Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

120 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Oh, my! (-1, Offtopic)

SmoochYourBowels (2926695) | about a year ago | (#43763915)

Now that's a rancid rectum if I ever saw one! I can't even handle being in the presence of such rottenness without succumbing to lust! I'm going to thrust my fetid, disease-ridden cock right into your feces-filled asshole and let loose my little white tadpole friends! I hope any tasty treats you fart out of your asshole are covered in my cum! What say you?

Re:Oh, my! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764079)

I get that you're trying to provoke a reaction. The problem is, no one's offended by that kind of thing anymore. It's 2013, and we've all been desensitized by goatse and shitting dick-nipples. Plain obscentiy won't work anymore; you have to move on to something new and fresh.

Re:Oh, my! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764217)

How old are you? 14? Your troll is lame. Work on it.

Re:Oh, my! (1)

tibman (623933) | about a year ago | (#43764275)

I've never heard someone under 30 years old use the word "rancid". It has really fallen out of use. That guy is probably old and sad.

Re:Oh, my! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764359)

Have you seen his asshole? It looks (and smells) like there's a dead animal in there. What other word could you possibly use?

Re:Oh, my! (1)

tibman (623933) | about a year ago | (#43765963)

FYI, people generally go with "gross" or "nasty" now. Also, assholes generally smell bad anyways however the smell of death should never emanate from a living person. Get that guy to the hospital.

Yawn (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43763927)

Smart watch for stupid people.

Smooch, smooch! (-1, Offtopic)

SmoochYourBowels (2926695) | about a year ago | (#43763939)

My fetid cock wants to marry your putrid, rotting rectum. How will this be done? Well, obviously, a cock smooch will seal the deal. Shall I smooch your bowels and get this whole thing over with? Your childhood dreams will finally be fulfilled! What say you?

I want one (5, Insightful)

EmperorOfCanada (1332175) | about a year ago | (#43764011)

When the flip phone was all the rage it often reminded me of an 1890's station master pulling out his pocket watch and flipping it open/closed and then sliding it back into his pocket. The wristwatch basically put the pocket watch out of action. I suspect that history is going to repeat itself as I am now pulling out my smartphone repeatedly to quickly check various things such as the time, the weather, certain stocks, who just called, GPS, who just messaged, ebay alerts, fiddle with the audio, etc. Rarely do I pull out my smartphone to use the larger screen for things such surfing, typing, or talking.

So for at least 90% of my smartphone interfacing it would be awesome to interface with a convenient wrist watch to reach the phone in my pocket or pack. The key is that the watch does not stray into any territory where the phone excels. An example would be mapping. Don't try to put a small map on my watch; that will just drive me nuts. But a navigation app that just distance, direction, and turning instructions would be perfect for a watch.

Where I am presently confused is how to interface with my audio. I guess I could either use a bluetooth earpiece (loser) or headphones with a microphone and that would be fine.

The smartphone interface watch will be far more successful than google glasses. I think that google glasses will be cool for the most part at fulfilling our terminator fantasies but not for meeting our boring needs such as: What time is it?

Re:I want one (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about a year ago | (#43764089)

Thats interesting. I too made the 'cellphone is pocketwatch' observation. I even bought a prop pocketwatch to explore making it into a modern device.

Re:I want one (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764133)

What's a smartphone? And why would anyone want this? Sundials still rule!

Re:I want one (2)

Hognoxious (631665) | about a year ago | (#43764887)

Sundials still rule!

I used to know an [Irishman|Polack|Belgian] who thought that. I pointed out that they're no good for telling the time at night.

Next day I saw him buying a tin of luminous paint.

Re:I want one (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764201)

I believe short term you are correct. Long term I doubt it. Once google comes up with HD recording + waterproof + motion stabilization + battery life + phone + sunglasses / software based adjustable lenses + always online it will be expensive but people will pay for it..

Re:I want one (1)

7-Vodka (195504) | about a year ago | (#43764241)

Yeah, it's a great stepping stone on the way to a contact lens display.

Re:I want one (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764271)

Difference is you only needed pocket watch OR wristwatch, but you'll need phone AND smartwatch.

