am an "able-ist" in that I am biased to think about things as if I'll always be hale and healthy.
If the product is made affordable, it would be a lot nicer and less intrusive than a Lark or a Rascal for sure. But I don't see it as being quite as revolutionary as the car, simply because it does not radically increase carrying capacity, doesn't really offer commercially compelling advantages over a regular scooter, pair of feet, or a bicycle to balance out the cost... I don't see how this device would change the world for the average mope, but for some people it sounds like a godsend.
Attenuate your expectations, as this Dean Kamen seems to be telling us, and in context it is pretty neat. Not earth-shattering, but pretty neat, alright.
Remember that what's inside of you doesn't matter because nobody can see it.
What Dean seems not to have realized is that although a segway would be useful in some cities, it won't be to any in America that I can think of. He intended it to replace the car for in-city commuting. But the problem with cars in-city is not from people residing within it - it's from all the people commuting to and from the city. The fact is, most people either live in the suburbs and commute all over the place by car, or in a few cases (New York especially) live in the city and commute by walking and public transportation. The segway is not in competition with the walker or the car, but the bike - a cheaper, faster, healthier, more flexible (try hauling a 60lb segway up stairs) and more environmentally responsible way of getting around. The segway might have some uses for certain industries and age groups, and it will probably go over better in Europe and especially Japan, but here in the states there's not much point to it.
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
It's also not clear where you are supposed to use these things. Using them in traffic seems more unsafe than a bicycle (since you are even less visible and have even less protection in front of you), but riding anything motorized at 15mph on the sidewalk seems both rude and dangerous. And these things are too slow for bicycle lanes.
A cynic might say that this is simply an attempt to boost sales of one of Kamen's other technologies: automatic insulin pumps, since obesity is the leading cause of diabetes.
I don't think so. The Segway and scooter serve the same purpose, and get the job done with negligible difference in method and results from a users perspective. A carriage, on the other hand, lacks a mile-long list of features that a car has.
It's just the closest concept you have to fit.
Yes, and beyond technology, which is irrelevant from a users point of view, how is this any different from a scooter?
Can't you see that a vehicle which uses Dynamic Stability to be driven as an extension of your own body movements is a great innovation?
Yes, its an innovation, but is it an advancement or just a cool hack thats too costly to be commercially viable? Most seem to think the latter.
Initial implications for this device begin at the private sector. Imagine a mail carrier being able to strap on a pack and make a run in half as much time, going across sidewalks, dirt, grass, gravel, etc. Mail carriers at large corporations would be able to use this to get across larger buildings. Security guards could quickly and efficiently make their rounds, making it easier to put more rounds in a night. Park rangers could more easily get from point to point in a park. There are implications for airports, and any long walk areas that have the need for getting a certain percentage of people from point a to b quickly. Think about areas normally patrolled by officers on horseback or rollerblade or bicycle and just introduce segway/IT. Replace every oversized golfcart on a factory line that the management uses to shuffle from place to place inside.
For the public, there are schools/colleges where you might have classes on oposite ends of the campus, making it difficult to get books and then get to class on time making you carry a double load most of the day. For the infirm/elderly/disabled it would allow them to once again go for a "walk" in the park with their family/friends. It would allow people who are temporary disabled (casts, sprained ankles, etc.) to not need to slowly hobble everywhere they go. It will help the asthmatic who doesn't have the endurance to go on a hike with his friends to finally enjoy the outdoors like others. It would allow those already so damned lazy they can't walk two blocks to the store to not have to get in their car to go get something.
