Slashdot Mirror


Sony Ericsson Develops Contact Headphones

TechnologyResource writes "Sony Ericsson has just introduced the MH907 headphones. The headphones will pause or play your music based on contact; eliminating the use of a pause or stop button. Removing one ear bud will pause the music. Removing both ear buds will stop the music. Both ear buds have to be in your ear to play the music. According to Sony Ericsson, this will allow you to 'play your music and answer phone calls just by inserting the buds into your ear or taking them out.'"

173 comments

  1. Van Gogh. . . by JSBiff · · Score: 4, Funny

    What if you're missing one ear?

    1. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm sure you can stick the second ear bud somewhere else. ...perhaps in the ear of your scantily clad model?

    2. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Ambvai · · Score: 3, Funny

      Simple: Insert one into a similarly sized cavity within reach of the cord. I recommend a nostril.

    3. Re:Van Gogh. . . by fireball84513 · · Score: 2, Funny

      nonsense, ears can be grown off of skinless rats now remember? and if you cant afford the procedure, you probably shouldn't be forking out cash for expensive earphones that make life slightly more convenient

      --
      "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
    4. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Jurily · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is a better question than the mods seem to appreciate. They deny you the ability to listen with only one ear, while keeping in touch with the outside world with the other.

    5. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      asd

    6. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dsa?

    7. Re:Van Gogh. . . by dbet · · Score: 5, Funny

      I tried your suggestion, but the rat kept running away, pausing the music.

    8. Re:Van Gogh. . . by DigitalPasture · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If that's the case then these probably aren't the headphones for you.

    9. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sda

    10. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Jurily · · Score: 0, Troll

      Will you guys please stop the "then don't buy it" bullshit? This is a discussion, not eBay.

    11. Re:Van Gogh. . . by vlm · · Score: 1

      I'm sure you can stick the second ear bud somewhere else. ...perhaps in the ear of your scantily clad model?

      Based on your comment, I had high hopes before I clicked on the article. What I saw in the article wasn't quite what you implied I'd see, although that is quite the plunging neckline on that gentleman's shirt.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    12. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Fozzyuw · · Score: 1

      No doubt, no doubt. But I'm still scratching my head as to the usefulness of this "technology". Was there some sort of market that was demanding that music should only be played if both buds are in the ear?

      I say this as I have 1 ear-bud in at work, so if a co-worker calls my name I can answer them. Yet, when I'm at the gym, I'm more than happy to have them both in.

      Point being, what's the point? All things being equal, these ear buds are less flexible than normal headphones and will probably be significantly more expensive. Is this an answer in search of a problem?

      --
      "The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth." ~1984 George Orwell
    13. Re:Van Gogh. . . by unixan · · Score: 1

      This redundant threat can be made funnier. What if these are /dev nodes?

      /dev/sda - first SCSI hard disk
      /dev/dsa - ?
      /dev/asd - ?

      --
      This signature intentionally left unblank.
    14. Re:Van Gogh. . . by SoupGuru · · Score: 3, Informative

      I thought we were discussing how you should not buy these if they don't meet all your needs...

      --
      What doesn't kill you only delays the inevitable
    15. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Idiomatick · · Score: 1

      I doubt they'll criminalize regular headphones. I also doubt they'll catch on or gain a significant market share.

    16. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Exception+Duck · · Score: 1

      Ok, I'm wondering where the discussion would go ?

      Probably there are settings that you can turn the "sensors" off, since maybe you are listening to live broadcast, and unless these are some super timewarping headphones (or with a cache cabability for all real time streaming video apps) the "pause" will not always work.

      And no I didn't read the article... :)

    17. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Exception+Duck · · Score: 1

      mod parent up. funny as hell :)

    18. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And having the choice to buy a different pair of headphones is part of the discussion.

      More likely you don't want people saying "don't buy it" because that is the correct and logical answer, meaning nothing more needs saying. You don't want a discussion, you just want to whine about shit for not being exactly the way that you personally want it.

    19. Re:Van Gogh. . . by KC7JHO · · Score: 1

      My current set of head phones have a feature which have caused me to decide to stay with them instead of going with the much more expensive ones I had been saving up for. Namely a sliding piece that 'straps' the 2nd earphone to the cord allowing for use of only one while keeping the other out of the way for exactly the reason you suggest above. If these new phones were configurable it may be different but I rarely use the 2nd ear piece and listen to podcast/audio books/streaming talk radio/talk on phone and during each of these I need my other ear to pay attention to what is going on in the office / on the road around me.

      The ones I use now are made by body glove and sold at walmart if anyone is interested.

    20. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Asclepius99 · · Score: 1

      I have to question your stance that these do anything that would actually make life even slightly more convenient.

    21. Re:Van Gogh. . . by tftp · · Score: 1

      I tried your suggestion, but the rat kept running away, pausing the music.

      You obviously listen to wrong music.

    22. Re:Van Gogh. . . by xxuserxx · · Score: 1

      Why the hell would you want to listen to just 1 earphone? You do realize most MP3's are stereo right?

    23. Re:Van Gogh. . . by fireball84513 · · Score: 1

      ive been waiting for something like this to come out, i hate it when someone starts talking to me while im listening to my zune (yeah, i use zune fellas) and i have to fumble around in my pockets and get my zune out, fumble with the lock on it, and then press the pause button and hope i didnt nudge anything else that would mess it up just so i dont lose my place with what im listening to. i realize that i can just take my headphones out but then i have to listen to the background noise while i listen to the person talking to me.

      --
      "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
    24. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      C-C-C-C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!

