Today's idea addresses a problem that only some people will have with some stations in some locations.
Certain smaller stations will have multiple frequencies depending on your exact location relative to your local urban center. The station is served on different frequencies in different areas. The North suburbs might have 102.1 while downtown might have the station on 95.5 for example.
These tend to be, in my experience, smaller less popular stations.
The result is that you can be driving along and have the station die out or become unclear. If you wish to continue listening to the station it requires you to switch over to the other station. This can be problematic if you stumbled across the station while surfing for something to listen to (and thus do not know that they have multiple frequencies), or if the station used more than two frequencies so that you need to figure out which one will end up being most clear.
Digital radio signals can let the radio know the station name and name of the song and artist currently playing. It would also be possible for the signal to have alternative frequency information embedded into it. If the signal detected noise from static (something your radio can already do, this is how it autotunes), it would quickly check the alternative frequencies to see if any of them were clearer.
This could also be used with syndicated radio shows that are being hosted on multiple stations. If the signal of the station you were listening on grew too weak, it could automatically check the signal of other stations hosting the show at that time.
This would increase the cost of the radio (just like digital radios cost more). It would need a bit more hardware to figure out how to flip frequencies, and it would likely need multiple tuners (to allow it to check the other frequencies without interrupting what you are listening to). However, these costs would not be too great. They would also lay some of the hardware groundwork for another one of my ideas, a radio Tivo.
Ultimately, as I said earlier, this would only be useful some of the time for some people. However, when dealing with these types of small stations, retuning into them is very annoying. I feel that the people who DO have to deal with this would greatly appreciate the functionality, and it would almost certainly help the listenership of these small stations.
Showing posts with label Tech. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tech. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Remote Entry Key Fob Meets Cell Phone
In reality remote entry key fobs for car do not save all that much time. However, people use cars enough that they seem like a great convinience and luxery. However, they are not perfect.
The first problem is the space they take. In a multi-car household their size can make it difficult to have the 'keys' to every car on your key chain. The other problem that I have observed stems with how people use them. If the driver is slow with taking out his keys and unlocking the door, passangers may need to wait for the door to be unlocked. While this is not a huge inconvinience it can be anoying.
There is a solution to both these problems.
If cars were designed to unlock their doors in the presscence of a coded bluetooth signal, your cellphone could be used to enter your car (bluetooth is the type of wireless signal that cellphones use to communicate with headsets). Infact if the car was equiped with a keyless ignition system (as many luxery cars are) the cellphone could also turn on the car. All of the sudden you don't need any keys for your car.
There would be nothing preventing a single cellphone from having the codes for multiple cars. In a multi-car household with multiple drivers, there would be no need to make multiple copies of multiple keys so that everyoen would have a set. It would be as simple as punching the codes into everyone's cellphone. Right here, money is being saved. There would be no cost to enter the code into multiple cellphones. The process could even be 'automated' just requiring the press of a 'pairing' button, just like with bluetooth headsets.
This also could solve the second issue I mentioned. Since the 'clicker' has been replaced with the cellphone which has a rechargable battery, it's ok if it is running all the time. The cellphone could automatically send a 'lock' signal as you walk away from the car and could automatically unlock the door when you got near. There would be no need to wait for the driver to take out and press the button. As long as the driver was within range (likely 10-15 feet based on bluetooth specifications). This continuous transmision method would cause the cellphone to eat through its battery faster; bluetooth consume power. But this feature could be made optional.
As far as security, there would be no reason why it would be any less safe. The methods used to prevent people from currently 'capturing' your key fobs security code work just as well with a cellphone (click here is you are interested in why your keyfob won't likely open up anyone elses car http://auto.howstuffworks.com/remote-entry2.htm).
This idea is also provides a perfect way to apply an earlier idea of mine. Some time ago I mentioned the posibility of 'Car Logins' (http://dailyinnovention.blogspot.com/2010/06/car-logins.html). Basically the idea was to allow the car to remeber the seat positions, radio presets, and mirror positions of individual drivers. These prefrences could easily be stored in the cellphone.
This would not require people to have cellphones with special hardware. All it would require would be a software download. Also, many cars allready have bluetooth hardware installed to facilitate handsfree phone calls. It should be obvious that this would be easy for car manufactures to impliment.
The only real problem I see with this idea is the eventuality of having a dead cellphone battery. If someone replaced all of their keys with their phone they could be locked out of their car. This could be mitigated by including a small secondary battery (like those used in key fobs currently) with the sole purpose of unlocking car doors when the main battery is dead. Of course if cellphones had preemptive low battery warnings as I discussed yesterday, this wouldn't be a problem.
All in all, I would love to not worry about keys. Being able to opperate multiple cellphones as long as I had my cellphone on my person is something that I would definetly be willing to pay for, and I suspect, is somethign that many others would pay for as well. Combined that with 'car logins' and people are looking at a great increase in convinience. Even at a modest price, being able to avoid copying keys could still save money. And as for the auto industry? It wouldn't cost them much more in the manufacturing process, and they could definaetly market it to cell new cars.
The first problem is the space they take. In a multi-car household their size can make it difficult to have the 'keys' to every car on your key chain. The other problem that I have observed stems with how people use them. If the driver is slow with taking out his keys and unlocking the door, passangers may need to wait for the door to be unlocked. While this is not a huge inconvinience it can be anoying.
There is a solution to both these problems.
If cars were designed to unlock their doors in the presscence of a coded bluetooth signal, your cellphone could be used to enter your car (bluetooth is the type of wireless signal that cellphones use to communicate with headsets). Infact if the car was equiped with a keyless ignition system (as many luxery cars are) the cellphone could also turn on the car. All of the sudden you don't need any keys for your car.
There would be nothing preventing a single cellphone from having the codes for multiple cars. In a multi-car household with multiple drivers, there would be no need to make multiple copies of multiple keys so that everyoen would have a set. It would be as simple as punching the codes into everyone's cellphone. Right here, money is being saved. There would be no cost to enter the code into multiple cellphones. The process could even be 'automated' just requiring the press of a 'pairing' button, just like with bluetooth headsets.
This also could solve the second issue I mentioned. Since the 'clicker' has been replaced with the cellphone which has a rechargable battery, it's ok if it is running all the time. The cellphone could automatically send a 'lock' signal as you walk away from the car and could automatically unlock the door when you got near. There would be no need to wait for the driver to take out and press the button. As long as the driver was within range (likely 10-15 feet based on bluetooth specifications). This continuous transmision method would cause the cellphone to eat through its battery faster; bluetooth consume power. But this feature could be made optional.
As far as security, there would be no reason why it would be any less safe. The methods used to prevent people from currently 'capturing' your key fobs security code work just as well with a cellphone (click here is you are interested in why your keyfob won't likely open up anyone elses car http://auto.howstuffworks.com/remote-entry2.htm).
This idea is also provides a perfect way to apply an earlier idea of mine. Some time ago I mentioned the posibility of 'Car Logins' (http://dailyinnovention.blogspot.com/2010/06/car-logins.html). Basically the idea was to allow the car to remeber the seat positions, radio presets, and mirror positions of individual drivers. These prefrences could easily be stored in the cellphone.
This would not require people to have cellphones with special hardware. All it would require would be a software download. Also, many cars allready have bluetooth hardware installed to facilitate handsfree phone calls. It should be obvious that this would be easy for car manufactures to impliment.
The only real problem I see with this idea is the eventuality of having a dead cellphone battery. If someone replaced all of their keys with their phone they could be locked out of their car. This could be mitigated by including a small secondary battery (like those used in key fobs currently) with the sole purpose of unlocking car doors when the main battery is dead. Of course if cellphones had preemptive low battery warnings as I discussed yesterday, this wouldn't be a problem.
All in all, I would love to not worry about keys. Being able to opperate multiple cellphones as long as I had my cellphone on my person is something that I would definetly be willing to pay for, and I suspect, is somethign that many others would pay for as well. Combined that with 'car logins' and people are looking at a great increase in convinience. Even at a modest price, being able to avoid copying keys could still save money. And as for the auto industry? It wouldn't cost them much more in the manufacturing process, and they could definaetly market it to cell new cars.
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Customized News Traffic Reports
Most local morning news programs have a segment on the traffic. This makes sense. These programs often air before people begin their commute to work and can provide valuable information to make a commute easier.
However, it involves sitting through whatever traffic information they report even if it does not apply to your commute. There is also the chance they do not cover the route you take.
