ImaginativePRO Blog

TWO COPER UNION UNDERGRAD STUDENTS DESIGN THE 'RAPID PACKING CONTAINER,' A CARDBOARD BOX FOR THE 21ST CENTURY

TWO COOPER UNION UNDERGRADS CONSTRUCTED A BOX THAT'S LESS WASTEFUL, EASIER TO PACK, EASIER TO OPEN, AND GOOD LOOKING, TOO.

While some companies, like Ecovative, are tooling around with highly sustainable alternatives to shipping products around the world, two undergrads have just reinvented the humble cardboard container itself to be more efficient.

Extremely wasteful, environmentally harmful, and hard to put together, the standard cardboard box is as much of a practical necessity as it is a bane to a country dominated by big box retailers, warehouse clubs, and free SuperSaver shipping. Where others looked at the ubiquitous cardboard box and saw a necessary evil, undergraduates Henry Wang and Chris Curro saw a problem that needed to be solved. Their solution? The Rapid Packing Container, a cardboard box for the 21st century that is not only less wasteful than traditional paper boxes, but which can also be put together in seconds and easily reused.

As students at the Albert Nerken School of Engineering at Cooper Union, Wang and Curro started by identifying a few key problems with existing cardboard boxes: they use too much material, they are hard to open, and difficult to pack. The design of the Rapid Packaging Container addresses all of this and more.

 

Some of that cardboard will inevitably be recycled, but not as much as anyone would hope: in 2011, only 37% of all fiber used to make new paper products came from recycled sources. That means that up to 63 billion cardboard boxes a year are made out of newly felled trees.

For the Rapid Packaging Container, Wang and Curro used about 15% to 20% less cardboard than traditional paperboard packaging, while maintaining a maximum 260-pound load strength. The Rapid Packaging Container gets away with using less cardboard thanks to the physical redesign.

Click Image To Enlarge

The Rapid Packaging Container's uses cardboard that when folded makes it strong enough to support the content of the box's load weight, even though tape might be the only thing holding it closed.  Wang and Curro realized that by designing their Rapid Packaging Container so that the bottom of the box was a single, structurally-sound piece of cardboard, they could eliminate a lot of waste.

This top-loading system also has another practical benefit: it's much easier to fold. All you need to do to fold the Rapid Packaging Container into the right shape, in fact, is take an unfolded box and press it into a custom jig, then close the top and affix it with the built-in adhesive strip . Comparatively, a regular cardboard box needs to be folded manually, and then reinforced with packing tape, which can be a cumbersome and error-filled process.

Click Image To Enlarge

The Evocative Rapid Packaging Container is a packaging dream for many companies. But the end-user design is delightful too. Instead of ripping open a taped-together cardboard box, opening a Rapid Packaging Container is as simple as pushing a tab on the top of the box and having the whole thing unfold itself flat again before your very eyes. Even better, it's fully reversible, meaning that if you receive one in the mail, you can just turn it inside-out for a label free box that you can then send to someone else.

According to Wang and Carro, the Rapid Packing Container already has a patent pending, and the clever design duo are currently looking for manufacturing partners. Anyone else hoping that a company like Amazon invests to make the Rapid Packing Container the cardboard box for the 21st century?

COMMENTARY:   I have a feeling that the U.S. Post Office and Amazon are going to be calling these two young college students about producing and using the new Rapid Packing Container cardboard box much sooner than anybody every though. 

Courtesy of an article dated January 6, 2013 appearing in Fast Company Design

DOORBOT LETS YOU ANSWER THE DOOR WHEN YOU'RE NOT HOME

THE DOORBELL IS GETTING MADE OVER AS A DIGITAL DOORMAN AND SURVEILLANCE CAMERA.

Unless you live in a doorman building or your house is located in a theft-free neighborhood, the downside of online shopping--especially during the holidays--is the fear that your packages might get swiped. For most of us, the new DoorBot is the doorman-slash-security-camera we've always wanted. Sleek and wireless, it easily attaches to your home and uses low-voltage Wi-Fi to beam live video of whoever rings your doorbell directly to your phone so you can see who’s there and communicate with them intercom-style.

The Doorbot package includes all the necessary components and an easy-to-read installation manual (Click Image To Enlarge

Jamie Siminoff, chief inventor for the company says.  

"Usually, when I tell my wife about my invention ideas, she correctly tells me they are bad.  Then one night I showed her my idea for the DoorBot, and she told me that I did not just reinvent the doorbell, but I gave her the feeling of having gates on the house for a fraction of the price. Now when I travel, she can answer the door from a comfortable, safe area in the house."

With that vote of confidence, he and his team--including several people who helped him create PhoneTag, a pioneering service in 2005 that transcribes voicemails into emails and text messages--got to work, figuring out how to pack a full-featured product into a small ABS plastic box, and make it simple to install and use. They successfully raised more than $250,000 via crowdfunding site Christie Street late last year, went into production, began shipping units earlier this month, and are on pace to sell $7 million in units this year.  Siminoff says that beyond raising capital, the process served to refine his invention, challenging the team to make it everything his customers needed it to be.

Doorbot device allows your to see and speak with visitors at your front door through a mobile app that installed on your smartphone (Click Image To Enlarge) 

He explains.  

"Using crowdfunding for a product definitely impacts the overall process that we went through in bringing DoorBot to market. We received immediate feedback from passionate customers prior to the product ever reaching the shelves. The result is that we were able to design and manufacture a product that is much more appealing to the market right at launch than a typical version one product."

That's good news for those looking to automate their homes. Installing a DoorBot means you're connected to your door--the portal to your abode--24/7.  Beyond just seeing who's knocking, the $199 unit can be paired with Lockitron to provide keyless entry (buy them together for $349).  

 

Back to that online shopping conundrum: Expecting a package while you’re at work? Confirm the delivery guy's identify, buzz him in so he can leave it inside, and use the camera to watch him leave--all through the app. The DoorBot even has night vision, so you can always see who's dropping by, even after hours or in a dark entryway. It can be hardwired where your old doorbell lived, or run on an internal lithium polymer battery that only needs to be recharged annually. The free app works with both Apple and Android phones, and the unit is built to stand up to extreme weather. It’s now being sold in more than 60 countries.

It is also going live on the Staples Connect system, which allows you to unite all of your Internet of things in one app and it allows you to piece together the system with only the hardware and services you love, rather than using an out-of-box solution that one company put together.

Siminoff says. 

"Homeowners don't want to spend a fortune on a comprehensive system, and now they don't need to.  DoorBot provides convenience and safety for when you're at home, and peace of mind for when you're away."

COMMENTARY:  I absolutely love Doorbot because it solves a real need in the marketplace: Knowing who visits the front door of your house when you are not home, and being able to do something about it.  

If you expect a package or an important visitor to show up at your front door, and you will not be home, this is your backup plan and a damn good one.  If it is a bad guy, they are immediately put on notice that you saw them and heard them.  This reduces the likelihood that they wlll break into your house.  At $199, you cannot beat that price for piece of mind.  

With security systems and services like ADT, you must pay a one-time upfront fee for installing a security system and a monthly rental fee that will run for a minimum of three to five years.  The final costs of an ADT system are many thousands of dollars.  Doorbot at $199 is much cheaper and is affordable by all homeowners, a very huge market indeed.  

