A Hypothesis On Segway Hate 487
theodp writes "Admit it, IT is ingenious. Also, IT is surprisingly effective for certain uses, including real cops and mall cops. And if you tried IT, you probably smiled to yourself. So why all the Segway hate? Paul Graham looks into The Trouble with the Segway and offers a hypothesis about what prompts people to shout abuse at Segway riders: 'You look smug. You don't seem to be working hard enough.' Not that someone riding a motorcycle is working any harder, adds Graham, but because he's sitting astride it, he appears to be making an effort. When you're riding a Segway you're just standing there. Make a version that doesn't look so easy for the rider — perhaps resembling skateboards or bicycles — and Segway just might capture more of the market they hoped to reach."
like motorcycle riding? (Score:4, Informative)
Maybe if they could stand up to the hype .. (Score:4, Informative)
The hype was just mind boggling and there is no way Segway wil ever come close to match all the promises that were made.
The Segway "FAIL" is just another example of the dangers of overhyping a product before it gets to the market.
IT (Score:1, Informative)
Want some respect? Stop calling it "IT". That's a big part of the hate. The thing was WAY over-hyped as the "next big thing in transportation, going to revolutionize how we live".
And then police departments bought them en-mass when any old scooter would serve the purpose just as well for 1/3rd the cost.
Over-hyped, over-priced, and yes, it does make people seem lazy/pretentious.
Re:like motorcycle riding? (Score:5, Informative)
Slow speed turns. Bumps, pot holes, debris, ruts, grates, gravel, wet manhole covers and paint stripes. Avoiding FUCKING SUVS. Visual direction control. Lean angles, peg weighting, body english, counter-steer. Decreasing radius turns.
Balancing a one-in-front-of-the-other 2 wheeled vehicle traveling at over 70mph through rain, crosswinds and traffic without killing yourself isn't exactly *easy*. It's not really anything like a Segway, and I'm quite angered by this authors belittlement of something that I've spent a very large part of my life learning how to do well. I bet you half of the Segway riders can't even operate a clutch in the first place. He obviously has absolutely no fucking clue.
It's the law (Score:4, Informative)
You can't use a motorized vehicle on the sidewalk in most places.
You're out of your mind if you drive one in the street.
So where exactly are you supposed to ride them?
Indoors in a crowded place it's just an accident waiting to happen.
As a practical matter they are just toys for the few who can afford them.
Re:Bingo (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, a bicycle is not gyroscopically balanced [wikipedia.org]. The angular momentum in the bicycle wheel is tiny compared to the overall mass and moment of inertia of bicycle and the rider. It's actually the rider's own sense of balance (whether the hands are on the handle or not) that keeps the bicycle standing, and which is why you have to learn to ride one.
This isn't to say, of course, that Segways are superior just because they use a gyroscope.
Re:Or maybe... (Score:3, Informative)
Exactly, it's the cost. If you got on a bike, wearing a clown outfit and held a huge wad of burning hundred dollar bills, the effect would be the same. If segways were only a few hundred dollars, it wouldn't look nearly as stupid.
Nothing to do with it looking like you're not working.
Not that someone riding a motorcycle is working any harder, adds Graham, but because he's sitting astride it, he appears to be making an effort
Right, because sitting looks so much harder than standing.
A better example would be if you saw someone riding one of those motor scooters designed for people with limited mobility, but then they parked it and walked away, with normal mobility. If you can picture that in your head, that's about as dignified as riding a segway looks to the rest of us.
That, and I bet the name rhyming with "gay" is too easy a target for some people.
Re:Or maybe... (Score:3, Informative)
So are pedestrians. And some cyclists (whether legally or not varies by jurisdiction). They still end up crossing a lot of roads, unless they just go in circles.
Re:Bingo (Score:5, Informative)
Because, on a bike, your manipulated variable is the handlebar's position. When driving, you adjust the handlebar so that the bicycle moves to the side, compensating disturbances. The control action is proportional to handlebar setting angle times speed (roughly), so if speed comes to zero you have no control action available. This is actually gradual: notice how at low speed, you turn the handlebar much more to maintain equilibrium.
If the bike were actually significantly gyroscopically stabilised, you could bump into a driving biker and see him come back to upright position without him doing anything. In reality, any biker in such a condition will counteract manually using the handlebar.
Re:Bingo (Score:2, Informative)
From the very article you link to - gyroscopic/centrifugal force does play a part.
Not an important one, though. This has been investigated experimentally, by constructing (rather elaborate) bikes that have nearly no gyroscopic effects. They're barely any harder to ride than regular bikes. OTOH it's a good deal more difficult to balance a regular bike on exercise rollers, where the gyro effects are unchanged but the ground reaction forces are much reduced. (Ref: Effective Cycling by John Forester for the former, personal experience for the latter.)
Re:The main reason I've seen for Segway hate (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Or maybe... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Bingo (Score:5, Informative)
Re:just get a bicycle (Score:5, Informative)
Stopping: a segway stops swiftly and can remain in place without extra effort by the rider or any loss of stability.
