[itistoday]

I think, that it's a very typical product to be thought up for America; The Land of the Obese�.

I wouldn't ride on this thing if you paid me to, it seems more like an insult to my two legs if you ask me. Get a bike.

[funkboy]

I like the fact that it's faster than walking (sometimes I could *really* use that... late to class anyone?) and really safe - safer than riding a bike through a big crowd of people.

But for $5000 I won't be getting one until I make my first million.

[Link]

Nice if you have money.

but it's big.. Actually the obese thing.. segways have a weight limit of like 180 or 200 so that counts everyone out. (lol.. including me)

but I don't need a segway.. I can run if I'm in a hurry to go somewhere (being that I can run a mile in just under 8 mins), and walk rather fast

[icruise]

I don't think Steve Wozniak is under 200lbs and he has one.

[An Alias]

I remember George dubya having a problem with it, think he fell of it, or was incapable of using one. I guess it might be ok for the rest of us.

[Eug Wanker]

1 yay and 12 nay so far in the poll.

Sounds about right.

[wataru]

Segway was such a disappointment. I was thinking, "if 'IT' doesn't fly or hover or something, I'm not going to be impressed." And I wasn't.

[Skywalkers new Hand]

Originally posted by itistoday:
I think, that it's a very typical product to be thought up for America; The Land of the Obese�.

If that was the case it would be a lawn chair on wheels with a 6 cylinder engine and come with a Foam Dome.

[Powaqqatsi]

Originally posted by funkboy:
I like the fact that it's faster than walking (sometimes I could *really* use that... late to class anyone?) and really safe - safer than riding a bike through a big crowd of people.

But for $5000 I won't be getting one until I make my first million.

How is riding a bike through a crowd unsafe ?

[An Alias]

Originally posted by wataru:
Segway was such a disappointment. I was thinking, "if 'IT' doesn't fly or hover or something, I'm not going to be impressed." And I wasn't.

Lol, I like that idea of flying.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by An Alias:
I remember George dubya having a problem with it, think he fell of it, or was incapable of using one. I guess it might be ok for the rest of us.

Naw, lots of people have problems with them at first. Then they get used to it.

[Link]

Originally posted by Powaqqatsi:
How is riding a bike through a crowd unsafe ?

If you don't have a very good sense of balance or aren't too careful (hehe I am a very safe bike rider I think you can tell)

[CIA]

I thought it was a little cheezy, then I got to ride around on one.....

I have no use for one here in VT, but I think if I lived anywhere else, I would buy it in a heartbeat.

[DigitalEl]

I remember George dubya having a problem with it, think he fell of it, or was incapable of using one. I guess it might be ok for the rest of us.

The genius forgot to hit the "on" switch before stepping on, so the gyroscopes weren't activated and it simply fell forward.

The weight limit of the "i" model is 250 lbs. The cargo model, I forget what it's called exactly, has a weight limit of 325 (75 lbs. for cargo).

There's a great book out now called "Code Name Ginger," by Steve Kemper. It's the story of the development of the Segway and Dean Kamen's personal story. It's one of the best non-aviation-related books I've ever read... Until they get into Kamen's politics, which make me admire him less.

[The Placid Casual]

I like it. It is deliciously ridiculous. And also completely useless here in the UK...

I would not be able to ride it anywhere as you are not allowed to ride it on the pavement, or on the road, or in buildings... pretty much anywhere.

I would be limited to riding around my living room or up and down my drive... both of which are really too small.

But if I had the money I would still buy one...

[Sealobo]

At best it's a toy, only if it's cheaper.

it doesn't help you to get from point A to point B faster, nor more efficiently in any sense. A bicycle is basically a "smarter" choice to travel. i mean, if you need to climb a stair, at least you can carry your bike on your shoulder.

Forget about those fancy technologies... the major function of that HT thing is to allow you to cover a short distance in a lazier fashion. Period.

[mitchell_pgh]

[Zmai]

Well, they are kind of cheesy. I don't think I'd look to sexy on one.

I'd rather walk anyway. Or bike.

.z

[funkboy]

Originally posted by Powaqqatsi:
How is riding a bike through a crowd unsafe ?

Going fast, easy to tip, people jumping out in front of you, reaction time, etc. The Segway will automatically compensate for any unexpected bumps or run-ins with people. No tipping, either.

