Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

IPOD KILLER!!

crazytom

crazytom

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jul 23, 2002
524
0
IL
Ha, ha. Made you look! :D

But seriously, I saw this today and it looks really cool:

Oakley Thump

A bit pricey, though. $395 for the 128Mb and $545 for the 256Mb model. I like Oakley sunglasses, but that's out of my league!!!
 
crazytom said:
A bit pricey, though. $395 for the 128Mb and $545 for the 256Mb model.
Click to expand...

I was like WTF? And people say the iPod cost a lot?!

But then I saw this:

crazytom said:
I like Oakley sunglasses, but that's out of my league!!!
Click to expand...

So there glasses, eh? Interesting concept.
 
Pretty neat Crazytom!

Though a bit strange to use it when indoors. If it was BOTH sunglasses and regular glasses (in addition to the music) that would be cool.

But still like the iPod, so not really a killer. Just my two cents though...
 
I have one and only one thing to say about these pieces:


YYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!!
left_main_image.jpg
 
These have been out for a while now. They are way over priced, and not the greatest to use/ wear. A bad idea in general if you ask me.
 
Another stupid idea that some sad person will buy because they have too much money and want to try and impress people. Very sad.
 
Trying too hard to catch the train to Coolsville. Stumbled and got run over instead.
 
Actually, they're quite irritating, and rather annoying. Ive tried a pair on, and after fidgeting for an hour to get the distance right, as soon as i started walking, the earphones would move out of position and give you horridly unbalanced sound. Not to mention the poor quality earpeices.

It sorta reminds me of the Sony Glasstron (i believe) basically, goggles with lcd panels in them and earphones, horribly expensive, horribly heavy, horribly... well just plain horrible!
 
I'm not sure why anyone would even want to try them on.. both of the models look like they're in excruciating pain.

It looks like an R and D project that got in little too far, turned out to be crap but they throw it on the market anyways... anyone who'd pay $200 for a pair of Oakley's in the first place couldn't be too bright.
 

Attachments

  • 1.jpg
    1.jpg
    31.1 KB · Views: 118
  • metzger.jpg
    metzger.jpg
    12.6 KB · Views: 130
My last pair of sunglasses, I left on the top of my bugatti and drove off. It was only $30 but I was still pissed. If I lose a $300 pair, I'd be in a murderous rage.
 
Lacero said:
My last pair of sunglasses, I left on the top of my bugatti and drove off. It was only $30 but I was still pissed. If I lose a $300 pair, I'd be in a murderous rage.
Click to expand...

man -- so far i've lost since 2001

Prices are in Canadian Dollars

265$ pair of oakleys that i spent an additional 125$ to have the scratched lenses replaced with Polarized ones <-- lost them in a shopping mall

215$ pair of Boley sunglasses with interchangable lenses for varies ski conditions <-- fell out of my shirt pocket in an airplane

200$ frame + 100$ sunglass clip + 200$ for perscription lenses total 500$ <-- lost them swimming in the ocean

Now -- you would think that would teach me, to either pay more attention, or buy cheaper sunglasses

but no ... i bought another pair of 200$ maximize sunglasses last year after i lost the Oakleys (i love polarized lenses)

CONCLUSION <-- i'm a stupid, stupid man
 
They are not...

trademarking the name of the element. they are trademarking the use of the name of the element in reference to any variation of their product.

just FYI..

technocoy
 
revenuee said:
man -- so far i've lost since 2001

Prices are in Canadian Dollars

265$ pair of oakleys that i spent an additional 125$ to have the scratched lenses replaced with Polarized ones <-- lost them in a shopping mall

215$ pair of Boley sunglasses with interchangable lenses for varies ski conditions <-- fell out of my shirt pocket in an airplane

200$ frame + 100$ sunglass clip + 200$ for perscription lenses total 500$ <-- lost them swimming in the ocean

Now -- you would think that would teach me, to either pay more attention, or buy cheaper sunglasses

but no ... i bought another pair of 200$ maximize sunglasses last year after i lost the Oakleys (i love polarized lenses)

CONCLUSION <-- i'm a stupid, stupid man
Click to expand...

Holy crap, man! Over a $1,000 Canadian bucks in sunglasses!? Thats like $200 US dollars, or like $50 Euros. :D

Just kidding. I can can totally relate. I've owned maybe two pairs of expensive sunglasses in my life and I just lose them within a week or so. Now I refuse to buy the expensive ones. I just drop $10 bucks on them and if I lose them, no big deal. Hopefully I get a couple of weeks out of them.
 
Regardless of how fast i would lose or sit on them. I think it looks kind of un-cool to wear sunglasses when the sun doesn't shine. Even flipped open
girl.jpg

We don't get that much sun here in .be.

Lacero said:
My last pair of sunglasses, I left on the top of my bugatti and drove off. It was only $30 but I was still pissed. If I lose a $300 pair, I'd be in a murderous rage.
Click to expand...
Just buy yourself another pare of oakleys for in car use. I do hope your car has a decent sound system you can use with the top of. :p
 
Yup, this is old news... This was introduced last year I believe. Anyway, it's still overpriced. To save a few hundred, simply buy a good pair of sunglasses and glue an iPod shuffle on the side. Easy..........
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back