For me, and I presume for most men, taking out the phone from pants pocket takes not much longer than sliding sleeve back to look at the watch. It might make difference for women - their phones are usually in the purse, but the watch's huge and reducing it for female wrists will shrink its usefulness as well - and for sportsmen, but there I believe HUD devices are much more promising.

Re:I want one (1, Insightful)

I'm New Around Here (1154723) | about a year ago | (#43764461)

I just google imaged it, and from that I can say I won't be buying one. I think they are ugly as hell. Plus they are the size of a large wristwatch, which are already too big for my tastes, but are at least round. These Pebbles are a huge square computer screen on the wrist.

No thanks, I'll pass.

Re:I want one (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about a year ago | (#43764525)

You seem to be insinuating that the pocketwatch was wrong somehow. How does that follow?

Re:I want one (2)

LordLucless (582312) | about a year ago | (#43765945)

The pocketwatch wasn't wrong, any more than the horse and carriage was wrong. However, like the horse and carriage, you don't see many pocketwatches around anymore. Noting that A has been superceded by B doesn't imply any moral failing on the part of A.

Re:I want one (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | about a year ago | (#43764737)

Where I am presently confused is how to interface with my audio. I guess I could either use a bluetooth earpiece (loser) or headphones with a microphone and that would be fine.

You could walk around with your hand against your head, but you'd run the risk of being mistaken for a folkie.

[sing, badly] As I roved out one sunny morn ...

Re:I want one (1)

Immerman (2627577) | about a year ago | (#43764955)

Reminds me of a comment I read somewhere: The only thing I like about bluetooth earpieces is that now I can walk around talking to myself and nobody looks at me funny.

Re:I want one (1)

SydShamino (547793) | about a year ago | (#43765425)

Of course, when you walk around not talking to yourself with a bluetooth earpiece in place, everyone will still look at you funny..

Re:I want one (2)

LordLucless (582312) | about a year ago | (#43765965)

I guess I could either use a bluetooth earpiece (loser) or headphones with a microphone and that would be fine.

I don't understand why having a headphone and a microphone is fine, whereas having a headphone and microphone without the cable makes you a loser. I guess it's the same reason why wearing the wrong brand of clothing makes you a loser. All hail the arbitrary dictates of fashion.

Re:I want one (1)

EmperorOfCanada (1332175) | about a year ago | (#43766033)

The key here is who seems to wear the earpieces. It just doesn't seem to be a class of "Winners".

If you have seen the movie Oblivion and remember Tom Cruise's earpiece, then I could live with one of those. But the USB memory stick in my ear, those just suck. They should come with propeller hats (something I would have killed for age 9).

"7+ days of battery life" (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764083)

Would be impressive if this product wasn't being sold as a watch. It's nice to imagine "a watch that can do all this stuff", but for me a defining factor of a watch is something I don't have to worry about recharging (or replacing the battery of).

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (1)

tibman (623933) | about a year ago | (#43764291)

Remember when your phone had 7 days of battery life? (mine still does, but only because it's ancient)

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764423)

A smart phone is a general purpose computer that goes in your pocket. If it was only a phone it'd last 9 days as well. Nobody wants to talk on their iPhone, that's just a vestigial appendage more or less.

-s

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (1)

Immerman (2627577) | about a year ago | (#43764975)

Indeed. I've yet to come across a smartphone that actually works half as well as a *phone* as your average "free with $15 prepaid card" flip phone.

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#43764311)

Would be impressive if this product wasn't being sold as a watch. It's nice to imagine "a watch that can do all this stuff", but for me a defining factor of a watch is something I don't have to worry about recharging (or replacing the battery of).

well the thing sending data to this is going to be need daily charging.. or dual daily.

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (1)

Fencepost (107992) | about a year ago | (#43764617)

This may actually improve battery life on some devices - those big bright displays are serious battery hogs.

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#43764795)

keeping the radios on and device out of sleep is a real hog. updating stock widget and so forth.

then again my phone has an oled display showing the time all the time and I need to charge it every 3rd day or so..(I usually use it to take one picture a day and to read news on the john..)

