This thing is bloody awesome. Definitely not vaporwear, as my wife saw it demo this past January.

who the hell keeps giving these morons money?

Um. Why does it have to be a ring? Isn't this basically what the Wii remote does? The ring seems to do less and take up more space.

It's kind of sexy...and I detect it has really good potential for throwing at people's heads when they act up.

Now how does one "point" a ring?

I'd definitely consider a universal remote that works like mouse gestures: I program the motion/trigger, the resultant signal goes out. I consider this a massive improvement over Hunt-The-Button.

While the CNet article doesn't sound like this is the case, one can always hope.

OK. First I'm going to look like an idiot using the Wiimote. Now I'm going to look like more of an idiot tring to change the video input to play the Wii.

I reserve judgement on this remote until I use it.

That said, I find it very hard to believe that I will prefer using anything at all instead of my Harmony 880. That is the greatest remote ever, I highly suggest that anyone who doesn't own one already go buy one right now. We'll wait.

Here's a link to get you started...

http://froogle.google.com/froogle?q=harmony%20880&ie=UTF-8...

I think the couch potatoes will be happy with this product if it results in a decrease of physical exertion to change channels.

I will not be satisfied until I have a pair of hands worth of power rings to use on you lowly HU-MANs a la the Mandarin.

Don't worry, I'll wear something else then that gawdawful purple cod-piece when I am being viewed by the grubs of earth.

Set your Powerpoint phasers on stunning!

Yeah but sorry a ring isn't going to do more to make it easier to control a TV, cable box, and reciever. Changing channels now is a push of the favorite channel button.
This is something that's different, but not better or easier than what's out there already. People need a backlit universal remote that the company will program for you via Internet if you call and tell them the model numbers of what you have.
That's what's easier, not putting it into a ring or anything else. Big, readable, backlit, color coded buttons for the common things, not to make a remote any more cryptic than it already is.
I think we've reached a technology saturation point like, the Ipod, where ease of use counts more and is the only way to compete rather than just more crap packed into the box.
Any of these MP3 players, universal remotes, cars, anything have reached the limits as far as the technology arms race goes. Places like Apple are the winners because they make an MP3 player that people like to use, not because it has Wifi or other crap. It's easy to use and understand it. This is harder, we want easier.

I would pass it up for something exactly like what I already have -- a Philips Pronto T1000. It takes a good chunk of time to custom code the thing, but MAN is it sweet when it all comes together...

As demo'd last year at CES, the loop isn't a standalone remote replacement. It's part of a new U-I and it requires dedicated HW to receive and process its signals.

Put together, the whole system is very impressive, but unless there's something radically new since last year, it's not really an option for replacing your remote.

The inane crap on TV already has me swearing at the screen. With the Loop, I can change the channel by giving my TV the finger!

I used to have the harmony 550 and now Im using the 880, great remotes but you still have the problem of having to look for the buttons, either by touch or by looking (and there goes your comfortable position on the couch!), but the ring is basically using sign language to communicate, next best thing to voice recognition i think!

I read Gizmodo religiously, but I've never seen you guys so miss the mark as on this one. I've been tracking these guys for a couple of years, and have met with their CEO several times, a couple of times with my telco or cable clients along, and I will say that the Hillcrest technology will probably be one of the single biggest transforming technologies to hit the TV in decades. My rationale is here is my column on Network World from last year: http://www.networkworld.com/edge/columnists/2005/0523bleed...

If you guys had really been tracking the leading edge, you would know that this CE division has actually existed for a long time at CES, and contrary to them getting on the bandwagon of Wii, had major CE customers signed a while ago. I can tell you that the signed list is pretty amazing. I'll just get my butt sued off if I name them.

In any case, the point about Hillcrest is that this is the mouse for the TV -- finally. All the people that have tried this before failed because the technology did not work (read: Gyration). If someone is going to critique this, try replace "TV" with "PC" and imagine surfing the Web won your PC ith your up/down/left/right buttons -- you can't. The Web would not have happened without the mouse. The killer app for the TV is not TV, it's shopping and other Web destinations, in an open (not closed garden) way, and 50-inch plasmas are going to transform that experience. But you cannot have Amazon or eBay on your TV without the ability to easily scroll, point, and buy. You need a mouse.

I sat down and previewed this technology with the CTO of the largest telephone company in America, and the response from him was typical -- this is a seachange for the TV. So before you start panning it, imagine this technology not in their prototype model, but say in a gun, and panning left moves the screen left....and firing is accurate right away...what does that do to gaming adoption among non-adopters for first person shooting games? How about a Mickey Mouse controller that kids can use to change channels, or visit ToonTown.

This is not about a better remote, it's about replacing the remote entirely. Consumers hate their remotes, especially the elderly who can't see the buttons, especially in the dark. I have 11 remotes on my entertainment center. A universal remote is not the answer, any more than programming my TV. The TV application on-screen needs to change. The remote is going to be sucked into the TV application interface, it has to, because the day of a new button per application (think add buttons for VCR, search, DVR, etc) are gone. You'll use on-screen icons for fast forwarding, etc. This all becomes 'soft' in the TV, not 'hard' in your remote. So new changes can be made with a download. If you guys are really leading edge and you care anything about the TV, you'd understand what a paradigm shift is happening here.

Psh microe, my Infinity Gauntlet remote is totally better than your Mandarin one.

Seriously though, I thought a remote was supposed to make things easier for you? If I have to learn new gestures and everything how is that easier than the simple point and click that I do now?

Wasn't this *exact* product noted at CES last year? You guys are 11 months late. Can't wait to see what they intend to point at - doesn't seem like a pointer would work with current TV UIs. Think about it.

I'm very much skeptical that this "ring" would even fit on my humongous fingers. I'll stick to my Harmony remote, tyvm.