Notice any key theme in the above? Outdoors? Not just some punk ass kid (which we all were/are at some time) on a "scooter" bumping into you making you spill your latte, or noisily flying down the street on his gas powered scooter interrupting your nightly viewing of "Friends". Look at the design of this machine, large tires, self-balancing, automatic shutoff and speed control safety features, this is a standup ATV. Even if it has say only 30 minutes of battery life that's 4 miles at top speed (I'm assuming). Many people with asthma or cardio/pulminary problems can barely walk a block or two, imagine being able to say you went out for 4 miles. I could almost make it to work on a segway in the same amount of time as it takes me to drive through the traffic, as I'm sure many other people could. Training! Bah! Step on lean forward and go, easy as falling. Safety! Bah! Step off and the device stops dead. Redundancy in computing and drive mechanism means little chance of failure, catostrophic or otherwise. Price! Bah! $8,000 for the "industrial" version $3000 for the commercial version, early adoptors will easily pay. The early adoptors and an increase in chip speed/decrease in chip costs will drive the price down by half within the first year. By Christmas 2003 Korean companies will be selling knockoffs for $250 with fold up chasis and backpack straps. By 2004 they'll come in 15 different colorful shades and be as lame as the jellies, pagers, cell phones, and the backstreet boys.
Or the same people who drove the hype machine to it's heights can sit around an be dissapointed about how this won't change their miserable lives and bad mouth it and destroy yet another perfectly usable worthwhile product. How anyone could sit and bad mouth a man who educated himself, owns his own country (island), and works to do nothing but make the majority of peoples lives better, is just beyond me.
This assertion begs several questions (which are extremly relevent to someone living in, say, Austin, where I am):
I too, am in Austin, so hello!
1. How many people live close enough to work that they can afford the time to communte on a device that moves at walking speed? (no one I know)
Did you read the articles? It can move up to three or four times walking speed. Otherwise it would be pointless. Plus I am currently going to UT, and live about 15 minutes away, by walking. This would be a GREAT thing for me, as it would shorten the time down to 5 minutes or less. And it would help MANY people get around in this area, as in many other college campuses or downtowns. You think this wouldn't be of use to people living in downtown high rise apartments all over the world? I'm sure some live on one side of a cities business district, but work on the other. Too far to walk, yet not far enough to warrant the price you pay for gas to drive through traffic.
2. How many people live in places where the weather is neither too warm or too cold to spend the time outside?
With the recent cold spell here in Austin, I had to still walk to class, due to the lack of parking. Same thing applies in many other places. A lot of people are not forced to walk, but do so because it is more efficient. Well, when it gets cold, they are forced to either freeze their tails off or waste gas and time by riving a few miles through traffic. With this thing shortening your time my almost a third, if not more, it would be an excellent alternative. I know I can stand riding around on something for 5 minutes in freezing weather. Just early this week I was walking for 15 minutes in 40 degree weather with a 20 mph wind! And too hot? Thats when a nice 15 mph breeze from you moving on this thing comes in handy!
3. How many businesses have the infrastructure to handle storing and charging these things?
They run on NiCD or NiMH batteries. Again, if you read at least the Times article, you would know it takes $0.05 worth of electricity to completely charge one. And storage? Did you even check out that flash graphic of it? How hard is it to store something that takes up about the same amount of floor space of a persons two feet? Yeah it takes more, but this can easily fit into the corner of a cubicle or office no problem.
4. Is it really going to share the sidewalk with pedestrians? Where are they going to go now?
Again, read the damned article. It says being bumped into by one of these is like being bumped into by a person. And since they can be slowed down, they can move with pedestrians.
5. What about security? Riding around on a $3000 device that can't move faster than walking speed is a huge crime oppurtunity.
Again, read the article. Moves faster. Of course, same thing applies, if you're out at night with one of these, and you get muggged, its your own fault. Be smart.
If his device really is good enought to get rid of cars, it won't be because he SAID so, it will be because he made something that has the same (or better) combination of convinience, speed, economy (both $$ and time), and security as the car. And, unfortunately, this cool device is not "IT".
He didn't say it would get rid of cars. He said it would eventually, if they become as popular as he says, get cities to ban cars from downtowns so these could be taken advantage of. Already many places in many cities you have to walk because cars are off limits.
This is meant to compliment the car, not replace it. Read the article before posting please.
Moderators should too, so they realize that this post is not "insightful" or whatever it was modded up for.
Blake
the $3000 price tag is a "target price" for 5 years from now, if production is able to meet their projected demand (40,000 per month.)
