Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Television Media

Seiko TV Watch is now 20 years Old 133

Posted by CmdrTaco from the nothing-else-going-on dept.
TheGreatOrangePeel writes "In 1982 the Seiko "Television Watch" became available to buy. Now, 20 years later, the watch has become a bit of a rare item to find. When it was available new, it contained the following: 1-1/4" LCD Screen on wristwatch, Shirt pocket receiver, Case, Earphones, Owner's Manual." Apparently the small wonder is still the smallest TV commercially produced.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Seiko TV Watch is now 20 years Old More

Seiko TV Watch is now 20 years Old

Comments Filter:
  • I want a TV watch
    • It'l be obsolete in the US in 2007 unless it comes with a digital tuner. Analog broadcasts are to end. I don't want to pack a VCR or DVD along just to use the watch. I want one that will work at the ball park to watch the replay.

  • 20 years... (Score:1, Flamebait)

    by Anonymous Coward
    ...and we haven't come up with any new ideas since.

  • Casio remote watch (Score:4, Funny)

    by Calimus ( 43046 ) <calimus@@@techography...com> on Friday July 05, 2002 @04:28PM (#3829774) Homepage
    Now the real questions is, will the remote watch work with the the Tv watch?
  • Wait, pocket receiver? So the whole thing DIDN'T fit on a watch, and they had to hide the bulk. Today, they wouldn't use a wire, they'd use bluetooth from pocket to wrist :)

  • i am guessing (Score:1, Insightful)

    by lingqi ( 577227 )
    nothing-else-going-on dept

    a *really* slow news day.

  • The watch was fine ... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 05, 2002 @04:30PM (#3829789)
    It was the giant dish you had to wear on your head that was a bother.

  • How can I masturbate with this thing? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 05, 2002 @04:31PM (#3829794)
    Well fuck, I can't masturbate to erotic TV commercials if the TV is mounted on my friggen wrist... it keeps moving back and forth, back and forth...

    Masturbation requires concentration, which this device does not allow.

  • You can buy one (Score:3, Informative)

    by Jim Buzbee ( 517 ) on Friday July 05, 2002 @04:31PM (#3829801) Homepage
    here [ebay.com]

  • how many they have sold since it's introduction. I'm guessing not many.... who wants to watch tv on a 1-1/4" LCD screen?

  • They can't build them again (economically) (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 05, 2002 @04:34PM (#3829816)
    My organization is known for studying the viability of certain technology products, including televisions.

    We've found that the next place a TV makes sense is within cell phones. With phones getting high quality displays, it's relatively inexpensive (power/space/$) to add a television tuner.

    We found smaller devices were not economical, due to the fact that most people already carry around a cell phone as a device.

    We've also found that cell phones are displacing the sales of watches, as most modern cell phones have a server-synchronized clock built in.

    Over time, we find that the cell phone will shrink into a watch-sized device - but that will take at lesat two more generations of development. Battery life and size is, as always, the limitation.
    • You've got me on the watches being replaced by cell phones. I'll buy that one. But I won't buy the watch-sized cell phone. Unless the phone is somehow implanted, anything smaller than an existing phone isn't going to be convenient for people to talk into or dial out of.

      I would believe half of the cell phone on the wrist and the other half of the cell phone in a headset. But I think the next step is to combine the cell phone and the PDA.
      • Combining the cellphone and PDA? Wow, that would be an exciting new step. It's a shame that no one has thought of it or indeed done it already.

        • They've done it, Mr. Troll, but who uses them right now? How long did it take to go from wanting a pocket computer (Sharp Wizard, various Radio Shack pocket computers, Newton, etc, etc, etc,) to actually HAVING a usable pocket computer that caught on (PalmPilot, iPAQ, etc.) for widespread usage? At least 10 years.

          This is what I am referring to -- the time when it goes from geekazoid toy to part of life for a good percentage of non-geeks.
          • I'm not trolling - (well, I suppose that's always arguable depending on whether you agree with me or not). The cellphone / PDA convergence thing has been going on for a while now - while handspring's visorphone (PDA add-on) and Treo and similar could be argued as you say to be geek only toys with no market penetrance, most high-end cellphones now have PDA capabilities, with extensive address books, very capable note-taking (and dictation taking) and calender abilities, and calculators - the biggest selling point of PDAs (which are really just electronic filofaxes). The thing they don't have is modifiable software but I believe the newer ones have Java. Some even use Palm OS.

