On Sun, 2010-05-16 at 20:09 -0500, John Griessen wrote: > Lojack gets results for cars. There's bound to be some way to do > something that fits in with what happens with bikes. Why give up so easy?
It's easier to fit to cars because there are more places to hide a box like this, and the car has a permanent power supply available so the user doesn't have to take the unit out for recharging. It's not necessarily "giving up easy". If someone takes a product to market without it being critiqued then it's likely to have fundamental flaws because of issues that the original designer did not forsee. I don't think that it's necessarily a bad idea, just that there are a number of significant issues in making it work on a practical basis for a wider market than just the enthusiast that designed it. > Taking the headset off a bike is not too long or difficult on some kinds. > That might be an access point for some RF transparent frames. Restricting to non-metallic frames would seriously impact the available market, and even on a carbon-fibre frame, is the headset tube carbon-fibre as well? I would have thought that that bit would be metal anyway. > A thief would not get results taking headsets off bikes he wanted to take... > so it's not a dead end. Also a bit of a PITA for the user having to take off the headset frequently for recharging. _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user