I'm surprised by the outlash against the thing here on a technology-related message board, though. I'm surprised more people wouldn't be, "Boy, I'd love to tool around in one!" I'm certainly not buying it, but it seems like it'd be pretty fun to ride around in.

Apparently Dean Kamen didn't do enough market research...

[Zmai]

Originally posted by funkboy:
I'm surprised by the outlash against the thing here on a technology-related message board, though. I'm surprised more people wouldn't be, "Boy, I'd love to tool around in one!" I'm certainly not buying it, but it seems like it'd be pretty fun to ride around in.

Basically, we're all thinking the Segway is a solution with no problem. The device has no real point.

.z

[DaedalusDX]

Originally posted by DigitalEl:
[B]The genius forgot to hit the "on" switch before stepping on, so the gyroscopes weren't activated and it simply fell forward.

Goodness... *smacks head* it stupifies me... yes STOOPIFIES me waking up every day and realizing that he's our president.

[itistoday]

Originally posted by DaedalusDX:
Goodness... *smacks head* it stupifies me... yes STOOPIFIES me waking up every day and realizing that he's our president.

<bitter resentment> Hey what do you expect from the majority of Americans? They elected him. My neighbor gives a funny reason for voting for him: "I didn't understand what Gore was talking about, Bush laid it out simple." Something to that effect at least...

After all, doesn't the elected President represent the majority of his people?
</bitter resentment>

this comment should probably go into the political forum... but hey, couldn't help myself.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by itistoday:
<bitter resentment> Hey what do you expect from the majority of Americans? They elected him. My neighbor gives a funny reason for voting for him: "I didn't understand what Gore was talking about, Bush laid it out simple." Something to that effect at least...

After all, doesn't the elected President represent the majority of his people?
</bitter resentment>

this comment should probably go into the political forum... but hey, couldn't help myself.

Technically, more people didn't vote for Bush, but more states did. One of those little electoral college issues. If we didn't have the electoral college, NOBODY from Alaska, Road Island, etc. etc. would even bother voting...

With out the electoral college, we might as well have Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida, New York and California just have an election and forget about the other states.

[mitchell_pgh]

dp

[Zmai]

oh look. politics.



.z

[funkboy]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
With out the electoral college, we might as well have Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida, New York and California just have an election and forget about the other states.

Have you learned nothing from the 2000 election? If votes from winner-take-all-electoral-votes were counted for the candidate, Al Gore, the guy with more votes nationwide, would have won. If I vote for a Democratic presidential candidate in my state, which historically always votes Republican for President, my vote counts towards nothing, since the majority winner will get all my state's (very few, but still count) electoral votes.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by funkboy:
Have you learned nothing from the 2000 election? If votes from winner-take-all-electoral-votes were counted for the candidate, Al Gore, the guy with more votes nationwide, would have won. If I vote for a Democratic presidential candidate in my state, which historically always votes Republican for President, my vote counts towards nothing, since the majority winner will get all my state's (very few, but still count) electoral votes.

My point was that little states would have very little say in the president we have in office if we did it via 'winner takes all' method. The big states would really make the decision.

It's all the little states that gave Bush the presidency.

Not flaming... just found it interesting...

[The Mick]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
It's all the little states that gave Bush the presidency.

Little states....like Texas? Florida? Virginia?

[JLFanboy]

On-topic:

I was actually surprised at the backlash against Segway when it was first introduced. It was almost like nobody could see just how amazing it was. I saw it a lot like the iPod; at first, everyone was like, "What? An mp3 player? What the sh*t is that!?!" Then we all came to appreciate just how amazing it was.

Yes, the Segway is just a scooter. But it's also the most technologically advanced scooters on the planet. The stuff inside it will no doubt have a very lasting effect on technology for years to come. If a Segway cost under $500 or even $1000 I bet a ton of people would have them. It's just a shame they're so damn expensive.

Off-topic:

My point was that little states would have very little say in the president we have in office if we did it via 'winner takes all' method. The big states would really make the decision.

