This is IT? 1787
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.
What is important in technology? (Score:5, Insightful)
cities eh (Score:2, Insightful)
It doesn't look like much but... (Score:2, Insightful)
IT's not for you! (Score:5, Insightful)
COULD be exceedingly useful (Score:2, Insightful)
We Americans have never really been very much interested in public transportation. Trains, busses, subways...they all take second place to our cars. Our nice, inefficient, polluting cars. Now then, could you imagine if these things genuinely cought on? Imagine having our cities interconnected with high-speed railways, not highways. Imagine replacing all the roads in our cities with smaller pedestrian walkways, populated with people on Segways. Imagine how much less polution there would be, how much less noise would be generated, and how much less space would be wasted.
Yeah, I know...I'm still waiting for my flying cars and giant robots...but this could actually be useful technology.
yrs,
Ephemeriis
Why can't anyone see the implications of this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Begging Questions and Urban Planning (Score:0, Insightful)
This assertion begs several questions (which are extremly relevent to someone living in, say, Austin, where I am):
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)
2. How many people live in places where the weather is neither too warm or too cold to spend the time outside?
3. How many businesses have the infrastructure to handle storing and charging these things?
4. Is it really going to share the sidewalk with pedestrians? Where are they going to go now?
5. What about security? Riding around on a $3000 device that can't move faster than walking speed is a huge crime oppurtunity.
I really get disapointed when people who are smart in one are (ie fantastic engineering) think that they can easily solve all the problems (real or not) for the rest of us. The market of ideas, economics, and labor always decides what happens based on the aggregate effect of the millions of small decisions made by the individuals.
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".
Donut, glad "IT" doesn't make you DP and ski-pole to operate.
Re:I think it's dumb. (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm Surprised (Score:5, Insightful)
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!
More a proof of concept than a finished product (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:No Engine? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Less cool at $3000 (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Why can't anyone see the implications of this? (Score:4, Insightful)
Not really, it just seems like a way to waste money. If this was some kind of research project to develop stable gryos for other applications (which it may prove useful for afterall), then we would all applaud it. But so WHAT if it can stand up on its own? So WHAT if it has a turning radius of zero?
Its three thousand dollars. It probably goes much slower than an electric bike (~20 mph) and probably has heavy batteries, just like an electric bike. It will be stolen within a weeks time if you leave it anywhere but locked in your garage (no matter what spiffy lock you use in public).
This is not revolutionary, although it seems to be quite a feat of engineering. What will be great are things like fuel cells instead of batteries. Weight is a real problem with any bike/scooter/moped powered by batteries. It will be revolutionary when you can buy something with this much electronics for a few hundred dollars. For now, I'm only slightly impressed.
Segway is irrelevant to American cities (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why can't anyone see the implications of this? (Score:2, Insightful)
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?
Yeah, it's sad. I think this and its predecessor, the iBot, is extremely innovative. Unfortunately, unless it has something to do with Linux or Open Source, it automatically gets sorted into the 'lame or irrelevant' bucket in about 2/3 of Slashdotter's heads.
more obesity (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Naysayers are crazy on this one (Score:2, Insightful)
There's no reason to drive 3000lbs of metal around on fuel that comes from the other side of the planet(for some, for the other's it's processed on the other side of the planet).
This thing is intended for cities. When I went to college, I had a transportation dillema. From the dorm room to the college classroom, it took 30 minutes to walk, 30 minutes to drive, 30 minutes to ride public transportation, 15 minutes to ride a bicycle, and maybe 10 to ride a motorcycle. This thing would do the job in ten, or less.
It's not large, so you can fit many in one place. You might be able to ride them inside buildings. It can go fast, or slow. It's safer than almost any other form of transportation, and can be enjoyed by a wider audience.
For long distances cars may be work better. Likewise for rainy days. However, city-dwellers experience the effects of both less, making this more useful.
On top of that, you can avoid short bits of bad terrain by hopping off and carrying it to your next bit of (roughly)flat surface.
If just 15% of people started using these for their 1-5 mile travels, you'd see traffic problems in major cities ease.
Many people who live in major cities don't even buy cars. I believe they'd enjoy this quite a bit. Plus, for people who only need to travel 1-5 miles for most things, this might be a better idea.
Or take the 3-person family. Mom and Dad don't drive 14-year-old junior everywhere. Mom and Dad only need one car, because on most days neither drive them to get to work. The car is for the larger grocery runs and trips to grandma's house.
So instead of paying out $30k-$60k for the vehicles, the family pays half to serve the same needs.