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43766407)

No, keeping the radios on uses power, but not absurdly so, keeping the device awake doesn't matter (not doing heavy processing does). It's also two things that 7-day standby phones also have to do. Big screens (not tiny oleds) on the other hand are absolute battery hogs. If you can keep the processing to a dull roar and keep the display off you'll win a day or two for sure.

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (4, Insightful)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about a year ago | (#43764365)

I remember when you would forget a watch in a closet for 3 years and it would still be running when you took it out again.

This is a truly atrocious battery life for a watch. If it cannot even last the length of a vacation or a camp in some situation, what good is it as a watch? At least with a old fashioned Wind-up watch you can recharge it in seconds anywhere.

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (1)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | about a year ago | (#43764435)

My watch hasn't had a battery change in 7 years and still works fine.

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (2)

Hognoxious (631665) | about a year ago | (#43764971)

I have one like that, but sometimes I forget to wind it.

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about a year ago | (#43764453)

But it's a tremendous battery life for a desktop computer. Try seeing how long a desktop computer lasts if you unplug it from the charger.
Ofcourse this new type of phone-connected watch is just as much a desktop computer as it is a watch, so that comparison is just irrational..

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about a year ago | (#43764523)

But it is being called a smartWATCH and it absolutely sucks at being a watch.

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (3, Funny)

Immerman (2627577) | about a year ago | (#43764997)

Well that's about right then - a smartPHONE generally sucks at being a phone. I think someone changed the meaning of "smart" when we weren't looking...

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (1)

jimbo (1370) | about a year ago | (#43766441)

People often say smartphones are bad phones but IMHO some smartphones are surprisingly good at being phones. For example top models from Samsung and Apple supports AMR-WB and voice quality is impressive where networks support it. Ofcourse it's subjective what a good phone is, considering UI, size, battery, voice quality, etc.

So, it's not clear cut. For my personal opinion I've tried several Apple and Samsung smartphones and I consider them all to be excellent phones.
The battery on my current [smart]phone probably lasts five days unless I start doing lots of shit. I think that's fair. In reality I do charge it every couple of days but I've been doing that since my first mobile phone, the Nokia 2110.

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (2)

Ruprecht the Monkeyb (680597) | about a year ago | (#43764727)

A 747 gets terrible gas mileage for a car, too.

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about a year ago | (#43764935)

You mean the airplane? You mean the airplane that has a fuel economy of about 100 mpg(per person)? Which is about 5-10 times what a car gets.

Re: "7+ days of battery life" (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43765073)

Using your metric my car gets about 120mog (per person)

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43766411)

You mean the one seater car? I think that one's around 100 mpg too.

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (1)

bloodhawk (813939) | about a year ago | (#43766623)

If A 747 was being sold as a smart car then that would be a valid analogy. However it isn't because people realise that would be moronic, just like selling a watch that sucks at actually being a watch.

Re:"7+ days of battery life" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43766287)

If it cannot even last the length of a vacation or a camp in some situation, what good is it as a watch?

Aww, has someone not found out about these yet?
http://www.amazon.com/Lightning-Thunderbolt-Blackberry-connectors-customized/dp/B009USAJCC/ref=sr_1_1
If you're going somewhere where you can't recharge for more than a week, yeah, a smartwatch isn't the thing to pack. Get a G-shock or hell, don't worry about the time, you're on vacation in the wilderness! But most of /. lives near a power grid and wireless data is available to us, so some may find uses for this "watch".

They've proven to have a seller (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764179)

and they only took 15 million? One can only hope they didn't give up their rights in return.

Re:They've proven to have a seller (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#43764323)

and they only took 15 million? One can only hope they didn't give up their rights in return.

it might not be a seller two years from now.

Re:They've proven to have a seller (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#43764325)

and they only took 15 million? One can only hope they didn't give up their rights in return.

I have to wonder why they talked to the VCs at all... I can imagine taking the risk if you've just started somebullshitwithnorevenuemodel.com and crazy guys in suits are offering you a giant stack of pretend internet money for it; but why would a company with an actual shipping product, and sales, and such, risk going up against the elite equity-diluting and value extraction skills of a hardened VC?

Re:They've proven to have a seller (4, Insightful)

mwvdlee (775178) | about a year ago | (#43764491)

Because with all the extra money you can do better marketing, promotion, sales and even product development.
If you can make 4x the money by giving away half, it's still double the money in your own pocket.