    25. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ads

    26. Re:Van Gogh. . . by LarrySDonald · · Score: 1

      You can set it to mix them to one phone. Being a married man with three kids, I barely remember the concept of stereo - having one ear to play music into is a rarity, but not needing even one on the world at large is unheard of. Perhaps it's good to someone but I'm not sure how terribly difficult it is to tap a key or two to get your phones to do what you need.

    27. Re:Van Gogh. . . by garompeta · · Score: 1

      what if... what if you are deaf!

    28. Re:Van Gogh. . . by dontmakemethink · · Score: 1

      Besides, we lost touch with the outside world back in high school.

      --

      War as we knew it was obsolete
      Nothing could beat complete denial
      - Emily Haines
    29. Re:Van Gogh. . . by esper · · Score: 1

      Personally? I mostly listen to podcasts - short fiction, talking heads of the tech world, that kind of thing. Not music. When you're dealing with a single person talking (as in, say, most short fiction or audiobooks - or a phone call, for that matter), they either won't use stereo or both channels will carry identical audio. Panel discussions may use stereo, but they often don't. Even when they do, you don't really lose anything by mixing it down to mono, since it's just being done to virtually position the panel members, not to create any effects that enhance the experience (or at least it doesn't enhance my experience).

      Just because stereo matters for music doesn't mean that it matters for audio recordings in general.

    30. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will you guys please stop the "then don't buy it" bullshit? This is a discussion, not eBay.

      Sure. These headphones only work with Sony's phones. Fuck em.

    31. Re:Van Gogh. . . by DigitalPasture · · Score: 1

      Point being, what's the point? All things being equal, these ear buds are less flexible than normal headphones and will probably be significantly more expensive. Is this an answer in search of a problem?

      My thoughts exactly. I don't need my headphones to try to figure out what I'm doing, I often don't know myself. Besides, I long ago switched to bluetooth stereo headphones (with a play and pause button on the side).

    32. Re:Van Gogh. . . by DigitalPasture · · Score: 1

      Will you guys please stop the "then don't buy it" bullshit? This is a discussion, not eBay.

      My point is valid. If you are concerned about not having an ear free to listen to what is going on around you, DON'T BUY THE HEADPHONES THAT REQUIRE BOTH EARS TO BE LISTENING. Seems pretty common sense. Am I missing something? There are definitely other (cheaper) options out there. You have the normal ear buds, the single earbud (saw this at Radio Shack awhile back for about $4 USD) as well as hundreds of other options I'm not going to spend the time to document.

    33. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      perhaps in the ear of your scantily clad model?

      He sometimes painted his mom. No! Wait! It was your mom he was painting!

    34. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      aids

    35. Re:Van Gogh. . . by Asclepius99 · · Score: 1

      I'd like the feature, if you could turn it on or off. If I'm waiting for someone to call or something, I usually listen to music with my headphones on only one ear. So the price for the convenience is limited options in other scenarios which is why I'm not really sure it's convenient at all. I suppose it depends on what options you'd like to have available.

  2. What if...? by mackil · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Great idea, but what if you listen to music with only one ear? I work in an office environment where people regularly interrupt my coding work. As a result, I have taken the habit of listening to my music with only one ear bud. That way I can hear whenever someone is trying to get my attention, but can still listen to my alternative rock to my heart's content.

    1. Re:What if...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How about you and Van Gogh buy some other earphones? Or do they have to get your personal approval on this one?

    2. Re:What if...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I realize this is a tough one to figure out, but the solution is to not buy these headphones.

    3. Re:What if...? by blakelarson · · Score: 2, Funny

      Easy -- just put both ear buds in one ear!

    4. Re:What if...? by mockchoi · · Score: 1

      I do exactly the same thing. It can't be all that uncommon.

    5. Re:What if...? by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

      Wrap some scotch tape around an earphone.

      Wait, was this technology supposed to make things more convenient?

    6. Re:What if...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I realise you may not be very smart, but realizing that when music is paused, you don't need any ear buds at all isn't too hard either. You usually stop the music only once, so the "removing both earbuds" functionality is completely useless - might as well make that the pause 'button'.

    7. Re:What if...? by Estragib · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You'd be right it the first sentence of TFA didn't read, "Sony Ericsson may soon make the play button a thing of the past with its new motion-controlled earbuds." With a claim like that, this kind of critical response to the arcticle is to be expected and justified.

    8. Re:What if...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I realize this is a tough one to figure out, but the solution is to not buy these headphones.

      Wow! Thanks AC! Mod this one Informative. I had my check book out when I read this post.

    9. Re:What if...? by ChienAndalu · · Score: 1

      I think this technology works best if it can be disabled sometimes.

    10. Re:What if...? by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ideally there would be a setting in software.

    11. Re:What if...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The idea is that if you're let's say a jogger... you jog down the street with your headphones on... then you run into your friend Mary. You stop to talk and like many other people, you remove one headphone so that you can converse rather than yell at each other. This makes this frequent gesture better by pausing the music for you.

      Is this necessary for everyone in every circumstance? No. But is it worth it to someone? Yes, I'm sure it is.

    12. Re:What if...? by dnahelicase · · Score: 1

      Is it a great idea? Are people really that lazy that they would buy specialized devices just so they don't have to hit a button? Does that make it easier? I realize that developing new technologies is a good thing, but you're really trying to sell me earphones I have to take out of my ears and then reinsert (but only one!) in order to answer a call? I wonder if you can change the volume based on the pressure that you shove them into your ears with...

    13. Re:What if...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Are people really that lazy that they would buy specialized devices just so they don't have to hit a button?

