Despite the big media splash leading up to its announcement, the Segway scooter (aka "Ginger", aka "IT") hasn't come anywhere close to meeting anticipated sales objectives.

It's another case of falling in love with a technology, and ignoring the real business issues. Too bad NASA can't take a lesson from it.

It's also a technology designed with 1990s venture capital in mind-- It doesn't have to show a profit anytime soon, because it's so insanely great that it'll eventually make all involved rich if enough money is thrown at it.

If it had been introduced immedately when the hype started, instead of waiting for a year for the economy to change, and people to not care anymore, it might have had a chance, too.

Now if they have any real smarts, they'll wait a few years, then market it to aging baby boomers as a mobility alternative to electric wheelchairs and "walkers" and all those things their parents are forced to use to get around

Ever notice how just about every high-technology personal transportation innovation fails to be an improvement on the bicycle?

Speaking as someone who's never driven a motorized vehicle (for almost 36 years now)... I agree that bicycles are great, but they have some fairly serious limitations as personal transport devices. Much of that is due to a general lack of accomodation for bikes/people who don't drive cars, but there are times when it seems there should be better solutions.

The Segway looked vaguely interesting, but all the discussion about banning it in various places around the country has made their demise inevitable. As good or bad an idea as the SHT is, I have to applaud them for at least trying.

I knew It was going to be a bust when I found out It did not have a cup holder.

The South Park variation sure looked promising, though. :-)

>Much of that is due to a general lack of accomodation for bikes/people who don't drive cars, but there are times when it seems there should be better solutions.

Oh, I'm all for improved solutions, but the sort of thing something like Segway needs (paths, a place to park) is pretty much the same as what bikes need.

The Segway doesn't have to be pedaled, and it can be leaned up against something in your cube at work when you plug it in, but other than that it doesn't seem to be a big jump over the bike.

Motorized horse carriages caught on because it's easier to care for a motor than for a horse, and because they originally used exactly the same roads as carriages. I just don't see a similar improvement of the Segway over a bike, especially an electrical moped bike.

I just don't see a similar improvement of the Segway over a bike, especially an electrical moped bike.

Except the Segway does the balancing automatically, and responds to the normal reflexive actions we all make for walking -- the skills required are very nearly zero. Plus it's easier to mount/dismount than a bike.

I'm with Raoul -- it's gonna be great for the old folks. (I say this as my own arthritis grows worse -- I'm already at a point where bikes are pretty much impossible.)

I'm still thinking golf courses. Wider, low ground pressure tires and a trailer. Or you could go the hi-tech route and incorporate one of those radio controlled self propelled golf bag buggies that track after a belt transmitter. And a cup holder would be trivially easy.

For $5000 you could buy a small on/off road motorcycle. Who would want an 80lb scooter with a range of 11 miles at 10mph? What was the proposed market? Weight lifters that don't like to walk? Old baby boomers could never carry the thing up or down stairs.