Ofcourse this does not account for giving up more subjective values such as control over your own product and being able to "not be evil".

Or simply put; selling your soul does make you rich.

Re:They've proven to have a seller (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43765183)

Couple of reasons to go with VC $:

- The smartwatch folks are in a good negotiating position and they can probably sell some of their stock as part of the funding. It's nice to cash in a little of your equity up front, because statistically most startups return nada to the founders;

- The VCs are always motivated for a liquidity event that cashes them out and transfers their risk to somebody else like a corporate buyer or the public in case of an IPO. Smartwatch founders can tag along for this ride, again because they have a good negotiating position coming off the Kickstarter success, and can get favorable participation rights built in up front.

VCs suck, but they are herd animals and they can be used to your advantage if you have a big enough fiscal stick to whack them with.

Re:They've proven to have a seller (1)

SydShamino (547793) | about a year ago | (#43765455)

The Geek Chic people who went on Shark Tank recently have an ongoing business. They've been in business for several years, attend BGG Con each year, and have sold incredibly expensive tables to several people I know.

On the other hand, they have like an 18 month backlog, and once you order and make your down payment they'll ignore your emails for about a year until they're ready to deal with you, and ask you for your customizations. You can customize /everything/ on the table, even though it's marketed as a modular system, and it takes a while to figure all that out.

I suspect they went to a VC because they believed that they could be a bigger and more successful business, but they don't have anyone on board that knows how to become that business. Making the person who gives you the money have a stake in the company helps ensure that they'll actually help you succeed. I think they took $300k for a 25% stake or something like that.

why? (4, Insightful)

dlb (17444) | about a year ago | (#43764205)

who still wears a watch?

Re:why? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764297)

Look around you, a lot of people do.

Re:why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764317)

Wherever I look, they're mostly worn as fashion item or status symbol.

These don't look too fashionable, and "nerd/geek" as status is not really desirable.

Re:why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764541)

In my case i use my watch as its far simpler to check the time on my wrist than pulling out a phone. Sure its 'pretty' ( in that its what i want to see ), but its not a fashion statement as i don't care what others think.

Re:why? (2)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#43764807)

Wherever I look, they're mostly worn as fashion item or status symbol.

These don't look too fashionable, and "nerd/geek" as status is not really desirable.

but people are buying these to use as niche fashion items - and telling everyone they're buying one.

btw do you know how you spot a watch hipster? has a watch - but uses a phone to check the time.

Cool people like you (1)

future assassin (639396) | about a year ago | (#43764643)

don't but use mare morals don't don't always want to pull out our brick of a phone out of our pocket do.

Re:Cool people like you (4, Funny)

Rob_Bryerton (606093) | about a year ago | (#43764839)

He uses the morals of a female horse to... what????

Re:why? (3, Insightful)

twistedcubic (577194) | about a year ago | (#43764849)

Teachers. I can glance at my watch during lectures. It's kinda disruptive and inappropriate to pull out a cell phone while lecturing to students.

Re:why? (1)

dlb (17444) | about a year ago | (#43765349)

That's a good point.

The answer I was looking for was either
a) as a suit accessory, like cufflinks or a tie clip, or
b) for fitness reasons (heart monitor, lap timer, diving, etc)

Re:why? (1)

Libertarian001 (453712) | about a year ago | (#43764957)

I do. All of you pulling out your smartphone to check the time look pretty stupid.

I do have a smartphone. I don't use it to see what time it is.

Re:why? (1)

sunking2 (521698) | about a year ago | (#43764985)

Obviously plenty do. But to your point it seems a bit of a niche market. Considering a pretty good portion of those that do prefer the classic aesthetics I'm not sure how many are left to target.

Re:why? (1)

RawsonDR (1029682) | about a year ago | (#43765437)

You're right, nobody wears a watch anymore. But that's the point of this device, not a counter point.

not an advantage (2)

SuperBanana (662181) | about a year ago | (#43764243)

One advantage that the Pebble has over rumored watches from big names like Google and Apple is existing.

