Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Robotics Hardware Technology

Robots That Serve Beyond The Vacuum 258

Posted by timothy from the alt-title-robots-that-don't-suck dept.
Tim Brown of Mobile Robotics writes "While everyone has been debating the abilities of new robotic vacuum cleaners and their varying price tags, Siemens has quietly announced they have developed a 'Dressman' robot that will iron your clothes! (my least favorite household chore). Rumoured to be priced at US$1700 it seems expensive for an iron. But it appears that the Roomba's best work might be that it is ushering in a new era of innovation in home products. (Note very cool picture with the article.)"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Robots That Serve Beyond The Vacuum More

Robots That Serve Beyond The Vacuum

Comments Filter:

  • $1700 eh? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Moderator ( 189749 ) * on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @01:35AM (#9301025)
    Man, for $1700 this thing better do military creases.

    • Re:$1700 eh? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Total_Wimp ( 564548 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @02:34AM (#9301237)
      And what about autonomy? I expect an apliance that is in the category of "robot" to be able to take a pile of clothes and end up with a bunch of shirts on hangers. After setup, Roomba needs little assistance to get the job done where this device needs an operator for every shirt.

      If this is a robot, then so is my dishwasher, clothes washing machine and even my blender.

      TW
    • One thing I thought right away when I read the article was - will the shirt look right without creases? I think a proper crease is an important as the smoothness of the material when considering a well-ironed garment. With the way it just inflates under a sirt, you'd get a smooth shirt but no creases anywhere!

      They make a good point about the material lasting longer though.

    • Re:$1700 eh? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by JWSmythe ( 446288 )
      Read the article again, no creases at all. :(

      It's a $1700 glorified hair dryer. Judging by the last line that says "ironing dummy can be washed in the washing machine", I'd have to guess the whole thing is a fabric on a frame. You put your shirt over the cloth on the frame, and turn it on with a rotary knob (no sensor to detect dry). It takes up to 15 minutes to do one shirt. It doesn't load itself, it doesn't take the now dried and wrinkle free shirt, and fold it. It's simply a blow dryer. Worse

    • Re:$1700 eh? (Score:3, Funny)

      by gralem ( 45862 ) *
      I thought the title was referring to the "Terrible Vacuum of Space"! Not these household robots pushing vacuums around and shoving irons.

    • Re:$1700 eh? (Score:2, Informative)

      by luagnayr ( 697228 )
      Actually, this can't be doing well. This article is from a couple weeks ago, and I saw one of these things at Wal-Mart in Munich (in the Europa Industry Park - for curious shoppers)last weekend for 900 . That's a pretty hefty discount for something that just came out. It seemed like an overpriced steamer. If I'd known it was a "robot" I would have cared.

    • Re:$1700 eh? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by orthogonal ( 588627 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @06:48AM (#9301910) Journal
      Man, for $1700 this thing better do military creases.

      I've always loved the idea of home robotics, but at $1.25 a shirt, I can get 1360 laundered at the local dry-cleaners, and get then with heavy starch applied, hung on a hanger, and put in a plastic bag.

      Assuming one shirt per day, everyday -- and some days I do just wear a T-shirt -- that's more than three and half years worth of ironed shirts, with my labor limited to taking them to and from the cleaners -- and with no need to wash the shirts myself.

      The idea of inflating a dummy and drying the shirt from the inside out is great "outside the box" creativity, and I give the inventor credit for it. But that method doesn't crease the sleeves properly, it doesn't iron the collar, and I'm thinking that it may result in the placket at the back of a dress shirt bulging out at precisely where you want it creased.

      So it's a great idea that doesn't really substitute for ironing, and is too expensive. Much as I'd like to encourage this, it's a solution in search of a problem.

  • Too much for too little. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Seumas ( 6865 ) * on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @01:36AM (#9301026)
    More or less, I'm your average geek. I telecommute, but my state of dress on any given day is not much different than when I worked in an office. That being said, how often do men really need to iron their clothes?

    I don't recall ironing a single piece of clothing since my job interview more than four years ago and that is the only time I've used an iron in my twenty-seven years. Hell, I only even own an iron because an ex-girlfriend needed it for her clothes - and I needed it for an upcoming project which including using an applique.

    Still, if you're a snazzy dresser and you wear clothing that tends to need ironing and you're a single person, I suppose this is a decent product. Especially if you have the money to burn.

