Slashdot Mirror


Sharp Announces 3D Laptop

wembley writes "The Associated Press is running a story about a forthcoming Sharp laptop with a 3D screen. I can't find any pictures, but it requires no glasses, so you don't have to walk around looking like Biff's sidekick in Back to the Future. It comes with WinXP, but it's only a matter of time before we're arguing here about what looks better in 3D, Gnome or KDE."

266 comments

  1. huh? by waitigetit · · Score: 0, Funny

    And I thought the purpose was to get these things as flat as possible.

    --
    I could care less, but not without a lobotomy
  2. All laptops are in 3D.. by adeyadey · · Score: 4, Funny

    Unless theyve been run over by a steamroller..

    --
    "You lied to me! There is a Swansea!"
    1. Re:All laptops are in 3D.. by CGP314 · · Score: 1, Funny

      All laptops are in 3D Unless theyve been run over by a steamroller

      Wow, I didn't know steamrollers were able to make two-dimensional atoms.

    2. Re:All laptops are in 3D.. by adeyadey · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well its a bugger trying to get the phase/spin direction of all the protons and electrons lined up, but apparently it is possible..

      --
      "You lied to me! There is a Swansea!"
    3. Re:All laptops are in 3D.. by Spudley · · Score: 4, Funny

      Forget about laptops; I know someone who claimed he'd run over a bible with a steamroller....

      But I didn't believe him - it was obvious he was just stretching the truth.

      --
      (Spudley Strikes Again!)
    4. Re:All laptops are in 3D.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Well its a bugger trying to get the phase/spin direction of all the protons and electrons lined up, but apparently it is possible..

      And since when are protons and electrons 2D? They do have a diameter you know, which makes them 3D (the atom may be "flat" but it's components aren't)

    5. Re:All laptops are in 3D.. by pantycrickets · · Score: 0

      But I didn't believe him - it was obvious he was just stretching the truth.

      Baaaaaa-zing!

      Heh, a little shameless Family Guy referencing for the 99.99% that wouldn't get it.

    6. Re:All laptops are in 3D.. by Dr.+Smeegee · · Score: 1

      Well, that fell flat.

    7. Re:All laptops are in 3D.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here is the Website for it...

      http://www.sharp.co.jp/mebius

      If you can read it.

    8. Re:All laptops are in 3D.. by aagha · · Score: 1

      Uh, just because something has a diameter doesn't mean it has to be 3D.

      A diameter is the length of a straight line passing through the center of a circle and connecting two points on the circumfrence.

      You can draw a "flat" circle on a piece of paper, and it has a diameter. It doesn't mean the circle is 3D.

    9. Re:All laptops are in 3D.. by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't these laptops technically be 4-D? I mean, it's not like the monitor displays a static image. You have 4 variables here: x,y,z, and then t for time.

    10. Re:All laptops are in 3D.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure it is. The graphite or ink has a thickness. By that same token, the images on your monitor aren't 2D either. The excited phosphors or liquid crystals are also 3D. ...Don't mind me.

    11. Re:All laptops are in 3D.. by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > You have 4 variables here: x,y,z, and then t for time.

      Oh, in that case, find one of these things and display only a cross-section of the t dimension.

    12. Re:All laptops are in 3D.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Naaaah, I just think that he was spreading his bullsh*t a little too thin.

    13. Re:All laptops are in 3D.. by javadoug · · Score: 1

      actually they are still in 3D except one of the 'D's is smaller....

    14. Re:All laptops are in 3D.. by adeyadey · · Score: 1

      Ok I wasnt being too serious, but I was suggesting the idea that if all wave phase/directions of all particles within the atom were lined in a particular plane, could an atom be truely "flat"?

      --
      "You lied to me! There is a Swansea!"
  3. Ducking and Dodging by mholt108 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Can you imagine how sick you would get playing the original DOOM onthis??

    1. Re:Ducking and Dodging by advocate_one · · Score: 4, Insightful

      not a chance of that... all apps will have to be specially written to take advantage of the screen... it's NOT a magic "use this and everything you've got's 3D" driver...