Look at suburbia! When I was in High School it was important to know someone who was 16 so that they could drive you around. I was in prison at home. Not any more. Now I could go wherever I needed.
And the need for busses(crowding our roads, carrying our children) will decrease. If the infrastructure is done right, the kids won't need those busses, and we replace bus drivers with a few cops on scooters patrolling the Segway-sidewalks.
A trip to the convenience store takes me 15 minutes. I go to my car and start it up, wait until i think the oil has risen into the engine and coated my precious engine walls, and I drive along the roads, which aren't always well-placed or direct. I find a place to park(if i'm lucky), lock my doors, and go in to get what I want. I leave to get back into my car, try to get out of the parking lot with traffic coming at 45-60 mph, and get on the road, weaving round a not-so-direct path back home. this one-mile-each-way drive would be 5-10 minutes on the segway, 15 in the car.
When the segway hits the sidewalks, we will realize that it is actually easier to go about most daily travels on it, rather than in a car.
rhadc
Innovation? Yes. Better than a scooter? No. (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Why this is a big deal. (Score:2, Insightful)
I would think the only deterant to this thing will be how heavy it is for when you finally have to pick it up and use your feet and how long the batteries will last.
You have to wonder though if something like this became common how pathetic will we become physically. It's getting quite common that the only exercise a lot of people get is walking they do in their daily day to day stuff. What would happen if they loose even that? Better get your kids in the habit of doing exercise now it might become even more valuable of a habit than it already is.
Jartan
Re:Segway is irrelevant to American cities (Score:5, Insightful)
What happens when this thing gets lighter, more durable, and cheaper?
I know that I could use it right now (Boston). I walk to work everyday about 1.5 miles, and it would be cool to be able to ride on one of these. In fact, I would move futher if I could pipe along at 17 miles an hour.
I'm suprised at all the negative comments in this forum. Who wouldn't want one of these? What if it got down to $500? I mean, it's not as cool as a personal helicopter, but it's cool allright.
Think industrial, not just cites. Would this we useful getting around a large factory? (yes) How about delivering mail, fedex, or pizza door to door? (yes)
We all realize that it's not going to instantly change the world, but neither did the automobile or the airplane. It was a long process before things changed. Given time these things might get adopted all over the place. We'll see how it goes.
I like to think of it as an alternative to the bike, not competition. Both can easily coexist.
Re:Segway is irrelevant to American cities (Score:2, Insightful)
Personally, I would get a bike. A good deal cheaper, less maintenance required, easy to lug up stairs. Probably in less danger of getting stolen outside.
If IT is truly targeted at those who live inside cities, then IT is competing with either the bike (which is a lot cheaper), or just plain walking (which is a hell of a lot cheaper), not the car.
If it got down alot cheaper, that would help. If it was made lighter (you know those batteries are going to be heavy), that would also help. I just can't see anyone getting one, except for the coolness factor.
for all the shortsighted.... (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Begging Questions and Urban Planning (Score:5, Insightful)
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
Re:Neat idea but.... (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:Totally insulting price!! (Score:2, Insightful)
The price is ridiculous. But consider what this thing has going for it over a bike: it takes no skill to ride. It's supposed to be stupid easy, that's the whole point... riding a motorcycle isn't brain surgery, but there's definitely a barrier to entry there -- and the safety issue, which is what keeps me off a bike.
Lets get real people (Score:1, Insightful)
My work is 4 miles from the train station. Do I commute? No way, I instead drive 30 miles in my car. Why do I commute? Couldn't I take my bike on the train and then bike to work from the train station?
Sure. But I don't because that would mean, well, I need to bike 4 miles to work.
So am I a lazy ass? Sure. Is most of America, and for that matter the world, comprised of lazy fat-asses? You bet.
Now, ask my lazy ass if I would be willing to ride a device that I simply stood on, stabilized so that its much harder to fall of than a bike or scooter, to travel those 4 miles?
Yeah, I would. Kick in the price drops that will inevitably occur over time and the technological advancements to make this thing lighter and faster, and I think this thing could be as revolutionary as many are guessing.
Re:Why can't anyone see the implications of this? (Score:4, Insightful)
Think of college campuses where cars are hard to manage - shove up to 40,000 students away from the campus (parking and housing) and reclaim the space for classrooms. 75% of the US high-school population will go to college, and half of these will attend a university with a population of 10,000 or more - each a small planned city. These already employ fleets of electric and natural gas cars and carts. I bet every major university in the US will be discussing the feasibility of banning autos from their campuses tomorrow.
