darkflame

Its a shame that so many people are against glass's seeing as the most stable, flexible and universaly viewable 3D images require them.

Paralax barrier-methods have limited viewing angle and reduced resolution, and (sigh) holographic star-wars stuff is just physicaly impossible. (light cant be made to stop in mid air, it has to reflect off something).

For us to have any hope of true "personal viewing angle" 3D, as well as merely steroscopic 3D, glass's of some sort have to be used as well. (at least if you want to allow more then one person to watch at a time...Johnny Lee's method would work for one person...but even then youd have to ware a headband, so your going to look stupid either way!).

Personaly I dont see the problem with glass's, as long as there
a) Standard.
b) Light, comfortable and adjustable.

Millions of people already wear glass's everyday, might as well make the things usefull for more then mere focus correction.

More of life-recording then AR (unless she somehow overlays information back on the first eye), but still a very nice idea.

I'm supprised there isnt already a market for userfull body replacement rather then merely cosmetic.
Sure, nothing will ever be better then your natural limb/eye for awhile, but you might as well get something back if you lost something.

-sigh-
Can some one sale me a phone thats just a phone (+sms), but that works for a month non-stop?
That would be my dream phone.
I'd be perfectly happy with a black and white screen too if it was an ultra-sharp high-contrast paper like screen.

I dont want extrafeatures (especialy pointless magapixals) untill we have a better "form" of the phone.
Building a phone into a pair of glass's would be a step much more important then any of those mentioned here.
(then you could have information overlaid onto the world without waving your arms about...you could have a virtual screen as big as you wanted effectively)


"This is all possible due to the advanced accelerometer in the handset, taking into account the position and orientation, the 3D holographic projector situated beneath the screen,"

-sigh-
People still buying into the myth that holograms like that are remotely possible.

YOU CAN NOT GET LIGHT TO STOP IN MIDAIR.

It *has* to rest on a surface so it can reflect back at you.
Everything...absolutely everything...you see claiming to do so is a trick. -Light cant reflect off nothing-.

If you want things to hover in midair, your best bet is some augmented reality glass's.
Those are possible, and achievable with present tech if invested into.

Cell phones projecting star-wars holograms are not.
Not in 5, 10..or I bet even 50 years.
Getting phones to stop and bounce back is -incredibly- hard.
If you got a load of high-power lazers you can make a dot or too appear in midair by causing pocket explosions. But thats never going to be adaptable for a colour 3d projection out of a handheld device.

The Dreamcast was a far better machine then the PS2, given *almost* as good graphics significantly earlier and a bit cheaper.
It was better designed, much better online, 4 players as standard, and had a good line up of games.

However.
Sega fan's were long burnt by the short-lived Saturn, the MegaCD, the 32x and whatever other random machine Sega kept chucking out far too frequently. Sega always kept up with technology, but lost site of the fact their fans cant afford to buy THAT much.

So the dreamcast had lackluster sales, giving the PS2 plenty of time to not only hype itself, but build a better game catalogue.
You see, thats what makes the PS2 a better system, overall, the game's it started getting half way into its life. It was the software, not hardware that did it.

hmz.
I think the next step isnt 3d, but rather have monitors that have a camera *in the middle*
I'm sure you could have some pin-prick sized hole that leads to a sensor ver a lens without too much impact on the screen itself.
Probably will look like one dead pixals in the middle, but if they use some one-way glass, might be almost completely unnoticable.

Yeah, just like when video games crashed with Atari in the 80s.

Thank god they never tried bringing that back after it proved an unprofitable failer. [roll eyes]

Personaly, I'm quite happy to were glass's.

The problem with all these "no glass's" displays is you have to be looking at the exact right angle, and anyone else in the room gets a 3d-inverted image.

Its a shame the industary is so scared of proper HMD tech, because with TOLED technology I'm sure really nice ones could be made these days.
Then we would not only have 3D, but our own personal viewpoint too. (which as Johney Lee demos; http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw is in many ways more "3d" feeling then steroscopicness)

Only if there is enough examples for them to work with.

If we got part of an alien language, without a key, nor context, we wouldnt have a clue what it meant.
The best codes are like this. Give your oponant as little information as possible, and hide as much of the original messages propertys as possible. (eg, for an easy example; letter frequencys).

In just about any situation these days the idea is to avoid the possibility of "automatic" hacking by computers anyway.
Most of us are perfectly safe if we have a code that would take a team of humans to crack.

Yo know, a bit of effort and you could make a completely independant game using Wiimotes.
A low cost bluetooth reciever, some IR points, and simple counter system and you got yourself a lazer-tag tag.
The signals from the Wiimote are pretty easy to process. (http://www.rateoholic.co.uk/ResultPages/get_and_display_review.php?reviewid=388) About the only tricky thing would be identifying scoreing for more then 2 players, IR's flashing in pre-devided sequences could do that though.

If companys actualy looked at what they could do with wiimotes other then putting plastic shells around them we might get some decent stuff.

Dont Eat The Mushroom DS would be worth it alone.

I cant wait for this...wheres an Alpha?