    It really seems that this device (which reminds me of those punching-bag exercisers I've seen on television a couple times) is geared more toward the garment pressing industry than a home-user.

    Personally, the only robot I'm interested in is a sex-slave android and I don't think we'll be seeing any of those in my lifetime.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
      Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • What would really impress me is a washing machine that you could just through your clothes into and it would decide, based on the color and material of your clothing, what temperature and how much water to use as well as how long to run for and how much of what kind of soap to include.

        That might only work if you used some sort of modified RFID tag that would transmit the details of the clothing, but it could still be cool.

        • "What would really impress me is a washing machine that you could just through your clothes into and it would decide, based on the color and material of your clothing, what temperature and how much water to use as well as how long to run for and how much of what kind of soap to include"

          Well this comes close....
          http://www.fp.co.nz/Products/Laundry/Sm artDrive-Sy stem.html
    • Why is it that every good idea that appears on /. gets knocked down by at least one person who doesn't see the usefulness of it just because it doesn't suit his exact personal individual circumstances? I mean, come on, this bit about "me being an average geek," which is as subjective a statement as ever there was; what has that got to do with the price of fish?

      Dude, if you live on the West coast of the US, then, okay, it's a good bet that you are not going to need to iron your shirt. I live in Silicon Val

      • if you live on the East Coast or in certain cities on Europe, or especially in Japan, this thing is gonna be worth its weight in gold to someone, most likely a dry-cleaning business.

        Which is why I said this "is geared more toward the garment pressing industry than a home-user."

        Anything short of a business suit doesn't really need to be pressed and ironed. Just buy wrinkle-free clothing. And you're right about the west coast thing. I've never worn a suit in my life and I can't recall the last time I saw
      • Dude, if you live on the West coast of the US, then, okay, it's a good bet that you are not going to need to iron your shirt.

        I live in NY. I used to work as a men's suit salesman and was expected to look seriously sharp at all times. I didn't have to iron a shirt while doing so.

        Indeed, I'm more inclined to iron when dressed casually in untreated soft cottons or linens that shrink and wrinkle. Plackets on flannel shirts pucker up terribly, and if you're inclined to more esoteric fashions (for the American

    • Re:Too much for too little. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by ahfoo ( 223186 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @02:24AM (#9301198) Journal
      "Personally, the only robot I'm interested in is a sex-slave android and I don't think we'll be seeing any of those in my lifetime."

      I shouldn't be giving away my plans to rule the world and make a zillion bucks, but the sex robot might not be as difficult as you think. As always, you start off with what has already been done. In this case, there's already a major growth industry in robotic milking machines.
      In fact, the reason there's so much growth in the field is that cows actually prefer robotic milkers and tend to go in for an extra milking a day because it just feels right. I'm not kidding. This is precisely why there is growth despite the costs, the diary ends up with higher milk production.
      So, perhaps an android is out of the question so far, but how about 1090i video on a cube of four 42 inch high resolution panels and a milk machine!
      You heard it here first baby.
      And as for this hot air toy, how the hell is it a robot if you have to put the shirt on it yourself?

    • How to get away without ever ironing (by a tailor) (Score:5, Informative)

      by TheMCP ( 121589 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @03:28AM (#9301402) Homepage
      I'm a tailor, and I teach advanced classes about shirts. You don't need this "robot". You shouldn't have to iron your cotton shirts. Here's how to never iron, but have your cotton shirts look like you did:

      First, open every button on the shirt and remove plastic collar stays (if any) before washing.

      When you dry, cotton shirts can be dried on "hot" in most American home dryers, but I use "medium" when I go to a laundramat because their dryers are hotter.

      When you take your shirts out of the dryer, if they feel bone dry to the touch, you've over-dried them. You should be drying them less. They should feel as if they have just the slightest hint of moisture left in them, which should evaporate naturally within about a minute or so. Over-dried shirts will be wrinkly. Properly-dried shirts shouldn't be wrinkly.

      If your shirts are dried properly but are coming out of the dryer wrinkly, your loads of laundry are too big. Wash and dry a little less stuff in each load. The general rule is, when you put the wet clothes in the dryer, they should take up a bit less than half the space inside the dryer.