            So to be short - they are now being produced and starting to reach high-end mass market - which will be tomorrow's low-end mass market. Which was my original point.

      • But I won't buy the watch-sized cell phone. Unless the phone is somehow implanted, anything smaller than an existing phone isn't going to be convenient for people to talk into or dial out of.

        You might well be right, but people are investigating ways to get around this. There's a prototype phone where you stick your finger in your ear [thestandard.com] to listen to vibrations, and talk into its wrist mic (no, really! :-).

      • Most phones have a jack that you can plug an earpiece/microphone into, and come with such a device. I know that when I used mine, I had a dramatic increase in my ability to hear and people's ability to understand me.

        It'd just use one of those with a wrist phone.
      • But I won't buy the watch-sized cell phone.

        Or, perhaps, it could just be a device you pin to your shirt and tap to talk, a la star trek.

    • We've also found that cell phones are displacing the sales of watches, as most modern cell phones have a server-synchronized clock built in.

      I stopped wearing a wristwatch a long time ago for just this reason. What's also interesting that I never though of before is that we went from pocket watches -> wrist watches -> and now back to pocket watches!

      • even with all my magical techno-gadgets, I still have a nice analog (you know, with hands..) watch strapped to my wrist, cuz it's just so much easier to tilt my wrist and look down rather than go digging around my pockets to find my cellphone...

        Simple, Functional, and Quick are still important rules of design, which are being ignored with frightening regularity due to the the modern addiction to feature creep/bloat.

    • I still wear a gold analog wristwatch, but that's because I'm an ape who likes shiny things.
    • I'm not sure these combination devices are all that they're cracked up to be. We've had the technology to do it for ~20 years, as this article points out, so why haven't they caught on?

      Personally I own both a wristwatch and a cellphone, and am not planning to ditch either. When I just want to know the time, I don't really want to be interrrupted by new text messages in a furious cascade of beeps - especially in a boring (and quiet) lecture theatre :). Or when out sailing and the gun goes off, you want to start your countdown timer without navigating through a pretty GUI menu.

      I'm not saying it's impossible to build smaller devices -- you're right, batteries and also keyboard sizes are the only real limitations (although this [bbc.co.uk] would be cool on a mobile), and some are probably economically feasible.

      But they all run up against the K.I.S.S principle -- most people prefer devices to have single, simple functions, so they can be used and upgraded/replaced easily on their own. And if one breaks or runs out of batteries, you still have other toys to pass the time :).

    • We've also found that cell phones are displacing the sales of watches, as most modern cell phones have a server-synchronized clock built in.

      I know I'm on a geek site but...

      Many people, like myself, don't wear a watch to tell the time only. For instance, I wear a movado, it has *no numbers* and *no strokes to mark anything*. You don't tell time on that thing, you take a rough estimate :)

      What the watch does very well is look nice. I get compliments from random people, chicks mostly, constantly. I've discovered a watch is one of the first things a girl will look for in bars,clubs,etc. to figure if you're worth the trouble.

      Sometimes it's good to take your geek hat off for a bit : )

    • Its too bad that cell phones are replacing watches so frequently these days. Personally, I still have a watch just because I like how it looks and the convience of not having to reach into my pocket. My watch is a Titanium Skagen [skagen.com] though, so its really more of a piece of jewelery to me.
      • ... so its really more of a piece of jewelery to me.

        Well then, you took the wind right out my reply. :)

        At least you can admit you're more concerned with the fashion than the functionality. I can understand where you're coming from... but the watch could just as well be a manly-looking bracelet (unless you're also habitually 'addicted' to the act of looking at your wrist to tell time.)

        --

    • The cellphone-tv combo would have certainly been a nice gadget for the Football World Championships. Hey, maybe it's ready 'till 2006.

  • wow. (Score:1, Troll)

    by dbretton ( 242493 )
    this is cutting edge stuff. .amazing. .snore.

    Hey Taco, if I email you some interesting info on the Great Wall of China, will you post it on slashdot?

    Apparently it's still the only man-made object that can be seen from space. So it must still be newsworthy, right?

    seriously, I know I'm trolling. But this post has to be among the worst I have seen.

