@mr-vince I figured I would give it a few days to let all the all the retards get their gibberish out.
I think you are saying I am not being pooled with the "retards." Well, I appreciate the sentiment, but calling people retards will not persuade others to your side. I do feel that @readysetawesome and @skyman88 and others had some valid points. I would not call them retards.
Thats fine and all that none of you like the idea, but I do find it odd that you all seem morally opposed to it being tested, and prototyping it... it wold cost nothing and the time would be minimal. The worst that could happen is that they would have a new product to sell.
I do want to concede that others (myself included) was a little too quick to slap down your no gyro idea. I think most of it is from real world experience. I have jumped on my OW unaware it was off and almost fell on my face.
Something you should know is that I build prototypes as part of my day job. It's so funny how a project manager, an electrical engineer and even the company president would come up to me and give me their concept for their new product with the most abstract ideas and leave it to me to hash out the hundreds of details. What often happens is that I ask those difficult questions that bring reality to them like a slap in the face. That is what I am doing to you. You have the abstract concept "no gyro with a trigger throttle" and I am asking the harsh questions that a mechanical engineer would ask to try and make your idea a reality.
So I ASK...
A more responsive remote will require a lot more throw than a standard e-skateboard remote. In fact if you watch reviews on eskateboards, you will find that the biggest complaint is that the throw of the throttle is too short so the eskate lurches forward or breaks too hard throwing the rider off balance. So how much more throw and what shape will the remote be? So the remote will need to be engineered from scratch. Perhaps more like a motorcycle brake handle or clutch since you seem to like to refer to motorcycles so much. and that's just in one direction, how will this throttle handle input for forwards and backwards? How will the user know where center of the throttle is where it is neither going forward or backward? How much tension is needed to provide the user with good positive feedback and still have the responsiveness of 14,000 inputs per second? So you see, it is not as easy and small investment as you think it would be. That's just the physical throttle. Still requiring engineering would be the electronics and software for the remote to ensure there is no latency (Latency is also a big complaint with eskate remotes) and a solid wireless connection. Maybe even some low level AI to anticipate your what you are trying to do with you fingers and to eliminate possible mistakes like squeezing the throttle hard when you loose your balance. Not to mention that the board was never designed to be remotely controlled, so the firmware will need a rewrite to make that possible. I work with electrical engineers with over 30 years experience each and we design circuit boards all the time. When we prototype a circuit board it cost us $500 to have 3-5 fabricated. We usually get the design wrong or need a tweek after the proto comes in so we redesign again, and pay another 500. Some PCB go through 3 to 6 versions until we have the final form factor at $500 each version. That's not even counting the man hours. So it's not "nothing." to make something new.
Then there is the board itself. The XR is already at the upper limits of what the hub motor can output with the battery supply it has. A "responsive throttle" will also require a motor that can output a lot more torque within milliseconds. So the hub motor would need to be re-engineered to supply that larger torque demand. The board would need to be re-balanced so that it is not tail heavy, or not so much tail heavy. That requires further engineering to move components around.
So you see, if you really hash out the concept, even just a little bit like I have you will see that what you ask is actually a lot of rework and redesign to make possible. It would cost significantly more than "nothing." This is why managers and the engineers both love and hate me at work. I slap them with reality. Don't even get me started about when the prototype I make meets what they want and we start talking about manufacturing...
I think part of the problem is the tone of arrogance you put out on your post. Perhaps, give a bit of humility and people would be more willing to listen to you. I have read your post history, this has been mentioned to you before.
I will close with this
That being said this is an awesome idea/product, and I will probably get one after they have been out for a bit longer.
You posted that almost three years ago. Actually in a couple of weeks it will be three years. Since then the board has had three released iterations and many firmware updates. Some of the suggestions you made on the post above have actually been implemented or third parties provide them. So what are you waiting for????