      Finally, you should get to the dryer as soon as it stops (not 10 minutes later: right away!) and take out your shirts and hang them up on clothes hangers. Do not use wire hangers, use plastic hangers (such as those available cheaply at Target or Kmart) or wood hangers. Wire hangers can cause the shirt to get funny misshapen wrinkles in the shoulders, which can only be removed by re-washing.

      If you do these things properly, your cotton shirts will look smooth and professional with no ironing.
  • The robot looks nice

  • A wonderful idea! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TWX ( 665546 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @01:37AM (#9301031)
    How about instead of spending $1700 on a robot, just take your clothes out of the dryer and hang them up quickly enough that they don't have time to wrinkle?

    It works for me...

  • Boooring. (Score:5, Informative)

    by revmoo ( 652952 ) <slashdot.meep@ws> on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @01:38AM (#9301037) Homepage Journal
    How is THAT a robot? It's a dummy that inflates with hot air(that you have to put the shirts on yourself, no less) that is supposed to save you $1700 worth of your time somehow.

    Yeah right.

    • Re:Boooring. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Manaz ( 46799 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @01:42AM (#9301059) Homepage
      Now, I agree with this comment (there's no way that's a robot) - but it brings up the question - exactly what DOES constitute a robot?

      A lot of us, I imagine, immediately think of devices such as the robot in "Lost in Space", or (those of us who are a bit older, or into movies) Klaatu (sp) from "The Day the Earth Stood Still". Industrial robots (such as those used to manufacture cars, or carry out extremely dangerous industrial procedures), or other devices, such as those used by the police to defuse bombs, etc are most certainly real "robots" - but what is it about those devices is it that makes them a robot?
      • And, perhaps just as importantly, what about this ironing "device" excludes it from being a robot?

      • Re:Boooring. (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Lord Kano ( 13027 )
        Now, I agree with this comment (there's no way that's a robot)

        Why not? A robot does not need to walk or talk. Automotive welding and industrial assembly robots are proof of this.

        but what is it about those devices is it that makes them a robot?

        The ability to perform a task without continuous human control. But I don't think that bomb disposal units count as robots because a human being is constantly in control of it.

        LK
        • But I don't think that bomb disposal units count as robots because a human being is constantly in control of it.

          Exactly. Just like "Battlebots", they're not robots; they're just remote-control whatevers. If it doesn't have AI of some sort, it's not a robot.

        • Now, I agree with this comment (there's no way that's a robot)
          >Why not? A robot does not need to walk or talk.

          But it has to manipulate things. This is an inflatable ironing board. An "automatic" washing machine displays more intelligence and does more useful stuff. Also, the damn thing would take up a lot of floorspace. Anyone with the money and space to use one of these wouldn't be doing their own laundry anyway, they'd have a maid or send their laundry out.

        • The ability to perform a task without continuous human control.
          What, like a oven or a dish washer?

      • Re:Boooring. (Score:3, Insightful)

        by lawpoop ( 604919 )
        You bring up an interesting point. Technically, you could call modern dishwashers or automatic carwashers robots. But it seems that people think 'robot' = 'mechanical living thing', where the criteria for 'living thing' is based on morphology -- it should look like a humanoid, or a 4 legged animal, or an insect... I guess plant-shaped robots don't count, unless they could grow somehow. Perhaps another criterion is automotive -- not like a car, but something that truly moves on its own. This might necessitat
      • I think that for me, the defining aspect of a robot is that it MOVES. It doesn't have to have a moving base, but it does need to move in space (e.g. industrial welding bots). I think that for me, as well as many other people, actuated mechanical joints and limbs is what a robot is. If it's autonomous or semi-autonomous, that's even better, but not strictly neccesary.

        I agree about this thing too - it's an appliance, not a robot.

      • but it brings up the question - exactly what DOES constitute a robot?

        How about "a machine that autonomously interacts physically with its environment"? That's probably the closest match to the way I've seen "robot" be used in recent years (caveat: I'm living in Japan). Traditional robots--humanoid things that walk around, talk to you, and so on--obviously do this, but so do industrial robots, for example. I recently saw a news segment about a new "robot" that's designed to help disabled people get int

        • Re:Boooring. (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Capybara ( 70415 )
          Not quite: a superball interacts autonomously and quite physically with its environment. You also need to require that it has a specific goal, like helping people into and out of bed.

          • Not quite: a superball interacts autonomously and quite physically with its environment.

