3 ms·
Who in their own mind would ever wear a 4-pounds brick on his or her wrist? Am I having a bad trip or we're headed in a dystopian future where tech companies ar
by cliveowen 13y ago
Who in their own mind would ever wear a 4-pounds brick on his or her wrist? Am I having a bad trip or we're headed in a dystopian future where tech companies are managed by a pack of monkeys designing useless gadgets to strap on the lesser humans?
- corresation 13y agoIt weighs 74 grams (or about 0.16 lbs).
- clone1018 13y agoSource for "4-pounds"?
- cliveowen 13y agoI was being sarcastic, the point is it's big, no, not even big, it's enormous and unwieldy.
- Mikeb85 13y agoMost luxury watches are bigger, and much heavier....
- cliveowen 13y agoLuxury items are meant to be flashy, a man with a Rolex is basically saying "Hey look here, I'm freakin' rich", while a man with that monstrosity is just saying "I'm a douchebag with a ridiculous-looking watch".
- fleitz 13y agoExactly, it's the difference between classy taste and ostentatious gauche
- Kylekramer 13y agoThe line between a watch saying "Hey look here, I'm freakin' rich" and "I'm a douchebag with a ridiculous-looking watch" would seem to be both in the eye of the beholder and razor thin.
- kamjam 13y ago4-pounds is about 1.8kg, the weight of most notebooks. I think you have your weights all mixed up. In comparison, the Samsung S4 weighs 130 grams, iPhone 5 is 112 grams. I wouldn't expect this to weigh more than 100 grams. In comparison, a Rolex Sea Dweller weighs 220 grams (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolex_Sea_Dweller http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolex_Sea_Dweller). For me this would be useful when going to the gym, I could listen to music, see urgent emails and if it had GPS then track bike rides and runs. If it had a heart rate monitor then perfect. I don't like the fact it has to connect to your phone, standalone would be preferred.
- cliveowen 13y agoAs I said, I was joking. Maybe its really light, but that doesn't take away the fact that it' s a giant piece of hardware that shouldn't even exist. It's a smartphone that couldn't be shrunken enough to actually achieve some sort of purpose, it's like a monument to the limits of current technology.
- kamjam 13y agoYeah, sorry, cross post with everyone else. Still, I think it is a valid gadget, it won't be for everyone, but useful for some. It's not that much different from using the iPod Nano as a watch - http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/18/ipod-nano-review-as-a-watch/ http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/18/ipod-nano-review-as-a-wat...
- cliveowen 13y agoYeah, It's not at all different, but I was the first to say that using an iPod nano as a watch was a stupid idea. I can understand testing the water with some prototype like Google Glass (those just look ridiculous, we're several iterations from something approaching a real product) but it's a stretch to go from prototype to mass product.
- kamjam 13y agoIf they could incorporate a heart rate monitor and GPS then this would be my ideal workout companion, and I could use it for bike rides and snowboarding in the winter - the separate costs of all these would be more than $300. I don't think it will become mass market, BUT you can only make the watch so small after which the interface become unusable - esp if you have fat fingers like me! You do require the the revolution before the evolution though, like with the Google Glass hopefully. But regardless of the size of this, have you been to a watch shop recently? Some of the sizes of the watches are ridiculous and I presume they sell... so this might do just fine!
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]