As I have mentioned before, digital television makes it possible to deliver customized content to viewers. Traffic reports are a perfect application for this.
When setting up your cable box, it would be possible to enter in the routes that you take on your commute. The traffic report on any news report that supports the feature could explicitly cover the roads pertinent to a viewers commute.
Once television providers and networks begin fully realizing the potential of digital television delivery we will begin seeing a whole spectrum of customized content on television. Customizing content is good for the viewer and thus good for the provider.
However, it involves sitting through whatever traffic information they report even if it does not apply to your commute. There is also the chance they do not cover the route you take.
As I have mentioned before, digital television makes it possible to deliver customized content to viewers. Traffic reports are a perfect application for this.
When setting up your cable box, it would be possible to enter in the routes that you take on your commute. The traffic report on any news report that supports the feature could explicitly cover the roads pertinent to a viewers commute.
Once television providers and networks begin fully realizing the potential of digital television delivery we will begin seeing a whole spectrum of customized content on television. Customizing content is good for the viewer and thus good for the provider.
Monday, September 6, 2010
Gestured Based Lighting Control
We are entering an area where it is possible to control electronic devices through hand gestures alone. A example of this in use can be found in an upcoming version of the Android phone OS (http://www.pcworld.com/article/198552/touchless_gesture_control_coming_to_android_devices.html). The Xbox Kinect is another example of this technology being put into practice. The company that developed the hardware for the Xbox Kinect is planning on eventually releasing a version for interacting with a PC.
Once this technology becomes more mainstream there will likely be a flood of ideas for potential uses. However, I would like to take this moment to discuss an idea that I don't think is an immediately obvious application, gesture controlled lighting.
It is important to keep in mind that most new input technology is 'buggy.' Voice control is still iffy at best. Anyone who has called a customer support line that utilizes speech recognition likely knows that there is plenty of room for improvement. It is important to keep this in mind. The best use cases for this technology would involve simple gestures and few commands. To control a light you only need one command, a command that switches the light between on and off.
Ultimately, I would want to be able to turn a light on and off with just a flick of the wrist. Using gesture recognition technology, I should be able to a light on across the room by snapping my fingers at it (using sound recognition and listening for a snap could actually improve the accuracy).
To make such a system a reality all that would be required would be a camera somewhere in the room (possibly attached to a lamp) and a computer system to process the video feed captured by the camera. The price (initially) would likely be high for individual lights. It would likely be more economical if it was installed into a room as part of a home automation system.
Now some people might say that wanting something like this is lazy. I say its wanting convenience. Being able to turn a light on and off (instead of needing to unplug it) is another similar convenience. For that matter, wall mounted light switches so that you do not need to use the lamps switch is similar as well. This is simply an extension of that idea.
People still buy 'clap ons' and touch activated lights. Its obvious that people wish to pursue convenience where it is available, and I think that in the near future that this should be one way in which our lives can be more convenient, even if it's only by a small amount.
Once this technology becomes more mainstream there will likely be a flood of ideas for potential uses. However, I would like to take this moment to discuss an idea that I don't think is an immediately obvious application, gesture controlled lighting.
It is important to keep in mind that most new input technology is 'buggy.' Voice control is still iffy at best. Anyone who has called a customer support line that utilizes speech recognition likely knows that there is plenty of room for improvement. It is important to keep this in mind. The best use cases for this technology would involve simple gestures and few commands. To control a light you only need one command, a command that switches the light between on and off.
Ultimately, I would want to be able to turn a light on and off with just a flick of the wrist. Using gesture recognition technology, I should be able to a light on across the room by snapping my fingers at it (using sound recognition and listening for a snap could actually improve the accuracy).
To make such a system a reality all that would be required would be a camera somewhere in the room (possibly attached to a lamp) and a computer system to process the video feed captured by the camera. The price (initially) would likely be high for individual lights. It would likely be more economical if it was installed into a room as part of a home automation system.
Now some people might say that wanting something like this is lazy. I say its wanting convenience. Being able to turn a light on and off (instead of needing to unplug it) is another similar convenience. For that matter, wall mounted light switches so that you do not need to use the lamps switch is similar as well. This is simply an extension of that idea.
People still buy 'clap ons' and touch activated lights. Its obvious that people wish to pursue convenience where it is available, and I think that in the near future that this should be one way in which our lives can be more convenient, even if it's only by a small amount.
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Integrating Social Networks with Television
I would like to preface todays idea with a disclaimer. I am not a fan of social networking. I have never used Twitter and I maintain my Facebook account only out of a sense of obligation. However, I do try to keep track of the trends so that I can understand the online social climate. I am well aware that many people are fans of social networks. I am also aware that for savvy businesses, social networking can prove to be profitable.
If people are talking on social networks about a television show, its essentially free advertising for that show. It's in the interest of television networks to allow fans to talk about their shows. Every delay between a person watching a show and then posting about it online will reduce the number of people actually post. Today's idea is to break down some of the barriers between the television and the 'cloud.'
Imagine a cable box with an extra button on the controller. Pressing this new button would bring up an on-screen keyboard allowing the viewer to enter text. While not the best input method, it could work for short messages (a few sentences long) much like most 'tweets.' A person could easily update their twitter account while watching TV.
If the box was compatible with social networks that support tags, the cable box could automatically label the update with the name of the show being watched. A Facebook button on the remote could automatically update a person's facebook status to let people know what show they are watching. Another button could list the show as an interest on their profile.
This could even allow for a "I'm bored button" in which the TV would change to a random program currently playing that you might like based on other TV shows that you have listed as liking.
Now this is pretty much all doable just using a computer. However, the point is that removing the necessity of a computer will increase the amount of people who will network about any given show.
Integration would not need to simply be with existing systems. There could be a button to allow the viewer to punch in a number of stars. Such a simple act (presumably it could be done with a single button press) would likely see frequent use.
A large drive with technology in the past years is to make social networking more seamless. A focus of many phones is to allow people to network no matter what situation they are in.
TV networks win. If this idea where to come to fruition they would get greater exposure. Cable networks win. If they offered this system its something they could use to negotiate better deals with networks and could also attract new subscribers. Viewers win, at least those that like social networking. The only people who don't 'win' are those who don't care for social networking, but they never have to setup their box for it (entering in their Facebook and Twitter username and passwords for example).
Rather than issuing new cable boxes, this idea could also be realized through an 'add on' box. Most cable boxes that I have seen have a USB port. Presumably I/O information could be sent through this port (perhaps with a firmware update) to allow a 'Social Networking Box' to find out what show is currently being watched. The Social Networking Box could have wifi to connect to the internet and come with a special remote control designed with its unique purpose in mind while still allowing regular TV watching.
The only real problem I could imagine is when there are multiple people in the same family. However, ultimately this is not a real problem. This is not the first time I have suggested having multiple profiles on one device (see my Roku/Netflix suggestion). When taking any social network actions a menu could pop up asking which profile to take the action under. These could even be password protected if the user desired. There could also be profile buttons on the remote. There are any number of other ways this problem could be solved as well. Ultimately a creator of such a device would want to experiment with various techniques of allowing profile selection to find which works best.
If people are talking on social networks about a television show, its essentially free advertising for that show. It's in the interest of television networks to allow fans to talk about their shows. Every delay between a person watching a show and then posting about it online will reduce the number of people actually post. Today's idea is to break down some of the barriers between the television and the 'cloud.'
Imagine a cable box with an extra button on the controller. Pressing this new button would bring up an on-screen keyboard allowing the viewer to enter text. While not the best input method, it could work for short messages (a few sentences long) much like most 'tweets.' A person could easily update their twitter account while watching TV.
If the box was compatible with social networks that support tags, the cable box could automatically label the update with the name of the show being watched. A Facebook button on the remote could automatically update a person's facebook status to let people know what show they are watching. Another button could list the show as an interest on their profile.
This could even allow for a "I'm bored button" in which the TV would change to a random program currently playing that you might like based on other TV shows that you have listed as liking.
Now this is pretty much all doable just using a computer. However, the point is that removing the necessity of a computer will increase the amount of people who will network about any given show.
Integration would not need to simply be with existing systems. There could be a button to allow the viewer to punch in a number of stars. Such a simple act (presumably it could be done with a single button press) would likely see frequent use.
A large drive with technology in the past years is to make social networking more seamless. A focus of many phones is to allow people to network no matter what situation they are in.
