I think the text could use some work. First paragraph doesn't ever get around to clearly stating what the product is. It's an entire computer in a mouse, right? Say that in the first sentence. Here is the current first paragraph. Look at the blah blah blah, then finally, in the last sentence, a hint (but not a direct statement!) of what the product actually provides.
"At the beginning moving computers was a real challenge. The problem was not just their quite big weight, but also their size which made it difficult to put them in a right place even though it was possible to lift them. Computer portability has been improving along with developing a PC. However, it still isn’t ideal as it is necessary to transport a lot of its parts – a monitor, a keyboard, a CPU and a mouse. The approach to computer design and appearance has been the same until today. We are introducing Mouse-Box, a computer different than ever before. An incredible combination of the two most important elements in a computer set – a computer and a mouse."
My thoughts exactly, they've probably invested a lot of time and money in this product, and it is wasted over the very poor presentation. For less than a $100, they could hire a copywriter to write a proper description.
I commend the team for the entrepreneur spirit but personally find the idea of showing off the ability to secretly do things which are against the policies of your workplace and presenting that as some sort of feature quite distasteful. From a visionary or marketing point of view I think it is petty and short sighted, and from a personal point of view my recommendation for anyone frustrated with the policies of their workplace is to invest their time on finding a better workplace rather than wasting it finding ways to be sneaky in the current one.
As for the product, I can see some use cases that would make it marketable without resorting to advertising sneaky and morally questionable scenarios.
If you've never worked outside of Tech, I can understand why you would think that. If you have, then I apologize for the miscategorization, but I find this attitude prevalent in Tech in general.
Most BigCos have two fundamental rules: you can't use any non-approved software[0] and you're to be at your desk at all times, even when you have no work to do. Given those restrictions, this makes perfect sense (although, a stealth switch works better[1]).
Believe it or not, most companies outside of tech are very controlling of what their employees can and cannot do with their computers. As an example, my first job out of college was with a NY branch of a multinational swedish-owned corporation that made airplane engines. One day, a top ranking employee walked out of the office with all of their blueprints on a usb drive and gave it to their biggest competitor[2]. Ever since then, they've forbidden any kind of physical data transfer, going so far as to pull all the cd and dvd burners from all desktops and disabling the USB drives (as much as possible).
anyone frustrated with the policies of their workplace is to invest their time on finding a better workplace
That's not an option for some. Not everybody works as a programmer. Aeronautical engineers, for example, have a limited number of employers. If you're not willing to relocate away from friends and family or you're not built for the city life, same thing.
[0]: Some even do network scans to check for unauthorized software programs on your hard drive
[1]: http://stealthswitch.com/
[2]: Yes, it's illegal, but I imagine he was paid enough ttraino risk it and even if he wasn't, it doesn't matter: once the blueprints are compromised, they can never be uncompromised.
Regarding working outside of Tech, In my pre-HiTech days I worked in a very large organisation where the all the practices you mentioned were strictly enforced. As your example has shown, these policies are in place for good reason. Having said that, I do think of them as taking the easiest solution instead of the best solution and find it morally analogous to using collective punishment on an entire population in order to deter a few bad apples.
I do realise this is the reality in many organisations (and, mind you, also inside the Tech industry) as it is much cheaper to implement. My own reaction was to stop working in a company that operates according to a philosophy I don't agree with and instead create an environment that operates from a philosophy I can relate to (basically one where people are trusted and do what is best for the company because that's what they love doing rather than out of fear of what will happen if they don't).
You say this is not an option for some, and you are right (though I think many people sell themselves short in terms of what they think they can do to start changing the situation) and I can imagine situations where you could argue that the "indecency" of breaking workplace policies is far less than the "indecency" of the policies that caused them in the first place.
However, all the above is a bit beside the point, as my main objection was from a marketing perspective. To take it to the extreme, if I manufacture freezers, I think you'll agree that mentioning in the advertising campaign that you can use them to make icicles which are the perfect murder weapon would not be very helpful to the public image of the company or product. If that is the major thing that product is suitable for, and there's a large target market then it becomes a moral discussion, but I don't think circumventing office policies is the main selling point of the device and therefore don't think mentioning it as the first feature is helpful.
I had the same first response, but then, purely in the interest of stimulating conversation, wondered why I'd viewed the situation in moral terms at all. Shouldn't a rational agent in a free market be doing everything possible to extract value from this relationship?