Think of new cities. There are roughly 2 billion people in India and China, both nations struggling with transportation and at least some of that tied to limited access to oil and refineries.
The US is not the killer market for this. NY could do solve some huge problems with widespread adoption of this. Vegas could benefit. Theme parks are designed around how far people are willing to walk. This can change all of that. Disney loans you a Segway when you enter their new theme park. So what if it's 15,000 acres? Who cares about the monorail?
>But so WHAT if it can stand up on its own?
Well, there are a lot of people that don't trust themselves on a bike. Bikes are hard in a suit, with heels, in a skirt. They generally go too fast. Bikes are banned in many places because they are too dangerous. Twice walking speed isn't too scary for a mall or airport, especially if there's no way in hell you can fall over. Just not having to worry about falling over will win a ton of people over.
>Weight is a real problem with any bike/scooter/moped powered by batteries.
True, but this has a follow feature that basically makes it a self-propelled pull behind, even on stairs. I imagine it'll be like pulling a broom behind you. No sweat.
It'll get lighter, go farther, get cheaper. There will be more people willing to pay $3,000 than they can accommodate, I guarantee.
First year physics (Score:2, Insightful)
They also have more friction stopping them, as the force of friction equals the force down (gravity * mass) times the coefficient of friction.
Since both the momentum and the stopping force are proportional to mass, it cancels out.
Of course, real rubber tires don't act quite like what you learned in high-school physics, but we'll leave that for another day.
If you're gonna flame somebody, try to get a bit of a clue first.
Re:Innovation? Yes. Better than a scooter? No. (Score:5, Insightful)
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.)
Re:Why can't anyone see the implications of this? (Score:2, Insightful)
And, it's $3k NOW, for early adopters. I reckon these'll get down to $500-$1000 once the cheap Chinese knockoffs come online.
Personally, I'm waiting to see how they hold up. And in NYC, while it may solve some problems, I see massive "Ginger" traffic jams in the future..
The new Super Cub. (Score:3, Insightful)
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
The concept (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
How long before... (Score:3, Insightful)
* 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
Re:Why 2 wheels? (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:It's a damn scooter (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Begging Questions and Urban Planning (Score:2, Insightful)
I actually had someone mention this at another board. My whole reasoning behind this is as follows (proceeds to other board, copies, and pastes):
To move forward, you lean the device forward itself. Therefore the handlebars are out in front. If you hit something, those are the first thing to hit it. As you keep going, the handlebars are stopped, against what you hit, so as the bottom continues forward, they stay where they are, causing the device to become more vertical. At the point if becomes vertical, it actually stops. So you don't get the whole weight of the device at the full speed.
Now that is my take on it. I don't know if thats how it works exactly, but thats what I gathered. And I'm sure the computer in it has some form of collision recognition or whatever.
I do completely agree with you on the weather point. And having lived here in Texas my life, I have experienced quite a few temperature differences myself. I know that, after walking to class for 15 minutes in 100+ weather, and a bit of humidity, its not that bad. Of course, I'm not in a suit or pants. But still, I don't think heat would be a problem for people who already walk in that kind of weather. As far as the cold, I don't have much of a solution for that. All I can say is bundle up!
Actually, I think the cold extreme can be withstood if you don't have snow and ice. But as I learned this week, it just really sucks without a hat. Of course, when its really that bad outside, should people be driving at all?
If Dean Kamen's whole theory about closing down whole sections of downtowns and business districts to cars actually comes about, I think using it around many pedestrians is very feasible. Imagine how many people you can move on these things if they get to take the whole road.
And about mixing it with Mass Transit, yes, that would be a problem. But I think its footprint is small enough where it can be placed between a persons legs as he/she is sitting down without causing too much trouble.
To tell you the truth, we'll just have to see. The first people to put their money into it can be the guinea pigs. We'll just have to see how that works out. I don't think there's much that we can predict with any kind of accuracy. Price will be a problem, but like I have said, I think the majority of the cost is the computing power and gyros, which the post of the comuting power itself should fall pretty rapidly.
I actually have to go OVER a hill to all my classes at the University. Therefore when I tell my children I had to walk to class everyday, and it was uphill both ways, I won't be lying!
Blake
Not so fast there (Score:2, Insightful)
The Segway technology has the potential to evolve, as portable phone technology has. From the individual's point of view, it may not solve an existing problem, but from society's point of view, a possible solution to the myriad problems of urban traffic (congestion, pollution, acres of real estate devoted to parking space,
I'm not saying in it's present form it will change the world, but don't write off the whole concept out of hand.