TV networks win. If this idea where to come to fruition they would get greater exposure. Cable networks win. If they offered this system its something they could use to negotiate better deals with networks and could also attract new subscribers. Viewers win, at least those that like social networking. The only people who don't 'win' are those who don't care for social networking, but they never have to setup their box for it (entering in their Facebook and Twitter username and passwords for example).
Rather than issuing new cable boxes, this idea could also be realized through an 'add on' box. Most cable boxes that I have seen have a USB port. Presumably I/O information could be sent through this port (perhaps with a firmware update) to allow a 'Social Networking Box' to find out what show is currently being watched. The Social Networking Box could have wifi to connect to the internet and come with a special remote control designed with its unique purpose in mind while still allowing regular TV watching.
The only real problem I could imagine is when there are multiple people in the same family. However, ultimately this is not a real problem. This is not the first time I have suggested having multiple profiles on one device (see my Roku/Netflix suggestion). When taking any social network actions a menu could pop up asking which profile to take the action under. These could even be password protected if the user desired. There could also be profile buttons on the remote. There are any number of other ways this problem could be solved as well. Ultimately a creator of such a device would want to experiment with various techniques of allowing profile selection to find which works best.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
DC Providing Surge Protectors
Laptops, external hard drives, and desktop PCs have something in common. They all internally run on DC power. In desktop computer AC power is converted into DC for the computer to use by its power supply. In laptops and external hard drives this conversion takes place in the power cord. In particular it happens in the 'power brick' part of the cord.
There is another thing to note about their power sources. The specification of their DC power (the voltage and amperes) are all very similar from device to device. This is because, inside, their hardware is all more or less the same. For example, if you own an external hard drive, you can easily crack the case open and install the drive itself into a desktop or laptop computer (depending on the size). The similarities in power sources are why some companies can sell 'universal' adapters. Really the only big difference between them is the shape of the plug.
Yet all of these devices have their own methods of transforming AC into DC. If two or three family (or more) members have laptops, that can create a large amount of 'cord mess.' However, at any given time, perhaps only one laptop needs to be plugged in. But if another laptop does need power, one can not simply switch cords.
I would like to see a surge protector that has a built in 'power brick.' It would be able to provide the necessary Direct Current to power a laptop for example (this is more than what could be provided through USB).
To plug a computer into the surge protector, a lightweight cord with a compatible plug would be all that would be required. If laptop manufactures could get their act together, their could even be a 'universal power plug' form. After all people 'agreed' on the three pronged outlet.
The surge protector could then easily be used to power a different laptop, or a external hard drive, or any other DC powered device.
Something to keep in mind is that this is also a 'green' option. Rather than having dozens of power adapters around the house, if a single power inverter could serve for many of your devices, there will be less electronic waste when devices are thrown out.
It would raise the cost of the surge protector. There is no way around this. However proprietary power adapters tend to run around $60-$75 dollars. The generic inverter that could be used in the surge protector would likely run cheaper. In the long run this may even save the consumer money. If they are not needing to purchase replacement adapters, it could be worth the cost (In my lifetime I have needed to personally purchase at least 4 replacement adapters because of shorts that developed in their cords. They where shoddily designed, but because of the propitiatory nature of the devices I was using, I had no choice).
However, there is an important thing to keep in mind. Surge protector manufactures could likely make more money by following this. Consumers could save money and gain convenience if this was possible. Device manufactures could even eventually cut manufacturing costs (if such a surge protector was likely to be in every consumer's home and they no longer needed to package devices with power adapters). But I could imagine that device manufactures would see a drop in profits. They obviously make some amount of money by selling power adapters (I do not mean to say that manufactures conspiring to force consumers to purchase an overpriced adapter. They are simply businesses, and business strive to make a profit). For a manufacture it could perhaps be a loosing proposition if adapter plugs became 'universal.'
Like many other things, I suspect that this idea will not become a reality until money begins to talk. Either consumers would need to make a desire for simpler power management clear, or some company would need to broker an agreement in hopes to strike something big. However, in the meantime I can still imagine how nice it would be to have a surge protector that I could simply plug things into without worrying which cords go to which things.
There is another thing to note about their power sources. The specification of their DC power (the voltage and amperes) are all very similar from device to device. This is because, inside, their hardware is all more or less the same. For example, if you own an external hard drive, you can easily crack the case open and install the drive itself into a desktop or laptop computer (depending on the size). The similarities in power sources are why some companies can sell 'universal' adapters. Really the only big difference between them is the shape of the plug.
Yet all of these devices have their own methods of transforming AC into DC. If two or three family (or more) members have laptops, that can create a large amount of 'cord mess.' However, at any given time, perhaps only one laptop needs to be plugged in. But if another laptop does need power, one can not simply switch cords.
I would like to see a surge protector that has a built in 'power brick.' It would be able to provide the necessary Direct Current to power a laptop for example (this is more than what could be provided through USB).
To plug a computer into the surge protector, a lightweight cord with a compatible plug would be all that would be required. If laptop manufactures could get their act together, their could even be a 'universal power plug' form. After all people 'agreed' on the three pronged outlet.
The surge protector could then easily be used to power a different laptop, or a external hard drive, or any other DC powered device.
Something to keep in mind is that this is also a 'green' option. Rather than having dozens of power adapters around the house, if a single power inverter could serve for many of your devices, there will be less electronic waste when devices are thrown out.
It would raise the cost of the surge protector. There is no way around this. However proprietary power adapters tend to run around $60-$75 dollars. The generic inverter that could be used in the surge protector would likely run cheaper. In the long run this may even save the consumer money. If they are not needing to purchase replacement adapters, it could be worth the cost (In my lifetime I have needed to personally purchase at least 4 replacement adapters because of shorts that developed in their cords. They where shoddily designed, but because of the propitiatory nature of the devices I was using, I had no choice).
However, there is an important thing to keep in mind. Surge protector manufactures could likely make more money by following this. Consumers could save money and gain convenience if this was possible. Device manufactures could even eventually cut manufacturing costs (if such a surge protector was likely to be in every consumer's home and they no longer needed to package devices with power adapters). But I could imagine that device manufactures would see a drop in profits. They obviously make some amount of money by selling power adapters (I do not mean to say that manufactures conspiring to force consumers to purchase an overpriced adapter. They are simply businesses, and business strive to make a profit). For a manufacture it could perhaps be a loosing proposition if adapter plugs became 'universal.'
Like many other things, I suspect that this idea will not become a reality until money begins to talk. Either consumers would need to make a desire for simpler power management clear, or some company would need to broker an agreement in hopes to strike something big. However, in the meantime I can still imagine how nice it would be to have a surge protector that I could simply plug things into without worrying which cords go to which things.
Monday, August 30, 2010
USB Surge Protector
There is a huge plethora of devices that can be charged through USB ports. Enough that when I am at the airport I notice USB outlets for people to use for charging. Despite this, in our homes we still need to use 'bulky' adapters.
For a long time now surge protectors have had a place to plug in phone cords. They had grown with the times and provided a way for people to protect their modems from electrical surges. However, I would like to see them grow with the times again and offer USB ports for people to charge their mobile devices.
I did a Google search after thinking about this and the closest thing I could find was the following: http://www.amazon.com/Belkin-Mini-Surge-Protector-Charger/dp/B0015DYMVO
I don't really consider that a 'full' surge protector. It was designed with travel in mind so people don't need to take their adapters with them. However, why should I have to worry about the adapters while at home. I would like to seem something like this, but in the form of a full strip surge protector for use at home.
There are two large benefits to this. One, you no longer need to worry about the power adapter for any device that can charge through USB. Two, you no longer need to deal with adapter plugs potentially blocking outlets.
I recently saw an article about how to install USB charging ports into wall outlets. Why in the world are they not part of full feature surge protectors? The convenience should be obvious.
It would increase the cost of the surge protector a bit. The protector would need to convert AC power (the type that comes from the mains) into DC power (the type delivered through USB). However, I think this cost would be well worth the additional functionality and would not be hard to market. Virtually everyone has a cellphone. Virtually every cellphone can charge via USB. People would have a use for this feature.
Ultimately, I think it is only a matter of time before we start seeing this become a standard feature in surge protectors.
Tomorrow's idea is going to directly pick up where this one left off. Personally, there is a lot more I think surge protectors could be doing to make life more convenient. So if you want to play a little game, try to guess what feature I am going to suggest be added into surge protectors tomorrow.