Shame on the Sharks from ABC's Shark Tank TV show for turning down Jamie Siminoff.   I would never have accepted money from Kevin O'Leary.  O'Leary wanted a 10% royalty and a 10% ownership for the $700,000.  The payment of the royalty would end when the $700,000 investment is fully recovered.  Here's the YouTube video of Jamie meeting those mean Sharks:

Click To View Video

Jamie did the right thing by pitching Doorbot using crowdfunding, and is now well on his way to generating first year revenues of $7 million.  Congratulations Jamie!!

Courtesy of an article dated December 20, 2013 appearing in Fast Company 

THE PIAMO ESPRESSO MAKER, AN INGENIOUS AT-HOME ESPRESSO MAKER FOR YOUR MICROWAVE IN LESS THAN ONE MINUTE

The Piamo is a charming, microwave espresso maker (Click Image To Enlarge)

HAS THE IMPOSSIBLE HAPPENED? HAS SOMEONE BUILT THE FIRST AMAZING MICROWAVE ESPRESSO MAKER? POSSIBLY.

Brewing world-class coffee is fairly inexpensive. All you need is a grinder and a kettle and some sort of combination of a funnel and filter. Good espresso ups the ante by about tenfold. You need pressure. Pressure is expensive, it’s counter-suckingly bulky and still requires a level of finesse to pull a perfect shot. Since the 1930s, the solution has been the moka pot, but a moka pot needs a stove.

In 30 seconds, it will turn your water and grounds into a very strong shot of coffee (Click Image To Enlarge)

The Piamo Espresso Maker, designed by Christoph and Hendrik Meyl, along with Lunar, is an elegant, microwaveable entry in the world of at-home espresso. It’s essentially a microwaveable moka pot, inverted. You pour water in a reservoir up top and fill grounds in the middle. Then you set the microwave for 30 seconds. Steam pressure builds in the reservoir, pushing water through the grounds into a cup. You’re done.

 

Lunar’s lead project designer Roman Gebhard told Co.Design.

“We really strived for creating a simple, on-the-go espresso experience that is communicated with a clear, unique, and iconic design expression.  There was a need and opportunity to form a brand new product icon/archetype that has the strength to become a symbol for this category.”

The Piamo has already been awarded a few patents based on its ingenuity, but its most brilliant move was to play off the already-iconic shape (and mouth feel) of the espresso cup. Because while I was able to find some “microwaveable espresso makers” on Amazon, their plastic construction oozed gimmick. And all their parts looked fragile and tough to clean. Even though I’ve never tasted Piamo espresso, I’m inherently drawn to the authenticity of that espresso cup. I trust it, and I want to drink espresso out of it.

The top (left) is the water reservoir. Then you have the compartment for the grounds--complete with metal shielding to stop them from burning. At the bottom is the cup (Click Image To Enlarge)

Of course, the larger design challenges had nothing to do with the branding. The team had to figure out, how do you toss ground espresso into a microwave for 30 seconds without burning away the intoxicating aroma? The solution was to implement metal shielding around just the grounds compartment of the Piamo. But don’t metal and microwaves not mix?

Steam pressure builds, pushing through the middle chamber’s grounds into the cup itself (Click Image To Enlarge)

Gebhard explains. 

"Any metal part in a microwave acts as an antenna. It needs to be designed in a way that its geometry is soft, rounded, and doesn’t have any pointy, sharp areas that create problems with the electrical fields that would result in the well-known sparks.  Furthermore, these metal parts need to be designed in a way that they are aligned with the standardized microwave wavelength and frequency."

Coupled with that espresso cup, which was actually built of ABS plastic to reinforce the metal’s shielding (better than ceramic would), the espresso grounds are kept safe from overheating. Ironically, moka pots are often chided for burning espresso before the water pressure mixes with the beans. Piamo’s design team may have solved this age-old problem despite the indiscriminate science of microwaves.

And it only takes 30 seconds (Click Image To Enlarge)

But before the snobs call me on this, it is worth noting that moka pots may not be the ultimate standard of espresso. Coffee consensus agrees that you need 8.8 bars (atmospheres) of pressure to pull an ideal shot. Moka pots, and the Piamo, both generate about 1.5 bars. So will the Piamo prove to be a replacement for your four-figure counter beast, brandishing a name that could be mistaken for an Italian sports car? Probably not. But could the Piamo be the all-around most convenient way ever to make a drinkable shot of super strong coffee at the inlaws’? Absolutely.

The Piamo is available for pre-order now. It’s $55 on the German equivalent of Kickstarter.

Order the Piamo Espresso Maker here 

COMMENTARY:   I'm not an espresso coffee drinker, but the Piamo Espresso Maker definitely appears to be a very simple alternative solution to what has become a complicated and fairly expensive solution to brewing a great cup of espresso coffee.  It's sort of a no-brainer if you want a quick cup of espresso coffee, and don't want to use one of those espresso machines.   

Courtesy of an article dated February 6, 2013 appearing in Fast Company Design 

 

TWINE: A KICKSTARTER PROJECT THAT RAISED TOO MUCH MONEY, THEN SHIPPED LATE DUE TO POOR PLANNING AND "MURPHY'S LAW"

Twine, a gadget that promises to make your your washing machine tweet when the laundry is done and your basement send an email when it floods, raised more than $500,000 on Kickstarter in 2011 (Click Image To Enlarge)

When Twine's creators signed up for Kickstarter, they thought they'd make about 200 devices using the same $20 toaster oven they had purchased for the prototype. Then they raised more than $500,000.

Twine is exactly the type of sensor-stuffed, Wi-Fi-connected gadget you would expect to take off in Kickstarter's tech section. The device promises to make your washing machine tweet when the laundry is done and your basement send an email when it floods. Blogs called it “the future” within a week after debuting. Nobody was surprised when it raised more than half-a-million dollars--except for its creators.

Supermechanical expected to make about 200 Twines after running its Kickstarter project. Instead, it ended up shipping 4,000 of them to Kickstarter backers (Click Image To Enlarge)

When John Kestner and David Carr posted Twine on Kickstarter in November 2011, they had set their fundraising goal at $35,000. Their plan was to produce about 200 units using the same process that created the prototype. But six weeks later, having raised $556,541, they were now committed to shipping almost 4,000 units. The homemade wax mold used to create Twine's prototype was no longer going to cut it, and there wasn't another plan. Kestner tells Fast Company.

“We were definitely not thinking of the risk of being too successful.” 

Twine's creators, John Kestner and David Carr, who call their startup 'Supermechanical,' prototyped Twine in the basement of a dorm (Click Image To Enlarge)

In scaling their manufacturing process, tasks the team of two hadn't considered--customizing a $15,000 set of tooling, designing packaging, communicating with backers, and searching for components--added up to an unmanageable number of full-time jobs. Twine’s estimated delivery date of March quickly became unrealistic.

Despite the disproportionate attention that superstar Kickstarter projects like Twine get, they're rare. Most projects raise less than $10,000, and until last year, none had raised more than $1 million. But as Kickstarter's scale rockets, breakaway projects like Twine are becoming not only more visible but more common. Seventeen Kickstarter projects passed the $1 million (or euro equivalent) milestone last year. Six of them, like Twine, were gadget projects, which are arguably left in the most awkward position after breakout success. When a Kickstarter project involving hardware takes off, what started as a dream and a prototype can morph into a mass-manufacturing commitment within a couple of weeks. It’s something of a Cinderella story--but one in which Cinderella must learn how to navigate mass manufacturing overnight. Here is how it worked out for Twine.