Apple has rarely entered a market first. iPod, iPhone, iPad, Air, etc. Hasn't stopped them from being successful, and in some cases reshaping or redefining the market.

Do you want to be the first to jump into the water, or see what happens to the other person when they jump in the water?

Re:not an advantage (1)

xlsior (524145) | about a year ago | (#43764557)

Do you want to be the first to jump into the water, or see what happens to the other person when they jump in the water?

Ask Micrososft how waiting for a market to have established itself first has been working out for them lately...

Re:not an advantage (2)

Telvin_3d (855514) | about a year ago | (#43764613)

Being first to market can have advantages. Coming later to the market with an improved product can have advantages. Coming later to the market with a product that is no better than what is already out there has no advantages at all.

Re:not an advantage (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764811)

"Coming later to the market with a product that is no better than what is already out there has no advantages at all."

Unless you have a monopoly position to prop you up (MS obviously). And Apple could apply here too, given their many years of walled garden lock in, they don't need to be good any more. They can weasel their way into the smart TV market just through the vast number of Apple IDs out there. I suspect that's right around the corner.

Re:not an advantage (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764625)

Do you want to be the first to jump into the water, or see what happens to the other person when they jump in the water?

Ask Micrososft how waiting for a market to have established itself first has been working out for them lately...

Err... you're completely missing the fact that Microsoft was that person who jumped into the water first. For both tablets and smartphones. They did a lot wrong, but they also showed others what doesn't work.

Re:not an advantage (0)

fermion (181285) | about a year ago | (#43764597)

Really they are not the first. They are a group of early manufacturers trying to develop a market for connected watches. About the only company that appears to be manufacturing and shipping actual watches to actual customers, as opposed to just promising to ship watches to customers eventually, is Cookoo. Yes I know that Pebble is shipping watches, but those are to those to are to kickstarter people, that is investors.

Apple will take over the market because only Apple has the means to integrate the watch and the phone. Fair or unfair that is the way it will be. Therefore, while Pebble has said it is the watch to integrate with iPhone(at the time iPhone had all the market) really what needs to happen now is they need to be the preeminent Android phone. Given the new funding I would say drop iPhone support completely. Be the first fully functional Android watch. Why make a sucky watch that works with iPhone when they could make a mass market watch that works with Android. Also, they need to get some fashion and industrial designers in there so the watch is not so ugly and can be made efficiently.

Re:not an advantage (1)

arth1 (260657) | about a year ago | (#43765477)

Let's not forget that Sony's Android watch has been out for quite some time now, and is slightly less clunky than the pebble too.
I don't know whether it's been rooted yet (by others than Sony...), but if it hasn't, it's just a question of time.

Me, I prefer to use a watch that does the primary function quite well - tell the time without requiring me to use my fingers, and no matter whether it's night or snow or direct sunshine or underwater or on a bike or I haven't given maintenance to it in months. It's just there, does its job, and I can depend on it doing so.

Re:not an advantage (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764777)

First mover has advantages in some markets (if there are high switching costs). Fast follower has advantages in others (if there are low switching costs, but high R&D risk).

Re: not an advantage (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764803)

Are we looking for sharks, or for the "diamond to shame all other diamonds"?

I'd be pissed (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764361)

If I contributed to the kickstarter, I'd be royally pissed. Kickstarters basically gave $15M to the VCs, who are going to basically own this device. Kickstarters paid for development and initial manufacturing so the VCs wouldn't have to.

Re:I'd be pissed (2)

synaptik (125) | about a year ago | (#43764567)

Kickstarters are not angel investors. Usually-- and this was the case with Pebble-- Kickstarters are prepaying for the device, and those prepayments fund development and initial manufacturing.
Yes, I was a Kickstarter backer for Pebble. And, I received mine, at the stated discount. So I got my expected ROI.

Re:I'd be pissed (1)

AuMatar (183847) | about a year ago | (#43765193)

Which is why I'll never do a kickstarter- I'm not going to pay extra for early access to a product that I can't test and may never be made. I'd be willing to invest for a share of the profits, but not pay extra for a presale.

Re:I'd be pissed (2)

TrollstonButterbeans (2914995) | about a year ago | (#43765433)

You miss the point of kickstarter.