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    2. Re:Ducking and Dodging by mholt108 · · Score: 1

      But still - it may introduce just that little bit more gut renching almost reality; just enough to send me hugging the toilet.

    3. Re:Ducking and Dodging by sn0wcrash · · Score: 1

      Just as sick as any other version of Doom or any other FPS? Those games are not for those of use who get motion sick easily. I really wish the FPS trend ended so more no scikening games could come out. Still taking advantage of 3D laptops of course. (ok.. I tried to get back on topic)

    4. Re:Ducking and Dodging by mholt108 · · Score: 1

      Life... is what happens to you while you're busy making plans...

      LIFE is what happens to you while you are busy posting on Slashdot

    5. Re:Ducking and Dodging by advocate_one · · Score: 2, Funny

      you can get that with a phal curry and ten pints of lager... no need to splash out $3000 for this effect... :)

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    6. Re:Ducking and Dodging by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      actually if it's real smart it can make it without 'spesific' support from the software, by some wacky directx driver that would use the depthness information it has for the polygons(for zbuffer), and create two bit different pictures by that. but of course there's a quite large chance that it gets screwed up.

      iirc some of the alternating shutting lcd-glasses thingys did this.

      -

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    7. Re:Ducking and Dodging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      No, life is what happens elsewhere while you are busy posting on Slashdot.

      ;-)

    8. Re:Ducking and Dodging by neil_rickards · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My final year project was an AWT modeled on a 3D graphics card. The theory was you can use this second processor, the GPU (that's doing nothing normally) to move windows, render fonts and images, etc. You'd get alpha blending and all sorts of cool effects for practically free. Windows were hanging in 3D space and could cast shadows, even button shading was done properly using camera angles and lights.

      It occurs to me that, with this technology I could dig out that old executable and find it actually in 3D!

    9. Re:Ducking and Dodging by curtisk · · Score: 1

      oooooofffff....curry and lager? My stomach is quivering just thinking about that combo.. :D

      --

      Sehr geehrter Toilettenbenutzer!

    10. Re:Ducking and Dodging by Spudley · · Score: 1

      You've obviously never been to England - it's standard fare here for the 20-somethings desperate to make themselves sick every friday night.

      --
      (Spudley Strikes Again!)
    11. Re:Ducking and Dodging by pantycrickets · · Score: 0

      You've obviously never been to England - it's standard fare here for the 20-somethings desperate to make themselves sick every friday night.

      Even Indian food is a step up from the norm in England, eh? That stuff makes me vomit.

    12. Re:Ducking and Dodging by FelixCat · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Note that the 3d effect requires that your head is positioned properly with respect to the screen. Hence, if you really do "duck and dodge" while playing some game, you will loose the 3d effect everytime your head moves too far to the left or right of the center-line.

      On a related note, you can buy Stereo LCD projectors, but most require special glasses that alternate between the left and right eye. On the normal LCD flatpanel display the light is polarized, so you can't use the polarized glasses trick.

      The nice thing about having glasses is that it doesn't restrict the viewing angle. Although maybe this is a good thing if you don't want the person next to you looking at the screen.

    13. Re:Ducking and Dodging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That stuff makes me vomit.

      That's probably because curry is for real men, not fat panty-waists addicted to baby food.

    14. Re:Ducking and Dodging by cens0r · · Score: 1

      Nothing wrong with alu gobi paneer and a nice kingfisher!

      --
      Jack Valenti and Orrin Hatch will be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.
    15. Re:Ducking and Dodging by ayahner · · Score: 1
      The nice thing about having glasses is that it doesn't restrict the viewing angle. Although maybe this is a good thing if you don't want the person next to you looking at the screen.

      Wouldn't the glasses and the restricted viewing angle both disable the person next to you from viewing? We gotta think more when we write these...

    16. Re:Ducking and Dodging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not if that person also has polarized glasses! Even if that person doesn't have polarized glasses, they can still "see" what is being projected, it just looks rather funny since they see a blurry version of the same image, or a rapid flickering. You are correct that we have to think before we write these things.

