Regarding the touchscreen, I think thats the wrong way to go. In my mind, this device should be the simplest possible design. Using a touchscreen would be like trying to compete with phones, why? You will only consume more power without any added funcionality. The wallet only needs an alphanumeric display, hopefully a very low consumption lcd, not a graphics display.
In my mind, a wallet should not be fancy, but simple, secure, and hopefully zero defect design. The less variables you introduce, the easier to reach that objective. I really think of Casio as my business model. They sell calculators and watches that have zero programming defects. In the last 20 years they sell basically the same thing, and it works. Why? Beacuse they do what they promise. Allways. And they are cheap, consume little power, are durable, and so on.
A wallet should also have the same paradigm. The funcionality is well known, the bitcoin protocoll should be more or less the same, it will not change much over the years.
To me this is a totally opposite business model as phones. The less fancy complexity, the better. You should make a strong, very strong statement as to being different from phones and computers. Why? Beacuse phones and computers allready run bitcoin, and they are expensive and not secure. The less things in common you have with phones and computers, the easier to create a market for the product.
What you want to communicate is inexpensive simplicity, reliablity, and security. A casio Bitcoin Wallet.
I am not a developer nor a designer, but If I were developing the device, I would spend most of my time thinking of how to remove functionality and complexity from my device (casio model), as opposed to how to add funcionality and complexity (the phone bussiness model).
I agree with you there on that the less fancy the better, but there needs to be a certain level of usability in order of it to be viable. I could of corse, make all features optional, and like I've said before, I'm going to be building a distro from the kernel up, so there is not much worry as to reduced functionality. If there is significant demand for an extremely reduced design, then Ill produce one. And the point of the ouch screen is because I can get one on the cheap, and it provides a more natural interface then using everything with you keyboard. Im estimating a total cost of the prototype to be around $100-200, but the actual production cost could be as low as $50-75 and I would be using an In my mind, a wallet should not be fancy, but simple, secure, and hopefully zero defect design. The less variables you introduce, the easier to reach that objective. I really think of Casio as my business model. They sell calculators and watches that have zero programming defects. In the last 20 years they sell basically the same thing, and it works. Why? Beacuse they do what they promise. Allways. And they are cheap, consume little power, are durable, and so on.
A wallet should also have the same paradigm. The funcionality is well known, the bitcoin protocoll should be more or less the same, it will not change much over the years.
To me this is a totally opposite business model as phones. The less fancy complexity, the better. You should make a strong, very strong statement as to being different from phones and computers. Why? Beacuse phones and computers allready run bitcoin, and they are expensive and not secure. The less things in common you have with phones and computers, the easier to create a market for the product.
What you want to communicate is inexpensive simplicity, reliablity, and security. A casio Bitcoin Wallet.
I am not a developer nor a designer, but If I were developing the device, I would spend most of my time thinking of how to remove functionality and complexity from my device (casio model), as opposed to how to add funcionality and complexity (the phone bussiness model).
Im thinking of calling it the Bit-It (a combination of bitcoin and wallet), but im not the best with names.