Twine's prototype cost just a few hundred dollars to create. Its first version's outer casing baked in a $20 toaster oven (Click Image To Enlarge)

Stage 1: Prototyping

Prototyping Twine cost a few hundred dollars. Recently graduated from MIT’s Media Lab, Kestner and Carr “squirreled away” a space to work in the basement of a Harvard dorm. Carr already owned a soldering iron and the electronics equipment for Twine’s circuit board, and he carved a wax mold for Twine's blue outer casing using a milling machine that he had built himself. Silicone and urethane cost about $100 at a local supply shop, and the toaster oven where Twine's first casing baked for six hours cost another $20.

Carr made the wax mold for Twine's outer casing with a homemade milling machine (Click Image To Enlarge)

It wasn't until the third day of the Kickstarter project, when Twine's funding passed three times the original goal, that the pair of inventors realized Twine had scaled past this manufacturing process.  Kestner says.

“If we had done 4,000, it would have taken months just to physically manufacture them. That’s not including all of the development time.”

Carr already owned the soldering iron and electronics equipment he needed to create Twine's prototype circuit board (Click Image To Enlarge)

3-D printing, Github-type sites for creating hardware such as Upverter, and makerspaces like Boston-based Artisan Aylum have all made the path to creating a functional prototype or a small batch of gadgets easier.  Scott Miller, the CEO of a production consultancy called Dragon Innovation that has about 20 Kickstarter projects as clients says. 

“But the big gotchya is that is really just the beginning, and there’s a tremendous amount of work to do after that. Because the entrepreneurs have a lot of unknown unknowns, they don’t really know how far along the timeline they are. And typically they will think they’re a lot closer to getting volume on the shelf or e-commerce than they actually are.”

The tooling for Twine's outer casing wasn't as easy to 3-D prototype, and the resulting component wasn't usable the first time around. Had the Supermechanical not gotten a refund for a mistake with the factory's software, it could have cost them $15,000 (Click Image To Enlarge)

Stage 2:  Surprise Scaling

Though Kestner had studied industrial design as an undergraduate, he had never actually produced a physical object on a large scale. “To be honest, I Googled a lot,” he says.

All of Twine’s manufacturing partners and most of its component sources are located in the United States, which successfully avoided the problems with language, time, and cultural barriers that Kickstarter projects such as Pebble and LIFX have dealt with while manufacturing their products in China. Even without overseas manufacturing, however, there were plenty of unanticipated challenges.

The company that manufactured Twine’s outer casing, for instance, didn’t design the tooling it used to shape them. Kestner did. Whether or not his designs ended up being functional, they each would cost $15,000. Twine’s gut, the part that holds its circuit board, is made of hard plastic and was easy to test with a 3-D printer before putting money down for the real deal. But only one 3-D printer would prototype the tooling for Twine’s rubber casing, and the results weren’t nearly as accurate as the gut prototypes. When the actual metal tooling arrived, it was a disaster. The case was too tight, and it looked terrible. Problems with the manufacturer’s preview software got the team a refund, but the lost cost could have killed the project. Even with the refund, it cost time. All together, it took five months to just design Twine’s outer casing.

Twine’s gut, the part that holds its circuit board, is made of hard plastic and was easy to test with a 3-D printer before putting money down for the real deal (Click Image To Enlarge)

Meanwhile, Twine’s first employee coordinated the delivery of 100 components to the factory that assembled Twine’s circuit boards--a job that was part scavenger hunt and part logistical Olympics. Kestner worked on a design for Twine’s packaging and put together a website for managing Twine backers’ new addresses and international shipping costs.

By the time the casing and circuit boards began arriving in June, the team had moved to Austin. Boxes started piling up in their new workspace (Click Image To Enlarge)

By the time the casing and circuit boards began arriving in June, the team had moved to Austin. Boxes started piling up in their new workspace.

By the time Twine's parts were ready for assembly, the team had moved from Boston to a workspace in Austin, TX (Click Image To Enlarge)

The casing arrived from an injection molding plant in Minnesota. Circuit boards came from a manufacturer in New Hampshire. And the 8-piece boxes that Kestner designed himself came from North Carolina in large flats.Supermechanical, the company behind Twine, had already spent nearly all of its Kickstarter money. It had overshot its estimated shipping date by three months, and it hadn’t even started putting devices together.

A factory in New Hampshire assembled Twine's circuit boards. Its cases were made in Minnesota, and its packaging manufactured in North Carolina (Click Image To Enlarge)

Stage 3:  Missing The Deadline

It isn't just first-time hardware entrepreneurs that struggle with the manufacturing demands of surprise scaling via Kickstarter. Pebble Technology's CEO, Eric Migicovsky, has been working on smartwatches for four years. The company manufactured about 1,500 units of its first product, InPulse, at a Bay Area manufacturer. But the 85,000 Pebble smartwatches the company owes Kickstarter backers after raising $10 million on the site required a shift to an overseas manufacturing process, and--though Migicovsky says this plan B existed in advance--the company missed its September estimated delivery date.

In fact, most breakaway hardware projects have missed their deadlines. iPhone station Elevation Dock shipped about six months late. Virtual reality headset Oculus Rift initially set its expected delivery date for October, but announced recently that it now expects to be delivering developer kits by March 2013. By one estimate, only 25% of Kickstarter’s design and technology products deliver on time.

Twine technician tests each finished Twine for quality control issues.  This is a very time-consuming procedure, but a necessary evil in order to avoid returns for defects, requests for refunds and the resulting bad publicity (Click Image To Enlarge)

Being late is not necessarily a big deal. Kickstarter is, after all, designed to support unfinished projects. A bigger problem is reaching a Kickstarter funding goal only to realize that the funding can’t come close to covering your costs. Twine, for instance, set its goal at $35,000—aiming as low as possible in order to avoid missing it. 

Kestner says.

“If we had gotten less than we did, but still met our goal, that would have really hurt us; we would have lost money.  There’s an uncomfortable valley between hand-making stuff and being able to have the capital to invest in tooling and all the stuff that goes into mass manufacturing that you just can’t get good prices on without mass production. So what do you do? You can’t afford to hand-make 1,000 of something.”

Dragon Innovation’s Miller says he often gets panicked calls from Kickstarter project creators who can't feasibly complete their projects. Their creators did not understand the manufacturing costs when they set their goal. Their timeline is unreasonable, or their design isn’t actually manufacturable.

Miller says. 

“They’ve also spent the money, and Amazon and Kickstarter have taken their cut.  They can’t even give back the money. It’s kind of a really unfortunate position to be in.”

Stage 4:  Delivering Against The Odds

Kestner asks at some point while describing Twine's journey from Kickstarter funding to shipping,

"What’s that quote that says,  'If I knew how hard it was to do it, maybe I wouldn’t have started in the first place?'"

Kickstarter doesn't provide any warnings. While it approves projects before they go live on the site, the process is more like filling out a college application than an investigation into the project’s feasibility. In September, however, the platform took its biggest step in preventing hardware projects from drowning in their own success (and the phrase "Kickstarter vaporware" from entering the vernacular) by banning renderings and simulations.  it advised in a blog post.

“The best rule of thumb: under-promise and over-deliver.”