For a long time now surge protectors have had a place to plug in phone cords. They had grown with the times and provided a way for people to protect their modems from electrical surges. However, I would like to see them grow with the times again and offer USB ports for people to charge their mobile devices.
I did a Google search after thinking about this and the closest thing I could find was the following: http://www.amazon.com/Belkin-Mini-Surge-Protector-Charger/dp/B0015DYMVO
I don't really consider that a 'full' surge protector. It was designed with travel in mind so people don't need to take their adapters with them. However, why should I have to worry about the adapters while at home. I would like to seem something like this, but in the form of a full strip surge protector for use at home.
There are two large benefits to this. One, you no longer need to worry about the power adapter for any device that can charge through USB. Two, you no longer need to deal with adapter plugs potentially blocking outlets.
I recently saw an article about how to install USB charging ports into wall outlets. Why in the world are they not part of full feature surge protectors? The convenience should be obvious.
It would increase the cost of the surge protector a bit. The protector would need to convert AC power (the type that comes from the mains) into DC power (the type delivered through USB). However, I think this cost would be well worth the additional functionality and would not be hard to market. Virtually everyone has a cellphone. Virtually every cellphone can charge via USB. People would have a use for this feature.
Ultimately, I think it is only a matter of time before we start seeing this become a standard feature in surge protectors.
Tomorrow's idea is going to directly pick up where this one left off. Personally, there is a lot more I think surge protectors could be doing to make life more convenient. So if you want to play a little game, try to guess what feature I am going to suggest be added into surge protectors tomorrow.
Saturday, August 28, 2010
More Entertaining Exercise Machines
Today's idea directly follows from yesterdays.
Many exercise machines at gyms are equipped with lcd screens to watch television and headphone jacks to listen to the TV programs. Using this only to watch TV is a rather limited use of the hardware in the machines.
Rather than needing to take my e-book reader, or an mp3 player to the gym, why can't the exercise machine fill this roll for me. They are already trying to serve other entertainment jobs.
With a little extra computer hardware much more could be done with the displays and headphone jacks. For example why not let the exercise machine be able to play mp3s. It could support flash cards with mp3s. Or perhaps there could be an online service that could be registered for in which users could upload their music and access it from the machines.
Likewise, a person could easily read their e-books on the machines without need for an extra device. Most people likely wouldn't take advantage of this, but some probably would. It could even be marketed to parents as something that encourages their children to read.
If we want to get really fancy, it could have a limited web browser. This use would have additional challenges, but they are nothing that could not be solved with a little thought.
There is obviously a demand for exercise machines at gyms that provide something to do while working out. I see people using the TVs and watching various programs. Why not give people the option of doing something other than just watching TV. Yes it will cost more to add in this functionality, but it also costs more to add in the TVs in the first place. I know I would definitely appreciate such a feature.
Many exercise machines at gyms are equipped with lcd screens to watch television and headphone jacks to listen to the TV programs. Using this only to watch TV is a rather limited use of the hardware in the machines.
Rather than needing to take my e-book reader, or an mp3 player to the gym, why can't the exercise machine fill this roll for me. They are already trying to serve other entertainment jobs.
With a little extra computer hardware much more could be done with the displays and headphone jacks. For example why not let the exercise machine be able to play mp3s. It could support flash cards with mp3s. Or perhaps there could be an online service that could be registered for in which users could upload their music and access it from the machines.
Likewise, a person could easily read their e-books on the machines without need for an extra device. Most people likely wouldn't take advantage of this, but some probably would. It could even be marketed to parents as something that encourages their children to read.
If we want to get really fancy, it could have a limited web browser. This use would have additional challenges, but they are nothing that could not be solved with a little thought.
There is obviously a demand for exercise machines at gyms that provide something to do while working out. I see people using the TVs and watching various programs. Why not give people the option of doing something other than just watching TV. Yes it will cost more to add in this functionality, but it also costs more to add in the TVs in the first place. I know I would definitely appreciate such a feature.
Friday, August 27, 2010
E-Book Reader Remote
For a long time now I have wanted to read while exercising on a treadmill. However, up until recently I have never been able to make this a reality. The issue I had with trying to read paperbooks for example was two fold. The first problem is keeping the book open. Keeping the book on my page generally requires the constant use of one of my hands which is awkward while exercising. The other issue is the font size. If the book is being rested on the treadmill's or exercycle's control panel often times its further away from my eyes than I am used to. At this longer distance the words are too small for me to read.
I found a solution recently that works amazingly well. I brought my Kindle to the gym. For those of you not aware, the Amazon Kindle is an electronic device that uses an e-paper display. It is designed to read e-books. There is no need to hold it open to a page as it displays the same page until the 'next page' button is pressed. This solved the first issue. It also allows the font size to be increased fixing the second issue. The cherry on top is that I am also able to put my music on the device and listen to it while reading and exercising.
It almost was perfect.
The problem was the 'next page' button. I was constantly needing to lean forward and press the button. It was not nearly as bad as needing to hold a book open to a page, but it was still disruptive. More than physically disruptive, it broke the mental mindset that I had while exercising.
I was thinking for awhile what a good solution would be. Putting page turning on a timer would be no good. There were a few intense points in my workout where my mind drifted and I found myself needing to reread pages.
Likewise voice activation would not work well. There is too much background noise, and people would quickly get tired of saying "next page" over and over again.
So I decided the best option would be if the device had a remote control. All it would really need to do would go forward and backwards in a book.
To be useful and not a burden or hindrance the remote would need to be small. I almost feel that working it into some sort of sports glove would work best. Clenching the hand could be the next page signal.
Ultimately all the various manufactures of e-book readers need to do is make their device capable of accepting remote signals from paired devices. The design of remotes could be left to third party companies. This could open up their devices to a whole range of new uses.
For example, there is the situation already discussed above. However, another use situation could be allowing a lecturer to discreetly keep his or her notes on the e-book device. For beach goers, the device could be safely kept in a sand/water proof transparent case while still allowing control through a cheap remote control.
I'm sure there are a number of other cases where having a remote for an e-book reader would be useful.
While it may not be intuitive, after all who ever would want a remote control for a book, e-book readers are NOT books. That is why people are willing to shell out money for the devices. However, I know that I would be willing to personally pay a decent sum for this ability in a device.
I found a solution recently that works amazingly well. I brought my Kindle to the gym. For those of you not aware, the Amazon Kindle is an electronic device that uses an e-paper display. It is designed to read e-books. There is no need to hold it open to a page as it displays the same page until the 'next page' button is pressed. This solved the first issue. It also allows the font size to be increased fixing the second issue. The cherry on top is that I am also able to put my music on the device and listen to it while reading and exercising.
It almost was perfect.
The problem was the 'next page' button. I was constantly needing to lean forward and press the button. It was not nearly as bad as needing to hold a book open to a page, but it was still disruptive. More than physically disruptive, it broke the mental mindset that I had while exercising.
I was thinking for awhile what a good solution would be. Putting page turning on a timer would be no good. There were a few intense points in my workout where my mind drifted and I found myself needing to reread pages.
Likewise voice activation would not work well. There is too much background noise, and people would quickly get tired of saying "next page" over and over again.
So I decided the best option would be if the device had a remote control. All it would really need to do would go forward and backwards in a book.
To be useful and not a burden or hindrance the remote would need to be small. I almost feel that working it into some sort of sports glove would work best. Clenching the hand could be the next page signal.
Ultimately all the various manufactures of e-book readers need to do is make their device capable of accepting remote signals from paired devices. The design of remotes could be left to third party companies. This could open up their devices to a whole range of new uses.
For example, there is the situation already discussed above. However, another use situation could be allowing a lecturer to discreetly keep his or her notes on the e-book device. For beach goers, the device could be safely kept in a sand/water proof transparent case while still allowing control through a cheap remote control.
I'm sure there are a number of other cases where having a remote for an e-book reader would be useful.
While it may not be intuitive, after all who ever would want a remote control for a book, e-book readers are NOT books. That is why people are willing to shell out money for the devices. However, I know that I would be willing to personally pay a decent sum for this ability in a device.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Digital Equivalent of CB Radio
If you ask most people they would probably tell you that the days of citizen band (or CB as it is more popularly called) radio's popularity is over. It has been phased out with other, more efficient means of communication. The digital era has made things such as podcasting and text messaging as easy as a press of a button.