...With that said, undoubtedly, if he's free and able to do so, yes, this character is better off finding a relationship that requires less risk to extract similar value from.
I hate wires coming out of my mice. I can tolerate the thin braided cables coming out of most high-end mice, but that's about it. With Mouse Box, I'd have display, USB, and a bunch of other stuff sticking out of the mouse making it much harder to move around and use.
The mouse itself looks unexceptional. It's not especially ergonomic (my Logitech MX Revolution looks much more comfortable to hold), and the button set is pretty limited. It's fine for basic use, but it would kind of defeat the point if I felt compelled to plug a mouse into my Mouse Box.
Mice wear out. Mine collect dust and scuffs on the bottom and sweat and dirt on the top. I guess the mouse itself could conceivably outlive the usefulness of the computing part, but it seems like a bad idea to put the computer in a consumable device.
The use cases seem a bit contrived. I might accept the projector one because clicking to advance through slides is something that people do, but surreptitiously using it at work by connecting it as a second input to the monitor sounds pretty far-fetched.
I had the same thought about the cables... the marketing images look like a lot of today's electronics which are full of cables (like chromecast and/or clones, etc) which look "beautiful" in paper but are choked with cables once you really want to use them.
I think it would be a better idea to have a keyboard-box (PC inside a keyboard). You would have more space to work and it doesn't have to move due to its very nature.
That just brought back memories of some of the promo material that came with our Commodore 128 when I was a kid. One of the images showed a guy in a suit carrying his Commodore instead of a briefcase as he walked across some corporate campus. As a kid I thought it was so cool that someday you'd just carry your computer instead of some boring box full of papers.
Of course now we have Penny's "computer book" from Inspector Gadget so it's not quite as mindblowing as it was for 8-year-old me.
> seems like a bad idea to put the computer in a consumable device.
This was my first reaction, too, but I'm not sure it makes sense, at least not categorically. My current Logitech mouse is over two years old with no issues at all. And I don't know that I'd expect a tiny ARM computer with no expansion to be worth using on general purpose software more than a couple years. Still probably wouldn't trust a newcomer to produce a mouse able to go the distance and worth keeping for years, though.
I am okay with the general concept(though I guess it would be a lot better to put a computer on a keyboard, or seriously, on a phone), but I think that claiming this is the future of computing is ridiculous, pretty much the only thing this seems to be good at is being able to procrastinate at work, and once people are aware that you can put a computer on a mouse, that goes away
Everyone with a Kickstarter thinks he's Steve Fucking Jobs. When Steve said things like "magical" and "revolutionary" every presentation, it was annoying as hell, and he came a lot closer to actually revolutionizing the world than Mousebox ever will.
The Motorola Photon 4G had an entire Ubuntu-based GNU/Linux distro packed into the ROM image, and they sold a docking station for it that basically turned the phone into a full fledged computer when connected to an HDMI capable monitor. Its cousin, the Atrix, did the same thing using a laptop-style dock.
A company called Cybernet has been putting full computers in keyboards since at least the early 90s (think Commodore 64 but with x86 guts).
In other words, this Mouse-Box is evolutionary, not revolutionary. I like it, but I'm not blown away.
Everybody already carries a computer that powerful around with them continuously -- their phone. And that phone is powerful enough to run office applications, web browsers and video games.
Soon every monitor will be a docking station for both phones and laptops. A USB 3.1 type C connector will carry power, displayport and legacy USB.
The only remaining problem is software: iOS and Android aren't well suited for a keyboard+mouse+big screen interface. I bet that both Apple & Google are working on that.
a) First, for something to be a "toy" it has to be fun. Putting a computer in my mouse is not fun; it's frankly rather boring.
b) It's only a good sign if you (the founder to which Paul is speaking) have a future in mind where your product scales from toy to appliance. There are fundamental problems with this product that prevent it from scaling in such a way. Display connectivity is a big one.
IMO, this whole concept is rendered obsolete by the "computer on a stick" form factor that a few big names have released. By plugging directly into the HDMI port on the display, the highest bandwidth link is physical, and peripherals connect wirelessly.
Ok, in the video, the dude's boss comes by and he switches his screen so his boss doesn't know his mouse is actually a PC and he's really browsing pr0n while at work.
