An amazing Eve Phone


#624

@Niloc: The price point for this product is about $1,000 retail as an entry level so yes, more than the Neptune. If you look at my Part 1 post, you’ll recall I did say this won’t be in the same price point as a smartwatch which was the pricepoint target of the Neptune. That was a mistake on their part but I had no say in that, I was just the guy who contributed the concept free of charge.

No offence taken on the ‘poor execution’ comment, in fact I fully agree with you. There is no point to pretend, they botched it badly. In fact, even their initial design was not what I had come up with so the redesign wasn’t the first disappointment for me, yet I was one of those backers.

Truth be told, an experienced and professional team who have worked together before, like the engineering team of Eve Tech, could in theory prototype this within 10-18 months. They would need to hire a jewellery designer though but I think the more important question would be whether the community is interested or not.

-hatter


#625

Seems fun to comment on these points, please don’t mind :smile:

  1. A mobile wearable should not be a watch.
    What happens when someone who wants to wear their …

I believe you hit the nail on the head here! Very few people (that I know of) would wear two watches. Those who are wearing luxury watches probably won’t even give a slight consideration for getting a smart watch (maybe for exercising? we’ve got smart health bands for that purpose).

Knowing your market is important though, who’s going to spend $1,000 for a general computing device that is not a smartphone or a PC/Mac. Not that I know though.

2 The wearable should not be the accessory of a larger device but should be the core of an ecosystem.

Partially agreed (if I understood correctly), I would say it should be a smartphone replacement itself.

Cannot fully agree, if skeptical, if you mean it’s the only device lay users ever need.
I’d say that’s overly ambitious but rational.

3 Do not put a screen on it.

This is tricky. Any other display methods IMO doesn’t really work, including pico projectors.

In fact, at some point I though the Google Glass solution, or visors, would have worked. If there was something that can project a reasonably sharp image to just about any consumer glasses, it’s going work.

Now I’m thinking about AR and the technology Hololens used.

4 It must be water-resistant.

I’ll take this for granted.

5 Battery life is everything and contactless wireless charging is a must.

I’ll also take zero-interfacing as granted for such wearables.
Wearable accessory should not have any holes you plug stuff in.
Holes are necessary evils from the start, they accumulate dust, make things less water resistant and stuff…

I kind of understand why Apple is trying to push towards wireless-everything. Not that I like what they’re doing it to a smartphone though.

6 Processing power, storage and RAM are your make or break specs.

I do not fully agree with this.
As a user, there are things you can and cannot do effectively and efficiently with a cannot-be-seen device, interface-less device.

I see that this compliments you 2nd point, if it means to be the One Device though.

I can picture that if someone has a Bluetooth keyboard at home, along with a supported smart TV, can flick a finger to connect everything together (we already have these technology) and the TV suddenly becomes a full PC wirelessly powered by the strap on your wrist.

This doesn’t mean the users who would prefer doing this needs top-notch computing specs.

I believe professionals of different fields - graphical artists, designers, photographers, animators, etc. - those who need 16GB/(top-notch) 512GB SSDs, have strong preference on what device they work on.

Again, I’m not one of them so it’s just my imagination.

7 Understanding your target price point is important.

Agreed. In fact in my opinion, utmost important point in terms of business.

8 Security is paramount.

Again, taking this for granted. Not much to say about it.

9 Design from the perspective of jewellery first, technology second.

Agreed. There’s always a gap between Engineering perfection, Aesthetics and Usability though. Striking the balance between the three is difficult, doing it right alone would imply partial success of a product (or more accurately, doing it wrong alone would imply failure).

10 Support multiple Operating Systems.

Cool idea but hard to realize.


#627

@hatter: May it be possible that you open a new thread for this idea.
I think that there are far more things to discuss on this than it suits the amazing Eve Phone thread.

Here we should discuss a phone and in a new thread we can discuss your well thought ideas.


Amazing Eve Wearable Computer
#628

@kaum: I have taken your advice, please see the new thread over here on this topic.

@kazenorin: I absolutely do not mind, after all the whole point of the post was to stir discussion first then see if there is enough of an interest that Eve Tech may take this seriously enough to investigate possible research into doing it.

The “only device” comment refers to the fact that it would replace a smartphone, android-style tablet and smartwatch plus could take the place of a regular Windows 10 tablet/convertible for example. I don’t expect that a user will replace his Nvidia powered 32GB RAM Core i7 powerhouse of a notebook with it just as they wouldn’t replace that with the Eve V either.

In reference to your response about the screen and A/R etc, it is fully explained in the new thread over here. My application of the pico projector technology is more along the lines of the ASU Cast 1.

-hatter


#629

Maybe not currently, but I look forward to the day. I think it would be awesome to have a handheld device that functions as a PC, with dual-boot option.

I won’t even ask “what about Microsoft’s full Windows 10 on ARM experiment?” because I’ve already seen some of your responses to this.

:wink:


#630

Yes ARM is improving. But as I said earlier, Intel (and maybe AMD now) is improving at equal speed. So, trying to race it is not an insanely smart idea :smile:
That Microsoft’s experiment is just an experiment and I strongly believe it will soon fail just like Windows RT :slight_smile:

And that’s why I’m suggesting to use a real Intel processor and forget all the emulation. Most Android apps work natively on x86 processors, but not the other way around: Windows apps don’t work on ARM without emulation. (If AMD releases something noteworthy with low enough TDP, then why the hell not :wink: )


#631

@pauliunas: …again speaking authoritatively about things you don’t actually understand.