      Are you really that lazy that you would buy a specialized device to spin the CD instead of manually rotating it by hand?

    14. Re:What if...? by mackil · · Score: 1

      I think it's an interesting idea, and certainly headed in the right direction. Having had one of the early mp3 players back in the day, it was a relief to deal with the iPod just because of the simplicity of the interface.

      What we really need is a 'mouse gesture' like control for your headphones. That way the user could customize their controls to whatever they wanted. Now THAT is something I would buy... but then that would probably prove too complicated for the average user. Never know though...

    15. Re:What if...? by NoYob · · Score: 1

      Great idea, but what if you listen to music with only one ear? I work in an office environment where people regularly interrupt my coding work. As a result, I have taken the habit of listening to my music with only one ear bud. That way I can hear whenever someone is trying to get my attention, but can still listen to my alternative rock to my heart's content.

      You can concentrate on what you're doing when you listen to music?

      When I tried that once, my attention alternates between the music, what I'm doing while tuning out the music, to not paying attention to anything, and just being distracted. What I'm saying is, I can't do it and be productive - and I'm also saying that I don't think anyone else can either.

      --
      It's NOT me! It's the meds! I'm on 1000mg of Fukitol.
    16. Re:What if...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why stop the music? I'm perfectly capable of listening to music in one ear, and pretending I'm listening to Mary with the other.

    17. Re:What if...? by oh_bugger · · Score: 1

      I'm a developer and I listen to music at work too. But I use it to help me ignore my coworkers. They think twice about bothering me if I have my earphones in. They try to figure it out for themselves for a change!

      --
      Go home and shave your giant head of smell with your bad self
    18. Re:What if...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Consider that he is doing even more than that. Listening to music in one ear, people in the room in the other ear, plus coding. Ugh, that has to be the stupidest idea ever.

      I mean for most people the whole point of listening to music is to shut out all the other sounds so they can focus on whatever it is they are working on. In that case the music is just background noise, not meant to be focused on as you suggest.

    19. Re:What if...? by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      He isn't the only one who regularly puts in one headphone all the time. I do too, and based on all the other posters, they do too.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    20. Re:What if...? by Jurily · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This makes this frequent gesture better by pausing the music for you.

      I believe the correct solution is to allow a one-ear mode, and to retain the functionality of the pause/play button at all times. Insert two, remove one: playback stops. Insert only one: playback starts.

      Nobody gets to tell me how many ears to use for listening to music, tyvm.

    21. Re:What if...? by Demonantis · · Score: 1

      Maybe after enough people complaining a firmware update that lets you setup what the reaction to triggers will be. I mean if it is written well, it should be object oriented enough to allow for this with little effort. It is silly how much software is written that could be improved by letting the user have more access to preferences to configure the software to their specific situation. Of course there can always be a default for those that are to busy to fiddle.

    22. Re:What if...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is because the "options" the user expects don't often exist. And if you allow the user to input data you now have to test exponentially more "setups" than before. The extra work leads to less options and more "stock" values.

    23. Re:What if...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody is telling you to buy these earbuds either.

    24. Re:What if...? by gbarules2999 · · Score: 1

      We all know that's just sensationalist journalism at its finest. Acting like Sony is out to spite the one-eared music lovers of the world is completely dishonest when only faced with such a ridiculous, Google-surfer-eye-catching quote.

    25. Re:What if...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At first I was going to suggest not using these, but someone else already beat me to it.

      However, upon further thought I realized the solution is simple. Why hide the functionality from the user? Make it configurable... for instance, I personally also like to listen with both earbuds while coding at work, but I also sometimes listen with one in cases where someone might walk in and start talking to me. Why not just make it configurable so I can do just that, and when I remove them then it "pauses" or "stops" depending on what my preference is. Another neat idea is if you have only one inserted, both L/R channels are played through the one earbud that's in my ear and the other earbud is deactivated. That would be very useful to me.

    26. Re:What if...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work in an office environment where people regularly interrupt my coding work. As a result, I have taken the habit of listening to my music at full volume with noise canceling over the ear headphones. That way I can't hear the jackass trying to distract me from my work.

    27. Re:What if...? by MBGMorden · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's great, but that doesn't mean that these aren't useful. 10% of the population is left handed. Some devices are built specifically for right handed people. The solution for them isn't to complain that such devices exist, but rather to buy ambidextrous or left-hand specific items. Anyone who thinks that an item is poorly designed simply because it doesn't meet their specific criteria is just being naive.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    28. Re:What if...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great idea, but what if you listen to music with only one ear?

      then don't buy them.

    29. Re:What if...? by Rasperin · · Score: 1

      I wear sound blocking headphones so that I don't have to listen to co-workers ramble on about meaningless things. If they really want my attention they can tap my shoulder.

      --
      WTF Slashdot, why do I have to login 50 times to post?
    30. Re:What if...? by vertinox · · Score: 1

      Great idea, but what if you listen to music with only one ear? I work in an office environment where people regularly interrupt my coding work.

      Simple. Stick the unused earbud into your coworkers ear.

      Not only will you continue to listen to your music, but your coworkers will think twice about asking you a question next time.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    31. Re:What if...? by mjayde · · Score: 1

      Great idea, but what if you listen to music with only one ear? I work in an office environment where people regularly interrupt my coding work.

      Try sticking the other in your nose.

    32. Re:What if...? by jayme0227 · · Score: 1

      I thought it was sad that you had to post this response to begin with. I was wrong. The really sad part is that you were modded insightful on this one. I would have thought that any reasonable person would be able to figure out that they shouldn't buy a product if it doesn't pertain to them, and that not every product is useful for every person.