Non-kickstarter: Bankers, corporate stiffs have 100% control of what can raise capital

kickstarter concept: A bit of democracy possibility to bypass that control.

I don't personally feel Kickstarter is about investment but taking control --- and near stranglehold --- away from the kind of corporate culture unwilling to roll dice or uninterested in small yield/high interest projects.

Note: I am not arguing "kickstarter" is perfect.

Re:I'd be pissed (1)

AuMatar (183847) | about a year ago | (#43765847)

Then let me invest, rather than prebuy. Let me buy a tiny part of the profits. But I'm not going to pay to pre-purchase an item that doesn't exist yet from a company with little to no track record. That puts all the risk on me, the consumer, rather than the entrepeneur. That's ass backwards.

Re:I'd be pissed (1)

synaptik (125) | about a year ago | (#43765975)

I did get a tiny part of the profits... in the form of a 27% discount on the smartwatch.

Re:I'd be pissed (0)

AuMatar (183847) | about a year ago | (#43766005)

I'm going to hope that was a joke. I don't have the heart to explain all of economics tonight.

Re:I'd be pissed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43766421)

I hope you aren't under the impression that all investments result in an ongoing share of profits. Or that you're under the impression that bonds aren't investments.

Re:I'd be pissed (1)

AuMatar (183847) | about a year ago | (#43766499)

They're more of an investment than stocks are (outside of public offerings). But buying an item at a discount isn't an investment. It's like coming home from the mall with 20 shirts you didn't intend to buy and saying "but I saved money, they were on sale!"

Re:I'd be pissed (1)

mysidia (191772) | about a year ago | (#43766455)

Then let me invest, rather than prebuy. Let me buy a tiny part of the profits.

This would be in violation of SEC regulations against selling unregistered securities to the public.

The only way they would potentially be able to do so would be to require that all site members prove they are accredited investors; E.g. by providing a copy of their paystub, showing sufficient income to meet the $200,000 per year income minimum set by the government for accredited investor status.

Re:I'd be pissed (1)

AuMatar (183847) | about a year ago | (#43766517)

Except there are ways to get around that. Ever known anyone who got a loan from parents/friends/ to start a business? Spin it as debt rather than equity. Although you could make a decent argument for waiving those restrictions for very small investments (say sub-100 dollars per investor with a cap on total investment as well).

But that's fine- if you can't do it you can't do it legally. That still doesn't mean that Kickstarter is anything other than a complete rip-off, transfering risk from the business to the buyer. The way its supposed to be is you make a product, taking the risk, and profiting for doing so. Its not supposed to be you con people into giving you money, let them take the risk that you can't complete development (or that you're just a scam), and then profit as well.

Re:I'd be pissed (1)

TrollstonButterbeans (2914995) | about a year ago | (#43766629)

if you can't do it you can't do it legally. That still doesn't mean that Kickstarter is anything other than a complete rip-off, transfering risk from the business to the buyer. The way its supposed to be is you make a product, taking the risk, and profiting for doing so. Its not supposed to be you con people into giving you money, let them take the risk that you can't complete development (or that you're just a scam), and then profit as well.

Is that any different than the risk of "pre-orders" of games or products that don't exist yet? Or buying a product that doesn't achieve critical mass and dies (The Barnes & Noble Nook, a Zune, etc.) I agree with you, by the way --- but look at Craigslist. Caveat Emptor.

Re:I'd be pissed (1)

mysidia (191772) | about a year ago | (#43766449)

Yes. And I feel like the community is being abused by the VC people, if they can just get kickstarter funding, and then go grab additional VC funding at the same time.

Why the VC people can just make 'starting a kickstarter' project as a precondition to obtaining VC funding, and approve the funding, after success of the kickstarter project; so the venture capitalists take the equity of the business, anyways, instead of the project founders.

If they could get VC funding, from the bankers, then the VC should be funding development too.

I don't see the resolution as to ban VC funding.

I think Kickstarter project creators should be required to disclose, if they are also seeking or obtaining VC funding, or other investments, prior to the completion of their project and fullfillment; In other words, any other funding should be disclosed.

That way, the crowd can if they choose to, rank/sort their projects that they are considering gifting to, based on their perceived need for those funds.