            I wouldn't call superballs autonomous--they don't do anything without someone directly acting on them, such as by throwing them. (Or are you referring to a different object? To me, "superball" is one of those bouncy rubber balls I played with as a kid.)

      • The Wikipedia suggest this definition of a robot [wikipedia.org]:[qoute]
        In practical usage, a robot is a mechanical device which performs automated tasks, either according to direct human supervision, a pre-defined program or, a set of general guidelines, using artificial intelligence techniques. These tasks either replace or enhance human work, such as in manufacturing, construction or manipulation of heavy or hazardous materials.

        A robot may include a feedback-driven connection between sense and action, not under direct

      • History of the word... (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Beolach ( 518512 )
        Clicky [wikipedia.org]

        The word robot comes from the Czech robota meaning "labor." The word was first used in Karel Capek's play R.U.R. (Rossum's Universal Robots) (written in 1920; first performed 1921; performed in New York 1922; English edition published 1923).

        1 [setonhill.edu]. While Karel is frequently acknowledged as the originator of the word, he wrote a short letter in reference to the Oxford English Dictionary etymology in which he named his brother, painter and writer Josef Capek as its true inventor. 2 [misto.cz]. . . .

        So, at least lit

      • A programmable device with at least three degrees of freedom (3DOF).
      • the robot in "Lost in Space", or (those of us who are a bit older, or into movies) Klaatu (sp) from "The Day the Earth Stood Still".

        Spelling right; but Klaatu was the human(oid), (Michael Rennie). Gort (Lock Martin) was the robot.

        • Ah, you're right.

          It seems that I'm SO old that my memory is already failing me.

          At all of 27... :/
        • Spelling right; but Klaatu was the human(oid), (Michael Rennie). Gort (Lock Martin) was the robot.

          Going slightly off topic, but I've always been fascinated by the efficiency of that alien language.

          I mean, its 3 words (Klatuu, berata, nictu), but it conveys so much! As far as I can tell, it means:
          "Quick! Klatuu has been shot! He's at the corner of which-and-which street, go get him, he needs your help! But do not, I insist, he was very adament about this: Do NOT destroy the world. Get Klatuu, don't destro

    • Re:Boooring. (Score:5, Funny)

      by Soko ( 17987 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @01:45AM (#9301064) Homepage
      Yeah.

      A bunch of dummies inflating with enough hot air to stuff a shirt, all for all too much money.

      Sounds like Congress, doesn't it?

      Soko
    • What a huge contribution! The problem of shirt ironing is now gone.... But, wait a minute... how about the goddamned pair of trousers.

    • Re:Boooring. (Score:5, Informative)

      by canadian_right ( 410687 ) <alexander.russell@telus.net> on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @02:19AM (#9301183) Homepage
      I worked as a clothes presser at a dry cleaners ( a long time a go!), and that "robot" was a standard piece of equipment circa 1980, and it certainly was not a robot! We called it "the susan". It was used for suit jackets mainly as we actualy laundered shirts and pressed them because they were generally too wrinkled to look nice with a just good steaming. All the pressing equimpent shoots out steam, and is air-powered. There was a small iron for deatil work. We also had a similar machine for doing the tops of pants, and a big press for doing legs and bodies.

      For a minute there I thought my back up career might in jepardym but looks like it is still safe.

    • Re:Boooring. (Score:2, Funny)

      by Seumas ( 6865 ) *
      It would be cheaper just to export the ironing jobs to India. :P

  • Gee I wonder how many (Score:3, Funny)

    by TCaM ( 308943 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @01:39AM (#9301040) Homepage
    people here are drooling over the future prospect of the Cherry 2000.

    • I wonder how many people actually know what Cherry 2000 was.

      At least if this ironing shirt malfunctions, your shirt's the only thing that's gonna be blown (up)...

  • What will REALLY put robotics in the home... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by xagon7 ( 530399 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @01:39AM (#9301041)
    is a robot that will pickup, wash, dry, iron, fold, and put away your clothes.

    As well as wash, dry, and put away your dishes.

    O yeah,

    Mow the lawn and wash the car while its at it.