  4. pornography by CGP314 · · Score: 5, Funny

    but it's only a matter of time before we're arguing here about what looks better in 3D, Gnome or KDE

    It's a sad day when you hear the words "3D display" and the first thing that comes to mind is desktops wars, not pornography.

    1. Re:pornography by Felinoid · · Score: 1

      Anyway everyone knows xaw3d will blow them away.

      FYI: I'm joking I'm joking....

      Anyway no worrys it'll be a while before we see it.

      It's always done on Amiga first.
      Microsoft announces a new version of Windows with it.
      Linux has a better way.
      Somebody patents it and sues everyone.

      But IBM will have prior art having done it in the 1940's only back then the computer cought fire and causes a city wide power blackout.

      --
      I don't actually exist.
    2. Re:pornography by 2Bits · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, I was thinking of pr0n too, then suddenly I remember one that I just watched 2 weeks ago where the guy, after "hacking" 3 girls at the same time, and turned to shoot at the camera... and I'm like.... NOOOO!!! I'm not going to imagine this scene in 3D!

    3. Re:pornography by dolo666 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think pr0n looks better "over there". Seriously, do you really want some nasty thing coming out of your laptop? This kinda reminds me of the scent-maker hardware product that would simulate smells. We all commented about some smells that would be possible at pr0n sites, and how certain spam emails would better be left unsmelt.

      Personally, I think 3d displays are still fads. Now if it were a 3d hologram display that replaced the flat screen, like the chess boards in Star Wars, then I think there is definately a market (the whole market), but then you're looking at a whole new market for peripherals, or possibly hidden peripherals.

    4. Re:pornography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have always wondered what is so happy about facials and cum shots? When I think of the art of love making, the last thing on my mind is pulling it out, waiting for her to assume the position and open wide, and spew. Call me funny but that doesn't sound very erotic to me, esp if I have to kiss her after!

    5. Re:pornography by MikeXpop · · Score: 1

      "then I think there is definately a market (the whole market)"

      Because no one minds adding an extra grand on their laptop to have pretty stuff come out in a hologram. How exactly would you interact? A 3D mouse would be *hard* to design (especially on a laptop) and a stylus would be intrusive.

      --
      Etiquette is etiquette. He kills his mother but he can't wear grey trousers.
    6. Re:pornography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahh, you must be a cream pie fan then.

    7. Re:pornography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where was that again?

  5. 3D desktops suck. by msh104 · · Score: 1

    i don't see how a 3d desktop can be usefull to anybody. movies, games and simulation are the only things that bennevit from this. ( still exited the see it though, mmorpg in 3d would rule the world !!! )

    1. Re:3D desktops suck. by JanneM · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, this kind of 3D can be useful, since it gives you actual stereoscopic cues.

      Just keep the normal desktop look and functionality, but use this to really give different windows on screen different depth. Visualizing stacking order would be a very informative cue, helping people make better sense of their desktop.

      Another, related, use would be to make floating windows (such as panels and the like), really float in front. Done right, you would no longer feel that they take up screen estate (even though they still do), and be _less_ conspicuous when you aren't interested in them, and more conspicuous when you are.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    2. Re:3D desktops suck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      right, cause hardly no one uses their pcs for movies, games and simulation

    3. Re:3D desktops suck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "i don't see how a 3d desktop can be usefull to anybody. movies, games and simulation are the only things that bennevit from this."

      Perhaps it would be useful to people who watch movies (most people), play games (most pople) and do simulations (lots of people in industry).

      *sigh*

    4. Re:3D desktops suck. by c4seyj0nes · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This isn't really 3D. It's still the illusion of 3D on a 2D screen.

      Floating windows would still take up just as much screen estate, I wouldnt be able to move my head to the left to see around the web browser i as using to see if i got a new email.