However, most forms of digital communication do one of two things. They connect you with people you know, or they connect you with random strangers across the globe. Most forms of digital communication have little regard for geographical location. After all, why should the technology limit it self with such a restriction.
The role that CB radio served in communication has yet to be replaced with a digital equivalent. Many people still use CB radio. However, it has lost the appeal it once had with the mass public. If you want a way to wirelessly connect to strangers in your area (perhaps to hear about road conditions), CB is still the best technology. But it does not have to be.
In the past I have discussed a bit about Ad Hoc networks and wide area WiFi. The details are not overly important, but basically these are techniques that can allow a number of devices to connect to one another over a relativity large area (in some cases over the distance of a city).
There are a number of reasons why these types of networks can be installed (they do exist in some locations). If a city was equipped with an existing wide area network, a communication protocol could be created to take advantage of it.
This could have a number of advantages over existing CB radio. For one thing it could allow for 'chat rooms.' Even though it could be using voice communication, people could split off into rooms based on what they are using the 'Digital CB' for. For example, there could be one room primarily occupied by people on the road driving and another for people who just want to chat.
This would prevent 'frequencies' from getting 'cluttered.' In fact, if properly engineered, the network could support an arbitrarily large number of chat rooms (in practicality there would be network limitations, but the number of users would likely become an issue before the number of rooms was a problem).
Such a system could even allow people to set up Digital CB profiles. CB handles would simply become usernames. If it was not a privacy concern the network could also give a rough distance to other users.
As the years have passed more people have complained about 'garbage' being on CB radios. This is another area where going digital could help. With a digital system one could easily block any users who are broadcasting useless chatter to you.
Now it is possible, and perhaps even preferable, to 'go digital' without the use of large area WiFi networks. In a sense it would simply be like digital radio. This has pros and cons. The main pro is that such a system could operate even where there was not an existing infrastructure. The con is basically that you would loose out on some of the functionality. Ad Hoc networks would be a type of compromise. This is basically where peoples radios would create a web of communication. Person A's radio might relay a signal through person B's in order to get a message to person C. This method is used to extend internet service in some undeveloped areas where it might not otherwise be available
Perhaps this form of communication, talking with strangers in your geographical area, is a thing of the past. However, it seems to me that one trait of the last two decades is exploration, the exploration of every possible means that there could be to conceivably communicate with one another. People are constantly trying to find new ways technology can let them communicate, and it seems to me that no one has tried this. It might not take off. It is simply reinventing an old form of communication, but wasn't that what email was to begin with?
However, most forms of digital communication do one of two things. They connect you with people you know, or they connect you with random strangers across the globe. Most forms of digital communication have little regard for geographical location. After all, why should the technology limit it self with such a restriction.
The role that CB radio served in communication has yet to be replaced with a digital equivalent. Many people still use CB radio. However, it has lost the appeal it once had with the mass public. If you want a way to wirelessly connect to strangers in your area (perhaps to hear about road conditions), CB is still the best technology. But it does not have to be.
In the past I have discussed a bit about Ad Hoc networks and wide area WiFi. The details are not overly important, but basically these are techniques that can allow a number of devices to connect to one another over a relativity large area (in some cases over the distance of a city).
There are a number of reasons why these types of networks can be installed (they do exist in some locations). If a city was equipped with an existing wide area network, a communication protocol could be created to take advantage of it.
This could have a number of advantages over existing CB radio. For one thing it could allow for 'chat rooms.' Even though it could be using voice communication, people could split off into rooms based on what they are using the 'Digital CB' for. For example, there could be one room primarily occupied by people on the road driving and another for people who just want to chat.
This would prevent 'frequencies' from getting 'cluttered.' In fact, if properly engineered, the network could support an arbitrarily large number of chat rooms (in practicality there would be network limitations, but the number of users would likely become an issue before the number of rooms was a problem).
Such a system could even allow people to set up Digital CB profiles. CB handles would simply become usernames. If it was not a privacy concern the network could also give a rough distance to other users.
As the years have passed more people have complained about 'garbage' being on CB radios. This is another area where going digital could help. With a digital system one could easily block any users who are broadcasting useless chatter to you.
Now it is possible, and perhaps even preferable, to 'go digital' without the use of large area WiFi networks. In a sense it would simply be like digital radio. This has pros and cons. The main pro is that such a system could operate even where there was not an existing infrastructure. The con is basically that you would loose out on some of the functionality. Ad Hoc networks would be a type of compromise. This is basically where peoples radios would create a web of communication. Person A's radio might relay a signal through person B's in order to get a message to person C. This method is used to extend internet service in some undeveloped areas where it might not otherwise be available
Perhaps this form of communication, talking with strangers in your geographical area, is a thing of the past. However, it seems to me that one trait of the last two decades is exploration, the exploration of every possible means that there could be to conceivably communicate with one another. People are constantly trying to find new ways technology can let them communicate, and it seems to me that no one has tried this. It might not take off. It is simply reinventing an old form of communication, but wasn't that what email was to begin with?
Friday, August 20, 2010
Window Sensors
How many people with central AC have been in the situation where, after running the AC all day, they realize a window somewhere in their home had been opened the entire day. For me this doesn't happen often, but when it does its like a slap in the face. An open window with the AC running is a great way to waste power.
One of my posts was regarding automated windows in the home that could open or close in coordination with the AC. The large problem for this idea to see a lot of use was cost. This idea is not for a system that would close the windows for you, but for one that would at least tell you if windows are open.
One of my posts was regarding automated windows in the home that could open or close in coordination with the AC. The large problem for this idea to see a lot of use was cost. This idea is not for a system that would close the windows for you, but for one that would at least tell you if windows are open.
A simple sensor on each window could send a signal to the thermostat. If the AC is on and a window is open a warning light would turn on. This could help prevent the occasional screw up and make it so a person would not need to stop and ask "hmm, are all the windows closed?" Perhaps most important in today's economy, it could save money by helping you ensure all your windows are closed.
An interesting thing to realize is, these sensors already exist in many people's homes. Many home security systems are capable of sensing if a window is open. All that would need to be done is to feed this information into the thermostat.
Instillation into existing homes would not be a complicated process. The cost of installing it would also be relatively low. This is especially true when you consider the fact that depending on where an open window is located relative to AC vents and the thermostat, an open window can significantly hurt the ACs efficiency. Adding in this functionality is simply a smart move.
Monday, August 16, 2010
Smarter Commercials
I just saw on TV a commercial for AT&T highspeed internet. Basically the commercial was trying to convince me that their service is faster than whatever service I have and that I should make the switch. But here is the thing. I already have my internet from AT&T. In fact they provide my cable as well.
I feel that if I am going to see a commercial or ad, it might as well be pertinent to my life. This is why I don't mind the targeted ads online. Online advertisers have figured out the game. An ad tailored to the viewer is more likely to result in a sale.
With modern digital cable it is more and more possible to customize commercials to the viewers.
It would require cooperation between the cable providers and the television networks. The providers would need to put forward the technology backbone and the networks would need to change they pitch themselves to potential advertisers.
Let's imagine a hypothetical toy retailer. They are looking to expand their advertising. They already have commercials on all the channels specifically targeting kids. They have a choice between two networks. Network A will just try to show their commercial to all viewers and charge accordingly. Network B will only show the commercial to some viewers, but can get away with charging less (because they can show other commercials to other viewers). The catch is that network B will be showing their commercial specifically to families that have a history of watching kid friendly networking.
It would be simple for cable companies to collect viewing histories to help target commercials. Combine this with other traditional ways of collecting information (like browser cookies) and commercials could be shockingly well targeted.
How effective is it to show commercials for feminine hygiene products to a bachelor, or toy commercials to someone without kids? What if you could be confident that commercials for retirement planning would be showed to people in the age range that they would be considering retirement?
That AT&T commercial, rather than trying to sell me their internet, instead could have been a commercial thanking me for using their service. Imagine seeing a commercial along the lines of "Thank you for using XXXX as your cell phone service provider. We are dedicated to giving you the best service at the lowest price possible. As always, if you have questions or comments, please feel free to contact us." No information would even need to be gathered for such a commercial. The cellphone company would just need to cross-reference their customer database with the customers of whichever cable services have these 'smarter commercials' in order to figure out who to target.
There is not much preventing this from becoming a reality. There would likely need to be some additional technical upgrades made to existing cable systems, but I think the increased efficiency in advertising would more than make up for the cost. The biggest concern many people may have is the 'invasion of privacy.' The thing is companies don't need to gather any additional information. Referring back to the opening of this post, presumably AT&T knows I receive my internet through them. Is it an invasion of my privacy if they use this information that they already know to customize a commercial for me? Once again, ultimately, if I am going to be watching a commercial, it might as well be pertinent to my life.
I feel that if I am going to see a commercial or ad, it might as well be pertinent to my life. This is why I don't mind the targeted ads online. Online advertisers have figured out the game. An ad tailored to the viewer is more likely to result in a sale.
With modern digital cable it is more and more possible to customize commercials to the viewers.
It would require cooperation between the cable providers and the television networks. The providers would need to put forward the technology backbone and the networks would need to change they pitch themselves to potential advertisers.
Let's imagine a hypothetical toy retailer. They are looking to expand their advertising. They already have commercials on all the channels specifically targeting kids. They have a choice between two networks. Network A will just try to show their commercial to all viewers and charge accordingly. Network B will only show the commercial to some viewers, but can get away with charging less (because they can show other commercials to other viewers). The catch is that network B will be showing their commercial specifically to families that have a history of watching kid friendly networking.
It would be simple for cable companies to collect viewing histories to help target commercials. Combine this with other traditional ways of collecting information (like browser cookies) and commercials could be shockingly well targeted.
How effective is it to show commercials for feminine hygiene products to a bachelor, or toy commercials to someone without kids? What if you could be confident that commercials for retirement planning would be showed to people in the age range that they would be considering retirement?
That AT&T commercial, rather than trying to sell me their internet, instead could have been a commercial thanking me for using their service. Imagine seeing a commercial along the lines of "Thank you for using XXXX as your cell phone service provider. We are dedicated to giving you the best service at the lowest price possible. As always, if you have questions or comments, please feel free to contact us." No information would even need to be gathered for such a commercial. The cellphone company would just need to cross-reference their customer database with the customers of whichever cable services have these 'smarter commercials' in order to figure out who to target.
There is not much preventing this from becoming a reality. There would likely need to be some additional technical upgrades made to existing cable systems, but I think the increased efficiency in advertising would more than make up for the cost. The biggest concern many people may have is the 'invasion of privacy.' The thing is companies don't need to gather any additional information. Referring back to the opening of this post, presumably AT&T knows I receive my internet through them. Is it an invasion of my privacy if they use this information that they already know to customize a commercial for me? Once again, ultimately, if I am going to be watching a commercial, it might as well be pertinent to my life.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Improved Laptop Power Jacks
I have seen a phenomenal number of laptops die because their power jack stopped working. I have also had a large number of power adapters develop a short and need to be replaced. I know I am not alone in having this problem.
The issue is poor design. Laptops have received power from outlets the same way since they were created. There has been very little variation in how power cords feed into the computer. Virtually every laptop I have seen uses a circular connector. History has shown that this does not work very well.
If the connector comes straight out from the computer there is a good chance the cord will end up being bent frequently. This leads to a short in the power cord requiring that it be replaced. It seems that L-shaped circular connectors do not tend to have this problem as much. However, I am uncertain why these types of connectors are not more universally used. I suppose they provide slightly less freedom in terms of what direction the cord can lay. I think that this is a small price to pay for not needing to replace an often seventy dollar cord.
However, even computers with L-shaped connectors tend to have their jacks die. The problem is that the jack needs to be soldered onto the motherboard of the computer. Over time, after the power cord has been plugged and unplugged and twisted many times the solder connection begins to wear. Eventually a short develops inside the computer.
The easy solution is to not have a solder connection. Rather than have a jack, a computer could have two metal connectors directly on the motherboard exposed through a slot. A power cord similar in design to the type of plugs we use with AC outlets (only with the prongs lying in the same plane) could be used. The cord would then come in direct contact with the connectors on the motherboard.
A short could develop in the cord (though the chance of this can be reduced based on the design as mentioned above), but the chance of internal damage to this 'jack' or perhaps I should say non-jack would be minimal.
Ultimately we are stuck with an infective, easy to break, design of power jack simply because it is the way power jacks have always been made. However, I never believe that this is a good excuse not to inovate.
The issue is poor design. Laptops have received power from outlets the same way since they were created. There has been very little variation in how power cords feed into the computer. Virtually every laptop I have seen uses a circular connector. History has shown that this does not work very well.
If the connector comes straight out from the computer there is a good chance the cord will end up being bent frequently. This leads to a short in the power cord requiring that it be replaced. It seems that L-shaped circular connectors do not tend to have this problem as much. However, I am uncertain why these types of connectors are not more universally used. I suppose they provide slightly less freedom in terms of what direction the cord can lay. I think that this is a small price to pay for not needing to replace an often seventy dollar cord.
However, even computers with L-shaped connectors tend to have their jacks die. The problem is that the jack needs to be soldered onto the motherboard of the computer. Over time, after the power cord has been plugged and unplugged and twisted many times the solder connection begins to wear. Eventually a short develops inside the computer.
The easy solution is to not have a solder connection. Rather than have a jack, a computer could have two metal connectors directly on the motherboard exposed through a slot. A power cord similar in design to the type of plugs we use with AC outlets (only with the prongs lying in the same plane) could be used. The cord would then come in direct contact with the connectors on the motherboard.
A short could develop in the cord (though the chance of this can be reduced based on the design as mentioned above), but the chance of internal damage to this 'jack' or perhaps I should say non-jack would be minimal.
Ultimately we are stuck with an infective, easy to break, design of power jack simply because it is the way power jacks have always been made. However, I never believe that this is a good excuse not to inovate.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Automatically Universal Remotes
There is no good reason why every device in an entertainment center has a different unique remote control. Ultimately it is because each manufacture simply does their own thing and there is no standard.
However, if a standard did exist for RC signals, every remote would suddenly become a universal remote. That is to say, if every TV used the same off signal as every other TV, if every DVD player used the same play signal as every other DVD player, a Sony TV remote would work equally well with a Toshiba DVD player.
Currently universal remote controls need to be programed in with the codes of the devices that you wish to control. This is a tedious process (though some higher end ones streamline the whole thing a bit). If there was a universal standard there would be no need for this. Every remote would, simply by nature of being a remote, serve all of your devices.
Certainly there would be some cases in which a device might have a unique feature that would not be supported by remotes from other devices, however this is frequently the case with universal remotes as well.
All this would require is for some of the major manufactures to agree to a standard. This may not seem feasible to some. However, this does happen all the time in the tech industry. Manufactures are constantly agreeing on security and encryption standards. Electronic communication standards are another big one, and ultimately communication is what we are talking about: communication between a device and remote. Sometimes it can take awhile for companies to agree on standards, but it can and does happen.
The problem is that manufactures need an incentive to do this. Improving customer experience is not enough if it does not mean an increase in profits. Consumers would need to demonstrate that this is a feature that they would want. If consumers voiced a preference for devices conforming to a communication standard to ones that did not, perhaps then manufactures might see profit in agreeing on RC codes.
However, if a standard did exist for RC signals, every remote would suddenly become a universal remote. That is to say, if every TV used the same off signal as every other TV, if every DVD player used the same play signal as every other DVD player, a Sony TV remote would work equally well with a Toshiba DVD player.
Currently universal remote controls need to be programed in with the codes of the devices that you wish to control. This is a tedious process (though some higher end ones streamline the whole thing a bit). If there was a universal standard there would be no need for this. Every remote would, simply by nature of being a remote, serve all of your devices.
Certainly there would be some cases in which a device might have a unique feature that would not be supported by remotes from other devices, however this is frequently the case with universal remotes as well.
All this would require is for some of the major manufactures to agree to a standard. This may not seem feasible to some. However, this does happen all the time in the tech industry. Manufactures are constantly agreeing on security and encryption standards. Electronic communication standards are another big one, and ultimately communication is what we are talking about: communication between a device and remote. Sometimes it can take awhile for companies to agree on standards, but it can and does happen.
The problem is that manufactures need an incentive to do this. Improving customer experience is not enough if it does not mean an increase in profits. Consumers would need to demonstrate that this is a feature that they would want. If consumers voiced a preference for devices conforming to a communication standard to ones that did not, perhaps then manufactures might see profit in agreeing on RC codes.
Friday, August 6, 2010
Home Automated Windows
I was sure this already existed. However, searches on the major home automation sites did not turn up any hits.
The idea is automated windows.
Whenever we turn our AC on or off, we need to run around our house like headless chickens closing or opening all of the windows.
An automated thermostat control could judge the exterior and humidity and based on user preferences decide if the AC should be on, the AC should be off and the windows closed, or if the AC should be off and the windows open. A signal would then open or close the windows.
Now the first thought I had is, perhaps these aren't sold as a solution because a lot of older windows can be a bit tough to open. Maybe stuck windows makes this too unreliable. But then I realize, if you are going to be dumping money into a home automation solution, it would not that much of an additional cost to replace the window tracks and fix the windows up.
So what are the best ways to go about making a window that could open and close by itself? Ultimately I think you would need to play around with a bunch of different ideas and decide which one has the best mix of reliability, low cost, and ease to install.
However it seems that there are a couple of general categories that would bear investigation:
Hydraulics/pneumatics - They could be attached to the top of the frame and pull the window up, or be embedded in the wall beneath the frame and push the window up.
Cable with motor - A cable or cables would attach to the top of the window and go up to the top of the frame. A motor could wind up the cable and pull the window up. This option seems like the easiest to install in an existing home as it could just be bolted into the top of a window frame.
Teeth and gears - If the side of the window was covered in 'teeth' and there where powered gears in the frame, they could push the window up or down. This seems like perhaps the best option, except for a few problems. One, it requires space on either side of the window to be free for installing the necessary parts. Two, it seems like the one most prone to injury if a finger was caught in the teeth.
Tying this into one of my previous ideas, it seems like if it was combined with Integrated Window Fans it could create the ultimate automated climate controlled home.
Perhaps getting this to work would be expensive. But home automation is already expensive. I am just shocked that the major home automation companies do not offer a solution already.
The idea is automated windows.
Whenever we turn our AC on or off, we need to run around our house like headless chickens closing or opening all of the windows.
An automated thermostat control could judge the exterior and humidity and based on user preferences decide if the AC should be on, the AC should be off and the windows closed, or if the AC should be off and the windows open. A signal would then open or close the windows.
Now the first thought I had is, perhaps these aren't sold as a solution because a lot of older windows can be a bit tough to open. Maybe stuck windows makes this too unreliable. But then I realize, if you are going to be dumping money into a home automation solution, it would not that much of an additional cost to replace the window tracks and fix the windows up.
So what are the best ways to go about making a window that could open and close by itself? Ultimately I think you would need to play around with a bunch of different ideas and decide which one has the best mix of reliability, low cost, and ease to install.
However it seems that there are a couple of general categories that would bear investigation:
Hydraulics/pneumatics - They could be attached to the top of the frame and pull the window up, or be embedded in the wall beneath the frame and push the window up.
Cable with motor - A cable or cables would attach to the top of the window and go up to the top of the frame. A motor could wind up the cable and pull the window up. This option seems like the easiest to install in an existing home as it could just be bolted into the top of a window frame.
Teeth and gears - If the side of the window was covered in 'teeth' and there where powered gears in the frame, they could push the window up or down. This seems like perhaps the best option, except for a few problems. One, it requires space on either side of the window to be free for installing the necessary parts. Two, it seems like the one most prone to injury if a finger was caught in the teeth.
Tying this into one of my previous ideas, it seems like if it was combined with Integrated Window Fans it could create the ultimate automated climate controlled home.
Perhaps getting this to work would be expensive. But home automation is already expensive. I am just shocked that the major home automation companies do not offer a solution already.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Credit / Debit Card Memos
When you write a check, you can jot down a memo on it. This small 'feature' can make it much easier to keep track of what the check was written for.
The problem is, most people don't use checks most of the time anymore. I cannot count the number of times when I was looking at my statement and asked myself "what in the world is this charge?" I then need to go through all my receipts and try to figure out what I was doing around that time. Over 90% of the time they turn out to be legitimate charges. Perhaps I went to a gas station and they routed it through some company in India, or maybe I ordered something online and the charge went through some company in England. Sometimes the names on the statements seem to be little more than random letters, being an acronym for some organisation.
Whatever the reason, the names on a credit or debit card statement are frequently of little use when attempting to track down charges. The ambiguity can make it difficult to be responsible and aware of what is being done with your cards.
There is a simple solution. Credit card and debit cards could allow you to enter memos when using them.
This would be easiest to implement online. Whenever there is an online 'purchase' forum, there simply would need to be an extra box to allow the user to type in a quick note for themselves: "B-day gift for mom","New laptop case","Online Magazine subscription." Basically something to help a buyer remember what those lines on his or her statement represent.
It would be a little harder at stores and gas stations. After all, you don't have keyboards on hand there. You do however, have keypads to enter your pin. Numeric keypads are how people typed text messages for years before phones came out with full keyboards. If I counted right it would only take 6 key presses to type in 'gas' at a gas station. Or perhaps a person simply enters in a 3 letter combination that is their own secret signal to themselves that the charge is legit. It is not the most ideal of ways to do it, but it is relatively easy to implement.
The hardest would be at places like restaurants, where you had your card over. The best way I can think of in this regard is for them to have a 'memo' line underneath the signature line. They would then need to scan that in and send it to your credit card company.
Most places would not need additional hardware. It would simply be a matter of updating the software that deals with the cards. If people don't want to take advantage of it, they would not need to. But for those that did, it could greatly simplify the 'balancing of their checkbook.'
Ultimately this would require two things to happen. Credit and debit card companies would have to put in the system to support this. Then stores, gas stations, online retailers, and restaurants would need to support it as well. The second point would be the harder to enforce. A credit card company could easily require online retailers to have a memo form (or otherwise would not honor any charges) because updating online checkout would simply be a matter of adding one line of code. For other stores, they could provide 'Memo Secure' stickers for retailers to advertise that they are helping customers protect themselves.
Its something that could take awhile to be implemented. But then again, it took awhile for debit card or even credit card support to become widespread. The only way the system will improve is if we begin working to improve it.
The problem is, most people don't use checks most of the time anymore. I cannot count the number of times when I was looking at my statement and asked myself "what in the world is this charge?" I then need to go through all my receipts and try to figure out what I was doing around that time. Over 90% of the time they turn out to be legitimate charges. Perhaps I went to a gas station and they routed it through some company in India, or maybe I ordered something online and the charge went through some company in England. Sometimes the names on the statements seem to be little more than random letters, being an acronym for some organisation.
Whatever the reason, the names on a credit or debit card statement are frequently of little use when attempting to track down charges. The ambiguity can make it difficult to be responsible and aware of what is being done with your cards.
There is a simple solution. Credit card and debit cards could allow you to enter memos when using them.
This would be easiest to implement online. Whenever there is an online 'purchase' forum, there simply would need to be an extra box to allow the user to type in a quick note for themselves: "B-day gift for mom","New laptop case","Online Magazine subscription." Basically something to help a buyer remember what those lines on his or her statement represent.
It would be a little harder at stores and gas stations. After all, you don't have keyboards on hand there. You do however, have keypads to enter your pin. Numeric keypads are how people typed text messages for years before phones came out with full keyboards. If I counted right it would only take 6 key presses to type in 'gas' at a gas station. Or perhaps a person simply enters in a 3 letter combination that is their own secret signal to themselves that the charge is legit. It is not the most ideal of ways to do it, but it is relatively easy to implement.
The hardest would be at places like restaurants, where you had your card over. The best way I can think of in this regard is for them to have a 'memo' line underneath the signature line. They would then need to scan that in and send it to your credit card company.
Most places would not need additional hardware. It would simply be a matter of updating the software that deals with the cards. If people don't want to take advantage of it, they would not need to. But for those that did, it could greatly simplify the 'balancing of their checkbook.'
Ultimately this would require two things to happen. Credit and debit card companies would have to put in the system to support this. Then stores, gas stations, online retailers, and restaurants would need to support it as well. The second point would be the harder to enforce. A credit card company could easily require online retailers to have a memo form (or otherwise would not honor any charges) because updating online checkout would simply be a matter of adding one line of code. For other stores, they could provide 'Memo Secure' stickers for retailers to advertise that they are helping customers protect themselves.
Its something that could take awhile to be implemented. But then again, it took awhile for debit card or even credit card support to become widespread. The only way the system will improve is if we begin working to improve it.
Sunday, August 1, 2010
Bluetooth Enabled Hearing Aid
From people that I know who use hearing aids, I have heard that using phones can be a problem. Apparently in many instances hearing aids are unable to pick up the sound of the phone really well.