Earlier that summer additional guidelines for design and technology products required information about creators' relevant experience and a manufacturing plan. Kickstarter has also advised against posting finished products on the site, remind its users that "Kickstarter is Not a Store." So what is the appropriate amount of risk?

No matter how overwhelmed by their projects, all six of the Kickstarter gadget creators I interviewed for this article talked about the opportunities Kickstarter gives entrepreneurs to solicit input and test demand for a product at an early stage.  Kestner says.

"It’s okay that you have the chance to fail.  That’s how good stuff gets made. You’ve got to have the chance to fail."

Some did say they wished they had waited until later in the development process before putting their gadgets on Kickstarter.  Some couldn't have afforded to get further along in the process before their Kickstarter campaign. Alex Hawkinson, the CEO of the company that makes SmartThings, a platform for connecting objects to the Internet that raised $1.2 million, said his product was already on track to ship when the campaign first went live. He set the reward thresholds knowing that he'd pretty much break even.  He told Fast Company.

“We were on track to launch the product at the end of this year anyway, but we were all Kickstarter users, and thought it was a great way to get the word out and sort of build on that three-legged stool.” 

Even without being prepared for it, Twine’s creators successfully navigated the mass manufacturing process by picking up new skills as they went. Now with a staff of five, Supermechanical started snapping units together last summer. Each of the 4,000 units took about 10 minutes to assemble, test, and package: A total of about more than 650 hours.

Supermechanical finally shipped its first 25 Twines in September--about six months after the estimated delivery date.

Kestner and Carr celebrated with a nice dinner.  Kestner says. 

"We didn’t cry.  But it was a great, great weight off."

The next day, they dove into what is sure to be a never-ending series of unexpected challenges: The circuit board assembler couldn’t keep the schedule it had agreed to, some of the shipped Twines returned in the mail, and, with the Kickstarter project behind them, it was time to address the small task of turning Twine into a sustainable business.

Kestner says.

“I’m a workaholic.  I’ve always been a workaholic, but this is the hardest I’ve ever worked in my life. It’s not free money. That’s for sure.”

COMMENTARY:   The thing I see happening with a lot of entrepreneurs building something is their lack of knowledge and understanding of the intricacies of manufacturing.  Developing production-ready prototypes, preparing precise engineering drawings and bills of materials, and exacting tooling is extremely important.  Several of my former clients didn't both to provide manufacturer's with precise engineering drawings or a bill of materials, or take into account the useful life of the tooling, or factor in additional tooling as production qualities scale.  

My recommendation for startups is to avoid assembling the finished product yourself, not unless you care about your family and kids, don't have much of a social life, and you have a high tolerance for pain and frustration.  Do what the big boys do.  Work only with individuals experienced with the manufacturing process from start-to-finish.  They are familiar with the material specifications, and whether the finished product will holdup during regular use.

If you can afford to produce several working prototypes, do so, then conduct a thorough A/B market test in order to determine if the product satisfies customer needs, provides a great overall experience, and provide you with the feedback to make any last minute changes to the prototype before you go into production on the final finished product.  Again, I can't tell you how many times entrepreneurs dive right into manufacturing without conducting an adequate market test, only to encounter quality control issues and huge numbers of product returns.     

Courtesy of an article dated February 5, 2013 appearing in Fast Company 

 

TECHSHOP, A FULLY-EQUIPPED OPEN ACCESS WORKSHOP TO HELP ENTREPRENEURS BUILD PROTOTYPES AND MAKE THINGS

As a Web journalist, I don’t need many tools. Give me a laptop, a smartphone, and an Internet connection, and I’m basically a roving newsroom. But don’t ask me to make anything other than words: in my loft, the closest thing to a power tool is the kitchen blender. To build, say, a robot dog, I’d first have to spend thousands of dollars on design software and metalworking equipment.

Or at least, I would have until this week. Now there’s another option: I could just get a $100-per-month membership at TechShop, a craftsmen’s clubhouse that plans a “soft opening” of its new San Francisco location this weekend.  TechShop has almost every conceivable tool at the ready, from design workstations to computer-controlled looms, laser cutters, commercial-grade sewing machines, welding equipment, injection molding machines, an electronics lab, and a full woodworking shop. It’s a DIY enthusiast’s paradise.

Founded by Jim Newton, a former science advisor for the Discovery Channel cult favorite Mythbusters, TechShop has grand plans to expand Kinko’s-style to dozens of cities around the United States. But the former San Francisco Chronicle distribution warehouse that TechShop is renovating at 926 Howard Street is the company’s first big venture beyond its Menlo Park, CA, birthplace. (There’s a TechShop partner location in Raleigh-Durham, NC, but it’s not company-owned.) As such, the San Francisco opening a major test of the whole TechShop premise, which is that urban areas are bursting with creative people who want to make and sell stuff, but lack the necessary tools, training, and facilities.

“Our mission is to engage, enable, and empower people to build their dreams,” says TechShop’s CEO, Mark Hatch.

That may sound like marketing-speak, but Hatch is as earnest as they come. He’s a business development ninja who once ran the computer services business at Kinko’s and has studied the ideas of sociologists and new-economy gurus like Richard Florida (The Rise of the Creative Class) and Joseph Pine (Mass Customization, The Experience Economy, Authenticity). He’s convinced that Americans have a deep-rooted urge to make things with their hands, and that with the right tools, a significant minority could turn their basement-shop hobbies into real businesses. Which is why he believes that there’s a place in every major city for a fully tricked-out machine shop that functions on the Gold’s Gym model—that is, charging a flat monthly fee in return for unlimited access to TechShop’s space and equipment.

 

Those membership terms aren’t just an administrative convenience—they’re the cornerstone of the company’s business model and marketing philosophy. At Kinko’s, says Hatch, “the fascinating story that was about the community that developed between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.” This was back in the 1990s, when hordes of desktop-publishing professionals and design students would descend on Kinko’s stores every night because they couldn’t afford a $1,000 copy of Quark or Photoshop or their own laser printers. They’d end up helping one another and, in more than a few cases, going into business together. “The problem was that we charged by the hour, so you were incentivized to leave,” says Hatch. “If you want to create a movement to change the world and really help drive innovation and creativity, you need a ‘third place,’ as Starbucks likes to 

 

describe itself.  TechShop is a truly third place for creatives. The all-you-can-eat pricing model encourages you to hang out. You have no idea who you’re going to run into, but I guarantee it’s going to be interesting.”

The 800 people who’ve joined TechShop’s Menlo Park shop, which opened in October 2006, apparently agree. And Hatch’s belief that many makers join TechShop in order to turn their avocations into vocations isn’t just a theory anymore. Real companies like Dodocase, a San Francisco-based maker of premium iPad cases, and Clustered Systems, which makes high-tech cooling systems for data centers, have used TechShop as their launchpad. (There’s more on each of these companies below and in my audio interview with Hatch and Newton—see page 4.)

 

That track record has won the company big fans at places like theKauffman Foundation, which spends millions each year on the search for better ways to promote entrepreneurship. “Lots of people have great ideas, but many can’t act on them, because they lack the tools, equipment, and knowledge to turn those ideas into marketable products,” says Carl Schramm, the foundation’s president and CEO. “TechShop is a place where idea people can literally build their dreams today, becoming tomorrow’s inventors and entrepreneurs.”

