Hacker News Reader

Comment by annoyingnoob | Hacker News Reader

You seem kind of touchy on the 'cargo pocket' subject, which is the first thing that came to mind for me. Glad you found something that works for you.

Google 'dockers cell phone pocket'. You can already get shorts and pants with a cell phone pocket on the side. Some very similar to yours, some zippered, some a little closer to the hip, some a little lower.

View on HN

I guess I should re-write that postscript, given how much attention it's receiving. I have nothing against cargo pants! My point was just that they're solving very different problems for different people, and are stuck in a different kind of innovation-rut.

My experience with a couple of the docker pockets is that my phone falls out when I sit or lay down. Most chairs have the knees slightly higher than the bottom and those pockets end up with the opening pointing slightly down and the contents come out.

IMHO, what you propose and cargo pants have only in common that they're pants with pockets, nothing else. So the last paragraph is warranted, even if it seems that some here feel personally attacked by it... The whole point is how the pockets are integrated into the pants, and that's completely different solution than cargo pants.

Anyway, seems neat! I had some work shorts on a summer job years ago, funnily they were mostly like cargo pants, but they had an additional pocked very similar to your proposed one. It could be used for a folding meter stick (or whatever it's called in English) and that pocket alone made the shorts perfect. It allowed easy storage and access to a frequently used tool which was almost unwieldy long.

Do you plan to sell something like this online?

Haha, no, no sales. Making clothes to fit one specific person is an relatively easy task. Making clothes to fit distant internet strangers is much, much harder; and wouldn't pay as well as making software, anyway.

Even the US startups that are making clothes to customized measurements, etc, are forced to stay price-competitive by using the same overseas factories that (in addition to the specific kinds of inflexibility I bring up in the post) are often labor rights disasters, which is part of why I make my own clothes in the first place.

If I had a clear plan of attack against fast fashion, I'd probably take it, but the best I have right now is individual action.

Docker has had khakis with a zippered pocket concealed in the seam for something like 15 years. They used to call it some nerdy name that I can’t seem to recall, but they’ve been there.

I had a couple pair stashed away hoping I’d lose weight but when I did I suddenly remembered I don’t wear khakis or slacks anymore, so why am I keeping these?

But a pocket that low on the thigh could take a hit, and I’m not sure these days when I’m more active if that’s a great idea.

Years before the DIY/maker movement started up, I saw a howto where someone slit the pocket in their jeans and sewed a second pocket over it, so that you had a double pocket. I know someone who owns a serger and I have made noises several times about getting some pants altered but we never manage to connect on that.

It’ll all be moot anyway in a few years if they keep making phones bigger. We will all be carrying purses for our phones.

I searched exactly as you said and there were many different designs. This seems to refute the introduction of the article.

Most of those pockets, notice, are in the side seam itself -- allowing them to be made without changing the order of construction, but requiring a zipper to keep things from falling out.

I realize that within-the-seam vs, welt pocket is externally a small thing, but it changes the order of construction dramatically. My approach doesn't need a zipper to prevent things falling out, but does need a reordering of the construction process, and so is much rarer to see for exactly the reasons I enumerate in the post, even in spite of being potentially materially cheaper.

For me, the following style allows the phone to slide out when I'm sitting: https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/7qwAAOSwwpZbd0x9/s-l1600.jpg

This style holds the phone better but I find it too much effort to get the phone out: https://di2ponv0v5otw.cloudfront.net/posts/2019/02/28/5c78a7...

Notice the button: https://www.westportbigandtall.com/ProductImages/37600/37600...

Honestly, the author seems mostly to be reacting to the name cargo pants. Thus the reeling off of associations they aggressively dislike.

These are merely pants with additional pockets. Their placement being similar to cargo pants being merely a coincidence...

Yes, coincidence of reinventing the wheel. They reinvented cargo pants with pockets going inside instead outside. The purpose of the two is exactly the same: storing things. I don't care who invented cargo pants and who started wearing them first. I'm neither a pilot nor a soldier, nor am I pretending to be one, but I find them super convenient.

The whole point of the article is the placement and design of pockets.

Saying, "Oh, its just all some pants with pockets and thus it's all the same reinvention" doesn't help anybody - it's like saying to one which proposes a better roofing system that a shed and a house have both a roof already, so why bother making it better for one of those. Er what?

Sorry, you are conflating two things: placement and design. OP hasn't changed the placement of the cargo pants pockets. For me as a proverbial user, the interface didn't change. The implementation details did. Don't get me wrong, I like the approach OP took, but this is basically an iteration on cargo pants design, by making them more socially acceptable.

It's only an iteration on cargo pants if they started from cargo pants. If they started from dress pants, then it's an iteration on dress pants. The fact that it might be only a few steps away from cargo pants is irrelevant - it's also only a few steps away from most other pant designs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com