The current seatbelts we use are not broken. Why fix them?
If we want to improve safety, we should focus on getting people to actually USE them. We all know people who buckle them before sitting down on top of them. They'll do the same thing with this particular "innovation." The way to do that is to figure out a clever ignition lock-out that won't let the car start until the drive is actually buckled in, not sitting atop a seatbelt. If anyone could figure that out, it's Apple. (And I don't mean those "passive restraint" belts we had in the '90s, before airbags. Everyone hated them.)
You could say that about every single fucking product category before Apple entered that market and either completely reinvented it, or set a new bar that everyone scrambled to then meet.
Seatbelts are decades old, without a single change. Why do you think that's the best anyone can do? Don't we have better insights and tools and technology and knowledge now than we did when the seatbelt was 1st invented? Why not make it better?
Also, if someone doesn't want to wear a seatbelt, why should we worry about forcing them to protect themselves if they don't give a shit about their own safety? There's only so much you can do.
I heard Apple was going to add the seatbelt to iCloud. If you don’t pay your monthly, seatbelt disables. If you pay your monthly the seatbelt sometimes works! 😂🤣😜
How about a Magsafe seatbelt, basically an Apple variant on Fidlock buckles? They are extremely easy to buckle and unbuckle.
I think you don’t want it to be extremely easy to unbuckle. That’ll be quite something when you’re in an accident.
You want them to be easy to unbuckle intentionally, but very hard to unbuckle accidentally. Maybe magnets could be involved, but it'd have to be very different from the current MagSafe implementations.
How about a Magsafe seatbelt, basically an Apple variant on Fidlock buckles? They are extremely easy to buckle and unbuckle.
I think you don’t want it to be extremely easy to unbuckle. That’ll be quite something when you’re in an accident.
You want them to be easy to unbuckle intentionally, but very hard to unbuckle accidentally. Maybe magnets could be involved, but it'd have to be very different from the current MagSafe implementations.
I'm not sure magnets could be involved since the buckle is near pockets which often has ferrous metal in them and even clothing can have ferrous metal.
How about a Magsafe seatbelt, basically an Apple variant on Fidlock buckles? They are extremely easy to buckle and unbuckle.
I think you don’t want it to be extremely easy to unbuckle. That’ll be quite something when you’re in an accident.
You want them to be easy to unbuckle intentionally, but very hard to unbuckle accidentally. Maybe magnets could be involved, but it'd have to be very different from the current MagSafe implementations.
I'm not sure magnets could be involved since the buckle is near pockets which often has ferrous metal in them and even clothing can have ferrous metal.
The front belts aren't all that near the pockets. Even for the others, I'm sure that can be designed around if Apple want to take the time.
How about a Magsafe seatbelt, basically an Apple variant on Fidlock buckles? They are extremely easy to buckle and unbuckle.
I think you don’t want it to be extremely easy to unbuckle. That’ll be quite something when you’re in an accident.
You want them to be easy to unbuckle intentionally, but very hard to unbuckle accidentally. Maybe magnets could be involved, but it'd have to be very different from the current MagSafe implementations.
I'm not sure magnets could be involved since the buckle is near pockets which often has ferrous metal in them and even clothing can have ferrous metal.
The front belts aren't all that near the pockets. Even for the others, I'm sure that can be designed around if Apple want to take the time.
Right, because spending millions of dollars re-engineering a $2 item that already accomplishes the desired function simply and effectively would be a great use of resources. Using a magnet for the purpose of restraining a person in the event of a collision would almost surely necessitate a powered electro magnet, in order to maintain a sufficiently strong connection when sudden, powerful forces are applied to the restraint. That then would introduce magnetic fields that would likely interfere with pacemakers and other nearby electronics. It would also require the design of a power source that could not be interrupted during a collision, lest the restraint come loose the moment a wire is broken or disconnected somewhere in the vehicle, which is just the sort of thing that happens in automotive collisions. Or, they could stick with the simple metal buckle that, without further engineering, has already been demonstrated to reliably remain connected, without power, in all sorts of collisions with myriad anticipated and unanticipated variables occurring during said collisions.
Here we have, once again, people dreaming up things that run counter to Apple's well-established design ethos. They never replace a simpler design with a more complex one, just for the sake of introducing technological bells and whistles. The patent referenced in this article is in no way seeking to do anything like that. They are merely lighting up the existing buckle device to emphasize the importance of its use, and nominally to make it easier to find, especially in a dark car at night. There is no need to also replace the extremely simple and effective snap-in metal buckle, which if it didn't already exist, Apple would create, because it just works.
Comments
You could say that about every single fucking product category before Apple entered that market and either completely reinvented it, or set a new bar that everyone scrambled to then meet.
Seatbelts are decades old, without a single change. Why do you think that's the best anyone can do? Don't we have better insights and tools and technology and knowledge now than we did when the seatbelt was 1st invented? Why not make it better?
Also, if someone doesn't want to wear a seatbelt, why should we worry about forcing them to protect themselves if they don't give a shit about their own safety? There's only so much you can do.
Here we have, once again, people dreaming up things that run counter to Apple's well-established design ethos. They never replace a simpler design with a more complex one, just for the sake of introducing technological bells and whistles. The patent referenced in this article is in no way seeking to do anything like that. They are merely lighting up the existing buckle device to emphasize the importance of its use, and nominally to make it easier to find, especially in a dark car at night. There is no need to also replace the extremely simple and effective snap-in metal buckle, which if it didn't already exist, Apple would create, because it just works.