I would say that ultimately the Segway was a failure, but that perception is partially affected by the hyperbolic hype that preceded it. I wonder what its own inventors think.
How popular did they expect it to get? How did they expect people to use it? How did they not foresee the backlash to its incredible dorkiness? Would a smaller, handle-less form factor (like the Chinese clones now known as "hoverboards") have been possible with the battery technology of the time?
Segway will always be tainted for me by the hyperbole that surrounded its launch.
"Steve Jobs, Apple's co-founder, predicted that in future cities would be designed around the device"
This was said before any of us knew what 'Ginger' was due to the secrecy surrounding it and its marketing hype.
In this context, it is a failure. I've barely ever even seen one of the things in the wild, and certainly haven't seen any cities redesigned for the Segway.
Riding a Segway telegraphs either "I am fit enough to balance standing on a moving platform, yet rich enough to drop several grand on a vehicle whose only benefit over a bicycle is not having to move my legs," or "I have respiratory issues." At least today's so-called "hoverboards" and electric skateboards are an order of magnitude more affordable (and transportable).
I wonder if an inexpensive automated rental model (à la HubWay or other bicycle sharing systems) could have been successful in negating the "rich douche" image by eliminating the price barrier. As it was, the multi-grand price tag and overall impracticality screamed "entitled".
Mall cops and airport security also have them now, so that ship has more or less sailed. They still do Segway tours across the country in tourist trap areas. They're a novelty with some limited niche commercial uses.
It feels like failures on the scale of Segway are now pretty run of the mill. They "only" raised a 166MUSD [1]. Doesn't really compare to modern failures like Theranos, 686MUSD.
Hm. Calling it a failure is pretty strong. It is used. What hindered it was a) the expensive price and b) at least in many country it was/is illegal to use. Is it like a bike? Or like a motor vehicle and needs insurance and license tag? A drivers license? Can you ride it on pavement or do you have to use the street?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/11926027/Hoverboa....
> like the Chinese clones
A bit sad: Segway inc was bought up by one of these Chinese clone companies (Ninebot) for its patents.
I think the only way it really could have been revolutionary is if it were faster, smaller, lighter, and safer (both for riders and for people around them) at once. Think of something that doesn't measurably increase a human's form factor, slows to human speeds when around walkers but can go much faster otherwise, packs down to be easily carried, etc. Then you'd have the use case where an individual person could take walkways for car-commute distances. But since that wasn't possible, it ended up being a worst-of-many worlds kind of device - too unsafe (for riders) for roads, too unsafe (for pedestrians) for sidewalks, too slow (in practice) for its cost, too expensive for its benefits, too heavy, etc, etc.
How popular did they expect it to get? How did they expect people to use it? How did they not foresee the backlash to its incredible dorkiness? Would a smaller, handle-less form factor (like the Chinese clones now known as "hoverboards") have been possible with the battery technology of the time?