    That way I can use all my spare time exercising.
    • This is why Isaac Asimov believed that the best robots would be humaniform - a humaniform robot would be able to use any tool designed for human use (think the vacuum, lawnmower, dishwasher, etc that you already have), and would not be limited to one specific area of specialization. Of course, in Asimov's robot stories he had his 'positronic brain' that gave his robots near-human AI, which is the big requirement for a multi-purpose robot (although there are of course several other difficulties with humanif
    • they call them children...
  • What makes it a robot? It's just an alternative to an iron. It's a fairly dumb machine. It just has to pre-heat and then blow hot air for a set time. You have to put the shirt on and everything.
  • I was hoping for something that had a little arm that move hot steel over a board.

    Instead it is looks like some kung-fu fighting dummy and it only irons shirts - they don't mention different sizes.

    I think of a lot of ways spending 1700 hours than having something that just irons shirts. How much does a decent ironing service in the States cost these days? 1 or 2 dollars a shirt?

    • I was hoping for something that had a little arm that move hot steel over a board.
      Why go to such effort, when you can already get a perfectly good rotary iron [miele.com]? My friend has one and it's wonderful.
  • Considering the extremely low rate that I need to iron my pants and the relatively low cost of dry cleaning, $1700 would pretty much keep me going for several lifetimes.
  • till blow-up dolls start doing the work for you? you know there has to be a company working on it somewhere. i just want to know when their IPO is. no, really.

    Make $5250 Guaranteed!!! All you need is a PayPal account and $25. We'll do the rest. Click here to find out how. [flamingboard.com]

  • I see a new feature... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Kiryat Malachi ( 177258 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @01:48AM (#9301076) Journal
    I see a new feature for RealDolls. Just make their skin a thermoelectric heating element, and...

    Shirts pressed while you wank!
  • While it is nice that the home robotics field is getting some attention, I believe this is a nearly useless device. Most of us (even us uber-geeks) saw our mothers iron clothes once or twice in our lives. I could easily spend $30 on a nice iron, and learn a new ironing technique ( Google, anyone? [google.com]) and iron my clothes from time to time. There is probably a .3% market demand for this robot that simply irons clothes, mainly because of the price and the size.. Seems like an enormous waste of space to me, when an

  • Also, the Robotic Toaster (Score:5, Funny)

    by nacturation ( 646836 ) <nacturation AT gmail DOT com> on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @01:59AM (#9301113) Journal
    Just like this one, you set a dial for how well you want your bread (shirt) toasted (ironed). You then depress a lever (press a button) and the robot then toasts (irons) your bread (shirt). It boasts an air filter so that the air due to convection doesn't contain any dust or dirt particles to contaminate your toast (shirt). It also has special insulation so that the outside doesn't get scorching hot -- only the internal elements are hot enough to heat the bread (shirt). But the Robotic Toaster is a bargain at only $795, less than half the price of the Robotic Ironing machine.

  • Wow, a valid use for a patent (Score:3, Interesting)

    by michaelmalak ( 91262 ) <michael@michaelmalak.com> on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @02:00AM (#9301120) Homepage
    It's a non-obvious solution for a long-standing problem using technology that's been around for over a hundred years.
  • I was expecting this article to be about somebody's space exploration project, determining the shape of the edges of the universe or something.

    But no - it's just hardware that does housecleaning... :-(

  • I am waiting for the robot bird that eats mosquitos (especially West Nile!)
  • but there are actually businesses that will wash and iron your shirts for you, and they will even fold them (imagine that!). If you need an "emergency shirt" that you can just wash yourself, you can get a no-iron shirt, too.

    And for vacuuming, you could always hire someone (but, unlike a robot, a cleaner will raise eyebrows at leftover pizzas and Playboy magazines).

  • explanatory link (Score:3, Funny)

    by Quasi Qubit ( 620828 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @02:14AM (#9301158)
    Ironing [wiktionary.org]
  • I want a robot to completely manage my laundry. At least move the laundry from the floor, thru washer, then dryer, then fold and reshelve it. Exception handling could just package drycleanables by checking the tag. If it can handle that, it won't need to manage my bachelor's "degrees of wearable laundry", via some eNose and StainSeverity tests. If I spent $3200, including soaps, on all the apparati, I'd save money over about 4-5 years of sending out laundry. To say nothing of looking and smelling better.
  • 1. overclock the air compressor
    2. press start
    3. watch the robot inflate like the incredible hulk
    4. duck flying buttons
    5. rinse and repete
  • What is more, ironing dummy can be washed in the washing machine.