      --
      "In wine there is wisdom. In beer there is strength. In water there is bacteria." --Old German Proverb
    5. Re:3D desktops suck. by NanoGator · · Score: 2

      "i don't see how a 3d desktop can be usefull to anybody. movies, games and simulation are the only things that bennevit from this. "

      That would be easy to debate. Unfortunately, everybody suddenly becomes a minimalist when their precious CPU cycles are spent doing snazzier UI effects. Anything the UI does to tell you what the computer is doing is good. Remember when Win2k came out and the menus faded in and out? That was good. Did it use CPU cycles? Yes. Did it take longer for the menu to come up? Yes. Is it bad? No. When that menu fades in, you have a moment to realize the new thing that just popped up. Little animations like that give the mind something to respond to. This means that using your computer becomes a reflect. Efficiency is achieved. You'd be surprised as to the subtle things people notice and respond to, like screen refreshes, etc. I can understand the argument that not everybody wants to spend the CPU cycles or the actual time to make those menus fade in/out. Instead of seeing it for what it is, they label it as 'bloat'. Sadly, it's often ignored that Microsoft was kind enough to put in a little "turn it off" feature along with a "Detect how powerful this machine is and turn it off if it's going to be to slow" feature.

      Okay, so we understand that UI cues are useful, right? A stereoscopic display could turn into a huge desktop 'must-have'. Imagine stereo-scopic window management. You've not got a new variable of information for your brain to cue off of. The desktop is awlays in the distant background. The start menu is in front of everything. Windows are in between. When a window loses focus, it moves into the background while the new focus moves into the foreground. Are you using a form on a web page? No problemo, the textbox's depth moves a little closer to you without actually changing the physical size of it. No more confusion about which field you actually have selected!

      As a 3D artist, I in particular would love to have a good 3D screen. I've been working on a project for the last month that has become rather complex. My machine can barely handle it. I noticed something interesting while working on this project. I spend quite a bit of time studying my model by making it rotate subtley. Sadly, the frame rate is so slow that it's a painful experience, but I do it anyway. As it slowly rotates, I have an idea from the paralaxx what is going on with the mesh. It occured to me that what I was doing was compensating for the lack of depth information. A stereoscopic display would have saved me a good deal of time here, plus it wouldn't have needed all that much more processing power!

      Stereoscopy, if done in such a way that it doesn't induce headaches, will be a much bigger hit than people think. It's not just a gimmick. It's an extra dimension.

      On another note, the best display I've seen wasn't exactly stereoscopic, but it did have 2 layers. It was a pair of LCD screens, one in front of the other, and the forerground one was transparent. No "you gotta have your head right HERE." No "you need funny glasses!" None of that stuff. It did, though, have a very clear foreground and background. I remember wishing I had one on my desktop.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
  6. Details by BJH · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you can read Japanese, here's Sharp's explanation of how it works.

    If you can't, look at the pretty diagrams and the stupid faked 3D photo.

    1. Re:Details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      and the stupid faked 3D photo.

      There must be a bug with these stuff. I am just staring at the photo right now, and it does not look like 3D on my CRT.

    2. Re:Details by molarmass192 · · Score: 1

      I just can't imagine this not giving the user a pounding headache after a few hours. It's one thing to create 3D using perspective on a 2D screen but to implement it by using the shift in the focal points, better keep the bottle of aspirin handy.

      --

      Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
    3. Re:Details by sharkdba · · Score: 1

      I just can't imagine this not giving the user a pounding headache after a few hours.

      Agreed. After watching this picture (the 3D one) just for a few seconds, I got a "tired" feeling in my eyes, and had to look somewhere else. Similar to when watching CRT TV at very close distance. And this was just a small picture. Can't imagine watching whole screen of this stuff, not to mention for hours.

      Maybe this technology will improve in the future, or maybe our brains/eyes will adapt, but for now it just doesn't seem like ready to use technology. Did they perform any tests on people using this technology for hours at time?

      --
      The purpose of life is to find the purpose of life.
    4. Re:Details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It only works if viewer is looking at the screen at a specific location relative to the screen. It's just like 3D surround audio.

