Slashdot Mirror
Assorted CES Gizmos
Frank Buckheimer writes "The CES 2003 show in Las Vegas will give us some pretty nice introductions of some brand new products." Other submitters sent in news about a "Mini PC" the size of a paperback book, and a spiffy digital sound projector. mbstone writes "Bill Gates announced a line of MS wristwatches that receive email, stock quotes, sports scores, etc. by FM radio. Gates claims it's a 'whole new product concept that was completely incubated by Microsoft Research,' but it's really just a reprise of the Seiko MessageWatch -- mine became just a watch, sans atomic time, as of 12/31/99 when Seiko called it quits. Once bitten, twice shy. Has anybody proposed an open standard for such gadgets so that new wristwatch-data-service providers can enter the market when the old provider leaves?"
So exactly how does this differ from a full powered 3G_UMTS_imode_etc phone ? They offer all that AND phonecalls, so I would give this a big ZERO for innovation.
My guess is that MS Research has been watching too many "Inspector Gadget" reruns.
> Vulcan hopes it will attract mobile computer-users willing to
> pay for wirelessly transmitted movie trailers and other content
Is there no point at which shame kicks in? Who where these people raised by? While I do realize that some people will pay $10 for a movie they don't intend to see just to see an anticipated trailer preceding it, $1500 for trailers seems just a tad over the top. Like there is nothing else well-heeled geeks could do with a wireless computer except watch trailers--TRAILERS, mind you, not movies. Because we certainly couldn't bring ourselves to invite global piracy and the resulting collapse of society by offering actual movies online.
>> Is this revolutionary?
No, and I don't think anyone's said that it is.
Does every new product have to be a revolution that ushers in a whole new paradigm and way of life, or is a company allowed to just make a neat gizmo?
Btw, I don't see any pagers using broadcast FM.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
The data will be beamed over FM radio airwaves to the gadgets, wherever they are. Consumers will pay $120 to $300 for the watches and perhaps $99 more a year for the data service.
Once the frequency is know, anyone with a shortwave will be able to pick-up the information. Of course MS could have it sent digitized and encrypted, but how long until that gets hacked? Could this be the precursor to DRM for radio?
Doesn't it seems like the market is being cluttered with a variety of devices that do essentially the same thing? PDAs already do this, my old cell phone delivers text alerts, hell my old pager did it as well, the tablet pcs will facilitate this...its just same content, different devices.. I already have one of these given to me by my employer, its much more convenient than a clunky watch, plus, sprint gives us unlimited data on our montly plan... As far as MS goes..All of these devices center around their "software as a service" plan, which integrates into your .NET wallet which will efficiently handle this (-_-)
Solid!
If they start broadcasting FM data signals with weather/stock quotes/whatever, can anyone legally pick them up, decode and use?
Or would you be violating some sort of law if you created your own device to 'hijack' the signals?
And if the latter, is it even legal to 'encrypt' a transmission in the FM range? I thought it was licensed by the FCC solely for public broadcasting?
What's the legal status of FM/AM/VHF/UHF? I thought it was a 'you can use this frequency but anyone can hear your broadcasts' range?
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Unless you are a student, wristwatches are wholly unnecessary and a matter of preference
Or if you don't have a cell phone/pager/whatever.
When I was tied to a pager I stopped wearing my wristwatch... it was just as convienent to look at the pager really.
I don't need one now, and I won't carry one by choice. Ditto for a cell phone. Maybe if I could eliminate my land line, but since I have DSL that's not an option.
Somebody at Microsoft is smoking crack to think that people would wear a Microsoft watch
While I wouldn't, and obviously you wouldn't, that doesn't mean nobody would. Frankly, the average Joe doesn't think of MS as an evil corporation since MS does a lot of spin control. A lot of people with more money than sense will see this and think "oooh! Nifty!".
And about a year down the road it'll get piled with the various PDAs and other gizmos that last made them say "oooh! Nifty!".
