I used to get PopSci, but I think Wired would be more receptive to this kind of thing.Com64 said:nooooo, stop telling people, then i'll never get mine... lol joking.
sounds good... how about other magazines... like Wired?
I personally doubt either PopSci or Wired would care too much for the Pandora.quadomatic said:I used to get PopSci, but I think Wired would be more receptive to this kind of thing.
PopSci Entry Rules said:4. ENTRY FEE
A product or technology should be entered by filling out the entry form on this Web site and submitted with an administrative fee. The fee is $300 per product entered until August 1, 2010; the fee will rise to $350 for any product entered between August 1, 2010, and the final entry deadline of August 30, 2010. You may enter as many products as you like. There are no refunds, so please read the rules carefully before submitting.
Speculant said:I sent an email to Wired about the OpenPandora project, hopefully I will get a response.
I don't really think that Make would really go for this sort of thing, but if someone wants to tell them about it, go ahead.
They may say that, but a glance through their previous winners (specifically in the gadgets and computer sections) show nothing particularly revolutionary. Such amazing innovations and a laptop with a battery that lasts a little bit longer, or PMP that streams hi-def video to a TV (seriously, big deal).Sphinxter said:
I don't think the iPad won't be on the list. I'll actually be very surprised if it doesn't make the list. I just don't think it deserves to. There's nothing revolutionary about taking the product you released three years ago and making it bigger.Speculant said:What makes you think the iPad won't make the list?
I think this is what my lovely wife was getting at when she said that PopSci probably isn't interested in what we're doing here... PopSci is quite obviously in the back pocket of the big-name gadget companies and could care less for REAL innovation. LOL it's quite ironic that they say they want "ideas that are revolutionary, not evolutionary" because all their submissions from previous years have been evolutionary, and definitely NOT revolutionary.emcee said:But on the other hand everything on the gadget and computing list from last year seem to be already big-name, heavily marketed products. I wonder if the Pop-Sci editors even really consider small, barely known products.
Ugh I hate those bastards for this... all their "top 10 most revolutionary tech products" type articles are sooooo full of BS. Yeah right, like steaming video is anything new... lol, never heard of VLC have they?emcee said:They may say that, but a glance through their previous winners (specifically in the gadgets and computer sections) show nothing particularly revolutionary. Such amazing innovations and a laptop with a battery that lasts a little bit longer, or PMP that streams hi-def video to a TV (seriously, big deal).
Good point... maybe it IS worth the entry fee. I mean what's 300 dollars and one console when you're already several thousand in debt, right?emcee said:Adding a full QWERTY key set to a high end handheld gaming console (or, if you prefer, adding gaming controls to a UMPC), is a great idea and fills a large gap in the handheld market. But, to me at least, it's hardly earthshakingly radical. But then, compared to last year's selection, OPT might as well have mastered cold fusion.