And as the Time article pointed out, marketing of course is the key, not the technology itself. To eventually crack the consumer market, the Segway must be painted as an indispensable lifestyle addition, complete with an array of eye-candy after-market accessories.
'course I could be wrong, and there's a worldwide market for maybe 5 of these things
Its been done before - and failed before. (Score:4, Insightful)
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 [sinclairc5.co.uk] 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.
The Uses (Score:2, Insightful)
We should start lobbying now for the government to start investigating how to convert some streets into IT and Bike paths. Cars are terrible -- expensive and harmful and deadly. If this helps change America's love affair with the car all the better.
It's not the device... (Score:2, Insightful)
Huh?! (Score:2, Insightful)
They used $100 million on that?! And he already had the balancing wheel-chair. (I've seen that btw, and it's cool..).
But this? This will crash and burn. $3000 for a scooter? Think bike. And you'll even get exercise..
This is a toy for lazy rich guys. Nothing else.
Re:Why can't anyone see the implications of this? (Score:3, Insightful)
I live in a university city (Cambridge (UK, not Ma.)) where students aren't generally allowed to keep cars, and staff permits for most car pars are extremely limited.
Most students have bikes. Very very few (if any) of them have $3000 bikes. Few of them have $300 bikes. And a bike is lighter, faster, easier to carry loads on, simpler to maintain, and there are lots of existing bike racks (with no power for recharging batteries).
Re:Innovation? Yes. Better than a scooter? No. (Score:3, Insightful)
Uh, have you ever tried to balance on a Segway? This thing is marketing, I tell you.
Re:IT's not for you! (Score:3, Insightful)
And walking is so bad beeeeecause? Does it make a lot of sense to have to lug a 30kg lump of metal up and down stairs and rough paths, or leave the same $3000 trinket standing around while you go and deliver items?
So, it is going to shove pedestrians off the sidewalks to be mown down by bicycles and motor vehicles, or do you see people doing the honourable thing and taking to the roads themselves to be mown down by bikes and motor vehicles?
This thing does 8mph, is less manouverable than a pedestrian but less predictable than a bicycle in where it's going, costs a lot (technology and raw materials, not just inflated US retail price), has *ongoing* costs in replacing the NiCd / NiMH cells and requires about a jillion power outlets everywhere. Maybe you're right, but the bicycle seems to be doing a fair job as it is, and I'm not seeing a huge incentive to switch.
IT + America = (Score:2, Insightful)
America -
the only country where a product which enables you to be lazier is shut down by the lazy.
No childseat = no sale (Score:2, Insightful)
--
Nic
Interesting (Score:2, Insightful)
1)Auto balancing.
This IS big. Now some other company could use this technology and build something like oh say artifical legs, better wheel chairs, etc. And, suprisingly, there are people who have lost their ability to balance. Now (or soon) devices can be built to restor the function.
2) Low energy use.
3)Responds to human wants.
"Just imagine stopping" And it stops. This is the ultimate UI (yes better than KDE Aqua and Luna) That is my favorite part. I hope we can make more stuff that responds to what I want to do. Like the radios in HHTG.
Well In conclusion IT is nothing short of curious but the technology powering IT is very powerful and will make a dioffernce. The guy who made this was also the guy who made the filters in a portable dyallisis machine. So there is innovation here.
Secondsun
- My NoC can beat up you NoC
Re:It's a damn scooter (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:Begging Questions and Urban Planning (Score:2, Insightful)
Glad to know you guys can tough it out down there in Austin. Up here in New Hampshire, if the weather gets that good around now the joggers dig out their shorts.
Seriously, though, if this device has some kind of traction for slippery conditions and the ability to function in low temperatures there's no reason people couldn't use it -- just like they use snowmobiles, skis, etc.
Re:Its been done before - and failed before. (Score:3, Insightful)
1. The footprint of Segway is probably less than 20% of a C5 on the road.
2. Unlike the C5, the Segway has an effective turning radius of ZERO. That makes the scooter far easier to manuever in very tight spaces.
3. The Segway--as technology improves--could be designed so the whole thing folds down to probably less space taken than most folding bicycles. That means it can be schlepped through public transit systems without the major hassles you get of trying to get a regular bicycle through public transit systems (you can't carry them on buses unless the bus has bike racks, you have prohibition of carrying bikes on subway and commuter trains at certain hours and stations, etc.).
Where will people ride this? (Score:2, Insightful)
It's too fast for the sidewalk and not fast enough for the road.
If you ride on the sidewalk, you have to be very aware and extremely careful to not run into a pedestrian. It requirs more observation and forethought than many people are accustomed too.