Well, sure, the little states wouldn't have as much say as the big states, but the point of a popular vote system is that this doesn't matter. One person from Alaska has exactly as much say as someone from New York. I don't see how you can say how big a state is has anything to do with an election under this system.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by JLFanboy:
On-topic:

I was actually surprised at the backlash against Segway when it was first introduced. It was almost like nobody could see just how amazing it was. I saw it a lot like the iPod; at first, everyone was like, "What? An mp3 player? What the sh*t is that!?!" Then we all came to appreciate just how amazing it was.

Yes, the Segway is just a scooter. But it's also the most technologically advanced scooters on the planet. The stuff inside it will no doubt have a very lasting effect on technology for years to come. If a Segway cost under $500 or even $1000 I bet a ton of people would have them. It's just a shame they're so damn expensive.

Off-topic:

Well, sure, the little states wouldn't have as much say as the big states, but the point of a popular vote system is that this doesn't matter. One person from Alaska has exactly as much say as someone from New York. I don't see how you can say how big a state is has anything to do with an election under this system.

I see it as a check and balance. We have a house of representatives (population based) and a senate (state based) This way, the large states don't take control, yet popular demand hears an equal voice.

I'm not arguing that a "equal votes for all" system wouldn't be much simpler, but I also see why they don't have that system. If five states could essentially create a president that favored large states. That can still happen now, but it would be more difficult.

Back on topic:

I still stand by the "The Segway is UGLY and designed specifically for the physically challenged and nerd population"

[talisker]

Originally posted by funkboy:
Going fast, easy to tip, people jumping out in front of you, reaction time, etc. The Segway will automatically compensate for any unexpected bumps or run-ins with people. No tipping, either.

Well just don't go too fast on your bike through a crowd. As for people jumping out and reaction time, this would apply equally to the Segway, and I'd imagine a bike would be easier to stop and quicker to steer out of trouble. As for this tipping issue - have you ridden a bike? How many cyclists just randomly tip over? In fact a bicycle is self-stabilizing, thanks to the fact that it has large rotating wheels. That's why you can set a bike rolling on its own and it will stay upright for some time.

As for the Segway, clearly a case of the tail wagging the dog. Just because something is technologically possible doesn't mean consumers want it. The whole point of selling products is to meet consumers'
needs - if they don't need it, no matter what a technological marvel you think it is, they won't buy it in any significant numbers.

[funkboy]

Originally posted by talisker:
Well just don't go too fast on your bike through a crowd. As for people jumping out and reaction time, this would apply equally to the Segway, and I'd imagine a bike would be easier to stop and quicker to steer out of trouble.

Nope. Aaaaa. Wrong!

The whole thing about the Segway is that it adjusts to both the rider and the outside world - you can push hard into someone else, but the Segway will compensate and stop you. It will keep you upright without hitting anything else.

As for this tipping issue - have you ridden a bike? How many cyclists just randomly tip over?

You can hit a curb, somthing on the ground, whatever. Biking in a large group of people, something the Segway is designed for, is significantly more difficult than hopping on a Segway.
Of course, WALKING is probably easier than anything else

As for the Segway, clearly a case of the tail wagging the dog. Just because something is technologically possible doesn't mean consumers want it. The whole point of selling products is to meet consumers'
needs - if they don't need it, no matter what a technological marvel you think it is, they won't buy it in any significant numbers.

Dean Kamen believed in it hugely, but it's not panning out, at least not with the vigor he had hoped. I ain't buying it now.

[DaedalusDX]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
My point was that little states would have very little say in the president we have in office if we did it via 'winner takes all' method. The big states would really make the decision.

It's all the little states that gave Bush the presidency.

Not flaming... just found it interesting...

You're right about how the little states won the election for Bush.

the system that we currently have today is HEAVILY in favor of states with smaller populations... that's right... the states with the fewest population have the most say in our system.

the number of votes each state gets is approximately proportional to population... the number of electors is the # of districts in each state, ie number of house reps + 2.

for a small state like wyoming which only has 1 district, those 2 extra electors represents a TREMENDOUS amount of bonus representation. For a state with lots of population like New Jersey, 2 extra electors means very little.

If you consider population/elector... the smaller states have a significantly smaller ratio than larger states in part to that 2 extra elector bonus. That means it takes fewer votes to win those states. Those states are primarily in the midwest and in the last election, Bush won nearly all of them.