They hope to sell them at $8000, but make no production promises -- and won't even offer it to the public for a couple years.
Yes, there are. This is not actually news; stories about IT's true nature were available a week or so after the hype began. (I submitted, but apparently /. is none too interested in getting news out before its generally available.) Kamen is best known for his medical inventions: for example, he came up with the first wearable infusion pump, a Godsend to a certain type of diabetic who must have a steady influx of insulin to function well. In the earlier stories, IT was discussed as a mobility device for the handicapped, and although that's not the focus of the recent announcements its pretty clear that you could adjust the thing for a person with limited mobility by tweaking some of the control parameters.
The disabled, such as my 5-year-old son who suffers from Cerebral Palsy, are most often not retarded, but due to their limitations are indeed unable to operate a scooter or a car. IT may be just the thing for them. (And let me tell you, at $3000 it is priced very competitively with ordinary motorized wheelchairs.)
And the brethren went away edified.
Wnat to know why this is a big deal? Because if it is a small, fast, cheap vehicle, it could be the next Honda Super Cub is a small, cheap scooter that has long been a popular mode of transportation in Europe and third world nations, where the people have little money for vehicles and fuel, or storage space. Honda has been selling the Super Cub for decades, and Super Cub sales worldwide have been a huge staple of Honda's income for a long time. The Super Cub was also an excellent advertising tool, as it made the association of cheap and reliable with Honda for hundreds of millions, if not billions, of people worldwide.
....
If "it" can handle travel on a crappy dirt road, and sells cheap, this thing has the potential to be huge in areas with electricity. It could make a company, and in the long-run, be a pretty big deal.
Of course, I personally think that Kamen works for Microsoft and is going to show off the new
A rework of traffic rules will be required. This is a "motor vehicle" in some states, but doesn't meet the requirements for one. It might come under the definition of "motorized bicycle" in California (electric, 1KW max), but you'll need to wear a helmet.
The real problem is that it's too fast to mix with heavy pedestrian traffic, but too slow to mix with motor vehicles. It self-balances, but doesn't do automatic collision avoidance.
I'd rather be in an area full of skateboarders than one full of Ginger riders. Skaters have good reflexes.
* We see IT in fight rings?
:)
* IT gets a spot in a Holywood movie?
* they teach an ape to use one?
* the black market of stolen Gingers forces Kamen to license the technology?
* people complain it's a city-street safety hazard?
* people complain it makes them lazy and we should all go back to walking? (I say it was ofcourse a mistake coming down from the trees in the first place)
* we get a weatherproof one?
* someone will model a battle-bot after IT?
really nice, but I'm not waiting at the edge of my seat to get one
Because three wheels would increase the base of this devices. As it is the IT is only as wide as a person and the length is the same. It falls basically in the same dimensions that a person falls into. Add a third wheel and you must increase the base in order to get any sort of stability from the device, or you reduce the radius of the wheels to the point that powerring them becomes problematic.
I am sure that they did not want a size increase to limit the use of this device on sidewalks. if it was bulkier than a person then they may not hit their sidewalk use goal. Two wheels side by side gave them this base where two wheels front and back would not have. Two wheels front and back would have increased the length to achieve balance and increased the scooter comparison.
Papa Legba come and open the gate
I must say I'm rather disappointed with the /. community on this one. If the claims Kamen makes are true, this is a truly impressive piece of technology, and at a *minimum* it will be very useful in a number of niche markets.
I think whether it penetrates the consumer market and is able to compete with scooters, bicycles, and cars for short-haul trips is an unsolved question. But it clearly has a niche. It's a fraction of the weight and cost of a car, it's smaller (albeit a bit heavier) than a bike, and it's a *lot* faster than walking. Most of us can walk comfortably at 3-4 MPH. This thing goes 8-12 MPH. So it's definitely useful.
I'm a college student, and until last year I lived about a 15 minute walk away from campus. That meant I spent half an hour to an hour every day walking between class and home. This thing would have therefore saved me 10-20 minutes per day of walking time-- not a huge savings, but non-trivial. In addition, I make short trips around campus that take 5-10 minutes of walking. This thing could cut those times in half at least.
