Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 10 submissions in the queue.
posted by n1 on Thursday April 10 2014, @07:08AM   Printer-friendly
from the sundials-are-obsolete dept.

The BBC notes that the Bradley Timepiece, a watch designed for those who cannot see is up for design of the year at London's Design Museum. The watch has neither hands nor numbers on its circular titanium face. Instead a groove in the center holds a ball-bearing that rotates to mark the minutes while another ball bearing rotates around the edge of the watch to tell the hours.

The watch is named after paralympian gold medalist Bradley Snyder (a Navy lieutenant who was blinded in Afghanistan). The watch was also successfully funded via kickstarter this past August.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by lhsi on Thursday April 10 2014, @07:26AM

    by lhsi (711) on Thursday April 10 2014, @07:26AM (#29313) Journal

    What was interesting in the BBC article was that a lot of the people who wanted one of these watches were people who could see, so it was a stylistic choice. Maybe it is the novelty of having something other than traditional hands or a digital display. I had one of those "binary" watches and the selling point of that seemed to be the fact that it was different and not that it was easier to read the time (I prefer hands myself).

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by davester666 on Thursday April 10 2014, @07:47AM

      by davester666 (155) on Thursday April 10 2014, @07:47AM (#29316)

      The design looked like it would readily have problems with dirt/little bits getting caught in the groove where the roller balls are in.

      • (Score: 3, Funny) by WizardFusion on Thursday April 10 2014, @09:14AM

        by WizardFusion (498) on Thursday April 10 2014, @09:14AM (#29335) Journal

        Maybe they could put some sort of glass cover over the top to stop the dust.?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 10 2014, @11:22AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 10 2014, @11:22AM (#29369)
          Yes. That will keep the dust out ... and the fingertips that are trying to check the time. ;-)
          • (Score: 3, Funny) by dotdotdot on Thursday April 10 2014, @01:52PM

            by dotdotdot (858) on Thursday April 10 2014, @01:52PM (#29432)

            Here, I think you dropped this whoosh.

      • (Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Thursday April 10 2014, @09:42AM

        by Hairyfeet (75) <reversethis-{moc ... {8691tsaebssab}> on Thursday April 10 2014, @09:42AM (#29343) Journal

        Nice to see I'm not the only one who looked at it and thought "wow...what a BAD design! Since they have to put their hands on it to "feel" what time it is let old hairy do something for the blind folks and give out an idea to any watch designers out there for free...although if anybody cooks this up and makes a ton? You could always be nice and pick me up a new 5 string bass, that'd be mighty neighborly of ya ;-)

        Simple design with NO nasty roller crap to get gummed up...ready? Blind person pushes button on side of watch and a small rocker "thumper" taps on the top of their wrist, thus letting them know what time it is. Since the vibration is carried through the watch no need to have anything open to let gunk in, a wide thump at the top lets you know the hours a smaller thumper at the bottom tells you the minutes in the tens column and a little "tick tick" thumper on the side tells you the ones place.

        Since the skin on the wrist is sensitive it would be trivial to learn, it would be like the difference between someone tapping you on the wrist with their thumb versus their pinkie and again because its sealed no hassles, hell design it right they could even use it underwater or in the shower. Of course why you wouldn't just have a talking watch is beyond me but if the blind want a silent watch that they can use without having to worry about hanging it on something? here ya go.

        --
        ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
        • (Score: 2) by WizardFusion on Thursday April 10 2014, @10:04AM

          by WizardFusion (498) on Thursday April 10 2014, @10:04AM (#29351) Journal

          This is a good idea
          How about the even simpler button and a voice tells you the time. No moving parts to fail, and very simple to build.

          • (Score: 2) by lhsi on Thursday April 10 2014, @10:39AM

            by lhsi (711) on Thursday April 10 2014, @10:39AM (#29362) Journal

            Speaking watches do exist. From the article:

            "I had a speaking watch for a little while," he begins. "You pressed a button and it told you the time." Uncannily mimicking a robotic voice, Snyder says "the time is 3:30pm" and laughs. "It was utilitarian. And if I'm on a train, I can't hear it.

            "What's more, as soon as I hit that button it highlights me as someone with a special need. I love the idea of using the same thing that everyone does. And I want to feel as normal as possible."

            • (Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Saturday April 12 2014, @11:28PM

              by Hairyfeet (75) <reversethis-{moc ... {8691tsaebssab}> on Saturday April 12 2014, @11:28PM (#30629) Journal

              Which is why my design would be perfect, no exposed parts and since time is told by "feeling" the time on your wrist there is ZERO noise or sound to indicate that its a blind person. You could even have a traditional face on top so that non-blind users could use it as well, and since our wrists are very sensitive it would be trivial to tell the difference between the "thump" at the top versus the "tip top" of the smaller thumper and the "ticky ticky" of the minutes thumper on the side. And as a nice bonus its completely sealed (as the vibration is carried through the watch back) so no nasty balls needing cleaning.

              --
              ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
        • (Score: 2) by lhsi on Thursday April 10 2014, @10:36AM

          by lhsi (711) on Thursday April 10 2014, @10:36AM (#29361) Journal

          Of course why you wouldn't just have a talking watch is beyond me

          This was mentioned in the BBC article as they do exist. It calls out attention to someone being "different", particularly in an otherwise quiet environment.

          Earlier attempts tried to "show" the time using Braille, but not everyone who is sight impaired can read Braille, especially older people who lost their sight later in life.