Ok, I get that part.
But, then he goes into a meeting and connects his, seemingly innocent mouse, to the projector...
Game over dude.
How dumb is his boss?
Guess what happens the next time you are sitting at your desk playing with your... mouse?
I don't understand, they say "all you need is a screen". What about they keyboard. You need a wire, a screen, and a keyboard. This seems ridiculously impractical, i would rather carry a tablet or a laptop. Where, in normal circumstances, am I going to show up to a place that has a keyboard and a screen, but not a computer?
Work places where you'd normally dock a laptop, for example. But I'd rather carry a laptop, quite frankly. While the MouseBox would be far more portable, it would not offer anywhere near the same freedom as a laptop would, and it would be underpowered by necessity.
A further problem is that some people simply don't like your average cheapo mouse, and some people prefer very light mice.
Yeah, I'm very particular about mice. I don't really care about my keyboard, but my mouse has to be perfect. I have a Logitech Anywhere MX, and it's the best mouse I've ever had.
This mouse looks like the cheapo ones you see tech stores giving away on black Friday.
This product solves a problem no one has! Fail fast and iterate fast!
Seriously, who the hell ever said, "Damn, as much as I love my iPad, the problem of an integrated touch screen and lack of mouse really annoy me! What I want is a PC and mouse without a screen!" Said no-one. Ever.
"An incredible combination of the two most important elements in a computer set – a computer and a mouse."
In a system, by definition (at least according to Ackoff), the value/function rises from the interaction/inter-operation of its parts/components. So, there are not 'most important' elements, all are equally required for the system to work (yes, you could use a computer w/out a mouse or a keyboard but that is a different system, like you could use a car without gas in the middle of the road as a very uncomfortable motel room).
Furthermore, the mobility argument breaks in two links:
- To move your computer system (set) you'd need to move the kb and screen as well. How would I use the MouseBox on a plane flight? Laying on my couch? On the park? Laptop, tablet, phablet and smartphone are portable computer systems.
- Nowadays mobility of the hardware elements of a computer system are secondary, what needs to move is data (OS, apps and files). Cloud emerges then. I can read/write email from anywhere on a different device. Paradoxically the software elements of the system are not moving per se, they live on a server, but being ubiquitous accessible they are "like" moving. This reminds me of that night ride in that car (with gas this time) and a full moon following me everywhere.
Your product is somewhat cool but IMHO it would have been much better to do the kb-trackpad-box, like this one but with a CPU: http://www.amazon.com/Logitech-Wireless-Keyboard-Multi-Touch... and still it would under-perform other existing portable computing devices already mentioned b/c those come with a screen.
I'd suggest they make an entire computer that fit in the form factor of a keyboard, but theoretically we've already done that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_II ;-)
Yeah! You made me remember my first PC: an Atari 130XE. No mouse back then though only arrow keys. The one use for such device today would be to use your big flat TV as a 'smart' tv. I actually did that with an Android stick and the wireless kb+trackpath linked above. It was very useful that way but lack of muscle on the Android stick is what turned me off.
> Awesome for the colleges, maybe, but not so much for the students onto whom they'd be pushing the cost.
1. This is a political problem, first and foremost.
2. How much it costs depends on what the school does with its network. If it offers cloud storage as part of the tuition (to offset the cost of not having much storage on the little mice) and gives the more computationally-intensive majors access to a compute cluster for the price of tuition (same reason), it could be a nice little setup.
Students would always have most of their files on them all the time, the school could buy more keyboard-laptop pairs than it buys actual computers to reduce the pressure on the public labs, and the mice could be fairly cheap if bought in bulk and resold. (OK, I know, but in theory.)
Easier to carry around, fewer parts to break, and it's cheaper for the school to buy a ton of keyboard/monitor pairs to reduce the pressure on the public computer labs.
I mean, all of those arguments can be argued against, but it isn't hard to see some potential up-sides here.
This is hilarious and incredibly impractical. Unless the mouse part itself is stellar, there's almost no way this could supplant using a real computer/mouse - using a bad mouse makes using a computer awful IMO, and the likelihood of the actual mouse being very good is incredibly slim (not to mention how heavy it'll land up being)
To be fair on the heaviness point though, people add weight to their mice for wireless ones in the form of batteries, and for gaming ones actual literal weights. The raspberry pi is only 45 grams, so it is at least conceivable that this mouse will be a suitable weight. I do however totally agree that a first-time mouse making company probably won't do a great job of making a mouse.