    • Re:wow. (Score:4, Informative)

      by Sc00ter ( 99550 ) on Friday July 05, 2002 @04:42PM (#3829838) Homepage
      That would be wrong

      http://www.snopes2.com/science/greatwal.htm [snopes2.com]

      "If we take "space" to mean a low Earth orbit such as the one travelled by the Space Shuttle (roughly 160 to 350 miles above Earth), the Great Wall claim fails twice. First of all, it's not the only object visible from that distance: NASA's Earth from Space photographic archive (particularly the Human Interactions section) shows that pictures taken from low orbit reveal human-built structures such as highways, airports, bridges, dams, and components of the Kennedy Space Center. Secondly, even though other objects are visible at this distance, according to Shuttle astronaut Jay Apt, the Great Wall is barely discernable, if not invisible"

    • seriously, I know I'm trolling. But this post has to be among the worst I have seen.
      Whatever. You're such a troll.

      The watch is cool and everybody knows it. But thanks for contributing -- it's good to know that you don't get it.
    • click here. [straightdope.com]

      some quotes:
      ...Gemini V astronauts Gordon Cooper and Charles Conrad were able to spot, among other things, a special checkerboard pattern that had been laid out in Texas, a rocket-sled test in New Mexico, and the aircraft carrier that would later pick them up in the Atlantic, along with a destroyer trailing in its wake...

    • If the Great Wall can be seen from space then I guess all man-made objects with a width of more than say 10 meters are visible as well.

      Doesn't matter how long it is.

      If you glue a 10 meter long strand of hair to your neighbours wall and then walk away 50 meters, it will most probably be invisible to you.

      On the other hand, if there's irrigated, fertile green land on one side of the Great Wall and barren yellow desert on the other side I guess you know where the wall ought to be. But you still can't see the actual wall.

    • You can see Rosie O'Donnell from space.
  • dbretton writes:
    click here [kuro5hin.org]

  • sounds cool until.. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Xzzy ( 111297 ) <sether@tr u 7 h . o rg> on Friday July 05, 2002 @04:41PM (#3829836) Homepage
    ..you read the article and realize the thing had a walkman-sized reciever [tru7h.org] you gotta carry around too (source site was hosed, that's a mirrored copy).

    Seems to me one of the other portable TV's would be a lot more convenient, especially considering the improved screen size. Which you know, is probably a real darn good reason why it never cought on. ;)

    Still, having a resolvable display [tru7h.org] in the early 80's was doing pretty darn good, even if it ended up being little more than a neat hardware hack.

    • Re:sounds cool until.. (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      If you wore that today, people would think you were a wired suicide bomber. Strange cables everywhere...

  • You need a small transmitter for a small watch. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by User 956 ( 568564 ) on Friday July 05, 2002 @04:42PM (#3829841) Homepage
    Combine this with the world's smallest TV transmitter [abra-electronics.com], and you're all set.


  • I remember talking about this in grade school all this dick tracy stuff. I touted it as being impractical and expensive, which it was but in retrospect were these guys ahead of there time or what. Well there is an museum peice for you. Put it right along side the star treck communicators.

  • not on ebay. (Score:2, Informative)

    by User 956 ( 568564 )
    the watch has become a bit of a rare item to find.

    tell that to this guy who's selling one for 200 bucks. [ebay.com]

  • Want one? (Score:1, Informative)

    by jfroot ( 455025 )
    There's one on Ebay [ebay.com] for auction [ebay.com].
  • It's always nice to get a visual confirmation of a through-slashdoting. "Warning: Too many connections in /staff/WWW/Dept/web/deadch/pn_714/html/pnadodb/dr ivers/adodb-mysql.inc.php on line 108

    Warning: MySQL Connection Failed: Too many connections in /staff/WWW/Dept/web/deadch/pn_714/html/pnadodb/dr ivers/adodb-mysql.inc.php on line 108 mysql://deadch:@euclid/deadch failed to connect Too many connections    " And I remember seeing a couple of these back in the day (TV Watches), nice idea for the gadget lover, but even then seemed kind of a waste for us practical people that prefer calculators on our watches. =P

  • I Sold Them! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 05, 2002 @05:06PM (#3829954)
    I was a salesman at Bel Air Camera in Los Angeles
    in 1982 and I remember selling these silly things.

    Actually I remember selling ONE. It was bought by
    David Hearst... Patty's brother. He wandered
    around Westwood looking at the stupid thing and
    bumping into people.
  • splat, there goes another site that uses a mysql backend.

