Slashdot Mirror
IBM launching wearable PC
ari{Dal} writes "New IBM wearable PCs with eraser sized mice should be released by the end of the next year.
" With viewable-equivalent 14" screens, speech-recognition software and probable cost of 2000$, I think my carry-on bags for flying just dropped by another one.
The quote in the article is "anyone who would buy a laptop would buy one of these". That's not true in my opinion.
I'm not saying they're cool, and I'm not saying, as an uber-geek, I won't own one. But to make a blanket statement that people who buy laptops (my sister the computer illiterate as a good example) will buy these is a bit too optimistic.
Werd.
>You can get the illusion of a screen being further away by having TWO screens...
That still wont help(encreasing the differance between the apparent stereoscopic- and lenz-focus- distance just makes it worse actually). That just fools the stereoscopic depth perseption(spell?). The problem is that the eye still has to focus at a wery close range. This problem is solved by having a lenz attached direcly at the mini-screen.
LINUX stands for: Linux Inux Nux Ux X
FRA: STFU GTFO
>Maybe I'm missing the point, but are we so
:)
>wrapped up in technology that we can't walk down
>the street without bringing our computer with us?
The whole point is that we now have a *choice*. Same thing with cellphones or pagers. If I don't want to be disturbed, I turn them off or leave them home. Simple.
Years ago, in the days before itegrated circuits, if your car broke down on the highway, a hundred miles from Nowheresville, you had to wait for someone to stop and help you out. Nowadays, folks can call a tow-truck company instantly. Believe you me, that's important to someone who has to drive 160km per weekday in an 8 year old car.
>Can we no longer survive two hours without
>e-mail, the Net, our cellphone or Fax?
I know I can, but constant Net access isn't important to my studies. Cellphones and daily email, however, are.
>People are getting so addicted and dependant on
>technology and information that I wonder where
>family values will be in a few years.
Warning: "Family values" speech detected. Interest level decreasing... interest level now at zero.
Seriously, I don't think this is a problem. We'll adjust, just like we always have in the past. Have a little faith in humanity, friend. We're more adapable than we realize.
>What about sports?
Being a lazy couch potato, my initial reaction is to say that sports can take a flying leap up my ass. But that would be rude. So I'll say instead that sports can take a flying leap up my butt.
>What about nature? Until we put CPU's in
>birds, I guess birdwatching will lose it's
>appeal. Oh I forgot, some animals _do_ have CPUs >in them.
You just reminded me... I really want an Aibo. But not a Furby. I don't trust Furbys. They look like Gremlins. Except Furby don't have exploding gas tanks. Wow. That got offtopic fast. Need... caffeine... now...
Truly portable computers don't really change anything. Humans have always been dependant on technology of some kind, whether it's a hunting spear or a water treatment plant. The only real difference is the degree of sophistication.
Plus, it's just *too* cool a gadget to pass up.
Likewise, we all want our technical toys to be smaller, so "pioneers" building very expensive wearable computers don't impress me that much--they are doing what is natural. But a company that figures out how to produce them competitively and at a price I can afford, that's the real innovation to me.
Supposicell... with the copper coloured bottom. Also available as a rumble pack.
IBM will have to be careful here. A lot of the luster and the coolness factor will be lost if they even contemplate putting their recently announced ID chip in this machine.
Trying to track me is bad enough, but trying to track me while I'm wearing my computer starts to look a lot like the movie "Enemy Of The State".
They could drop the price to $100 and I wouldn't buy it unless I could clip that chip or install an OS that wouldn't allow the chip to function.
Russ
War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength. - George Orwell or George Bush?
I don't see this product on IBM's site. Nor a press release. I'd like to get one at that price, but this is just another Wearables intro in pop media.
Uhhh, from the IBM product website:
"Our wearable computers will bring user interaction to new heights. For example, when email is received the user is automatically notified by the unit which sticks a pin in their eye."
Hotnutz.com
Possibilities include voice input (urgh) or some kind of Grafiti-like language on a small pad.
Decent displays look a lot easier than decent input devices.
Paul.
You are lost in a twisty maze of little standards, all different.
I'm not sure it's all about just surfing the net while I'm walking down the street. I can think of a lot of times when I'm in a situation where I don't have my laptop and suddenly need access. PDA's don't cut it for many of these tasks (I do security support for a large telecom company), and a wearable would be perfect. Now if I can just get my IPSec client working on it...
"You can never have too many elephants on your team."
I'm not a chick, but I live with a few.
I've had to do the cell phone/beeper thing as part of my job, and when I see someone with one I pity them.
A beeper hasn't been a status symbol for 10 years. The only reason I would carry one now would be if I wanted to trigger my disconnect one to get out of a social situation.
A cell phone hasn't been a status symbol for 5 years. To me, it's just a sign that you're a lackey and the man has you on a very short leash. A geek might be impressed by an Iridium phone, but a non-geek would think you have a very old cell phone and can't afford a spiffy tiny one.
Palm Pilots are still a status symbol, but I doubt they're chick magnets.