What would be cute would be a wristwatch that Bluetooths to the PDA/phone in your pocket, and you the user could configure what to send to it to display as an alert...as well as stock quotes, newsflashes, etc., you could have notifications of incoming e-mails/text messages/telephone calls, appointment reminders, etc., all without having to dig the main unit out of your pocket.
[Happosai]
I think we've hit a plateau culturally. This is the cutting-edge, next generation of technological advancements: a wristwatch? Where's the great leap of technology? Are we that stagnant?
And yet, I realize that this is somewhat inherent in our marketing trade shows. Since the early World's Fairs, we marveled at a picture of a future we could only dream of, now we marvel at item-rehash, and spins of the same-old-technology. It reminds me of the car shows, where a beautiful new designer car is rolled out under the bump-bump music, ballons, and half-naked girls, and yet, it's a car, whose technology innards were invented in the 1950s.
So whose to blame for all this crap? I blame patents (and their extension thereof). But what good is it to complain about something without at least looking at solutions. My solution is thus: patents should only extend as far as a multiple of the current technological turnover.
Let's assume a late victorian-era inventor who invents some new whirly-gig. The invention is no small feat: precise forging and machining of parts, new alloys, highly-specialized techniques; all not to be repeated anytime soon due to the flow of information, barriers to entry, etc. Let's say the whirly-gig is a product of immense mass-appeal. The market loves whirly-gigs! How long should our inventor be able to keep a right to that intellectual property? Let's say, just for grins, 20 years. Now let's say that during that 20 years, the whirly-gig is refined, better, faster, cheaper, smaller, more features, an instruction manual in chinese; all the things associated with progress. However, at the 20 year mark, a new inventor, inspired by the whirly-gig's mass appeal, and astitute to it's inner workings, takes part of this design, and makes a toodle-doo. The toodle-doo is the first truly global product. Germans, French, English, Australians, they all love it. It spawns new products, new trade, international cooperation. But what if the patent had been granted for 40 years? Well we could assume at some point that the whirly-gig would become so cheap and affordable that it would be like selling some sort of commodity product like pencils. At some point, the manufacturing costs would become burdensome for a product at the end of it's life cycle and we'd see for perhaps say the last eight years of the patent, the same old product again and again and again. Change the colors, add some bells and whistles, but beneath it all, just a plain old tired whirly-gig.
I believe in the patent process, I believe it's made us a great country, and yet I fear we are now in the business of protecting whirly-gigs for at least a generation more to come. When I see the latest slew of gadgets, I wonder to myself: 'Will our posterity sit in some future tradeshow and watch Bill jr. show off a neato-wristwatch?'
"This isn't a study in computer science, its a study in human behavior"
If the design goal is highest efficiency for low frequency reproduction (and it usually is), it's difficult or impossible to beat a big driver, mostly for that long throw ability and cone area to push the air.
That said, small drivers can also be made with relatively long throws and a bunch of them can move a surprising amount of air. A benefit of the many-small-drivers approach is they can also handle mid and some high frequencies.
And this is where the need for aggressive EQ comes in. An array of long-throw, wide range 4" drivers together can respond on the lows but they'll be too strong on the mid and highs unless the EQ curve compensates for that.
I'd say this proposed setup from Pioneer is an example of a system that gives up that highest low-frequency efficiency for flexibility - ability to (more) precisely image sound. Now made possible with computer controls inexpensive enough to go into a consumer product.
I've owned a watch that picked up Radio One in stereo.
I've owned a watch that stored all my phone numbers.
I've owned a watch that told me the room temperature.
I've owned a watch that took my pulse.
I've owned a watch that let me change the channels on the TV.
Internet? On a watch? With a Velcro strap, a non-scratch face and digital analogue hands? Nah, no thanks Casio.
...I think I get one with a built in camera instead.
This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
Has everyone forgotten the Toshiba Libretto? This new thing seems only marginally larger.