Windows 32-bit apps don’t work natively on 64-bit Windows either.

They run on an emulation layer that is all software so what’s the difference?

In fact I think the new arm x86-32 hybrid software+hardware emulation support found in the new Qualcomm processors might be even more efficient and offer better performance than the built in Microsoft windows software-only emulation found in Windows x64.

Windows 10 on arm that will come later this year is the same full version of Windows 10 that will run everywhere else. The apps that will be supported natively will be arm based versions of existing apps and everythng else willb be 32-bit x86, so they should be able to get coverage for more than 90% of what’s out there right off the line.

-hatter


#632

I know, but x86 32bit code is hardware-compatible with 64bit processors. They are capable of following the same instructions, so that “emulation” is not the same. Only the OS functions need to be “emulated”, since the rest of the OS is running in 64bit mode.
You should really learn to be wrong sometimes, because all of your comments seem to begin with " you don’t know anything" without even considering that YOU might be wrong.


#633

Ok, so what do you understand to be the case with the new generation of arm processors? Do you not realize that the processor is a 64-bit arm processor which is as you put it “capable of following the same instructions”: as the 32-bit x86 code?

The emulation with windows 10 on the new arm processors is hybrid emulation, it is both hardware and software. The arm processor is doing the same thing with x86-32 code as the traditional x86-64 processor does under 64-bit windows. It is practically an identical process at the block level.

-hatter


#634

If it could run x86 natively, there would be no need for emulation, you could run Windows x86 out of the box. That’s how 64bit x86 processors work. They can run a 32bit OS without any emulation at all. Natively. ARM processors can’t run x86 OS natively, and while I don’t know their proprietary details, that just shows that these are two completely different things.


#635

an Eve-phone could be great if the thinking of the whole community could be implemented in this phone. This kind of project was in some kind also done by OnePlus with the idea of creating a phone which will focus on the community without any big advertising so that the price could be kept quite expectable


#636

Their campaign: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/cerulean-moment-smartphone-for-windows-phone-fans#/

Guys what do you think about this? The idea itself is great but could be better executed. For example, 1280x720 as the resolution seems far too low by today’s standards even if the display is 5’’. They said they had some innovative features but until now I’m not convinced.

Here is the link for the article from Windows Central that explains rather nicely everything:

They are nowhere near reaching their goal. The vision needs to adapt to what the market wants and I think they failed on that regard. I was hoping for a HP Elite X3 killer + those innovative features. Specs are for a mid range device and the two innovative features announced don’t excite me that much. The third one, which the writer on Windows Central could not talk much about is coincidentally and supposedly the most disruptive one but without knowing what it is and how it works I’m skeptical.


#637

720p is just fine. I had a 1080p phone, switched to 720p, nothing changed. I simply can’t see the difference. They’re both 5" :wink:

But yeah, otherwise the specs are “so-so”. Well, at least it can act as a placeholder when Microsoft doesn’t make Lumias anymore :slight_smile:


#638

If only they had gone the high-end route… make like a OnePlus 3T or even Pixel or Elite x3 but change it just a bit to align with their vision…


#639

The cerulean phone is the same as the NuAns Neo and way too expensive for that hardware. Windowsarea.de argued that this is just a cheap Chinese reference model that both of them bought and now try to sell with a good looking body for way too much money.

I’m totally with you that there is something needed that can live up to the HP Elite X3 without costing as much and I think that it would be possible, but no one is willing to take the risk - can’t blame anybody though.
A friend of mine came to me some weeks ago and was like “damn, have you heard about the feature of the new Samsung to use it with a screen as a desktop?” And I’m like “wow, you’re far behind in tech news” :smiley:

But yeah, the cerulean phone sounded to me just like they’re trying to rip off people by saying this phone is for fans…


#640

The specs aren’t exciting, and it doesn’t really seem to me that they have any kind of vision. Not one beyond their own superness anyway.

“We are WhartonBrooks, a company that uses emerging technologies to create high growth opportunities”
“Our new modern personal computer that is in a category all its own.”
“capable of ushering in a whole new level of disruptive personal computing that breaks the mold of current thinking to create a new path.”
“The Cerulean Moment is our smartphone powered by Windows 10 Mobile, which features the disruptive Continuum technology!”
“Creating a new smartphone company is only for the committed entrepreneur.”

All of these are signs to me that I’d be backing an ego more than a product.


#641

Yup completely agree. Search for Coship and you’ll see they basically rebranded a Coship phone. And as you say, fans are not looking for a mid range phone. They want the best possible experience and they will pay for it. If you make a mid range phone for fans you’re surely not aligned with your audience…

What makes me mad is this. Microsoft can’t create or doesn’t want to create awareness. Without awareness you won’t have developers as you won’t have consumers. You have to start from somewhere.


#642

Hehe… to add, every Android phone has been able to do that for a while, through an app called Taskbar (maybe there are some others too)

@Scuff you’re right :wink: if we’re talking about the campaign, it’s completely terrible. If we’re talking about the product, it’s “meh” but it’s not useless. It can fit in the gap created by Microsoft.


#643

Exactly! IF they say that, the product should deliver. And it starts by being premium. You don’t simply say those words and expect people to oblige. You need to show you are capable of delivering. And their disruptive technologies as they call it don’t make it a must have. If they have a third thing up their sleeve I’d use it before the crowdfunding campaign goes as a catastrophic failure…


#644

Yeah, I’ve just read your article. They actually say it themselves :smiley: