From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <13426df10705170824o184288ecp2696a368d3fe5aec@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 08:24:26 -0700 From: "ron minnich" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] Wearables In-Reply-To: <3fd183965e5baa133533b837abfe09c2@csplan9.rit.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <464B9474.9090206@conducive.org> <3fd183965e5baa133533b837abfe09c2@csplan9.rit.edu> Topicbox-Message-UUID: 6a59e9b8-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On 5/17/07, john@csplan9.rit.edu wrote: > > lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote: > > But if ever there was a market born to take best advantage of Plan9's long suit, > > handheld, or 'wearable' has to be the most obvious contender, and on power nd > > bandwidth consumption as much as CPU cycles or 'local' RAM capacity. > > > > A friend and I are starting a project to create a simple wearable computer. We've > got some hardware to get started; probably will begin with a laptop, our camera > viewfinder HMD, and a keyboard strapped around the waist (crude, I know) or > some form of home-brewed chording device. I considered using Plan 9, but since > we don't plan to include a pointing device yet, and the viewfinder can only display > low resolutions and in black and white, I think we'll end up going with something > designed to be used 80x24 characters at a time... Linux. If somebody can present > me with some good reasons to use Plan 9 instead, we can try it, but I really > don't think Plan 9 actually is ideal for a wearable. 80x24 eh? So, the provision, or lack thereof, of a "glass tty" is the deciding factor? I think your decision tree needs to have a few branches grafted on :-) ron p.s. Due to new workplace health and safety regulations, I am not allowed to tell you how to pronounce "glass tty"