          • (Score: 2) by Foobar Bazbot on Thursday April 10 2014, @11:02PM

            by Foobar Bazbot (37) on Thursday April 10 2014, @11:02PM (#29757) Journal

            Note that "Braille watch" seems to be a well-established term for an analog watch, read by flipping the crystal up and feeling the position of the hands, with Braille-like tactile markings (which aren't generally Braille numerals) for the twelve hour positions. I'm using the term "digital Braille watch" to refer to a watch with an electronic Braille display (of some sort) indicating the time as actual Braille numerals. I'm not aware of any such watch produced commercially, though there was the haptica kickstarter [kickstarter.com] (which failed) and some "design concepts" (e.g. OOSH) that AFAIK were never meant for production.

            Earlier attempts tried to "show" the time using Braille, but not everyone who is sight impaired can read Braille, especially older people who lost their sight later in life.

            While that's a good argument against anything needing full knowledge of Braille, the subset needed for reading the a time is really simple to pick up. Yes, people in a pilot program for a new watch will grumble about having to learn ten symbols, but I believe the objection is mostly perceptual; since this is presented as a new improvement, an immediate hurdle before one sees any benefit at all is a problem, but if a digital Braille watch were perceived as the default, learning enough Braille to read it would be one of the smaller hurdles in dealing with fading eyesight. (In case someone is sitting on cheap, efficient Braille display tech, at a loss as to how to overcome this perceptual obstacle, the logical way is to introduce it to the market in a dual-mode talking watch. That way people who don't know any Braille can use the watch in talking mode as they learn it...)

            AFAICT, the reason digital Braille watches haven't become accepted as the default option for the visually-impaired has a lot more to do with the expense and power-consumption of current Braille-display tech than the difficulty of learning the digits in Braille.

            I'm tempted to suggest that if electronic braille displays were as cheap, robust and low-power as this mechanism, there'd be no need for this invention, but as with many projects started by a "designer", practical deficiencies of current options are irrelevant. As TFA says, "For Kim [the designer], previous designs were more functional than beautiful." Fortunately, it looks like enough engineers were involved to make this design project actually become quite practical as well as (apparently) beautiful -- the magnetic coupling eliminates the possibility of bumping the hands to a different time, and allows the removal of the flip-up crystal of conventional "Braille watches", making it much faster and less obtrusive to check the time.

      • (Score: 2) by egcagrac0 on Thursday April 10 2014, @12:13PM

        by egcagrac0 (2705) on Thursday April 10 2014, @12:13PM (#29399)

        The channel that the ball bearing rides in appears to be loose (at least, loose enough so that minor gunk won't obstruct it), and they say that since the ball bearings are magnetically coupled to the innards, a quick shake of the wrist gets them reconnected.

        That should mean that twizzling a cotton swab around the channel readily takes care of gunk, and you can't really break the thing.

        • (Score: 2) by davester666 on Thursday April 10 2014, @04:13PM

          by davester666 (155) on Thursday April 10 2014, @04:13PM (#29520)

          But if you are blind, how do you tell if it's displaying the correct time or the ball has been jammed and the watch needs a cleaning?

          • (Score: 2) by egcagrac0 on Thursday April 10 2014, @04:49PM

            by egcagrac0 (2705) on Thursday April 10 2014, @04:49PM (#29552)

            I imagine that if I was concerned, I'd press on one of the indicator-balls enough to free it in the track, and then confirm that it sprung back into position.

            If a ball did get stuck on some debris, when the magnetic part inside went too far away, the ball would come loose in the track, allowing the debris to fall away, and then the ball should reconnect with the magnetic movement with a quick shake.

            Otherwise, the blind people I know aren't particularly dumb, and could recognize that the time is always reading "3:17"... then, like everyone else, they'd know to go get the battery replaced.

  • (Score: 1, Troll) by c0lo on Thursday April 10 2014, @09:56AM

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday April 10 2014, @09:56AM (#29348) Journal
    I'm sure the blind would very much prefer a sight to a watch.
    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 10 2014, @10:11AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 10 2014, @10:11AM (#29355)

    How many of his victims will need one?

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by tibman on Thursday April 10 2014, @02:37PM

      by tibman (134) Subscriber Badge on Thursday April 10 2014, @02:37PM (#29455)

      I'd be surprised that if while defusing bombs he created any victims. Unless you count himself, of course.

      --
      SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
  • (Score: 1) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 10 2014, @11:58AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 10 2014, @11:58AM (#29388)

    I was somewhat confused by the summary (how would you know which of the balls of the ball bearing are the hour) , but if you look at the pictures it's clear. The hands are replaced by a *ball* in a groove.

    But maybe it's a language thing and the english call a single ball a bearing IDK, english is not my first language :-)

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by lhsi on Thursday April 10 2014, @12:10PM

      by lhsi (711) on Thursday April 10 2014, @12:10PM (#29393) Journal

      The Wikipedia article for ball bearing starts with this: "For individual balls that are sometimes incorrectly called "ball bearings", see Ball (bearing)."

      Which links to here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_(bearing) [wikipedia.org]

      In this context, it is basically a little metal ball.

  • (Score: 1) by erichill on Thursday April 10 2014, @02:13PM

    by erichill (658) on Thursday April 10 2014, @02:13PM (#29441)

    I remember seeing a watch back in the 80's that looked similar to a domino. Designed for the blind, it had two groups of 4 "dots", that were mechanical and moved in and out relative to the surface of the watch. It worked like a binary system. The first dot meant 1, the second 2, third 4, and fourth 8 to indicate hours. The second grouping worked the same to indicate the minutes in 5-minute intervals.

    Does anyone else remember it?