My state, New Jersey, was won relatively easily by Gore... what that meant was that my vote counted alot less toward the overall result than someone's in wyoming.

i think this electoral system is VERY VERY broken. Even the concept of states is starting to become very antiquated, and arguments of States' rights are continuing to become more and more absurd as we become more closely tightknit as a nation.

Changing the electoral system would definitely change the way candidates campaign. It was easier and cheaper for Bush to reach more people... nix that... reach more ELECTORAL VOTES by going on a trip of the smaller states that were generally farm-based and more willing to vote republican anyway...

changing to popular vote system would mean that republicans wouldn't have such as easy time winning elections. Campaigning would have to be done in more population centers like the New York, granted...

but this goes back to what i was saying about our classification of States as being rather arbitrary and antiquated. it may have been an issue back in the late 1700s when people were wary of an overarching government, but our electoral college is a relic from that time that refuses to go away because politicians find it useful as a loophole to slip into office...

when people talk about States' Rights and how wyoming needs to be represented on the same level as New York, they're also saying that the representation should be shifted away from the INDIVIDUAL.

I'm going to be a little bitter now... I seriously think this is how George W. Bush, our frat boy president made it through college with a C. He rode the curve for all that it was worth. In the same way, he won the election.

I don't see a good argument against election by popular vote. An individual in Rhode Island would have just as much of a say in the matter as you, or me, or some guy in california, or in alaska, or so on.... as it stands here, a farmer way out in the midwest has more say than a programmer who toils away in Silicon Valley.

The bottom line is that politicians... in particular, our Republican politicians, don't like change. they fear change, and this might be disastrous for their party if this occurs.

Back on subject: anybody know a place where i can test drive a segway?

[Eug]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
I still stand by the "The Segway is UGLY and designed specifically for the physically challenged and nerd population"

You may have a point:





I find this one kinda cute though:

[Mediaman_12]

On the 'cycling in a crowd' thing. The fact is that the faster you go on a bike the more stable you are, with the stability controlled by the electronics in the segway it equally stable going insanely slowly as it is moving at full speed.
Walking still the best method for moving through a dense crowd though, but at least with the segway you could still stay on it at a slow walking pace. Riding a bike a such a 'speed' would require total concentration (and you would still probably still bump people with your front wheel, Getting off it and pushing would probably be easier (unless you do the cycle currier thing, and just go full speed in to and through the crowd and hope everybody gets out of the way!).

[itistoday]

Also on the cycling through a crowd thing, from a different perspective. If there's a large crowd that you can't cycle through on the path to work or something, then chances are that you'll move at the same speed walking as you would on a Segway, and the Segway will only make you look like a fool and stand out in a large crowd.

[Arty50]

Originally posted by itistoday:
Also on the cycling through a crowd thing, from a different perspective. If there's a large crowd that you can't cycle through on the path to work or something, then chances are that you'll move at the same speed walking as you would on a Segway, and the Segway will only make you look like a fool and stand out in a large crowd.

Not just that, but everyone is forgetting just how wide the damn thing is. Combine that with the fact that it's designed for linear motion and then tell me how you're supposed to get through a crowd without running into something. When you're walking you can turn sideways to avoid contacting something or even bump off an object and still maintaining forward motion. The segway doesn't allow for that. And as such it requires traffic control. Otherwise you'd have complete chaos. The sidewalk would be like the mini version of a freeway with no lanes and no center divider. So where do you put these lanes then. The sidewalk? Not gonna happen. The street? Yeah, sure. Kamen's an idiot. Any rational person would have recognized these problems and realized that they require a huge change in our transportation infrastructure. And I haven't even listed all of them.

[funkboy]

Originally posted by DaedalusDX:
You're right about how the little states won the election for Bush.

I do see your argument now, yes.

My state, New Jersey, was won relatively easily by Gore... what that meant was that my vote counted alot less toward the overall result than someone's in wyoming.

I see the validity of this, yes. Is your state a winner-take-all electoral vote state? Or do you split them up?

i think this electoral system is VERY VERY broken. Even the concept of states is starting to become very antiquated, and arguments of States' rights are continuing to become more and more absurd as we become more closely tightknit as a nation.

I agree that the system is broken - I cannot believe that we haven't fixed it already. If the party in control of the House and Senate would have been on the losing end of the 2000 Election, we would have had fixes, I think. I guess we did try fixing something in Florida... somehow...