      Honestly, even if you(not you in particular, but you in general) don't like these particular headphones, just the technology that they bring about is interesting. Maybe their next product (or their rival's next product) will allow you to listen with just one earbud in, or let you program it to work in the way that you would prefer. It bothers me how people treat one singular advancement as the end of advancement in that tree, when it is highly possible that considerably more development will branch off from the new technology.

      I can't complain about that, too much, though. I know I've done the same thing myself in a past life.

      --
      But then I realized the cable was blue, so I only gave it one star. I hate blue.
    33. Re:What if...? by Kyont · · Score: 1

      Better yet, I regularly eavesdrop by sticking both earbuds in and pretending I can't hear people near me. They'll say almost anything out loud as long as I throw out a little air guitar and cymbal hits when they glance over. Some days the office gossip gets so good in the neighboring cubicles, I forget to start the music.

      --
      You shall see a cow on the roof of a cotton house.
    34. Re:What if...? by Wowsers · · Score: 1

      If you listen to music with one ear, then Sony assumes you are a pirate who is letting the music be shared with your friends, so they stop the music playback. It is thus their latest attempt at DRM. You can only listen to music yourself, not with your friends!

      --
      Take Nobody's Word For It.
    35. Re:What if...? by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Just supply with sane defaults which 99% of the buyers would use, and the others could configure.

    36. Re:What if...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      headphones are activated by body contact,

      to repeat a poster above, stick the other ear bud in your ummm belly button, yeah that must be what they were meaning. Or you know they sell these things called wires, and with some electrical tape, you have a fake ear to connect the sensor pads together when you want single operation mode.

    37. Re:What if...? by tftp · · Score: 1

      What I'm saying is, I can't do it and be productive - and I'm also saying that I don't think anyone else can either.

      There are people who require complete silence to think. You are one of them, as it seems, and so am I. However there are people who perform best in a loud, noisy environment. I do not know why it is so, but some of my coworkers are such people - if they are at their desks they have headphones on. I guess that would be an interesting question for scientists.

      I personally find the music a distraction when I'm trying to design things. On the other hand, if I'm doing a repetitive, non-creative work (like assembling a PCB) then music helps me a lot. A job of soldering of a handful of 0805 capacitors requires exactly zero creativity and almost zero brain power - my hands do the work on autopilot. The brain is free to listen to the music.

    38. Re:What if...? by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      And how would you access the software in your headphones?

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    39. Re:What if...? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      And how would you access the software in your headphones?

      How do the headphones control the music player?

    40. Re:What if...? by karnal · · Score: 1

      Do this to a coworker's phone (earpiece works best; microphone just pisses off the other party) and watch.

      --
      Karnal
    41. Re:What if...? by shentino · · Score: 1

      Then they should put in a button/switch that allows you to control the autopause behavior, yes?

    42. Re:What if...? by vaporland · · Score: 1

      share the other earbud with your next-door cubicle dweller...

      --
      Ask Me About... The 80's!
    43. Re:What if...? by vegiVamp · · Score: 1

      Funny ? If I had mod-points, you'd get a +1 Insightful off me.

      --
      What a depressingly stupid machine.
    44. Re:What if...? by vegiVamp · · Score: 1

      > I think this technology works best if it can be disabled sometimes.

      This is the case for all technology, IMO. Feel free to make failsafes for dangerous tech hard to override, but make sure you *can* override if you need to. You never know when you'll need to reconfigure your graviton emitter arrays.

      --
      What a depressingly stupid machine.
  3. A lot of technology for a simple thing? by hattig · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "this will allow you to 'play your music and answer phone calls just by inserting the buds into your ear or taking them out"

    Sounds more awkward than pressing a button on the phone in my opinion, but if you're driving or you can't otherwise get at the device it could be useful. Or if you have ears that aren't just right for in-ear 'phones, which keep falling out as a result.

    However what's wrong with a clicker on the cable?

    1. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ...but if you're driving...

      You shouldn't have plugs in both ears. Illegal in most places. Dangerous in all places.

      Oh, and put the phone down. You're driving.

    2. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by mrisaacs · · Score: 1

      I don't know about local driving rules where you are, but in NY State it's illegal to drive w/o having one ear "free" - so not a good solution for driving.

      An no, I don't think this is more convenient than a button either.

      --
      ...carrier dead.....
    3. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by MartinSchou · · Score: 1

      The really silly things about laws against wearing ear plugs in a car is that it is perfectly legal to have the car stereo turned up so loud, that you can't even hear a fog horn being used in seat next to you.

      At most you'll be risking a fine for noise pollution, not reckless driving

    4. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by defaria · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Quite frankly BULLSHIT! Having music playing in your earbuds is no more or less distracting than playing the radio loudly. In both cases you can hear the music very well and other things not so well. If you are gonna outlaw earbuds then you must outlaw stereos.

    5. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by Dog-Cow · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I hope you die because the ambulance you were riding in couldn't get past some idiot who couldn't hear the sirens.

    6. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by thesandtiger · · Score: 1

      if you're driving... ... and you have headphones in, you have bigger problems than fucking around with buttons, namely that you're an idiot.

      Seriously, what makes people think that deafening themselves while operating a multi-ton vehicle at high speeds is a good idea?

      (Feel the same way about overly loud music in cars. My lawn; you're on it.)

      --
      Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
    7. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by nloop · · Score: 1

      That law has never made sense to me. You are allowed to drive with loud music and the windows up, but not headphones? It's pretty much the same thing.

      Also, Deaf people can drive.

      I'm not arguing Deaf people shouldn't drive, I'm saying headphones should be allowed. My stereo doesn't have an aux in port, I have to.

