Talk:NeuroSky

Some blatant copying/promo going on
Either someone's copied a lot of this article from a promotional text or the writer is affiliated and possibly promoting the product. It's very easy to see 82.132.139.212 (talk) 01:11, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree. I have POVed the article. The importance of the company timeline section is questionable. The article also contains a long list of products which I think is undue weight. Tesatafi (talk) 13:33, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

There has been nothing on the critical awareness of the function of the hardware and software, notably its lack of stability, the problems in getting RMAs to return the hardware, the frankly amateur quality of the sofware that is provided. I note that criticisms of the software about not being commercial standard, which were in the main text, have been deleted. The article is mostly a promotional and obviously written by Neurosky, What bad PR for them! The entry is otherwise a complete fluff piece. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.135.8.203 (talk) 12:22, 24 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, this article is basically fluff. No way it's even C-class. Downgrading here, and tagging with a more appropriate ambox about it being an advert. But somebody's got to clean this up. &mdash;/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 20:46, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

I came to this page looking for information on what NeuroSky does, and instead was subjected to a lot of PR fluff. I don't see how this could NOT be promotional given that there's an entire section devoted to "competitors" and how neurosky is better than them. Maybe this could be turned into a shorter article with more substantive content. 98.204.66.132 (talk) 18:08, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Updating
This page needs some updating. NeuroSky does sell their products to the public and also has developer packages. The game mentioned in 'Capabilities' is called NeuroBoy.

What's the deal? This isn't advertising.


 * What are you talking about? There's this magical machine known as the "Internet" that will give you lots of information about what ever you want. It seems to know a lot about NeuroSky. This isn't "shining" above the rest. There are is at least one other bio-neural interface on the market or near there. Also, sign your posts properly.--66.93.220.66 17:19, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Their tech seems really interesting, and I'm waiting for more info to come along. Sentineneve 15:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

It does read a little biased. Take this sentence: What makes NeuroSky and similar companies today shine above the rest is the promise of shrinking the technology and the cost which will allow it to be marketed to every day consumers. How about something more neutral. For example, "This technology is possible because prices have fallen dramatically." 66.93.220.66 03:39, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I think instead of "shine above the rest" it is meant to state more like "stand out". Eiher way, we know that through time products become better and cheaper so maybe this statement is not needed.

Can't think of any other reason why its flagged :-|

Similar Company
A similar company which seems to be a bit more popular is Emotiv. Check their site for more info on the tehcnology since NeuroSky's site is extremely small. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.200.34.177 (talk) 19:12, 30 April 2007 (UTC).

Changes
NeuroSky also has their own software, the e-sense algorithm library, which interprets the signals and translates them into logic commands for gaming.

This was nixed because it doesn't have a great deal of relevance to this as an encyclopedia article. So the company provides an SDK. That's nice.

What makes NeuroSky and similar companies today shine above the rest is the promise of shrinking the technology and the cost which will allow it to be marketed to every day consumers.

That sentence doesn't make sense. It says that bio-neuro interface companies are shining above themselves.

Stanley Yang intends to shrink the electrode down to the size of a thumbnail so the user may wear the device unnoticed.

That's great. Bother us with it when it happens. --66.93.220.66 17:25, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Promotional
I am sorry, but this article still reads more like an advertisement than anything else. Clearly this company has no shame and is willing to use Wikipedia as their advertising front. This is unacceptable and Wikipedia should not tolerate it. I have long gone to Wikipedia to get unbiased, neutral information about things and more and more when I visit it I feel like I am reading a promotional sponsored by the company itself. To think that I donated to Wikipedia to keep it independent and yet, despite this, I notice that Wikipedia is becoming more and more bias and corporate influenced and yet little is being done about it. In its early days WIkipedia had a system that did a good job defending itself against the occasional troll and vandal that wished to make what they thought were humorous and entertaining (to them) changes to articles. By requiring sources and having peer reviewers it did a good job defending itself against really bad mistakes and errors made as a result of ignorance or incompetence. Wikipedia is well designed to defend itself against individual attacks but as corporations became more aware of its impact it has become increasingly clear that it is unable to defend itself against corporations, with undue political and legal influence and with teams of lawyers that can threaten it with expensive lawsuits, even if Wikipedia could eventually win (assuming it can afford to defend itself), that hire teams of staff to modify articles in their best interests. Wikipedia is no longer the reliable source of unbiased information it used to be. It is very sad to see this. Addendum: I later noticed the top warning message indicating that this article looks too much like a advertisement. Due to this warning I take back most of my criticism against Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.109.144.159 (talk) 15:56, 15 April 2013 (UTC)