    Ok, I've washed the ironing dummy........ now what do I iron it with?

    :P

  • Cool (Score:2)

    by mcc ( 14761 )
    I was getting tired of accidentally setting my clothes on fire myself, now I can get a robot to accidentally set my clothes on fire for me

  • Usefulness (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ScriptGuru ( 574838 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @02:31AM (#9301227)
    A lot of people mention the rarity of ironing shirts, but while the Slashdot crowd may not, I know engineers, accountants, and businessmen who wear freshly washed and ironed shirts each and every day. If they make $50000 a year working 2000 hours (40 hours, 50 weeks), that's $25/hr. Say they spend 5 minutes ironing a shirt every busines day (~250), that's $520 of life they waste every year ironing. While still not enough to justify having something iron for them, especially as no one measures their life relative to how much they'd make on the job, there is enough savings to warrant consideration by people who iron in bulk, like Dry Cleaners. It may even be useful in a Laundramat (Probably not, but who knows?).

  • Wouldn't the results be the same as steaming? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Daimaou ( 97573 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @02:32AM (#9301231)
    The problem with home clothes steamers is that they don't actually get rid of wrinkles, but rather uniformly wrinkle the clothes; albeit with smaller wrinkles.

    Wouldn't the result be the same if one used this "robot"?

    It would appear it is a combination of the weight of an iron, or press, and the heat that presses out the wrinkles, not just the heat alone.

  • Not worth the investment according to Test-Achats (Score:5, Informative)

    by Raphael ( 18701 ) * on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @02:42AM (#9301266) Homepage Journal

    The consumer magazine Test-Achats/Test-Aankoop in Belgium has reviewed this item in its current issue. You can find the full article on their web site [test-achats.be], although it is only accessible for subscribers.

    In summary, here is what the article says about this "robot" that irons your clothes: the quality of the results is not that good, there are still some wrinkles left in the shirts (this is OK if you wear them under something else, but not if you want to look smart wearing only a shirt). They gave it an "average" rating for the quality, while most of the traditional irons get a "good" or "very good". One of the main selling arguments for this expensive item is that it irons your shirts for you while you can do something else during the 10 minutes that it takes to do its work. But in practice, you need 2 minutes to put the shirt on and 2 minutes to remove it once it is ready. So if you have several shirts this device lets you do something else for one hour, but only in slices of 10 minutes so this is not ideal.

    So it does not beat the good old low-tech iron...

  • For this price we could get 2 full time employees in India ironing clothes for the whole year. So what remains is to develop a technology to teleport the clothes back and forth. Man I am patenting this :-)
  • my local 5'Sec laundry in Kuala Lumpur has a similar gadget that's made out of an inflatable canvas sack attached to the steam generator they use for all their industrial irons. The Bangladeshi guys running the laundry use it more for long dresses and ballgowns rather than shirts. I'd take a picture to show you, but I'm in India right now and it's a helluva long way to go for karma points ;-)
  • ... because sooner or later, you just know it's going to do an "Incredible Hulk" on your favourite shirt.
  • How is that in any way a Robot?

    It's no more a robot than a Corby trouser press and requires extensive human intervention to actually start and complete the ironing process.

    An ironing robot would be one that notices when my wash has finished and goes and gets all the ironing to be done from the machine, irons it all, and puts it in my wardrobe in my preferred order. Nothing short of that will impress me.
  • It's called a tumble dryer.

  • Hmm... (Score:3, Funny)

    by dnight ( 153296 ) <dnight@lakkaCHEETAHdoo.com minus cat> on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @07:07AM (#9301953)
    Looks vaguely humanoid, no intelligence, fills up with hot air... It's not a robot, it's a politician!
  • Well, it doesn't fold, so maybe it is a bit expensive. I'd pay more than $1500 for it.

  • Missing Feature (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Compulawyer ( 318018 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2004 @10:21AM (#9302884)
    From what I can tell, this "robot" can't give you creases in your shirt sleeves. Speaking as someone who has worn both a "real" uniform and the "corporate" uniform, I can tell you that a single, razor-sharp crease in the proper position on the sleeve is an absolute necessity. People who have worn uniforms notice this right away. Even those who have not themselves worn uniforms can tell you someone looks "better" when their shirt sleeves are properly pressed, even if they cannot articulate just why that is.

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close