TechShop exists because Jim Newton, a lifelong tinkerer and inventor, wanted a world-class shop for his own projects. “I was on Mythbusters for a year, so I had access to their shops. [Then] I was teaching at the local college, showing people how to make combat robots, and I just taught that class that so I could get access to the machine shop…When I got done with that gig, I didn’t have access to a shop, and I thought about what is it going to take to build my own shop.”

Newton could have paid for a full shop by going into the prototype fabrication business, but he didn’t want to work on other people’s projects. That was when he hit on the gym-membership concept. “If you think about this as a health club, it’s exactly the same,” he says. “There are some nuances, like safety and training. But there are no hourly charges for the equipment, with rare exceptions like the 3D printer, where you have to pay for materials, and the water-jet cutter, which costs $1 a minute to cover materials and disposal of the slurry. Everything else, it’s come and use it as much as you want.”

What makes the whole membership concept plausible, according to Hatch, is the last two decades’ revolution in computer-aided design and manufacturing software, which can help users analyze virtual prototypes right down to the level of specific materials. If you’re building an engine and you’re trying to decide whether to use Alcoa aluminum or Nucor aluminum, for example, the newest Autodesk systems “will allow you to model how your engine will perform based on the different melt temperatures,” says Hatch. “The ability to do that on software that I can train you on and have you producing products within weeks is new to the world. Fifteen years ago, you would have needed a $15,000 computer and $10,000 in software and six months of training.”

NOTE:  TO READ THE REMAINDER OF THIS ARTICLE CLICK THE LINK LOCATED BELOW.

COMMENTARY:  An entrepreneur, inventor and friend of mine mentioned TechShop to me earlier this month.  I think TechShop is a great source for producing new invention prototypes and making all kinds of finished products.  

TechShop has several pricing packages for individuals, families and corporate users.  You can pay by the day or month   Prices range between $75.00 per month for students to as much as $3,500 per year for corporate users.  

TechShop provides additional services, including:

• 3D Printing 
• Personal training 
• Personal consulting
• Personal prototyping  

Rates for services are $95.00 per hour with a two-hour minimum.  There is also a $30.00 charge per hour for each additional attendee.   

TechShop also offers classes in Arts and Crafts (ART), CNC (CNC), Electronics (EEE), Fabrication (FAB), Laser Cutting (LAS), Technology (TEC), Textiles (TXL), and Woodworking (WOD).

Many entrepreneurs are strapped financially, and TechShop provides a complete DIY facility where they can go and learn how to make things, build prototypes and manufacture finished products.

TechShop has three locations that are open for business.  Two new locations are opening in Detroit, MI and San Jose, CA in 2011:

TechShop, Inc.
120 Independence Dr.
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: 1 (800) 640-1975
Email: [email protected]

TechShop Menlo Park is open 7 days a week 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnite.

 

TechShop SoMa, LLC
926 Howard Street
San Francisco, CA 94103

Phone: (415) 263-916
Email: [email protected]

TechShop San Francisco is currently Open Noon to 10:00 PM 7 Days a Week during Phase 1 of their opening!

TechShop RDU
5905 Triangle Dr.
Raleigh, NC 27617

Phone: (919) 782-2344
Scott's Cell Phone (336) 460-7373
Email: [email protected]

TechShop, Inc. - COMING WINTER 2011
120 Independence Dr.
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Toll Free: 1 (800) 640-1975
Email: [email protected]

TechShop, Inc. - COMING WINTER 2011
800 Republic Drive (in the process of leasing this space)
Dearborn, MI 
Toll Free:  Not Available
Email: [email protected] 

TechShop's motto is "Build Your Dreams Here," and this is a dream come true for craftsmen, do-it-yourselfer's, kids, designers, entrepreneurs and entire families.  

Courtesy of an article dated December 16, 2010 appearing in Xconomy

GOOGLE TO SELL CONTROVERSIAL AR HEADS-UP-DISPLAY (HUD) GLASSES BY YEAR-END, RAISES HUGE PRIVACY CONCERNS

People who constantly reach into a pocket to check a smartphone for bits of information will soon have another option: a pair of Google-made glasses that will be able to stream information to the wearer’s eyeballs in real time.

According to several Google employees familiar with the project who asked not to be named, the glasses will go on sale to the public by the end of the year. These people said they are expected “to cost around the price of current smartphones,” or $250 to $600.

The people familiar with the Google glasses said they would be Android-based, and will include a small screen that will sit a few inches from someone’s eye. They will also have a 3G or 4G data connection and a number of sensors including motion and GPS.

A Google spokesman declined to comment on the project.

Seth Weintraub, a blogger for 9 to 5 Google, who first wrote about the glasses project in December, and then discovered more information about them this month, also said the glasses would be Android-based and cited a source that described their look as that of a pair of Oakley Thumps.

Click Image To Enlarge

They will also have a unique navigation system. Mr. Weintraub wrote this month. 

“The navigation system currently used is a head tilting to scroll and click.  We are told it is very quick to learn and once the user is adept at navigation, it becomes second nature and almost indistinguishable to outside users.”

The glasses will have a low-resolution built-in camera that will be able to monitor the world in real time and overlay information about locations, surrounding buildings and friends who might be nearby, according to the Google employees. The glasses are not designed to be worn constantly — although Google expects some of the nerdiest users will wear them a lot — but will be more like smartphones, used when needed.

Internally, the Google X team has been actively discussing the privacy implications of the glasses and the company wants to ensure that people know if they are being recorded by someone wearing a pair of glasses with a built-in camera.

The project is currently being built in the Google X offices, a secretive laboratory near Google’s main campus that is charged with working on robots, space elevators and dozens of other futuristic projects.

One of the key people involved with the glasses is Steve Lee, a Google engineer and creator of the Google mapping software, Latitude. As a result of Mr. Lee’s involvement, location information will be paramount in the first version released to the public, several people who have seen the glasses said. The other key leader on the glasses project is Sergey Brin, Google’s co-founder, who is currently spending most of his time in the Google X labs.

One Google employee said the glasses would tap into a number of Google software products that are currently available and in use today, but will display the information in an augmented reality view, rather than as a Web browser page like those that people see on smartphones.

The glasses will send data to the cloud and then use things like Google Latitude to share location, Google Goggles to search images and figure out what is being looked at, and Google Maps to show other things nearby, the Google employee said.   They said.  

“You will be able to check in to locations with your friends through the glasses.”

Everyone I spoke with who was familiar with the project repeatedly said that Google was not thinking about potential business models with the new glasses. Instead, they said, Google sees the project as an experiment that anyone will be able to join. If consumers take to the glasses when they are released later this year, then Google will explore possible revenue streams.

As I noted in a Disruptions column last year, Apple engineers are also exploring wearable computing, but the company is taking a different route, focusing on computers that strap around someone’s wrist.

Last week The San Jose Mercury News discovered plans by Google to build a $120 million electronics testing facility that will be involved in testing “precision optical technology.”

COMMENTARY:    In a blog post dated February 8, 2012, I commented on the article by Seth Weintraub of 9to5Google.com, that revealed Google's development of "Terminator" style, Android-based head-up-display (HUD) glasses.   That was just a rumor, but it now appears that Google is rapidly moving towards launching their new HUD glasses by year-end.

