From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] Wearables Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 11:30:28 -0400 From: john@csplan9.rit.edu In-Reply-To: <464C6D8F.7040608@conducive.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Topicbox-Message-UUID: 6a66f824-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > 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. >> >> John >> >> > > 'Ideal' only in two senses: > > - Very well-suited to having the 'heavy' resources remoted over reasonably > efficient (low bandwidth) networking. > > - lacking a GP GUI (rio/acme are, IMNSHO, a coder's IDE, not a GP GUI), but > having lightweight tools to implement one (drawterm, VNC) - so you can do > 'locally' only what your app really *must* do locally. I'm not really looking forward to dealing with rio at the very low resolutions our device uses. The idea of window management on such a display, barring the use of wmii or dwm, seems ludicrous. > As to 'pointing device' - why not a tilt-disk, 'clit' or trackball? All of which > are cheaply salvaged from new or used hardware. Chording the 'Plan9 way' is not > an absolute requirement - just one already built-in. > > Viewing device? 'Virtual reality' headset, perhaps? As I mentioned initially, we're using a camcorder viewfinder as the display. That means black and white, low resolution (composite input). Until we can get club approval (Robotics club), our budget is nil; we're working on scavenged equipment. > > Or go the other way... > > text-to-speech in an earpiece, speech-to-text from a mic. > > 'Heavy' CPU to convert bothways accurately is remoted. > > Might mean the heaviest thing you have to wear is... > > ...a 'dumb' telephone handset and a thin LCD for graphics when needed. Although we do intend to write specialized code for the project, I do not want to write a text-to-speech and speech-to-text suite right now. > > My biggest personal objection to most modern PDA/phone rigs (Blackberry, Treo, > et al) is the need to grab a stylus and/or otherwise use BOTH hands when NO > hands is a nicer goal, and ONE hand was possible even with the ancient HP-200-LX > (thumb-typing). > > Belt-mount and Bluetooth or similar seems a good idea though. > > Linux? Far too 'heavy', even stripped - which is not as easy as it sounds if you > need even basic functionality). if not Plan9, then Minix3 revanche is lighter > (and very Posix compliant) Most likely candidate right now is a Linux laptop in a shoulder bag or Slackware installed on a mini PC we have in the lab. > But might be better-off with DRDOS and GEM. Seriously. > > Find an HP-100/200-LX (MSDOS, not DRDOS) and see what was possible lo those many > years ago with a couple of the right PCMCIA cards and lithium AA batteries. > > Used to carry a pair of clip leads and external twin D-cell holder to send faxes > and login to CompuServe from hotel rooms. Purchased and discarded batteries > locally so as to not have to carry the weight or a charger. ELSE 'borrowed' the > rechargeable emergency flashlight found in many hotels. > > 'Too soon we forget' how much could be accomplished with a lowly VT-whatever > 'dumb terminal' connected to the right support infrastructure at a mere 1200 - > 9600 bps. > This is what I want. That's why Linux seems like a decent candidate. The hardware we're looking at can handle it just fine. It gives us a VT type interface. Couple that with campus wireless and we can connect to whatever "support infrastructure" we want. John "Plan 9 Koolaid" Floren