Re:I'd be pissed (1)

TrollstonButterbeans (2914995) | about a year ago | (#43766651)

Don't most of them fail to achieve their goal? Kickstarter also does another service ... someone with a crap idea who is overexcited finds himself shot down and brought back to reality with minimal pain and with a bit of efficiency. The "best" solution to whatever issues Kickstarter has would be a competitor.

kickstarter: (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764413)

The new and easy way for the Rothchilds, Banker barons, and CIA to filter any new technology coming up and actively controlling it and distributing it to their liking.

If you cocksuckers didn't notice this is what the entertainment industry did with American Idol when it started: A systematic system of filtering all of the talent in the world so that in the end they can be controlled by said Rothchilds, Banker Barons and CIA

Americans are fucking stupid.

Re:kickstarter: (1)

EmagGeek (574360) | about a year ago | (#43764467)

That's basically what kickstarter is - it's a way for VCs to crowdsource initial investments without having to give any stock in return. As an AC noted below, in this case, it would appear that the kickstarters basically gave the VCs a gift of $15M, since now the VCs won't have to make any investment for initial development, prototyping, and manufacturing.

It's a pretty sweet deal if you're a VC - just snap up these kickstarters that someone else paid to develop, and laugh all the way to the bank.

Re:kickstarter: (1)

synaptik (125) | about a year ago | (#43764575)

Kickstarters are not angel investors. Usually-- and this was the case with Pebble-- Kickstarters are prepaying for the device, and those prepayments fund development and initial manufacturing. And, the amount raised through Kickstarter was $10M, not $15M. (The latter is the figure that the VC is adding.)
Yes, I was a Kickstarter backer for Pebble. And, I received mine, at the stated discount. So I got my expected ROI.

Re:kickstarter: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43764703)

Of course it's not that simple. The Pebble people aren't idiots, surely the investors got substantially less of the company in return for their $15 million dollars when the company already has an existing product and people who know about it on the internet and so forth.

Whereas if they gave $15 million to a company with no product and no recognition, they could get whatever they wanted. $15 million buys you more when you get in on the ground floor, and they didn't.

Re:kickstarter: (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#43764813)

The new and easy way for the Rothchilds, Banker barons, and CIA to filter any new technology coming up and actively controlling it and distributing it to their liking.

If you cocksuckers didn't notice this is what the entertainment industry did with American Idol when it started: A systematic system of filtering all of the talent in the world so that in the end they can be controlled by said Rothchilds, Banker Barons and CIA

Americans are fucking stupid.

funniest thing I've read all day! someone mod this funny (esp. the american idol bit).

Why VCs? (2)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | about a year ago | (#43764443)

Why do they need VCs, they have millions in the bank already.

And what's with the 'Nam-speak? (1)

denzacar (181829) | about a year ago | (#43764507)

There haven't been any Viet Cong for decades now. They're all simply Vietnamese now.

Pebble Owner Checking In (5, Informative)

WoodburyMan (1288090) | about a year ago | (#43764639)

I have now owned my Pebble for a month and have been using it with my iPhone 4S the entire time. I absolutely love it. The ability to keep my phone on silent while still seeing text messages, and who's calling without pulling my phone out is great. I backed it back in May 2012 when it was first featured here. One thing I love about the Pebble is it's usable! The E-Paper display and 7 day battery life got me. I once owned a Fossil Abacus (Look it up) back in 2006. It ran PalmOS 4. Battery like was dismal, a day at best, and it didn't even display the time unless you pressed the button. There was no connectivity, as smart phones were just coming into existence. After a month of use I called it quits because of the dismal battery life, always needing charging. Why I got the pebble is because I already have to charge my iPhone daily, or every other day. I don't want another device I use all the time always needing a charge. I regularly get 6 days battery life on my Pebble, and that's when Low Battery comes on. If i let it go no doubt it would go a full 7 days. Why I think Apple, Microsoft, Samsung, Google etc will fail in this market. I believe if any of them got into the SmartWatch market, they would use Full-Color LCD's. This means a dismal 2-3 days of battery. And the average Android and iOS user would want Video's, Songs,and all their favorite Android and iOS apps to work on it, like a tiny iPod Touch. This means battery draining graphics and higher end processors. The Pebble is great in this market because it accepts it's a Watch and a Companion device to a phone, where I dont think Apple and the other big players would try to market it as such.