    8. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by ZekoMal · · Score: 1

      Wow, that is a new level of ludditism. Now, it's not just interactive conversations that are somehow magically more dangerous if you use one of those evil modern talkie devices. Now, you are somehow being more dangerous listening to music if it is produced by the one of those evil modern talkie devices than if it is produced by the good and holy devices that became popular in or before the more righteous and holy 1980's.

      I do so hope that you are being funny. Cellphones. Worse than driving a little drunk. Common knowledge. Sentence fragments. Also, earphones in ears while driving means no hearie the big wailing emergency vehicles or cop cars, or hearing the honking horn. Besides, you yourself are quite the luddite for failing to note that there are these magical things called radios...and CD players...and even MP3 players that jack straight into your car's sound system. Why, there's even this mystical device called "hands free" that you can use with your cell phone. There, your hands are on the wheel and your useless crap is still available.

      Now you can use those holy and righteous devices from after the 90's without getting people killed the next time you pile into your SUV.

    9. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      New-fangled ambulances have a high-tech visual alert system (flashing red light) to warn deaf drivers/drivers with headphones/etc. I don't hope you die (because only an asshole would say something like that), but I do hope someone hits you on the head hard enough to knock some sense into it.

    10. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by Belial6 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Thank you for reinforcing my point on the stupidity of people who have no problems with the exact same results produced by a pre-90's technology like a walkman or even AM radio, while thinking that post 90's technology is somehow far more dangerous.

      (Yes, I know that the cell phone technically predates the 90's, but it was post 90 that it became popularized.)

    11. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by mujadaddy · · Score: 1

      deafening themselves while operating a multi-ton vehicle at high speeds

      I drive a Tata, you insensitive clod!

      --
      Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
      "Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
    12. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by adolf · · Score: 2

      That law has never made sense to me. You are allowed to drive with loud music and the windows up, but not headphones? It's pretty much the same thing.

      Also, Deaf people can drive.

      That deaf people can drive does not mean that drivers should deafen themselves while driving.

    13. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by Belial6 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Wow. Every single sentence of that post showed a great deal of ignorance. Seriously. Every single one of them. Just amazing.

    14. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by internettoughguy · · Score: 1

      Why not, one law for all they say..

    15. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by hattig · · Score: 1

      I totally agree - it was pretty much the only example of needing such a device that I could think of immediately, and the fact that said example is illegal in many places shows how totally pointless it is.

      Not that I wanted to start such an argument.

    16. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by hattig · · Score: 1

      I'm totally against mobile phone usage when driving - see my posting history!

      Just used it as an example. The fact the example is illegal says a lot about how useful this technology is in the real world.

    17. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Use the CD player you idiot, it's not a matter of holiness, it's a matter of plugging your fucking ears. You don't need to do that at all, just plug your media player in the car and use the speakers like an intelligent being would.

    18. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, he's ignorant, so why bother having an argument with him right? Let's just baselessly claim he's ignorant instead. Good one, tool.

    19. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by Chyeld · · Score: 1

      Yes but the sentence fragments displayed a rare wisdom I've only seen in Afterschool specials.

      Beyond that, OP has more of a point than your attack. Just because you can do something, and just because you can claim 'it doesn't impact shit' or 'it's only as bad as something else someone can do' doesn't mean you should.

    20. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      That's bodacious!

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    21. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by Swordsman02155 · · Score: 1

      What happens if you are listening to music, and theres an incoming call? does it put it up right away automatically without any warning - or do you have to fiddle around with buttons then?

    22. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by vegiVamp · · Score: 1

      I don't know the exact wording, but over here, the law roughly states that you have to apply your full attention to the road when driving. Strictly speaking, that could also be interpreted as 'no loud music, no eating breakfast, no reading your newspaper, no applying makeup and no shaving'. Yes, I've seen people do all of that behind the wheel.

      --
      What a depressingly stupid machine.
    23. Re:A lot of technology for a simple thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have to. If your car stereo has a tape player then use a cassette adapter, otherwise use a FM transmitter.

  4. I often... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I often listen to music with only 1 headphone... (To hear what's going on near me while listening music)
    Now Sony decided that I can't do it anymore!

    I, for one, welcome our new headphones overload!

    1. Re:I often... by Columcille · · Score: 1

      "Now Sony decided that I can't do it anymore!"

      Oops, looks like you made a typo. You meant to say: "Now Sony has given an additional choice to people who use both headphones."

      --
      I love my sig.
    2. Re:I often... by treeves · · Score: 1

      No, no. Sony really did enforceably forbid everyone from buying any earphones except the ones mentioned in this article, effective immediately. I always knew they were super evil.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
  5. Flawed design by DwrfwithHamr · · Score: 1

    I usualy walk with only one earbud inside my head. Not getting hit by car, is always better then stereo sound. For me this means the headphones will not work. This feature belongs in rubbish bin, as far as I am concerned.

  6. Good Idea... by PrimaryConsult · · Score: 2, Interesting
    so long as it works properly. Many times I take my headphones off to order food, talk to a bank teller, etc and then three hours later, I find it has been playing the entire time. This will do wonders for battery life...

    But what is more likely to happen is the contact mechanism will wear out in six months and it will be difficult to get them to play at all...

    1. Re:Good Idea... by fulldecent · · Score: 5, Funny

      but considering this is Sony, it is very likely that the headphones will overheat and explode in your ear, cause a commotion at a UN meeting, install a rootkit on anything you insert it in, and lose a format war with something else on the market.