    5. Re:Details by kavau · · Score: 1
      Here is the Babelfish translation of the mentioned webpage. Enjoy!

      As not needing the private glasses stereoscopic display possible liquid crystal display. Because plane surface indication (the 2d) with stereoscopic display (the 3d) it is possible, to change electrically, until now use and it is possible above by loading onto the liquid crystal applied commodity of existing field not only the new 3d private commodity, to expand the pleasure which is used. For example, if it loads onto the personal computer, when as for composition compilation and chart calculation et cetera in 2d indication, utilizing the 3d private contents of computer graphics and the game et cetera, the appearance impression changing to the 3d indication which overflows with real, you can think the utilization method of enjoying.

      * Principle of 3d liquid crystal

      * By the fact that the picture which controls the travelling direction of light from display, differs to the eye left and right that tries is visible, It is possible necessity do, three-dimensional, to make the private glasses indicate.

      * It is for a long time known in principle, being something which utilizes " parallax barrier system ", former TFT liquid crystal display and, It is constituted by with the combination " the switch liquid crystal " of individual development.

      * It provides the optical parallax barrier this switch with the liquid crystal, controls the travelling direction of light, in the eye left and right differs In order for light to reach, it is possible to separate.

      * And, with the picture which adds the picture for the right eye and and the picture for the left eye adjusts, as a picture for 3d indication to TFT liquid crystal display By the fact that it indicates, the picture which responds to the respective eye is visible.

      * And, it controls the parallax barrier electrically with the switch liquid crystal, by the fact that light is made to transmit, in the parallax barrier it depends Separation of light is lost, in order with the contents for 2d indication for the same picture to the eye left and right to be visible, because it is possible, past Also indication as a general display is possible.

  7. # never looked so good by aardwolf204 · · Score: 1, Funny

    # never looked so good

    --
    Im dreaming ofa big bndwdth, That can resist the /.crowd.May ur days b merry & bright & may al
  8. No, please no. by RMH101 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Can you imagine how bad Powerpoint presentations are going to be with this sort of technology? It was bad enough when we gave them clip art...

    1. Re:No, please no. by simong_oz · · Score: 3, Funny

      clip art was nothing compared to watching every bullet point flying in from all sides of the screen or flashing on and off or dimming or dissolving or ... having to listen to the constant mouse clicking/pgdn because someone has just discovered the animation feature.

      --
      "Because it's there." - George Mallory, when asked why he wanted to climb Mt Everest, March 18, 1923 (New York Times)
    2. Re:No, please no. by Ibix · · Score: 1

      "Because it's there." - George Mallory, when asked why he wanted to climb Mt Everest, March 18, 1923 (New York Times)

      What a strangely appropriate sig you have...

      I was trying to work out how you'd give a presentation on a 3d display. Probably wouldn't be worse than 2d - more variants on the evil "flying" methods (spinning is an obvious one) of making objects appear and 3d fonts are probably the worst you could do.

      I hope I'm right, and not just lacking in imagination. ;)

      I

    3. Re:No, please no. by KillerHamster · · Score: 1

      The worst thing about watching most powerpoint presentations is listening to the presenter slowly read the whole thing WORD FOR WORD. With 3D displays, though, they could add enough animation to make it bearable, like having bullet points actually shoot bullets at each other and using huge explosions for transitions. Any word on the possibility of a 3D projector?

  9. I really liked those glasses.. by peculiarmethod · · Score: 4, Funny

    Those red slatted glasses (that came in a McDonalds happy meal) were just the thing I needed to further ostrisize myself from my schoolmates in Oklahoma, as if running something called a Pirate BBS and actually reading the BTTF books (which all sucked except part III) didn't do that well enough already. Now kids can be singled out from the next car on public transports for mugging, thanks to Billy and his newly co-produced 3D minesweeper.

    I for one welcome my 3D natalie portman.

    -pm

    --
    ** "It's not my job to stand between the people talking to me, and the ones listening to me." -- Pego the Jerk
  10. Re:dupe by .tom. · · Score: 1

    Well this wasn't actually... ;-)

    Wasn't this a nice try to submit a relevant first post ?

  11. Re:w007! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was it goatse or tubgirl?

  12. Only slightly 3D by Mwongozi · · Score: 0, Informative
    If this is the same laptop I think it is, it works by having two LCD screens, one behind the other, with a gap between.