Re:Pebble Owner Checking In (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43765023)

And the average Android and iOS user would want Video's

But not arbitrary capitalization or greengrocers' apostrophes, you ignorant fuck.

Re:Pebble Owner Checking In (1)

zennyboy (1002544) | about a year ago | (#43765209)

This^ but without the insult

Otherwise, a nice review, thank you (GP, not P)

Re:Pebble Owner Checking In (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43765545)

Yes, because minor grammatical errors totally undermine his entire argument, thereby proving your intellectual superiority. Truly you are a god among men.

Re:Pebble Owner Checking In (5, Informative)

Lincolnshire Poacher (1205798) | about a year ago | (#43766263)

The E-Paper display and 7 day battery life got me.

Yes, E-Paper and not eInk. If it was the latter your battery life could perhaps be several weeks.

E-Paper is a clever marketing term for ... a Sharp monochrome LCD display. It still requires a low current to maintain the display, even when the graphic is static.

Re:Pebble Owner Checking In (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43766621)

The killer for me is battery life, until they work out a way to measure it in at least months not days I will stick to a traditional watch.

Another Pebble Owner here (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43765235)

My thoughts, for what it's worth:

Appearance - not bad but not great. I wouldn't get one in any of the bright colors that they offer (but if that's your look, then there you go), but my plain black Pebble looks okay. It's a bit big, but not as big as I thought it'd be. It looks 'normal' enough to not get a whole lot of looks in a typical business-casual environment, but it's not going to win any design contests. However, for me, I wanted it for the functionality, so the look isn't that important to me.

Build quality - so so. I don't feel like it's going to break if I drop it, but it's mostly plastic and doesn't feel as rock-solid as, say, an iPhone 4/4S/5.

Battery life - Great, now. It was pretty poor at first (when sync'ed w/ an iPhone; I heard Android users had better luck), but a recent software update has improved the battery life tremendously. I now get 7+ days regularly (though I usually turn the bluetooth off at night).

Watch - it tells time well enough. :-) I love the ability to change watch faces. They just recently opened up the SDK, so I expect more watch faces to be available as well as other apps.

Accelerometer -- I'm sure this will be used in many apps in the future, but for now, it's still kind of a cool feature that I can just flick my wrist to turn on the backlight. :-)

Phone sync - this is what it's all about. It's...okay, but it has potential, and keeps improving rapidly. There is currently an annoying iOS bug where it doesn't always sync up with all the services (SMS, email, calendar, etc) you want it to, and you have to toggle the alert in the iOS settings for it to see the connection again. I usually do this once a day whether it needs it or not, since it only takes a few seconds. Regardless, it's GREAT to have. My personal favorite is the calendar reminders (I'm in a out of meetings a lot all day at work). It's great to check quick text messages without pulling out my phone too. Emails are usually too long to be worth reading on a watch, but it can do some of that if you want. You can also control media playback with it, pretty much out of the box. And it displays the number or name of someone calling you, or whoever you're on the line with, so for example you can check your watch and ignore a call without taking out your phone.

Apps are finally starting to arrive. Supposedly Runkeeper has some Pebble integration now, though I don't use that app personally.

There definitely seems to be more you can do with it on Android, but I'm an iPhone user at the moment, so I can't speak to that at all.

Recently released updates seem to have enabled some key functionality for someone to possibly make a "killer app", so I am anxious to see what starts showing up in the near future.

It's well worth keeping an eye on if you consider yourself to be even a little bit of an early adopter:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/597507018/pebble-e-paper-watch-for-iphone-and-android/posts

Re:Another Pebble Owner here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43766355)

So you're saying that other than just looking plain ugly (seriously ugly) it provides you with a lot of the functionality that your iPhone already provides. Tells you whose calling...iPhone does that. Shows you a text message...iPhone does that. Controls your music...iPhone does that. Calendar...iPhone does that. Read e-mail....yup iPhone does that too.

Redundant technology is redundant.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>