    <preach>
    why don't people stick a line of code in their scripts that checks system load and disables databasey stuff while the system's getting hosed?
    </preach>
  • Captain Slash strikes again!! Warning: Too many connections in /staff/WWW/Dept/web/deadch/pn_714/html/pnadodb/dr ivers/adodb-mysql.inc.php on line 108 Warning: MySQL Connection Failed: Too many connections in /staff/WWW/Dept/web/deadch/pn_714/html/pnadodb/dr ivers/adodb-mysql.inc.php on line 108 mysql://deadch:@euclid/deadch failed to connectToo many connections http://www.cybercurator.com/ also deals with the seiko watch ... couldn't find a googled cache of the link in the article, or an archive.org mirror. -jms258
    • I'm not trying to sound like a troll, because I have no favorites, but why is it I see "Too many connections.." slammed websites that run on PHP/MySQL all the damn time, yet I don't remember ever seeing that on an ASP/SQL Server site? :\

  • Slashdotted (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Looks like the link is Slashdotted. You can check out more about it at this site:
    http://www.tvhistory.tv/Smallest%20TV.htm [tvhistory.tv]

    (Got it from the ebay add posted above)

  • a beowulf cluster on these.... ugh, nevermind just force of habit.
  • Come on, a story mentioning this thing showed up on the eternally spiffy memepool [memepool.com] just a couple of days ago. 5:1 odds the article poster got it from there without giving proper credit. Show some manners, people.
  • Ok, so it was a novelty item then and now, but even with its pocket receiver, it's still an amazing item for its time. Most electronics look obsolete less than a year after they're introduced - this baby still looks cutting edge today (well it does if you pretend the receiver wasn't there!)

    I remember as a kid when I got my first radio watch, and I was in love with it. Big ugly cheap thing, which could only pick up one band (medium wave) and its sensitivity was so poor that it could only pick up one local station that was very strong.
  • you can fit a cell phone into a hearing aid.
  • That's neat, but it should at least be cable ready! Or have RCA jacks so I can run linux on my xbox, keep it in my backpack powered by a fuel cell, and use X on my wrist-watch TV during commercials. Best of all, by the time all of the above is available, I might be able to afford it within only a few lifetimes.

    This would be cool, because I would assume that by now they could get it alot smaller (electronics part, not the screen because why would you want it?)
  • The idea of putting the main proccessing power (or tuner in this case) in a separate box is good. Technically, all the watch is is a screen, surely you could connect almost anything to it - a camera, a dvd player or even a computer. If you designed something like this with a touch screen, then you're set. I want to see a cheap, thin LCD touch screen (on a watch or in a star-trek style pad) with some kind of wireless system (bluetooth, infra red etc) or atleast a cable. You could then use it to access other devices while they're in your pocket or briefcase, such as your mp3 player, dvd player, laptop, camcorder or tv tuner. You could even use a wireless base-station. Basically it would be a dumb terminal, but a very cheap, tiny, and portable one. Obviously you'd need to sort out compatability between products, but it would make life so much easier.
  • This was up a few days ago on the excellent memepool.com [memepool.com]. Go take a look - you might like it.
  • I could have sworn it was Casio that made these! Maybe they came out with one too?

  • Computer Watch (Score:3, Interesting)

    by BoxJockey ( 50760 ) on Friday July 05, 2002 @06:47PM (#3830416)
    This reminded me of a watch I had long ago...It was a PDA/Organizer Computer Watch. It actually had a version of GW Basic in the rom, and 256k of RAM, I believe. Here's a british version on ebay http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item =941378559 [ebay.com]
  • And not so good either. With a small brick sized battery and antenna pack [si.edu], these were hardly the portable pieces they seem to be.
  • I still think that digital watches are a neat idea.
  • ... guess Guinan from StarTrek TNG has perfect and clear image .. with that dish on her head ...

  • I firmly believe TV is our 'circuses' and that fundamentalist Muslims are our Huns.
    I dumped my TV 6 months ago and I challenge all of you to do the same.

    The first week is pure hell.

    The second week you've got the shakes but you only think about it when Seinfeld reruns are on.

    After 3 weeks you begin posting heavily to /.

    {note: for this to work, you have to give the TV away}
  • Last year I made an effort to see if I could track any down. Seiko doesn't produce them anymore, and I could find any used ones for sale. I remember James Bond using one in Octopussy, and tried to find some places that might have some left over. If anyone know of a place to get one, please let me know.
  • ...they blew up Earth before he got the chance to buy one.

Slashdot Top Deals

The explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is the most likely to be correct. -- William of Occam

Close