I hate to say it, but these augmented reality HUD glasses are going to be very controversial and create many privacy concerns and liability issues.  Information about you is now readily available on the internet, especially from social networks, and Google will be able to tap into that information to display your name and possibly your contact information, and anything else you may have posted online.  

In an article February 22, 2012 by Thomas Claburn appearing in InformationWeek, there were 7 potential problems Google may encounter with their new augmented reality HUD glasses:

"Here are a few potential pitfalls:

"Privacy - The outcry over people beaming images back to Google's data centers will be deafening, far worse than complaints about Google's monitoring of Web browsing habits. Google engineers are said to be actively discussing the privacy implications of the glasses. But the company's history of repeated privacy blunders suggests controversy is inevitable."

"Google has the technology to enable facial recognition with its Google Goggles app, but has avoided doing so for fear of privacy problems. And that's the real shame here, because augmented reality glasses should be able to do things like present the name of the person you're looking at. That kind of technology will be available eventually, at least to police departments. But as a society, we're not ready for it."

"Redundancy - Augmented reality is cool. But putting the technology into a pair of glasses isn't strictly necessary. Everything your Google glasses might be able to do, your Android phone will do better, particularly given the assumption that the glasses will be intended for periodic rather than constant use."

"Cost - For several hundred dollars, you'll get what? Services already available on your smartphone. Augmented reality makes a lot of sense if you're, say, a NASA astronaut who needs to see Space Shuttle schematics in your visor while you're on a space walk to make repairs. Augmented reality makes less sense for consumers. A more cost-effective solution might be a smartphone scaffold for mounting your phone on your baseball cap."

"Health - There's already enough FUD about mobile phones and brain cancer. But even the most scientifically-minded are likely to balk if Google's glasses rely on anything more powerful than Bluetooth to transmit and receive data. And that's to say nothing of the potential health effects of visual distraction and impairment. No one wants their last thought to be, 'Hey, Google Maps says I'm walking across Highway 101...'"

"Liability - And if there are health risks, there will be liability problems. People will wear Google's glasses while driving, despite explicit warnings not to do so. They will collide with elderly pedestrians and someone will get hurt. Someone will end up going cross-eyed. There will be lawsuits. And some politician will hold a hearing. Add the cost of an insurance policy to your Google Glasses bill."

"Battery Life - Battery life continues to hinder the utility of smartphones, tablets, and notebook computers. And in these devices, you can generally feel the weight of the battery. Glasses need to be light to be comfortable, so the battery will necessarily be small. As a consequence, the glasses are unlikely to be useful for very long, unless they require a separate tethered battery ... and that would ruin the experience. The ideal augmented reality glasses will be able to run perpetually on sunlight. We're probably several decades away from that kind of photovoltaic and processor efficiency."

"Control - Head-tiling will not be enough if the glasses are to offer services beyond navigation. The glasses will either have to convert hand gestures to commands or accept voice commands. So add a microphone, which adds another layer of privacy problems and engineering requirements."

"The glasses will also have to be extraordinarily responsive--when you turn your head you won't be happy with information related to where you were looking three seconds ago. That will mean either a very fast network connection--something many mobile carriers can't manage consistently--or displaying as little data as possible for the sake of speed and to appease mobile carriers, which already consider you a data hog."

Wow, it looks like Thomas Claburn covered all the possible pitfalls that Google could experience. Notice that privacy was No 1 on his list.  I wonder if Google's X-Labs team asked themselves, "What would Steve do?"   Better yet, did Google confer with their attorney's about liability and privacy issues and did they conduct field studies and get feedback from consumers?

This is a great time to mention that the Obama administration is working hard to legislate an online "Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights" bill, and if the proposed bill passes in its present form without Congressional infighting, it could change the entire internet landscape with regard to privacy concerns.  Checkout my blog post dated February 23, 2012 about Obama's proposed Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights bill.   

I also envision a lot of ads appearing to the HUD whenever you look at a restaurant, movie theater, product whether a book or consumer electronics device, and a message telling you what it is, where you can get it, the price and if there is a deal on that item.  So unless you don't mind receiving these invasive ads appearing on your HUD, then its going to open up a whole new world for those individuals willing to forkup $250 to $650 and the software to use these new HUD glasses.    

I have always felt that technology would be heading this way, and it looks like it will be happening sooner, rather than later.   You can expect Microsoft, Apple and others to introduce similar devices, but they will probably wait to see just how much traction Google is making with their new HUD augmented reality glasses before launching their own.

Courtesy of an article dated February 21, 2012 appearing in The New York Times Bits

THE CRYOSCOPE HAPTIC WEATHERVANE IS A THERMOMETER THAT LETS YOU ACTUALLY FEEL THE TEMPERATURE OUTSIDE

AFTER DECADES OF WEARING THE WRONG COAT, NEVER AGAIN, I SAY!

Thermometers are superb at measuring temperature but lousy at describing it. A bulb of mercury tells me it’s 55 degrees--but what’s 55 degrees? When was the last time I walked into a room and said,

“This place feels exactly 55 degrees.”

Cryoscope from Robb Godshaw on Vimeo.

The Cryoscope Haptic Weathervane, created by Robb Godshaw of Syyn Labs, conveys the temperature by allowing you to experience it. Syncing with Wi-Fi to online weather reports, you can touch this aluminum cube to actually feel the outside temperature rather than simply reading about it through numbers or whimsical sunshine icons.  Godshaw tells us.

“I sought to develop a device that conveyed the forecast in a manner which left nothing to the imagination.  It provides a thorough and instantaneous understanding of what awaits the user outside.”

Technically, the 4-inch milled aluminum cube is stuffed with quite a bit of hardware, including an Arduino that controls a Peltier element and a heat sink, which work in tandem to pump heat appropriately. After the first weather sync, it’s just a few minutes before the device comes to temperature.

Click Image To Enlarge

But the best trick of the Cryoscope isn’t its ability to hit a perfect temperature, but its ability to hit the perfect perceived temperature.  Godshaw writes.  

“Due to the ‘cold’ nature of metal, the temperature is adjusted to match human perceptions of hot and cold.”

For the cube to feel neutral on human skin, it’s set to an 85°F baseline. From there, the cube adjusts its temperature by the number of degrees the outside differs from 73°F room temperature. In other words, if it’s 60°F outside, the cube will technically cool to 72°F.

So the imperfect temperature ends up feeling perfect.

Currently, Godshaw is open to commercializing the proof of concept, but that hasn’t stopped him from considering improvements to the simplistic temperature-only design to include all aspects of weather.  Godshaw writes.  

“A version of the device that could communicate precipitation or wind would be beneficial.  The addition of water would present numerous technical challenges. An Internet commenter suggested that a lightning feature should be added, where it gives the user a small shock. I do not plan to implement that feature.”

And if I might add, the water mixed with lightning sounds especially dangerous.

COMMENTARY:    I never thought I would say this, but this is the worst design for a household temperature thermometer that I have seen in a long time.  Steve Jobs designed the Apple cube idea too, and it didn't work.  The ability to feel the perceived outside temperature by simply touching the cube is a novel idea, but I would like to know the actual temperature displayed on a digital display.  How many individuals can tell the difference between 85 and 90 degrees fahrenheit, do you suppose? See my point?  

