I don't see this bike solving any problems that a simple smartphone mount wouldn't. It seems short sighted to put all of the technology in something as expensive as the frame.
It's traditional "improve the bicycle" design fluff. Whenever you see integrated anything on a bike, you know the designer isn't thinking about service life or tweakability or any of the other things that makes bikes so cool.
I'd like to see haptic directions in Wear though - buzz once for left, twice for right.
You could buy two such full featured smart watches and it'd probably still be cheaper and less maintenance than building it into the bike. Actually, the dev kit for Glass could well be cheaper too.
As a bike rider, I'm not sure why these bike design things get so viral. Is it like food shows where people who don't cook watch people making impractically extravagant dishes?
The author uses "peddle" instead of "pedal" twice, and thinks bicycles have a confusing number of levers to figure out. I think it's safe to say they don't know what they're talking about.
Obviously, but enough to base their bike purchase around that aspect? Most people I know who ride a lot and spend up on their bikes use them primarily for commuting (they know the route) or exercise (know the route or are riding with friends who know). Again, sample set is just those I know, but they still drive if they're heading to a meeting or event at a new location.
Well, sample size of one but I ride bikes to new locations. However, I have my phone's GPS in case I get lost. It helps a lot that the city I live in has a good bike share system and is fairly compact, so cycling is often the fastest option. I don't own a car, either, so I might not be the ideal respondent to your question.