3 ms·
Probably he wanted to distance himself away from similar products. It certainly didn't help him to never mention that the watch housing is not(probably, why wou
by deletes 13y ago
Probably he wanted to distance himself away from similar products. It certainly didn't help him to never mention that the watch housing is not(probably, why would he then make the same design) manufactured in-house. As for being hacked, maybe he was hacked( internet can become very vengeful for almost no reason )and that person/competitor succeeded discrediting the project.
- Nursie 13y agoSee this comment - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6862280 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6862280 It appears that the PCB is even the same one as in the other watch. I'd have no issue whatsoever with a KS that said "we found a pretty cool watch and we want to make it more awesome with some hardware tweaks and our own ultra-cool software stack!" But that doesn't seem to be what's happening here. >> maybe he was hacked( internet can become very vengeful for almost no reason )and that person/competitor succeeded discrediting the project. It's certainly possible, though it seems that the communication in the repeatedly spammed (and then denied) message was similar in style and content to the guy's previous comms and even if you ignore that he hasn't given any answers to his backers' questions.
- deletes 13y ago>>All this power is packed into our compact smartwatch without sacrificing power consumption. It’s a beautiful balance between the power processing and the power management of our dual processor architectural design.<< That is pretty misleading. I will set this to remind me in march or so and we will see the resolution( in case it's backed ).