Riding on the road puts you in danger of getting smashed by a car. I have runnin's on a weekly basis with this. Ask any bike messenger about this.
Bike lanes would be great, but if those existed we wouldn't need this device as much anyway.
Communities & Sweating (Score:2, Insightful)
As for a bike, I find it hard to
a) carry a lot of packages -- a self propelled machine like the Segway could probably carry a lot more.
b) SWEAT! How can I ride to work on a bicycle, in a suit, and not be covered in sweat when I arrive?
I think Segway will have a profound impact in places like NYC (where I grew up) and in small communities built around a town center.
Bikes and Segways could help each other (Score:2, Insightful)
Theoretically, if the Segway takes off, there will be a greater demand for small vehicle traffic design. Bike lanes -- intended for usage for both bikes and Segways -- could be added to some of the major areas surrounding urban centers.
Designing a traffic infrastructure for both vehicles would encourage and benefit both.
Of course, I emphasize the word "Theoretically" in this assessment. Americans' love affair with the automobile runs too deep. It might not be efficient to drive our asses a few miles, but automobiles offer relative safety, protection from weather, cargo hauling and occasionally social status.
Re:Does this make sense??? (Score:4, Insightful)
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 aren't lazy, A BICYCLE IS FASTER. (Score:2, Insightful)
1) Faster.
2) Less expensive.
3) Does not suffer limitations inherent from batteries.
4) Does not cause pollution (the battery power does have to come from some power plant, you know).
4) Keeps you fit, as an added benefit.
Sure, cities would be nicer places if most people used these scooters... but the same would be true if people would stop being so lazy and ride a bike!
Re:This is the sneaker of small vehicals...chill. (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
of course it pollutes. (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:of course it pollutes. (Score:3, Insightful)
Its niche (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Innovation? Yes. Better than a scooter? No. (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:What it'll do for me (Score:3, Insightful)
Bingo!-issues with IT (Score:2, Insightful)
1. Stairs. Especially in Europe, where I see a potential huge market because of the design of their cities, they have a lot of stairs.
2. Weather. A car is more than transport, it's a weather sheild. I don't want to ride in 110 degree Texas heat with no a/c. Besides, how could you get laid in it?
3.Security. How do you lock this thing up? Looks easy to steal.
4. Suspension. Is there any? The first good pothole may finish this thing off, or force the rider to visit the oral surgeon.
5. Safety & stupidity. We're dealing with people and something new that moves. Bad combination.
I see plenty of specialty and industrial applications as well as a home enthusiast market, but no one is going to redesign trillions of dollars of urban infrastructure for this thing.
Re:Its been done before - and failed before. (Score:3, Insightful)
Now that I've seen some footage of the device in action I can say that it looks very promising. It's going to struggle because of the way the car has affected the lay of the land, but there will be many people just the right distance from work (or whatever) that could use this. The main advantage: no effort means you can wear a suit. A bike is great, if you don't mind showering and getting changed once you're at work.
Finally, those worried about the cost -- try doing some figures on how much your car costs you to run -- it'll probably pay for itself in 2 years. And for those worried about putting it somewhere -- how much does your car cost you to park all day? Sure, we'd need some locker-like infrastructure, but propertly prices are such that car bays are just becoming too expensive for what they are.
Technical Stats from Press Kit- (Score:2, Insightful)
Range: up to 17 miles (28k) on single charge
Turning Radius: zero
Payload:
Passenger- 250lbs (110kg)
Cargo- 75lbs (38kg)
Future offboard cargo module- 300lbs (135kg)
Platform Height: 8in (20cm)
Footprint: 19x25in (48*63.5cm)
Weight: 80lbs (36kg)
Slashdotters have totally missed the point! (Score:1, Insightful)
It is only in the last couple of years that tethered robots like Sony's have been able to balance, stand up and take a step forward. Segway's control system does something even more difficult in my books.
I don't think that too many people can balance on a single axle never mind have a computer do it. From a robotics point of view, it is a very exciting technological leap.
I can see the benefits from everything from robotics to upright wheelchairs. The upright wheelchair allows level eye to eye contact, not the current looking down contact.
In robotics, one of the big problems is stopping multi-wheeled, multi-legged robots from falling over when on rough terrain. The six wheeled Martian rover comes to mind. Here is a 2 wheeled device that has the wheels on the same axis and it is pretty damn impressive on what it can do already.
My last point is that it seems that whenever the silent "majority" blasts a technology or enhancement as a waste of time or useless then it usually is quite successful. Two great technological enhancements come to mind that had the same initial negative response: the Internet and Linux.