However, states' rights should stay. The concept of states is being pushed out by certain people in Washington (John Ashcroft, for one). States serve a very different need than a centralized government... but I should leave that for a different forum.

Changing the electoral system would definitely change the way candidates campaign. It was easier and cheaper for Bush to reach more people... nix that... reach more ELECTORAL VOTES by going on a trip of the smaller states that were generally farm-based and more willing to vote republican anyway...

changing to popular vote system would mean that republicans wouldn't have such as easy time winning elections. Campaigning would have to be done in more population centers like the New York, granted...

Oh wow... but North Dakota doesn't get any candidates up here at all! We get no visits... big cities and swing states get visits.

...our electoral college is a relic from that time that refuses to go away because politicians find it useful as a loophole to slip into office...

Bing bing bing! Tell him what he's won, Johnny!

I don't see a good argument against election by popular vote. An individual in Rhode Island would have just as much of a say in the matter as you, or me, or some guy in california, or in alaska, or so on.... as it stands here, a farmer way out in the midwest has more say than a programmer who toils away in Silicon Valley.

False. If the farmer lives in a state that doesn't have a predetermined voting outcome - that their people actually think a little bit for themselves, and don't mindlessly vote for whomever is in their chosen political party - then the vote counts more.
However, I like popular vote. I'm just giving you a hard time.

The bottom line is that politicians... in particular, our Republican politicians, don't like change. they fear change, and this might be disastrous for their party if this occurs.

All politicians. Especially in a loophole like this. They'll only change it if it directly benefits them in the here and now or very near future.

Back on subject: anybody know a place where i can test drive a segway?

Wish I did. Wish I could try one out... maybe GM?

[DeathToWindows]

Saw one today... in the lab where I work.

Bigger than I thought... when it shrinks substantially I'll get one

[Richard Edgar]

The Segway strikes me as a bit pointless. From what I've read, it certainly seems to have some clever technology in it. I can see that it could be very useful for some people - the 'zimmer frame granny' comes to mind (although whether said granny would be prepared to use one is another matter) - people for whom walking is an effort, but who don't require a wheelchair to get around. However, the price is just ridiculous. So far as I can see, my legs, either by themselves or attached to a bike, outperform the Segway on any reasonable criteria.

[permanent68]

It was supposed to revolutionize the way we get around. It didn't. It costs more than a lot of used cars, and it's electric, which means crappy range, no use in the winter, and it can't really handle stairs that well.

I also, think of it as an insult to my feet.

- Rob

[brapper]

i rode one this weekend.
novelty wise, it was awesome. so funny.
wouldn't want to ride through downtown on one tho.

[TheBadgerHunter]

Yet another thread resurrection.

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

Now this thing I like!

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/general...710982,00.html

[brapper]

Originally posted by TheBadgerHunter:
Yet another thread resurrection.

you're just jealolus.
but seriously, if I started a new thread I'd get someone telling me to search before posting.

[Beewee]

I am more impressed with the technology than the device. I mean it is designed for rich people skinny people. $5,000, 200lb weight limit.

Crippled people can't use it because you have to stand...who are they designing this for? Though if I won the lottery, I'd buy one

[DigitalEl]

Didn't Steve Jobs say "cities will be built around these" before they debuted. The Segway is a perfect example of a great technology with an as-yet-unseen practical use. Some cities have "beat-walker" police using them and both the U.S. Postal Service and UPS have conducted tests, with their carriers/delivery people trying them out... But that was last year. Other than that, the buzz would seem to be over.

I do have to (more than a year later) again recommend the book "Code Name Ginger," by Steve Kemper. Good stuff for techno-geeks or anyone interested in the development of a product from concept through launch.

[OB1]

It's cool. I'd like to have a go on one.... but I wouldn't really want to own one. With 5000 squid to spend I'd buy a nice mountain bike - transport + you can blast it through the woods on a Sunday afternoon

[Skip Breakfast]

Make one that can tackle a 45-degree pitch up a hill or glide easily through up to 24" of snow and you've got something. Otherwise, I point and laugh at people riding them.

[GoGoReggieXPowars]

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
http://i.timeinc.net/popsci/images/tech/tech1104segway_485x353.jpg

Now that looks fun!

GOB on "Arrested Development" uses a Segway.