One of the reasons that phones can have trouble with hearing aids is because the hearing aid is converting the sound a second time. It is a bit akin to trying to listen to a phone where on the other end the phone is set next to another phone and the sound is coming from that other phone.
However, there is no reason that second step of audio transmission can not be skipped.
I do think that there is a solution. Many people now use Bluetooth headsets while on the phone. In addition to being more convenient than wired headsets, the sound is often clearer than talking on the phone regularly. It is definitely in the realm of possibility for a to feed audio directly to a Bluetooth enabled hearing aid. This would allow for a step where the sound can be garbled to be skipped.
This could work with either a cellphone or specially equipped home phones.
This idea could greatly improve the ability of some individuals to talk on the phone. However, one issue is the 'target' demographic. This solution could require some 'complicated' setup. Bluetooth devices do not automatically pair up and require a bit of configuration. Unfortunately, many of those in the target demographic with weak hearing tend to be uncomfortable with complicated technology.
However, this hurdle is nothing that a focus on user friendly design could not handle.
One of the reasons that phones can have trouble with hearing aids is because the hearing aid is converting the sound a second time. It is a bit akin to trying to listen to a phone where on the other end the phone is set next to another phone and the sound is coming from that other phone.
However, there is no reason that second step of audio transmission can not be skipped.
I do think that there is a solution. Many people now use Bluetooth headsets while on the phone. In addition to being more convenient than wired headsets, the sound is often clearer than talking on the phone regularly. It is definitely in the realm of possibility for a to feed audio directly to a Bluetooth enabled hearing aid. This would allow for a step where the sound can be garbled to be skipped.
This could work with either a cellphone or specially equipped home phones.
This idea could greatly improve the ability of some individuals to talk on the phone. However, one issue is the 'target' demographic. This solution could require some 'complicated' setup. Bluetooth devices do not automatically pair up and require a bit of configuration. Unfortunately, many of those in the target demographic with weak hearing tend to be uncomfortable with complicated technology.
However, this hurdle is nothing that a focus on user friendly design could not handle.
Friday, July 30, 2010
Extended Museum Exhibits
As time goes on more and more people have 'smartphones,' or at least phones with abilities traditionally attributed to smart phones.
While some organizations have begun to take advantage of this fact, many more have not. I will be discussing some ways in which the capabilities of modern phones can enhance old entertainments such as a museum.
There are several ways in which this idea could work. On its most simplest level an art museum, for example, could release a phone app for their museum. While wandering through the museum the phone could figure out what exhibits you are looking at. This could be done in any number of ways including RFIDs, WiFi, bar code scanning, or even image recognition of the exhibit itself.
The app would then pull up additional information about the exhibit, or information related to it. I know I have been in situations at museums where I wish I had had more knowledge at my fingertips beyond what was provided by the signs and placards in the museum. In our theoretical art museum the app could allow you to bring up a bio of the artist, find the location of 'related' paintings, or perhaps see pictures of other paintings by the artist not on display.
Depending on how the exhibit identified itself, this information could either be transmitted from the exhibit itself, or more likely from central server that the app would reference.
Other 'museum like' locations could take advantage of this. A zoo for instance is a prime candidate. The app could pull up all sorts of additional information on the animals on display. It could even mention the 'personal' histories of these animals for those who were interested: when they were acquired by the zoo or born for example. If the zoo had cameras in the animal's pen, perhaps people could then watch the video feed on their phone.
Now, much of this could be accomplished with signs. But it seems to me, the more signs and more text at any given exhibit the less of it will be read on average. This would provide additional information to those who desired it. It is very similar to renting a set of headphones to listen to an audio tour at a museum. In fact, I see this idea as a natural evolution of those audio cassette tours. It would not even be unreasonable for a museum to charge for this app.
In addition to providing additional information the system could be interactive. The app, in its settings, could perhaps allow for an 'age' preference. This could allow for content to be better targeted to demographics. It would make it easier to create an exhibit that would be both 'kid friendly' while interesting to adults.
I mentioned earlier that there were several ways that this could be implemented. Now, each museum could make their own custom apps, but this would be inefficient. A great opening for a new product would be for a single company to make such an app (and hardware to be installed at exhibits) and market it to museums. The product could be called something like "Museum Plus."
A unified system used by multiple museums would reduce deployment costs. It would also be better for the end user, as they would only ever need to obtain and learn how to use one app rather than a different one for every museum they attend. I feel the potential profit in marketing such a system worldwide could be quite impressive.
While this idea will not revolutionize anyone's life, it is these incremental steps forward that marks mankind's progress towards fully integrating technology into out daily existence.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Dream Recording Clock
The best way to remember your dreams is to get in the habit of writing them down when you do remember them. Doing this regularly will cause you to remember more of your dreams. But this can be difficult early in the morning, especially if you are groggy.
My idea is for an alarm clock, that after waking you up, automatically starts an audio recording. So instead of having to grab a pen and paper, you can simply dictate your dream. The system will save the recording to an mp3 file that can then be transfered to a computer.
This little push may be all that some people who want to have better dream recall need.
As an added feature the clock could allow a person to record a message on it before going to bed. The message would be a reminder to do something in the morning. Then, when they are done recording their dream, the message will play. This could be a useful feature just by itself for people that tend to be forgetful while still waking up.
Ultimately something like this would be a niche product. However, I think its a niche that a large enough number of people would appreciate.
My idea is for an alarm clock, that after waking you up, automatically starts an audio recording. So instead of having to grab a pen and paper, you can simply dictate your dream. The system will save the recording to an mp3 file that can then be transfered to a computer.
This little push may be all that some people who want to have better dream recall need.
As an added feature the clock could allow a person to record a message on it before going to bed. The message would be a reminder to do something in the morning. Then, when they are done recording their dream, the message will play. This could be a useful feature just by itself for people that tend to be forgetful while still waking up.
Ultimately something like this would be a niche product. However, I think its a niche that a large enough number of people would appreciate.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Electronic Tupperware
Tupperware has not changed much over the years, but it could be a lot better.
For me Tupperware has two problems. One, at times it can be difficult to know/remember what is inside the Tupperware (especially if you were not the one to 'pack' it), and two, it's easy to loose track of how old the contents are.
My idea is to have Tupperware lids with a slot to 'clip on' cheap LCD displays. The displays themselves do not need to be anything fancy. Really they just need to be capable of showing a single line of text.
A consumer would purchase a 'keyboard' when they first invest in the Tupperware. The keyboard/keypad would be magnetic and could stick onto a fridge. There would be a slot where the displays could plug in. When a display is plugged in, the consumer simply needs to enter in the label they would like to be displayed. To make things more convenient the keypad would automatically append the date to the label.
Simply by looking into the fridge a hungry person could know what was in each container and how old the stuff was.
The displays, when not in use, would dock with the keyboard and would likely be magnetic themselves. The keypad would then charge the batteries that power the displays. As for how the keypad gets this power itself? Perhaps it could be charged off of batteries as well, or integrated into high-end fridges and just draw power from the mains.
The amount of engineering to create such a product would be minimal. Ultimately the key would be in marketing it. But to me at least, this product is useful enough that all you would need to do is let people know it exists.
For me Tupperware has two problems. One, at times it can be difficult to know/remember what is inside the Tupperware (especially if you were not the one to 'pack' it), and two, it's easy to loose track of how old the contents are.
My idea is to have Tupperware lids with a slot to 'clip on' cheap LCD displays. The displays themselves do not need to be anything fancy. Really they just need to be capable of showing a single line of text.
A consumer would purchase a 'keyboard' when they first invest in the Tupperware. The keyboard/keypad would be magnetic and could stick onto a fridge. There would be a slot where the displays could plug in. When a display is plugged in, the consumer simply needs to enter in the label they would like to be displayed. To make things more convenient the keypad would automatically append the date to the label.
Simply by looking into the fridge a hungry person could know what was in each container and how old the stuff was.
The displays, when not in use, would dock with the keyboard and would likely be magnetic themselves. The keypad would then charge the batteries that power the displays. As for how the keypad gets this power itself? Perhaps it could be charged off of batteries as well, or integrated into high-end fridges and just draw power from the mains.
The amount of engineering to create such a product would be minimal. Ultimately the key would be in marketing it. But to me at least, this product is useful enough that all you would need to do is let people know it exists.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)