Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Beartooth

beartooth.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 152 posts

Re: Beartooth

#11

Post by csomar »

linksbro wrote: post #4

It transmits via some sub-1ghz free spectrum bands, which travel a good distance and have decent structure penetration. https://beartooth.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/216797018-Wh... This is why unlicensed spectrum bands are great; they allow for stuff like this to be built without a billion dollar spectrum price tag.

I don't think 2 miles is a good travel distance. (or maybe it is from a technical perspective but not from a practical one).

That would assume lots of users which I feel can be problematic with a $399 price range and big form factor.

Re: Beartooth

#13

Post by baldfat »

csomar wrote: post #7

I can see a chicken-egg problem here. Without enough users (probably millions), this device is useless. If the device is useless now, it makes no sense to purchase it. The pricing doesn't help either: $249! (and $399 after pre-sale). Assuming 10 million a good number to kickstart this thing and make it useful in many locations, they'll need to make a few billion dollars sales in the next couple years.

If it replaces walkie talkies in rural areas you only need your friends to have them. I know in the Adirondack Mountains in NY has very spotty signal and would be great with a few friends. Currently we use walkie talkies that have a 23 mile range. They cost as a pair $43 on Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001UE6MIO/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_d...) and they are single purpose and really don't need to worry about battery life.

Re: Beartooth

#14

Post by debacle »

csomar wrote: post #7

I can see a chicken-egg problem here. Without enough users (probably millions), this device is useless. If the device is useless now, it makes no sense to purchase it. The pricing doesn't help either: $249! (and $399 after pre-sale). Assuming 10 million a good number to kickstart this thing and make it useful in many locations, they'll need to make a few billion dollars sales in the next couple years.

Could seed metro networks with hubs. The need for additional hubs would grow with the number of users, which are in themselves hubs. You could cover most of NYC for a few thousand dollars a month and see adoption grow.

Re: Beartooth

#15

Post by melling »

csomar wrote: post #11
linksbro wrote: post #4

It transmits via some sub-1ghz free spectrum bands, which travel a good distance and have decent structure penetration. https://beartooth.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/216797018-Wh... This is why unlicensed spectrum bands are great; they allow for stuff like this to be built without a billion dollar spectrum price tag.

I don't think 2 miles is a good travel distance. (or maybe it is from a technical perspective but not from a practical one). That would assume lots of users which I feel can be problematic with a $399 price range and big form factor.

This is why selling to consumers is difficult. Consumers complaining about price is a given. An enterprise solution could be sold for much more.

Solving a business pain vs a consumer nice-to-have.

Re: Beartooth

#16

Post by baldfat »

kin wrote: post #8

Would love to see this in action as it solves my music festival communication woes. The price tag is a little steep though for adoption.

Try buying a bunch of two ways on amazon. You can get 6 of them for $150 and they work for 10 hours on 2 AA batteries and have a 23 mile range.

Re: Beartooth

#17

Post by freehunter »

csomar wrote: post #11
linksbro wrote: post #4

It transmits via some sub-1ghz free spectrum bands, which travel a good distance and have decent structure penetration. https://beartooth.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/216797018-Wh... This is why unlicensed spectrum bands are great; they allow for stuff like this to be built without a billion dollar spectrum price tag.

I don't think 2 miles is a good travel distance. (or maybe it is from a technical perspective but not from a practical one). That would assume lots of users which I feel can be problematic with a $399 price range and big form factor.

I've been trying to solve an issue similar to what Beartooth is doing, and 2 miles is amazing range. Bear in mind, these aren't huge towers hundreds of feet above the ground with 50kWh power sources and million dollar price tags, they're battery-powered, handheld, and consumer-priced. And cell towers with all the advantages listed only travel less than 20 miles. 2 miles with those limitations is a great distance.

I think maybe you're looking at the wrong use case. This doesn't replace GSM, it replaces walkie-talkies (or rather updates it for the text-based world). The use case is you and your friends are at an event downtown and cell service goes out (like it does when the sites are oversubscribed). You're camping and there's no service that far in the woods. You're in a disaster and trying to find your loved ones. It's short range communications, not long-distance calling.

Ham radio would go farther, but sending encrypted communications over ham radio is illegal, so that's right out. This is the next best thing.

Re: Beartooth

#18

Post by ryanberg »

csomar wrote: post #7

I can see a chicken-egg problem here. Without enough users (probably millions), this device is useless. If the device is useless now, it makes no sense to purchase it. The pricing doesn't help either: $249! (and $399 after pre-sale). Assuming 10 million a good number to kickstart this thing and make it useful in many locations, they'll need to make a few billion dollars sales in the next couple years.

From what I see, this isn't about creating a mesh network for many users, its about enabling communication with your friends or co-workers in places where there isn't network access. So in that sense, there is no chicken-egg problem. I was just wishing for something like this when skiing in Whistler last weekend so I could communicate with my friends without using int'l data/roaming.

Re: Beartooth

#19

Post by tetrep »

csomar wrote: post #7

I can see a chicken-egg problem here. Without enough users (probably millions), this device is useless. If the device is useless now, it makes no sense to purchase it. The pricing doesn't help either: $249! (and $399 after pre-sale). Assuming 10 million a good number to kickstart this thing and make it useful in many locations, they'll need to make a few billion dollars sales in the next couple years.

Yeah, the promise of "do things when you don't have signal" is predicated on a chain of people with these devices existing all the way from where you are to where a cell phone signal is. Which means you need to go to popular outdoorsy places, which (IMO) are intrinsically less interesting due to being around other people.

Re: Beartooth

#20

Post by ianburrell »

goTenna, gotenna.com, is an existing device that does the same thing. Interesting that both goTenna and Beartooth are only sold as pairs.
Post reply on HN