Hacker News Reader

Comment by Pamar | Hacker News Reader

I am sorry, Sam. You just reinvented cargo pants. :P

Only for the most broad definition of cargo pants.

Cargo pants are a style that emphasizes the size and bulk of the pockets to telegraph maximum utility. That is definitely not the case here. These seemed to be intended to provide a balance of utility with only minimal bulk.

I have had various pants over the last 15 years or so with variations of this pocket. When wearing them I keep my phone there and it is a relief. This avoids the pressure and breaking risk of the upper pockets and it avoids the unnecessary flopping around from a cargo pocket.

It was a bit tongue in cheek but the actual gist of my comment was (as demonstrated by the deluge of suggestions, especially hicker's and carpenter's styles) is that there was not enough investigation for prior art unless the whole piece was an attempt to get HN to provide it.

And the problem with putting cargo in your cargo pants is that it swings when you walk. I have aome great Kuhl pants with similar pocket design, but it's awkward to walk with my phone there.

I could perhaps get used to it, especially if they fit a bit tighter as his seem to.

I have what over here in .uk tend to be referred to as "combat trousers", where the side pockets are reasonably spacious (I can fit a 7" tablet in one, though it then doesn't close and I can't get anything else in there) but not sufficiently so that they swing.

The only annoying thing is finding ones where everything including the hip pocket linings are made of the same heavy material, there are too many where that lining is normal smart trouser pocket material and tear through long before the rest of the trousers are showing noticeable wear.

Combats also tend to be closer fitting than US "Cargo pants" and can even look quite smart.

Right, with a decent pair of shoes combats and a button down shirt can approximate smart casual nicely.

Admittedly, the shoes I've settled on have a deep tread and steel toe caps, but neither of those really show if you aren't looking for them :D

The pocket opening is placed where the pants are still close fit around the thigh -- I've experienced no swinging or banging of the contents.

Great. They do look very impressive. Pants are hard. (They look easy but there's actually a lot of construction.)

Cargo pants really look bad with anything in them though, except flattish items like paper money. These trousers look like an improvement.

I think the next step is to reinvent the bum bag in a slightly more sartorially-elegant form.

How "bad" they look is part of the aesthetic of cargo pants. Wearing them is in part a deliberate declaration that you do not care about the aesthetic considerations.

Or that you simply have different aesthetic criteria. When did fashion start being axiomatic?

Excuse me. You're right, I've been over-broad.

Purposely adopting cargo pants requires a rejection of the primacy of common, mainstream aesthetic culture in clothing decision-making for any of a variety of reasons. Examples include, but are in no way limited to, functional reasons and personal aesthetics.

Thank you for this opportunity to clarify my thoughts.

Better, but still not quite right. You don't have to reject the primacy if you never acquired it or considered it in the first place.

Fashion is a feature of socialization, and not everyone was socialized the same way.

Thanks, my cargo pants really needed that self-esteem boost.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com