Too Much Free Time

Too Much Free Time

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
bluetooth, luggage

Companies:
samsonite



Products That Get Announced And Disappear: The Bluetooth Suitcase

from the whatever-happened-to... dept

I've been reading a lot lately about the process of bringing new products to market, and what's almost as interesting is the products that never actually make it -- though there's a lot less information about those. Jeremy Wagstaff, however, is trying to find out whatever happened to Samsonite's missing bluetooth-enabled suitcase. Apparently, the product was announced back in 2002 with promises to be on the market later that year. Wagstaff found the idea compelling, while others (and I fall into this camp) found the idea baffling. What value is there in adding Bluetooth to a suitcase that can't be accomplished better and cheaper through other means? And, apparently, that's what Samsonite itself discovered soon after announcing (but not launching) the product. In various tests, it found that Bluetooth didn't work very well, not enough people had Bluetooth phones and there simply wasn't much value in Bluetooth-enabled luggage, so it went into the dustbin of products announced, but never launched.

15 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
 

Reader Comments

(Flattened / Threaded)

    Jul 24th, 2007 @ 9:10pm
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Call me thick but what possible use would there be for bluetooth in a suitcase?

    I'm assuming this is some sort of joke!

    (reply to this comment) (link to this comment)

    • Jul 24th, 2007 @ 9:31pm
    • Re:

      Call me thick but what possible use would there be for bluetooth in a suitcase?

      I know. I can't conceive of a single use that makes any sense. Yet, it does not appear to have been a joke.

      The ones mentioned by Samsonite originally are ridiculous:

      - storing info with the luggage?

      Huh? That's storage, not Bluetooth.

      - alerting a traveler if luggage was moved.

      Huh? With Bluetooth? Given Bluetooth's range (realistically just a few feet), you're going to see your luggage being moved before it alerts your phone.

      This was an ill-conceived idea from the beginning.

      (reply to this comment) (link to this comment)

      • Jul 25th, 2007 @ 5:12am
      • Bluetooth effective range?

        by christopher

        Try 300 feet outdoors, and 100 indoors. I effectively keep linked to my desktop even behind a closed-door conf room 50 feet away. I call shenanigans on your anecdote.

        (reply to this comment) (link to this comment)

        • Jul 25th, 2007 @ 6:29am
        • Re: Bluetooth effective range?

          by The Swiss Cheese Monster

          The effective range of Bluetooth is only around 32' (http://www.mobileinfo.com/Bluetooth/FAQ.htm#t6)

          I can testify that I have never seen a bluetooth device work that well at 30'.

          (reply to this comment) (link to this comment)

      Jul 24th, 2007 @ 11:14pm
    • Re:

      by The Swiss Cheese Monster

      This is the kind of thing you might sell to somebody who shops at sharper image and buys ion breeze equipment.

      (reply to this comment) (link to this comment)

    Jul 24th, 2007 @ 10:12pm
  • by Overcast

    LOL, wtf?

    Maybe next they will have bluetooth condoms.

    (reply to this comment) (link to this comment)

  • Jul 24th, 2007 @ 10:32pm
  • by Anonymous Coward

    may be to ease in finding you bag at airports ?

    (reply to this comment) (link to this comment)

    • Jul 24th, 2007 @ 11:14pm
    • Re:

      by The Swiss Cheese Monster

      RFID chip would be better suited for this task.

      (reply to this comment) (link to this comment)

      • Jul 25th, 2007 @ 6:45am
      • Re: Re:

        by TheDock22

        I agree. The range on Bluetooth is really the disadvantage to using it as a tracking system. Using an RFID chip would have much better range.

        Or better yet, everyone on the planet could have a tracking chip. Then you could "mark" your stuff like the animals, but be able to track is via satellite uplink. A little futuristic, but cheap and functional. =)

        (reply to this comment) (link to this comment)

    Jul 25th, 2007 @ 6:03am
  • Confusing Bluetooth with WiFi

    by Haggisdog

    There's no way you're getting bluetooth at 300 feet, you're obviously thinking of your WiFi connection.

    (reply to this comment) (link to this comment)

  • Jul 25th, 2007 @ 6:53am
  • Not well, but I've had bluetooth work to 100'+ ind

    by Anonymous Coward

    I use a Plantronics Voyager 510 headset on my office phone and cell phone. I have been alerted of incomming calls from my desk when I was on the other side of our office. I was able to answer. I was able to communicate (I wouldn't say converse) with the other party enough to find out they were in the office next door to the one I was visiting and drop in.

    This product is advertised with a 30' range. It only works well within that range, but for alerts it goes far beyond.

    Keep in mind most bluetooth devices are class 2. Class 1 is designed for a 300' range, but the battery drain is too high for most uses.

    (reply to this comment) (link to this comment)

  • Jul 25th, 2007 @ 7:45am
  • Throughout history and world...

    by Sanguine Dream

    there are many devices that are just bad ideas. This was not the first and it damn sure won't be the last.

    (reply to this comment) (link to this comment)

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now.
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Plain Text HTML
Save me a cookie
  • Plain Text: A CRLF will be replaced by break <br> tag, all other allowable HTML is intact
  • HTML: No formatting of any kind is done without explicitly being written in
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <p> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Close
Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now.
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Plain Text HTML Save me a cookie

Search Techdirt
And now, a word from our Sponsors..



Subscribe to Techdirt's Daily Email Newsletter

Techdirt's Daily Email Newsletter

Related Stories
Close
E-mail It