Return to the archive index

RE: Good HMDs - Was: help!!!

From: Don Papp <>
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 18:16:09 -0600 (MDT)

On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, Tony Havelka wrote:

> > 	I believe camcorder hacking is more about "getting resolution"
> > than "saving cost".  (Though of course it is much cheaper.  The M1 is
> > easily the most expensive component of any non-prefab wearable I have
> > priced out)
> 
> Wow. 2 big points here.
> 
> 1) I believe the number one issue in a wearable display should be
> ergonomics, or human interface.  The CRT just does not cut it. It's heavy,

	Fair enough - though this is doubtlessly a topic that would
attract much debate (for either side).

> 2) I've priced out many non-prefab wearables and none of them with
> acceptable performance have been under $700. (Cell, JumpTech, Ampro) And
> $700 has been just for the CPU core. Add $100 for RAM and $200 for a hard
> drive that puts you up to $1000 for a bare working unit. I have not
> considered cut and paste Laptops as a wearable solution.

	Yes, but a wearable does not need to be constructed of such items.
In fact, many wearables that I have seen on the web are not.  (This is of
course a skewed stat, as it only 'counts' those that are on the web, and I
don't know if they were in fact cheaper). I agree that the statement I
made about pricing is misleading as it applies only to the particulars of
the designs I have made.

	Again, a topic that is very debatable.  

> > 	The trend towards "waiting for something that does 800x600" may be
> > explained as simple grass-is-always-greener, but perhaps that is not it.
> > It could very well mean that to many wearable enthusiasts, display
> > resolution is simply more important than CPU horsepower or whatever else
> > you put it up against.
> 
> Following this argument, would it be safe to say that "wearable enthusiasts"
> are willing to pay more for a display than they are a CPU core since they
> value resolution higher then CPU performance? This does validate the earlier

	I don't think that's an accurate assessment.  I value a good input
device more than display or CPU or battery power, but that doesn't mean
that I would pay more for the input device than I would for any other
wearable component.  All that is known for sure from your email is that
you've determined people seem to prefer waiting for an 800x600 over buying
an M1 or other off-the-shelf display component.  You suggested people are
also preferring to hack camcorder viewfinders, but I haven't seen any
wearables other than Professor Mann's old wearcomps that use it.  (Again,
this is based only on the wearables I have seen on the web)

> comment of the M1 being priced higher than any wearable component - while it
> is not now, maybe it should be.

	I can't comment on this one, but perhaps others can.  I myself
would be happy with a simple 2x16 as long as it was unobtrusive enough, so
clearly I am not part of the 800x600 club - and therefore ill-suited to
follow up on this part of the argument.  I was pointing out an alternate
interpretation of the trends you noticed.

| Donald Papp
|           

--
Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with subject of
"subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" to 
Wear-Hard Mailing List Archive (searchable): http://wearables.blu.org

+Previous Message in Thread | Next Message in Thread

From Wear-Hard Mailing list Archive (WH)
Maintained by R. Paul McCarty

Archive created with babymail