      --

      -- I was raised on the command line, bitch

    2. Re:Good Idea... by The+Archon+V2.0 · · Score: 1

      but considering this is Sony, it is very likely that the headphones will overheat and explode in your ear, cause a commotion at a UN meeting, install a rootkit on anything you insert it in

      Including your ears.

      (Sadly, I'm sure the DRM-happy loons would root our ears if they could, so we can't hear people singing "Happy Birthday" unless they've paid the performance fee.)

    3. Re:Good Idea... by internettoughguy · · Score: 1

      Didn't Sony win the format war?

    4. Re:Good Idea... by The+Wild+Norseman · · Score: 1

      so long as it works properly. Many times I take my headphones off to order food, talk to a bank teller, etc and then three hours later, I find it has been playing the entire time.

      It seriously takes three hours for you to order food? Just take the Big Mac already and get on with your day.

      --
      "A government is a body of people usually -- notably -- ungoverned." -Shepherd Book
  7. weak sauce. by superdana · · Score: 5, Informative

    The MH907 is only compatible with Sony Ericsson's own Fast Port-equipped phones -- Fast Port is SE's proprietary connector on the bottom of its phones.

    Fail.

    1. Re:weak sauce. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What?!?!?!

      Do you mean Sony has made some proprietary piece of shit that will only work with Sony hardware?

    2. Re:weak sauce. by dyingtolive · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Makes sense. How else would you notify the device playing music that you wish for the music to stop?

      As an aside, I'm not sure about iPods, but the Zune will automatically pause music if the headphones have been removed. You could make an analogue to this technology by implementing something similar to that in an ordinary mp3/cd player and having a cutoff switch for the circuit in the ear piece (or on the cord, or wherever), and just trip it when appropriate. Resuming play automatically would be a trick, but then again, honestly how lazy are we?

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    3. Re:weak sauce. by Thuktun · · Score: 1

      The MH907 is only compatible with Sony Ericsson's own Fast Port-equipped phones -- Fast Port is SE's proprietary connector on the bottom of its phones.

      Fail.

      How, pray tell, would you expect them to do this with current, standard headphones? It's possible you're referring to their lack of a standard connector like USB, in which case you might have a point.

      Sadly, nuance like that is apparently not conveyable in 4chan-speak.

    4. Re:weak sauce. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      As an aside, I'm not sure about iPods, but the Zune will automatically pause music if the headphones have been removed. You could make an analogue to this technology by implementing something similar to that in an ordinary mp3/cd player and having a cutoff switch for the circuit in the ear piece (or on the cord, or wherever), and just trip it when appropriate. Resuming play automatically would be a trick, but then again, honestly how lazy are we?

      iPods have been doing this since long before the first Zune even came out.

    5. Re:weak sauce. by iamhigh · · Score: 1

      How else would you notify the device playing music that you wish for the music to stop?

      Well there has to be a full circuit... Simple switch that is always on when it has pressure, such as being jammed in your ear; when removed from the pressure the contact is broken and so is the circuit.

      --
      No comprende? Let me type that a little slower for you...
    6. Re:weak sauce. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, a second generation iPod nano has this jack-sensing feature (I can't speak for other models). It's actually quite useful, you can pause music with the player on hold by removing the jack. The real advantage here is that you can guarantee that your player will switch itself off (the cursed "clickwheel" interface is a huge contact area that will wake the iPod back up if it's not on hold), as there's no explicit "off" button (though there is an enable-able soft-option).

      And what a good idea for a Saturday project, although for best results, you'd want to communicate with the device directly (which would probably require alternate firmware, or at least significant hackery).

    7. Re:weak sauce. by fulldecent · · Score: 4, Interesting

      with a 4-port 1/4" jack... like the ipod

      --

      -- I was raised on the command line, bitch

    8. Re:weak sauce. by fulldecent · · Score: 1

      >> with a 4-port 1/4" jack... like the ipod

      i forgot that slashdot disabled the s|1/4|1/8|g feature that was originally in slashcode.

      --

      -- I was raised on the command line, bitch

    9. Re:weak sauce. by dyingtolive · · Score: 1

      And what a good idea for a Saturday project, although for best results, you'd want to communicate with the device directly (which would probably require alternate firmware, or at least significant hackery).

      Yeah, I miss my old phillips cd player. It had some strange mini-jack with four contacts in it, and had a inline "remote" that allowed for volume control and basic skip/play/pause controls. That thing was great for having in a backpack or pocket and being able to skip songs. I wish they would standardize something like that.
      Sony, try putting a control knob on the earbuds to skip songs.

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    10. Re:weak sauce. by Thuktun · · Score: 1

      with a 4-port 1/4" jack... like the ipod

      I assume you mean 1/8". I thought the iPod used a regular TRS connector and the iPhone used the TRRS/4-conductor plug. Curious how this would work with their "one out pause, two out stop" method of control.

    11. Re:weak sauce. by pavon · · Score: 1

      The protocol used by iPod remotes is every bit as proprietary as this.

    12. Re:weak sauce. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Pretty well all SE phones use fast port. They don't have normal headphone jacks. Are you suggesting SE should make a headset that doesn't fit their own phones???

      And even if they did make one that used a 3.5mm jack, they'd need some proprietary in-band signaling protocol to do the pause/stop, so it wouldn't work with a non-SE phone anyway.

    13. Re:weak sauce. by Joe+Jay+Bee · · Score: 1

      Pretty well all SE phones use fast port. They don't have normal headphone jacks

      Mine does, a little £5 cheap fucker (the J132). Has a headphone jack for the built in radio. I love it.

