5 ms·
The market for a generic would probably be smaller. My guess is each application probably shares basics (like an accelerometer) but has different requirements (
by sliverstorm 12y ago
The market for a generic would probably be smaller. My guess is each application probably shares basics (like an accelerometer) but has different requirements (accuracy, noise, processing power, sample rate) if not entirely different sensors (maybe one needs GPS and one needs a barometer). Which means the generic bracelet that would work for every application would have to be the superset of all possible requirements- and that's $$$$.
But you probably could market one bracelet for a couple different sports, so long as they are similar & you can write the software. Baseball & tennis might overlap a lot, for example.
- darkmighty 12y agoI don't think accuracy of IMU's out there vary dramatically, and the noise shouldn't matter too much (all major ones within some +-3 db?) -- sure, if they were a few orders of magnitude more accurate you would get a whole new type of applications -- but with current ranges you're restricted to some kind of pattern recognition (i.e. not full motion tracking), which is quite noise resilient.
- sliverstorm 12y agoBy "noise" I wasn't just referring to noise in the sensor. PSU noise, for example, needs to be controlled to below some limit. That increases the BOM count and thus $$$.
- hasancc 12y agoI agree. An open bracelet would be cool but from a bussiness point of view it doesn't make that much sense. There are countless of startups who refused to focus on a core target market and failed. Instead what you should do is focus your development efforts on the core product and listen to community feedback for cool ideas, then provide the necessary API for them to build it. Which is basically what these guys are doing.