If I want to feel the outside temperature, I go outside. I want to feel just how the temperature feels to the skin of my face.  If it's too hot, I will know.  I will instantly go into a sweat.  The Cryoscope Haptic Weathervane just does not shake my world.  I just don't think that this cube gives you the sensitivity of the outside temperature as it would feel on your face.  For a blind individual who can't see a temperature reading, this might work wonders, but for normal people, this is not very practical.  In my opinion the Cryoscope Haptic Weathervane is a dude.

Courtesy of an article dated February 13, 2012 appearingi n Fast Company Design

 

PRODUCTION OF INDIA'S $35 AAKASH TABLET DELAYED DUE TO A CONFLICT ABOUT THE FINAL SPECS, 1.3 MILLION HAVE BEEN PRE-ORDERED

Months after India's healthily anticipated $35 tablet was first unveiled, its owners are embroiled in a spat that is raising questions about its future.

A $35 Indian Aakash tablet may turn out to be a pipe dream after all.

In the most recent twist in the development of the unbelievably cheap piece of tech, the Indian government is trying to break a manufacturing stalemate by taking the decision away from the Indian university that created tablet prototypes.

As we wrote in early November, professors at Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Jodhpur, along with students at the institute, created the first models of the device, before handing over manufacturing responsibility to U.K. company DataWind. IIT is designing more advanced affordable prototypes, while concurrently testing the first batch of tablets that DataWind has made.

But over the past weeks, DataWind and IIT have disagreed on the final specs of Aakash 1. The difference of opinion, director of IIT Jodhpur Prem Kalra tells Fast Company, involves DataWind skimping on what IIT believed were minimum features. Suneet Singh Tuli, head of DataWind, has rejected the proposed "military grade" specifications but Kalra says they're only insisting on basic necessities for a tablet meant to be used by customers in rural India. DataWind's Tuli says there's no need to build a tablet that can be run over by a truck, while Kalra insists, in his own incindiary way, that his team's priorities are usability and safety.  He says.

"If you drop it, it should not catch fire."  

Meanwhile, several reviews of the device, including this recent one from IEEE Spectrum, have dismissed it as clunky and slow.

The recent move by the government could prove to be a butterfingered attempt to break the stalemate. The Economic Times reports that the government's Department of IT could be responsible for picking multiple manufacturers who'll take on production of Aakash 2. In a puzzling second twist, government sources have told the Times of India that two other universities--IITs in Chennai and Mumbai--will join the project as well. However, it is unclear what role they will play.

But there's a chance that the government's decision to hire a third-party tender writer, well-versed in the ways and wiles of commercial contracts, could avoid a future spat of the kind IIT and DataWind are mired in. In that case, this decision could actually streamline manufacturing of the Aakash 2, with the parties involved avoiding roadblocks like this one.

Kalra has been deeply involved with the Aakash project from its early days, and amid this recent fuss, he's keeping a brave face. He says that the decision will allow IIT to be involved, while letting it do what it does best--innovate at the early stage and continue designing.

Kalra says.

"Our main agenda is to come up with the new devices.  As far as the first testing phase was concerned, we took that on because it was part of our research agenda."  

Now someone else has to handle the testing, supply chain, and whole manufacturing loop while IIT continues to research and develop low-cost devices.

"That's a good step because we alone cannot do it. But, our research for improving the devices will continue."

In advance of its sales, demand for a souped-up commercial version of the tablet (costing about $50) appears strong. In early January, Suneet Singh Tuli announced that DataWind had seen 1.4 million preorders on its website.

The question now seems to be, with all the added performers in this escalating Greek tragedy, what will it take for them to all agree so that Aakash can hit the market?

COMMENTARY:   In a blog post dated November 19, 2011, I profiled the 7-inch Aakash tablet that was invented by the talented engineering students of the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT). My thoughts at the time were,

"Finally, I have found the iPad-killer that I have wanted for such a long time."  

Let's hope that DataWinds, IIT and the Government of India can work together on an amicable basis to decide on the final specs for the $35 Aakash tablet.  The world needs a very inexpensive tablet that is within the reach of anybody that needs one.   

If DataWinds has received 1.4 million preorders for the Aakash tablet on their website, that's truly amazing, and a clear indication of the interest in a very inexpensive tablet.

Let's get it done.  I want an iPad-Killer that will finally put the iPad out-of-business, that way I can pickup a few in the after-market dirt cheap, and use some rocks to break them.

Courtesy of an article dated February 3, 2o12 appearing in Fast Company 

GOOGLE'S 'TERMINATOR' STYLE ANDROID-BASED HEADS-UP-DISPLAY (HUD) GLASSES ARE REAL AND THEY ARE COMING SOON

We detailed the first information about the Google [x] Glasses project in December.

"They are in late prototype stages of wearable glasses that look similar to thick-rimmed glasses that 'normal people' wear.  However, these provide a display with a heads up computer interface.  There are a few buttons on the arms of the glasses, but otherwise, they could be mistaken for normal glasses.  Additionally, we are not sure of the technology being employed here, but it is likely a transparent LCD or AMOLED display such as the one demonstrated below:"

"In addition, we have heard that this device is not an 'Android peripheral' as the NYT stated.  According to our source, it communicates directly with the Cloud over IP. Although, the 'Google Goggles'  could use a phone’s Internet connection, through Wi-Fi or a low power Bluetooth 4.0."

"The use-case is augmented reality that would tie into Google’s location services.  A user can walk around with information popping up and into display -Terminator-style- based on preferences, location and Google’s information."

"Therefore, these things likely connect to the Internet and have GPS.  They also likely run a version of Android."

 

This movie clip from the film "Termintor 2-Judgment Day," shows the 'Terminator' character wearing HUD glasses

Since then, we have learned much more regarding Google’s glasses…

Our tipster has now seen a prototype and said it looks something like Oakley Thumps (below). These glasses, we heard, have a front-facing camera used to gather information and could aid in augmented reality apps. It will also take pictures. The spied prototype has a flash —perhaps for help at night, or maybe it is just a way to take better photos. The camera is extremely small and likely only a few megapixels.

Click Image To Enlarge

The heads up display (HUD) is only for one eye and on the side. It is not transparent nor does it have dual 3D configurations, as previously speculated.

One really cool bit: The navigation system currently used is a head tilting-to scroll and click. We are told it is very quick to learn and once the user is adept at navigation, it becomes second nature and almost indistinguishable to outside users.

(As an aside, I built a head mouse as a Masters Thesis project a few years back that used head tilts to navigate and control menus. I am ready to collect royalties!)

I/O on the glasses will also include voice input and output, and we are told the CPU/RAM/storage hardware is near the equivalent of a generation-old Android smartphone. As a guess, we would speculate something like 1GHz ARM A8, 256MB RAM and 8GB of storage?  In any case, it will also function as a smartphone.

Perhaps most interesting is that Google is currently deciding on how it wants to release these glasses, even though the product is still a very long way from being finished. It is currently a secret with only a few geeky types knowing about it, and Google is apparently unsure if it will have mass-market appeal. Therefore, the company is considering making this a pilot program, somewhat like the Cr-48 Chromebooks last year.

Yes, Google might actually release this product as beta-pilot program to people outside of Google—and soon.

FYI Motorola’s got something cool in this area brewing as well (thanks commenter!).

 

The Motorola Kopin Golden-i is being showcased at the Verizon booth at CES 2012, demonstrating Industrial uses such as Construction, Medical, Public safety, Utilities and more.

