|
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
I'd have to make a prototype which is expensive. I'd much rather spend a year in africa with the 10,000$'s it would cost to build the thing. Itd be time consuming also, and of little worth because half the technologies are already pattented.
Commercial value is minimal. Practical use is almost neglible. As a product it did have product neiches, But it is not realizable for myself to launch it because I would need support of major carriers, and they work with major companies. the startup capital to compete doesn't exist and it is a locked market. |
I agree to some extent, but the Technology/Gadget/Home Entertainment/Digital Media market's where the greener grass is, not particularly locked.
| quote: | | I highly doubt people would buy my smart phone for the 10,000$'s itd take to produce just because it has wifi capacity(meaning freevoip calls via wifi), unlocked, VR enabled, goggle based eye movement HID, voice activation, capacity to cluster with other units (actually I called this the X (before ms came out with the name xbox (this is up there with.. yah I made the name for the xbox, (right up there with the name blackberry came from lazardises late night trip to the tim hortons store I worked at.. err)(cause the world revolves around me.. whatever) |
right, and that's why you have 'test markets' and 'sample products'. I bet A company like 'Apple' would invest in "X" amount of sample products, to distribrute & trade in "Y" test market?
just a thought

___________________
"I think the scientific and the artistic spirit have something in common. The scientist wants not only to learn the facts, but to understand how they cohere, fit together and make a whole. He even uses criteria such as beauty and symmetry to help decide which theory he wants.
The scientist cannot capture the whole cosmos in thought. In his mind he makes a kind of microcosm, which we see as an analogue of the cosmos. In this way we try to get a feeling for the whole. The artist, I suppose, gets a feeling for the whole some other way.”
David Bohm in “Art, Dialogue and the Implicate Order”, published in On Creativity RC (Routledge Classics)
Last edited by winston on Mar-15-2009 at 21:34
|