Could a bicycle do the same thing? Yes, but not nearly as well. First, bicycles are not as stable as this thing apperantly is. Secondly, if it works as described, bicycles don't deal with crowded sidewalks as well as this thing does. This is because a bicycle has to be moving to be stable. So if you have to stop to deal with traffic, you have to get off the seat and stand, which isn't very comfortable or convenient. Bicycles also don't deal well with sandy or slippery terrain, and you're farther off the ground, so falls will hurt a lot more. With this thing, at worse it starts to tip forward or backwards and you can just step off.
Also, because it's not as big or bulky as a bicycle, most people will probably be able to just bring the thing in with them when they arrive at their destinations. In my case, I work on campus, so I could just bring the thing into my office and leave it there until its needed. And it apperantly has an access key, so if you stole it you'd have to rip out the electronics and replace them in order to use it again.
The big concerns as I see them are threefold. First is the cost. This is *not* going to replace a car, so it has to be a lot cheaper than a car. I think $3000 is too high for 90% of consumers. If they can get it down to about $2000, there are going to be plenty of yuppies who will be willing to shell out for them. If they get it down to $1000, they'll be able to easily sell millions of them. I imagine that most of the cost is in the custom electronics and precision hardware-- stuff that should come down in price as it's mass-produced. Going after corporate and government markets should give them time to perfect their technique and bring costs down before invading the consumer space.
The second concern is weight. 65 lbs is more than most people can carry for any distance, and it's more than some people can even pick up at all. If I were to get one, one thing that I'd want to be able to do is take it on the bus with me, and it sounds like it's a little too heavy for that. I'd imagine that the battery and motors are most of the weight-- hopefully they can make a lightweight version soon.
The third factor that I think will impact its success is the extent to which different form factors can be made. For example, I can imagine an enclosed version for use in cold places in the winter. Or a slightly larger version with a small cargo bin for hauling stuff around. If the technology is flexible enough to accomodate these sorts of adjustments to the form factor, then I can see them making different model to meet different niches. If they made one big enough to let me carry a couple of bags of groceries on the back, that would eliminate one of the major reasons I'd need a car.
Hello,
You may or may not be aware that this 'personal electric vehicle' idea has been carried out before. It caused the loss of a great computer company in the UK (Sinclair , remember them, the Spectrum, QL etc). This was back in 1985
Sir Clive came up with an invention way ahead of its time, called the C5.
See here for details and pictures!
It was an outstanding failure, mainly due to safety concerns on busy roads. It caused the downfall of Sinclair and massive personal debts to Sir Clive (brilliant man)
Prepare to be underwhelmed. Strange how these things go in cycles.
Uh, have you ever tried to balance on a Segway? This thing is marketing, I tell you.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
I think two things will likely lower the cost of scooters based on Segway technology:
1. The on-board computing power will get more powerful and get quite a bit smaller in a few years--imagine all the control electronics fitting in the space of two standard-sized deck of playing cards or less.
2. The use of improved metal alloys and/or composite materials plus better battery design could lower the weight to under 30 pounds, which will allow people to carry it around like we do now with folding bicycles.
I foresee Segway-like scooters with a top speed of 22-25 mph and a range of 35-40 miles by 2005. In that case the scooter does become a very useful urban transportation device.
A few additions:
IT=$3000, Used Bike=$100
IT top speed=12mph, Bike top speed=30+mph
IT weight=60+lbs, Bike weight=20-25 lbs
IT parts=specialized, only 1 manufacturer, unavailable overseas
Bike parts=available everywhere(even Afghanistan), mass-produced, ridiculously cheap
IT repair=send it back to the factory
Bike repair=send it down the block or do it yourself (even Afghanistan)
IT infrastructure=requires significant restructuring of sidewalk laws for motor vehicles, new "etiquette" to avoid collisions with pedestrians, too slow even for a bike lane
Bike infrastructure=all states and nations already have laws pertaining to bikes, most civilized countries have bike lanes in place in major cities (except for most of the US), significant lobbying groups already exist throughout the world dedicated to increasing the use of bicycles
Most importantly, bicycles are not dangerous. Bicycles are considered dangerous because of the proliferation of automobiles who make biking conditions unsafe. With proper bike lanes(shielded from traffic by planters and no parking on the curb) and increased usage, bike usage could be much more safe and common (see Amsterdam or China).