    14. Re:weak sauce. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course. They probably also require some multicabled adapter to use also. You know, with volume buttons. So that way you'll 20 feet of wire in your pocket and a soon to be faulty proprietary plug. Why Sony do anything else?

    15. Re:weak sauce. by vegiVamp · · Score: 1

      > how lazy are we?

      YMBNH.

      --
      What a depressingly stupid machine.
  8. Useless by cl0s · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ehh... When my phone rings, the music just pauses itself. But then again my phone is also my MP3 player. Useless... to me at least.

    1. Re:Useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ehh... When my phone rings, the music just pauses itself. But then again my phone is also my MP3 player. Useless... to me at least.

      Somebody had better tell Sony to stop development immediately then.

  9. Waiting To Hear About The Rootkit... by Xin+Jing · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Get it? Waiting to hear... Sony headphones... Rootkit.

    Ugh, nevermind.

  10. Hmm ... by daveime · · Score: 1

    According to Sony Ericsson, this will allow you to 'play your music and answer phone calls just by inserting the buds into your ear or taking them out'

    So you can listen to music with both earphones, but only listen to a telephone conversation piped through one earphone as you had to remove the other to pause the music ? And what happens if the person calling you puts you on one of those annoying musical hold things ?

    It's bad enough they sneak in rootkits, now they're sneaking in paradoxes.

    1. Re:Hmm ... by bcmm · · Score: 1

      It's bad enough they sneak in rootkits, now they're sneaking in paradoxes.

      They're obviously developing a new rootkit that is totally undetectable because it both is and isn't there.

      --
      # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
      Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
  11. Engineering challenge: by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

    I hope they built them in a way, that will avoid them switching on, while touching anything while not being in your ear. Like dangling on your chest, touching your arm or something hanging in front of you, etc.
    Oh, and please let them also not use energy to detect touches, because else even non-triggering touches could use up your batteries.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    1. Re:Engineering challenge: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder how those thermometers that give you an instant reading from your ear work and how much energy they drain? I have no idea how these headphones are made but that's what I'd consider easier to make functional than any mechanism which is pressed in when you put the headphone in your ear since anything like that will, if it's too soft, be pressed in whilst dangling and if they're stiffer, they will feel uncomfortable.

    2. Re:Engineering challenge: by Idiomatick · · Score: 1

      I assume it would be a button on the edge of the earbud or the cushion of the headphone that gets indented when you are wearing them. Seems simple enough to me.

  12. iPod elimated the difference between pause/stop by sandymac · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My first iPod showed me that there is no reason to distinguish between the concept of pause or the concept of stop. For some type of media devices it makes sense to have an off button but for many devices even that can be combined in with the pause button.

    1. Re:iPod elimated the difference between pause/stop by Idiomatick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Stop has always just meant pause or at most pause and go back. I think the last time I was something different than that would be.... VHS? Pause resulted in ugly lines. So ... unless iPod was released in the early 90s I really think you are giving credit for no reason.

    2. Re:iPod elimated the difference between pause/stop by happykoala · · Score: 1

      This is the way I understand it to work: If you play after a stop, the song will start from the beginning. If you play after a pause, it will continue from where it paused. And off is to turn it off and preserve my battery power.

    3. Re:iPod elimated the difference between pause/stop by gavri · · Score: 1

      The point is that the iPod did not have separate pause and stop buttons

  13. Pause feature too restrictive by NYMeatball · · Score: 1

    I'm lucky enough to have a policy at work that allows me to both bring my iPod in to work with me, as well as listen to it while working so long as I keep it reasonably quiet. I frequently (always?) use the "one bud in, one bud out" method so that I don't miss important things like actual conversations with co-workers. For people like me who use this listening style, this would be pointless. Surely they've considered this and have an option to alter the pause mechanics?

    1. Re:Pause feature too restrictive by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      Surely they've considered this and have an option to alter the pause mechanics?

      Yes. It's called "Buy some other headphones(TM)"

    2. Re:Pause feature too restrictive by NYMeatball · · Score: 1

      This seems to be the popular trend throughout the thread - this is all fine and dandy. In fact, for someone like me, they don't even care as the brand of hardware I use isn't compatible with their headphones to begin with. Point being - if I'm a well known brand like Sony, I don't want to spend all this R&D and marketing towards something new and great, and have my closing line be "Hey go buy something else!". I'm not complaining about the headphones - like I said I wouldn't ever have the chance to use them. I do however question why if they're going to produce something this necessarily complex they aren't going to offer functionality that seems like it would appease at least a large enough portion of their target audience.

  14. typical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [quote]
    The MH907 is only compatible with Sony Ericsson's own Fast Port-equipped phones
    [/quote]
    they could probably sell quite a few of these headphones if they had just used a 3.5mm jack...

  15. what? by bananaquackmoo · · Score: 1

    So what happens when you want to hear the phone call, but haven't got the headphones in your ear? I'm guessing you have to use it against your head, like a phone? Whats the point then?

  16. Oblig. quote by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

    I'm lucky enough to have a policy at work that allows me to both bring my iPod in to work with me, as well as listen to it while working so long as I keep it reasonably quiet./

    I was told that I could listen to the radio at a reasonable volume from nine to eleven, I told Bill that if Sandra is going to listen to her headphones while she's filing then I should be able to listen to the radio while I'm collating so I don't see why I should have to turn down the radio because I enjoy listening at a reasonable volume from nine to eleven.

          Brett

  17. Plan B by zzyber · · Score: 1

    What if you put them in the nose?

  18. gimmick by Threni · · Score: 1

    Since when did Slashdot be a resting place for crap, gimmicky rubbish?