Turning: a segway can turn either on the move or entirely in place(being able to turn entirely within your own footprint is handy for tight areas).
Visibility: riding a segway gives you a few extra inches, generally enough to see across a crowd, that a bike typically doesn't.
Now, for most people, those advantages don't outweigh the costs of a whole bunch of fancy gyroscopes and some dirty looks; but for those that do need them(mall cops and tour groups, for instance, where takup has been pretty decent) they do count.
Re:Actually, very dangerous. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Or maybe... (Score:3, Informative)
Invalid carriages are speed limited [direct.gov.uk], whereas bikes are only limited by the ability of the rider.
Re:Or maybe... (Score:5, Informative)
Here in the midwest you don't see a lot of segways, so I never heard of "segway hate" before; the only ones I've seen had cops on them. And a lot of people don't like cops at all no matter what's transporting them. Between crooked cops, cops with bad attitudes (like the one in Chicago that beat up the five foot tall woman bartender on camera and the one who beat a shackled man in a wheelchair, again on camera), to bad laws that good cops have to enforce, cops have gotten a bad name.
But if it was a civilian on a segway I think you hit the nail on the head. It's kind of like caddilac hate; it's a combination of envy and the smug, self-important "I'm better than you" attitude people who drive rediculously expensive cars have and the sociopathic way they're driven.
When the patent runs out you'll see $200 segways, and you this "problem" will go away.
The GP mentioned bicycles, I used to ride one untill I took a nasty spill on the way to work. I imagine a segway would be quite a bit safer than a bicycle. I'm looking forward to when they're affordable.
UK "pavement" = US "sidewalk" (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Or maybe... (Score:4, Informative)
In my jurisdiction (Cambridge, MA) the law is that you can bike on the sidewalk if you're traveling at a walker's pace. I quite like this rule, but it's not widely known so you still see morons zipping down a sidewalk when there's a perfectly usable bike lane painted on most of the major city roads. Also one of the lesser known laws... bikers have legal access to ANY car lane so if you're in a car and honking at somebody biking slowly in front of you then you're the moron.
I think what it really boils down to is that normal people have to adjust their behavior and be more cautious so they can accommodate the morons on the roads who are talking on their cell phones (yes, morons in cars, on bikes, and on their feet ALL do it and their lack of attention is a fault) and flagrantly breaking traffic laws. Though, one rare thing I've seen in my city is bicyclers getting pulled over by cops and issued $25 tickets for running red lights.
Wow, point proven! (Score:1, Informative)
The amount of venom and redundant arguments really proves the authors point. They aren't for lazy people because the point was never to use them for a trip to the corner the intent was for multiple mile trips that would have been taken in a car. They use less energy and take up less space than a car. Be honest with yourselves, when is the last time you walked five miles to the store rather than drive? Oh you did it once? Not every time? The other argument is they are too expensive. "Hey if they gave them away for $500 I'd have one." Gee and if they sold Ferrari's for 5 grand everyone would own one of those too. Also the over hype argument is pointless. The inventor didn't over hype it. He refused to say what it was which caused a media frenzy and the media over hyped it. A few wild statements by people that saw one fed the frenzy. People were all but expecting an antigravity device so of coarse it was going to be a disappointment. If I had seen it I would have been blown away at the time so I can't blame the people for over stating it's value. The cities overreacted as well passing laws banning them before they even went on sale. It's a rare time in history where hype largely killed a product instead of the other way around. I think the redesign cities comment wasn't as rediculous as it sounds. If the technology had existed when most cities were being built and it was afordable I think cities would look very different. If you designed a city today to take advantage of Segways there would be a lot of advantages. Everyone says just ride bikes but just how many people will actually ride one? Also try riding five miles up hill in the heat to get to work. Hard to start the work day soaking in sweat and tired.
The technology is doomed to niche status due to a combination of factors like car obsession and price. Funny that I never hear as much venom about SUVs? I personally get more upset about SUVs hauling single passengers. It'd take a 1/10 the energy to haul that person on a Segway and I wouldn't be worried about being crushed by one in my small car.
Re:Or maybe... (Score:3, Informative)
I think you nailed it. As technology its awesome and after spending an afternoon with one I was really impressed, but I still have a bitter taste in my mouth from all the crazy PR and hype on its release date. Everything was 'segway this' or 'segway that.' There was no intelligent discussion about the device, just marketing morons and tv personalities selling us on a few scripted marketing bullet points. Considering geeks dont want to be spoonfed media bullshit, it really meant that the people who were most likely to buy this thing and sing its praises were the most repulsed.
I think the marketers didnt care, they assumed they could sidestep the geeky first adopters and move straight into municipal purchasers and the "I own a bmw and a lexus already why not get this too" crowd. Turns out things dont work this way. Their pricing also reflects this. Now its just a novelty like riding a blimp or a unicycle. Perhaps we'll see some kind of competitor when the patents expire. A modular, hackable segway at a good price point might sell.