COMMENTARY:   The technology for headsup display or HUD eyewear has been around for sometime now, as several startups have introduced HUD glasses that incorporate virtual reality technology, although they are still in the laboratory.   I do shutter at the thought that with today's face recognition technology, especially Facebook's tagged photos, that people will be able to instantly recognize who you are just by looking at you through these new HUD glasses.   How much will Google's HUD glasses cost?  Hard to say, but the ones that I have seen are expensive, well over a thousand.  With those hefty price tags, I can certainly understand Google's concerns that they may not have large market appeal.

Courtesy of an article dated February 6, 2012 appearing in 9to5Google.com

DREAM AND FLY'S BUBBLES SLEEPING PODS FOR TRAVELERS ARE COMING TO AN AIRPORT NEAR YOU, WHAT A GREAT IDEA

Catch some sleep between flights -- without drooling on the guy next to you.

The legions of airline passengers stranded around the world several months back, victims of Volcanogate 2010, shone the floodlights on one seemingly inevitable fact of airports: They make for terrible hotels.

That’s about to change, if Dream and Fly has its way. The Barcelona-based design group has an idea to fit-out airports everywhere in small, designy “luxury rooms” -- think the Standard hard by Connections Bar & Grill.

Called “Bubbles,” they're fully equipped with beds, bathrooms, and tons of places to plug in laptops and the like (another seemingly inevitable fact of airports: they never have enough outlets). They come in three sizes; the largest, at 108 square feet, has a bed, a baby cot, and a bathroom. You rent them at a kiosk or online, and the rate is hourly. “Each Bubble has an astonishingly practical configuration, [and is] individually designed and built with attractive materials, offering great sleeping comfort and a unique experience,” Dream and Fly’s Cédric Michiels Chalamont tells us in an email.

It might sound weird at first -- only a crazy person would want to sleep at an airport. But because of strict security regulations, people are spending more time than ever at airports, and airports have adapted by turning themselves into little cities, with decent restaurants, bars, and way too many stores. Why not add sleeping accommodations to the mix? It’d be perfect for passengers with long layovers who want to catch some shuteye but don’t want to pass out on a chair. It’d also be great for people with canceled flights. Instead of wasting money on a cab to some crappy airport hotel, they could fetch up in a pod. Imagine how many people these things could have helped last April.

And it's not just a pipe dream. Chalamont says Dream and Fly has plans to implement Bubbles in two international airports. (Because of NDA contracts, he declined to specify which ones.)

Obviously, there are details to hammer out. How do you keep them clean? How do you make sure they don't turn into vessels for hot, airport hanky panky? And even if they are practical, will people actually use them? Or will they become like airport luggage carts, the exclusive realm of old people and families with too many children? Maybe we’re just not used to anything good coming out of places you rent by the hour.

COMMENTARY:  Mobile sleeping hotels and sleeping pods are the latest trend.  Japan has a hotel chain that offers sleeping pods similar to Dream and Fly's Bubbles. Not good if you are claustrophobic. They are about $60 a night, which compared to traditional hotels are considered a real bargain.  

The following Bubbles are currently being promoted and offered:

Simple Bubble - The Simple Bubble of  5 m² size is destined for individual occupancy and perfect for powernaps and a rest while waiting for the flight. It is not equiped with a bathroom and shower.  The Simple bubble is aimed at young budget travelers looking for a fancy room with basic technology and a bed to rest.  The plug and use solution ensures that the Simple Bubble can be installed both inside of existing building or in private areas in the exterior.

Simple Bubble  - Click Images To Enlarge

Features of a fully equiped Simple Bubble:

• Single bed occupancy
• Micro-kiosk terminal
• Light mood control
• Flat screen television
• Pod docking station
• Energy plugs
• PC work table
• Air-conditioning
• High speed internet
• Luggage storage space
• Online flight information

Single Bubble - The Single Bubble of 7 m² size is equipped with a bathroom and rain shower. It is destined for an individual occupancy with full privacy, entertainment, comfort and connectivity. The Single Bubble is aimed at wide range of transiting travellers in aiport terminals heading for early flights, transfer flights or with cancelled flights.  The plug and use solution of the Single Bubble can be installed both inside of the existing building or in the private area in the exterior.

Single Bubble - Click Images To Enlarge

Features of a fully equipped Single Bubble:

• Single bed occupancy
• Rainshower
• WC
• Washing basin
• Mirror
• Micro-kiosk terminal
• Light mood control
• Television
• Pod docking station
• Energy plugs
• PC work table
• Air-conditioning
• High speed internet
• Luggage storage space
• Pnline flight information

Double Family Bubble - The Double Bubble of 10 m² size is equipped with fully functional bathroom and shower. It is destined for tripple family occupancy (parents and one babby) and is perfect for comfortable private space for the family to rest and freshen up while waiting for their flight. 

Double Family Bubble - Click Images To Enlarge

Features of a fully equiped Family Bubble:

• Triple occupancy
• Double bed
• Baby crib
• Rainshower
• WC
• Washing basin
• Mirror table
• Micro-kiosk terminal
• Light mood control
• Flat screen television
• Pod docking station
• Energy plugs
• PC work table
• Air-conditioning
• High speed internet
• Luggage storage space
• Online flight information

A series of different Bubbles can be combined to form a "micro-hotel" or may function independently.  Booking of each Bubble is done online and onsite or through vouchers. A micro-kiosk is installed outside the entrance of every Bubble in order to make bookings and access the Bubble easily and safely by clients.

In addition to the Bubble pods, D&F's offers the following products and services:

1. Architectural, technological and management feasibility studies:
   1. Pre-implementation advisory services - Feasibility study for a potential hotel investor/operator.  
   2. Implementation advisory services - Setup turnkey micro hotel system according to D&F business model. Assembly and installation of Bubble pods, reservation kiosk and PMS software.   
   3. Post-implementation brand management - Dream & Fly branding, distribution channel management and online marketing.
2. PMS software for managing reservations of Bubble pods.
3. Distribution and sales channel.

D&F does not take part in the operational management of the concept that they supply. They promote the concept and its brand on a marketing level which is reflected in a commission derived from unit sales and monthly licensing fee for our software.   

D&F currently working on ongoing international projects and are particularly interested in expanding its options always depending on the following factors:

1. Services and business model is compatible with our client needs.
2. The quantity demanded.
3. Time of delivery.

It is important to take into account that the prices will depend on which type of Bubbles you require and its quantity + complementary options.

PRICING:  

D&F will quote prices in EUROS.  Unit prices for Bubble pods depend on the quantity and type of Bubble pod ordered.   Unit prices are quoted for less than 50 units, and for 50 units and up depending on the type of Bubble pod.

Unit prices EXCLUDE the following:

• Assembly costs per Bubble pod are extra and range between 2,000 and 3,100  EUROS per pod depending on the type of Bubble pod ordered.   
• Shipping, customs duty and fees.
• Sanitary, fixtures, fittings, check-in kiosk, D&F dynamic PMS software, security access code system and domotic system. 
• Micro-hotel architectural, building costs, facilities management, facility operations, legal, other consulting, and local licenses and permits.

Recommended Micro-Hotel Configuration:  

• 15 - 50 Bubble pods.  
• Check-in kiosk. 
• D & F dynamic PMS software. 
• Security access code system. 
• Domotic system.  

Courtesy of an article dated September 22, 2010 appearing Fast Company Design