I'd totally get one if it was in my "fun but wasteful" price range. So for example something like a Raspberry Pi is an easy purchase, as is something like Intel's Compute Stick at $89. Really under $100 and it is an easy buy just for fun and because it is different/unique.
However I don't see a price and an order page, so I don't think this "Mouse Box" exists yet. I guess they're just testing the waters? For me price is a key part of this product's success.
It might have legitimate uses, like presentations, but realistically it is a novelty and people have a budget for novelty gadgets. So if they can hit the sub-$100 price point and appear on sites like ThinkGeek as something to show off to your friends/colleagues, they'll do pretty well.
If it is like $200-300 then frankly I can just plug my smartphone into HDMI and use a bluetooth mouse which costs under $30 for the same effect.
It appears to have 128 GB internal storage, which I believe would easily bump it over the $100 range.
I think the real limitation is not the price, however, but rather the operating system. Since its ARM based, it would probably have some sort of Debian distro installed as opposed to a more mainstream OS (Windows etc). I wonder if we'll see a revision with an x86 Atom processor or something in the future.
I can definitely see a road warrior sales type buying this and a roll-up bluetooth keyboard or something for putting in his daybag to make presentations, etc., then just using his smartphone for on-the-move stuff.
This is great. Being able to so easily take your whole computer with you is amazing.
I am a bit more into touch screens these days.
I would like to use a small SoC computer, something like the Mouse Box or one of the few existing fully capable Android smart watches, and plug it into a touch screen display.
Basically instead of a full tablet I want just a dumb display/touch input module that can easily interface with a separate small SoC computer.
A bit perhaps like project Ara but I don't want to use it just a phone and I am more focused on carrying the core around and plugging in different displays.
I guess I could get a Chromecast or something and plug my smart watch/small SoC HDMI into the cheapest tablet available and that would achieve basically the same thing, but it is a waste because I wouldn't be using the other parts of the tablet aside from the display and touch.
Where I work, they supply flexible work locations with desks and cubes all configured with monitor, network/wi-fi, keyboard, mouse and Dell standard dock. I could see some enterprises like mine going for something like this. Except now they don't have to supply the dock, mouse or computer. If it has RDP support they could even supply corporately managed Windows desktops for people to remote into.
Day 1: Welcome to Synergydyne Corp. Here's your equipment.
My smartphone is more powerful than PCs several years ago and only slightly larger than a standard computer mouse, with the majority of its internal volume being the battery, so I'm not surprised this could be done.
It's not like the idea of putting the majority of the computing power in one of the peripherals is new either - many early home computers like the C64 and ZX did this with the keyboard, and early game "consoles" appeared with most of their circuitry located in the controller.
I just want a computer stick form factor like the Chromecast. Maybe a couple of USB 3.1 reversible mini-connectors on it. Ideally I want to be able to choose my Bluetooth keyboards, mice, trackballs, microphone, some future version of the Leap Motion, a Myo, a Wacom tablet, etc.
my dad has been telling me he wanted a computer with a built-in projector and laser keyboard for at least 5 years, and I agreed. the challenge seems to be fitting all those things into one reasonably small space and it takes time for Moore's law to get us there...
Extremely stupid dick in a box idea :/. What exactly is the point of putting $40 Android hdmi stick in a mouse when you could use that stick and wireless mouse separately? Maybe its for people that love cables?
Its one of those 'Im hip young and talented with big ideas, lets get money first and think how to do it later', or rather 'lets get some cheap shit from china, repackage it and make tons of money'. Reminds me of Soap router (lets put android tablet in the router). Soap scam got >$300K combined out of crowd funding suckers, and delivered ... new car to founder and money to cover bankruptcy filled _between_ two campaigns.
"At the beginning moving computers was a real challenge. The problem was not just their quite big weight, but also their size which made it difficult to put them in a right place even though it was possible to lift them. Computer portability has been improving along with developing a PC. However, it still isn’t ideal as it is necessary to transport a lot of its parts – a monitor, a keyboard, a CPU and a mouse. The approach to computer design and appearance has been the same until today. We are introducing Mouse-Box, a computer different than ever before. An incredible combination of the two most important elements in a computer set – a computer and a mouse."