  19. Isn't this just an ad? by charliemopps11 · · Score: 1

    Isn't this just an ad? Seriously, this isn't even slightly innovative. How may MP3 players come with a set of controls on the cord? How is this any better?

  20. Wow... SLOW news day? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have now noticed no less than 4 different sources running with this story... So they have earphones that stop playing music when you take them out of your ears. BFD! Is this the only development in the entire world today?

  21. Re:Music & Productive by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    You mean well, but you must not know of a couple techniques.

    The AC below you had the clue to your puzzle - it's listening to the other people that sinks everything.

    If someone authorizes you to work in a bloc because Something Must Get Done, you can then tap the music to boost your productivity.
    My productivity goes up some 20-25% doing that.

    The thing is - for me at least it works precisely and only on songs you like and know extremely well.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  22. sony rootkit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    never forget, never forgive

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_rootkit

  23. More Office Rage by archer,+the · · Score: 1

    Worker 1: Dude, I got this new phone, but the MP3 player doesn't work.

    Worker 2: Stick it in your ear.

    Worker 1: WTF? You stick it in your ear! Jerk.

  24. now if only... by Deisatru · · Score: 1

    They could get ear buds that actually fit my ears.

  25. You can't 'buy' them anyway... by Joce640k · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They only work with special SONY-only proprietary connectors and mp3 players. I'm sure this will trigger a sea change of people dumping their iPods and iPhones and switching to SONY.

    Or maybe not.

    --
    No sig today...
  26. It doesn't take Macgyver by aynoknman · · Score: 1

    Great idea, but what if you listen to music with only one ear?

    I'm guessing that a piece of Scotch tape wrapped around the bud that's not in your ear will do the trick.

    --
    We need a "+1 -- nice sig" moderation.
  27. Re: This will do wonders for battery life... by Joce640k · · Score: 1

    It might if they don't use power the whole time. Oh, wait...

    --
    No sig today...
  28. Auto-pause! by MasterNetHead · · Score: 1

    A solution! I hate hate hate it when I'm listening to something and the earbuds get yanked out of my ears by a wayward finger or pen. Too bad its proprietary. And I'd like to echo sandymac's comment. Who needs to differentiate between stop and pause on MP3 players anymore? Oh and while we're at it, lets stop calling them MP3 players and come up with a better name than portable music player, please.

    1. Re:Auto-pause! by ZackSchil · · Score: 1

      Oh, I know! Let's call them iPods! It's dynamic, catchy, and has this idiosyncratic spelling that I think will really take hold with the general public.

  29. Really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "If you're listening to music when a call comes in, you have to remove both earphones to stop the music, and then put one back in to answer"

    Sounds like a classic case of horrible user functionality!

  30. Article could be clearer by oqaqiq · · Score: 1

    In the section "How it works", the article explains how to use it, but not how it works. At some point it talks about "motion controlled" earbuds and then it says it is "activated by body contact".
    Frankly, if this article wanted me to consider a chance to buy this product, it should have been more precise. So far it is so vague that I just don't believe that this product will work as advertised.
    This is lame journalism. In fact this is not even journalism, it looks like an ad.

  31. Don't call this a "contact headphone" by dingen · · Score: 1

    TFA doesn't call it that and neither should Slashdot. A "contact headphone" implies a speaker system which uses direct contact with a surface to reproduce sound, just like a contact microphone records sound through direct contact with a surface, instead of using the air as a carrier.

    Obviously what SE has done here has nothing to do with the actual speaker system, but just adds a motion detector to a regular headphone, which of course only works through a closed and proprietary interface which of course can only be found in devices by SE.

    So please, don't attract my attention with an interesting sounding headline, while in fact it's just a commercial. Thank you.

    --
    Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
  32. headphone ideas by BRUTICUS · · Score: 1

    Does Sony think they have some groundbreaking new way of listening to music here? Very anticlimactic if so. What I think headphones need most of all is to be WIRELESS, also have more controls built in. On my iphone I have pause, skip track, skip back, play etc...how about the ability for voice commands? "play metallica", "shuffle alternative", "create quicklist, metallica, nirvana, alternative, shuffle all". The ability for voice commands might not work with an earbud as its pretty small to carry the weight of a mic while being wireless. However, what if your voice was picked up by some other means? Perhaps from the vibrations created in your head while you speak? Or possibly both headphones work together to gather the sound of your voice by measuring vibrations in between the two of them?

  33. Boycott? by Flere+Imsaho · · Score: 1

    C'mon, this is Slashdot - I thought we were all boycotting Sony after that root kit fiasco?

    --
    It gripped her hand gently. 'Regret is for humans,' it said.
  34. Another theme by Time_Ngler · · Score: 1

    How about a toilet that when it detects shit it tells you it's time to wipe?

    1. Re:Another theme by cheros · · Score: 1

      Just mod a Japanese toilet, as soon as it detects "remnants" it should switch to powerjet. Also teaches you to never do that again..

      --
      Insert .sig here. Send no money now. Owner may sue, contents will settle. Batteries not included.
  35. What if you only use one earphone? by ksemlerK · · Score: 1

    I only use both earphones if I'm in a noisey environment, or running power equipment. Other then that, I only insert 1 ear bud so I can hear the surrounding environment while at work. I hope there's a way to bypass the "one ear pause" of these earbuds.

  36. Tester's worst nightmare? by xezas · · Score: 1

    I'd hate to be the person testing this device...

    "Not working for you?...maybe you didn't shove it far enough inside." is not something I'd want to hear. Ever.

  37. test by adolf · · Score: 1

    just testing:

    ecode

    1
      2
      3

    pre

    1
      2
        3

    thx