If you must have a chick magnet status symbol, go for the old, reliable penis compensator, I mean Porsche.
George
Think how many hotties are going to be turned off by someone constantly wearing one of these, even if you explain how you have the entire illustrated Kama Sutra available, as well as links to four different chat rooms where you can ask real time advice when having sex.
A-and even if a computer wearing geek gets a hottie in bed, what happens when you get a BSOD?
"That felt good, why did you stop?"
"My OS crashed, I don't know what to do next."
And soon enough, we'll have web pages like www.nakedgirlsnextdoorwearingcomputers.com .
I kind of agree with Stephenson here, people who end up using these things constantly and in social environments are going to be rude, boring and shunned, gargoyles indeed.
Count me out of society based on wearables, if you please. Just because I can change a tire doesn't mean I'm going to walk around with a jack hanging from my belt, just because I like music doesn't mean I always have a walkman/discman on, and just because I like computers doesn't mean I want to wear one all the time.
George
If you're a wearable computing fan, you're probably thinking: "So what?"
I completely agree that IBM producing a wearable unit without any major technical innovation is largly duplicating the work of other companies. The difference is that this legitimizes the industry in the minds of many industry executives and normal users. Just as the news that Microsoft has heavily invested in some obscure technology sparks curiosity, the IBM announcement, like the IBM version of the Palm Pilot, will get wearables in to many corporate settings through the front door.
I personally have concerns about the social effects of wearables. Just as I don't carry a pager or cell phone, I'm not sure that I want the office constantly projected on a monitor centimeters from my eyes. I certainly don't want an employer requiring that I do so. But, I do want a wearable for personal use.
I'm glad to see IBM getting involved. This should attract considerable publicity and spur competition in the wearable market.
Given one hour to live, the student replied: "I'd spend it with professor FP who can make an hour seem like a lifetime."
The monitor, about half the size of a pen cap, sits about an inch from the eye, giving the user the illusion of reading a 14-inch screen at normal viewing distances.
How does this work? I've got pretty good eyesight but I can't focus on something that's only 1 inch from my eye. Would it work for people who need glasses, or would they have to use contact lenses? Would reading something this close to your eye cause damage to your eyesight?
HH
Yellow tigers crouched in jungles in her dark eyes.
She's just dressing, goodbye windows, tired starlings.
Ok. I'm tired of hearing about Media Lab and Xybernaut.
Check out Carnege Mellon's Institute for Complex engineering Systems. They've been doing the wearables for as long as anyone else.
I did a lot of undergrad work for this group, and their projects are as good/better than the stuff coming out of Media Lab, you just don't hear about it. Their wearable for speech translation currently translates between english, croatian, french and I believe one of the oriental languages (?). Pretty interesting stuff.
Sig:
Barbeque is a noun. Not a verb.
It may be a bit bulky, but it's still important. Once a major company introduces a product onto the market, other companies will try and refine the concept in order to steal some of the action. So it's a matter of time before someone ups the ante by slimming it down, turning up the power, and using the body to network wireless components (CPU in shoes, HD in wallet,)
[drool, drool....]
I see a lot of comments alluding to Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash, and I see 0 comments relating IBM's new "innovation" to William Gibson's Virtual Light. In fact, I'm rather disappointed by that. What I would like to see in a portable computer is fusing of miniturized camera technology *AND* miniturized computer technology. Put a pair of very small digital cameras on the goggles and the interior of the goggles can have a screen for each eye. The camera can broadcast the view of the room around you as the background, and overlay your text, graphics, favorite tv channels, etc) onto the image you're recieving from your environment.
As far as input devices, how about a glove with sensors in the fingertips? When you push a button on the back of the glove, a "virtual keyboard" could pop up in your vision and you could "type" on it just like a real keyboard. Maybe even with little pressure pads in the tips of the gloves' fingers, so that when you make "contact" with a key, the pad presses lightly back against you.
Having a computer effectively attached to your retina would make for super-keen LSD trips, too!
-The Reverend (I am not a Nazi nor a Troll)
=(.\')=
$2500 for a complete system, however, is starting to sound good. It's about the price of a nice laptop, and I think the market has indicated that it's about the price people are willing to pay for a nice laptop. I doubt they'll sell lots of them, and the ones they do sell will be to very niche markets (Mobile techs and maintenaince people, companies like Boeing who want to have their workers able to do stuff like pull up schematics while waist-deep in the wing of a 777, geeks who want wearables, etc.) but at that price, I'm sure they will sell some.
Also, with IBM's recent commitments to Linux and open-source in general, I'll bet they'll make sure it will run either Windows or Linux. They do have their ViaVoice speech API available for Linux, at least in beta form, so I can see them easily building a special distro that includes their ViaVoice for Linux for these things.
Now if they'll stick a wireless ethernet on it, I'll pull out the checkbook and pre-order today!
-=-=-=-=-
-=-=-=-=-
My mom's going to kick you in the face!
I hope they get Jerry Ryan to model this device. Oh please assimilate me 7, I won't resist.