Problems of balance for the elderly and inexperienced are easily solved by tricycles (yes!) and low-to-the-ground recumbent vehicles. Problems of hills are easily solved by low cost electric motors like those on Lee Iacocca's ebike.
If Dean Kamen really wanted to solve the transportation crisis, he would have spent $100 million on lobbying to increase legislation to make cities more bike friendly. Cities need bike lanes, bike paths, bike parking, bike rooms at work, showers at work, and a multitude of other things. Thousands of people have been working on this problem for the past 150 years, only to have their work ignored by lazy, ignorant consumers, rich, powerful oil and auto industries, incompetent politicians, and over-hyped entrepreneurs.
If you're moving at 17mph, you're not a pedestrian. 17mph is a fair cycling speed. These are electrically-powered motor-scooters, and will be treated as such. If they currently manage to get through some loophole through being electrically-powered, chances are the loophole will be closed shortly. Or at least it will be after the first person is killed by some asshole riding at 17mph along a sidewalk - 65lbs of scooter and 150-200lbs of person travelling at 17mph don't just _stop_, even with gyros...
65lbs is _bloody_ _heavy_ - think typical all-up weight of gear carried by a soldier in one of those large rucksacks. You can't carry it in both hands for more distance than a quick stagger. Certainly carrying it up stairs is a non-starter.
Batteries won't last - it'll need an order of magnitude improvement in battery technology to crack that problem. This scooter will run out of power on the first hill. 17 miles on a level, smooth surface is no big deal - let's wait and see how much they get on a real surface, or on anything with an incline.
Battery-assist bikes are a cool idea - they can give you some help up the hill whilst you still pedal, so you're still supplying over 50% of the energy, and even if the battery dies then you can still carry on under your own power. And if it really goes wrong, you've got 30lb of bike and batteries to push home, on large wheels designed to naturally cope with obstacles. But once this scooter runs out of batteries, you're screwed, stuck, dead-in-the-water, etc. And you have to push 65lb of scooter home up that hill, with little piddling wheels in a configuration which makes it naturally unstable.
In other words, this is a less-good version of existing battery-powered bikes. Innovation, schminnovation.
Grab.
>Get around town generating absolutely no >pollution
And that electricity is coming from where, fairies?
Uh, if you're in Boston, your electricity is probably coming from a 40-year-old natural-gas or coal-fired plant. You might well produce less pollution in some of the new SLEV Hondas than on an electric scooter.
I read your thread, and as everyone else is pointing out it really is absolute drivel.
I live about 25 miles away from my work, not a bad deal because I take the local light rail in. Problem is the nearest stop is a little under a mile away. So, often times I drive my car there and park and ride. Switching to Segway for this would be awesome. Gas costs alone over the course of three years for my vehicle would overcome the expenses of buying a Segway.
Also, 3 nights a week I go to kung fu. The school is about a mile away from a different light rail stop - and for effiency and time sake i have to drive an additional 3 miles to go to a light rail stop past the traffic congestion so I can make it to kung fu on time. Now, I take my time hit in the morning when often times it will take me about 30 minutes to go 3 miles - that isn't good gas mileage. Having a segway would enable me to ride to the close light rail stop, take it to work, take the light rail after work to the stop near my kung fu school ride there and back, then back home. Easy, efficient, and very practical considering I never carry anything more than my laptop bag/backpack combo.
I know I'm not the only one who has transportation patterns similar; in fact 2 other people I work with are very excited about it for nearly the same reasons. The rest of your arguments (in this parent and your other) are just idiotic and irrational. Many people would like this. I'll probably be buying one when they come available - another perk is I don't have to leave my car at the light rail stop where it can be broken into or damaged.
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.