    The front screen can make pixels transparent, which show the rear screen, allowing depth to be shown.

    Can't be very good for thin-ness...

    1. Re:Only slightly 3D by Mwongozi · · Score: 3, Informative
      Okay, this isn't the same laptop I was thinking of. It actually works by sending a different image to the left and right of the screen. Mod parent down please. :P

      This can't be very good for the viewing angle though, can it? You'd have to be sitting right in front of it.

    2. Re:Only slightly 3D by arbi · · Score: 1

      Holograms send a different image to each eye but still have a wide range of viewing angles. I don't see why a computer display cannot do the same.

    3. Re:Only slightly 3D by AlecC · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think it is what you were thinking of,, actually. The upper one is used to screen alternate columns of pixels from one eye or the other. When the upper is off, you have (say) 640 pixels on the line. Turn the upper one on, and the left eye can se the 320 even numbered pixels and the right eye can see the 320 odd numbered pixels - if the spacing is just right.

      Suspect it will work only at the right distance and have rotten viewing angles. OK for PDAs, not for home TV or big monitors where people want to move around or look over shoulder. And it loses half the light. Back to the days of early "hold it just so" laptops?

      --
      Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
    4. Re:Only slightly 3D by p3d0 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Then you don't understand holograms or LCD computer displays.

      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    5. Re:Only slightly 3D by RockBob · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I imagine it would probably be more a textured surface that split the image up (much like those old 3D stickers that gave the impression of depth by showing the image at an angle relative to the angle you looked at it). It would be thinner but I don't know if that's actually how it works.

      This has been around in print for years now; I guess it was only a matter of time before some bright spark applied it to screens.

      I always thought that it would be particularly good for 3D Games.

      --
      I know, I know... I need to learn a little English.
    6. Re:Only slightly 3D by Ibix · · Score: 2, Informative

      Holograms are kind of like those 3-d Magic Eye pictures you get, although a fair chunk more sophisticated. Essentially you choose a flat surface infront of your object, and work out everything (phase, intensity) about the light that passes through this surface on its way to your eye. You record this on a photographic film and, hey presto, the eye is fooled into thinking there's an object there when light shines on the pattern.

      Their viewing angle sucks because there's an assumption - light "on the way to the eye". Sure you can see tholograms off axis, but they get distorted really quickly. Not too bad for a picture of the starship Enterprise, but reading distorted text gets tiring really quickly.

      I

    7. Re:Only slightly 3D by arbi · · Score: 1

      It does not have to be LCD. Technologies evolve and LCD may be replaced by superior display systems.

      I believe it is entirely possible that a computer display could be both 3D and allow an acceptable range of viewing angles. If this has not already been achieved by this Sharp laptop I think it will be achieved within the next ten years.

    8. Re:Only slightly 3D by p3d0 · · Score: 1

      Fair enough. For some reason I thought you were actually referring to the topic of this article. ;-)

      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    9. Re:Only slightly 3D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the same thing when I saw the post. Then I RTFA.

      Speaking of, whey the hell hasn't someone done this?

    10. Re:Only slightly 3D by RockBob · · Score: 1
      Speaking of, whey the hell hasn't someone done this?

      Exactly. I'm sure there is enough knowledge here to modify an existing graphics engine. I'm sure it'd make a great open source project, or a fair amount of coin for someone.

      --
      I know, I know... I need to learn a little English.
    11. Re:Only slightly 3D by jhtr216 · · Score: 0

      The front screen can make pixels transparent, which show the rear screen, allowing depth to be shown.

      I have an old Casio CFX-9850G calculator (Think TI-85) That I used in high school (class of '99). It was much better than the TI-85 that all of my class mates were using plus it was color. I could graph is red, blue, green. Each color was on a seperate lcd screen but was very thin. I was able to get some very neat 3D action going on with a little tinkering.

      jHendrix
      Athens, Ga

  13. Can't wait: /. in 3D! by michib01 · · Score: 1

    I'm waiting for /. in 3D: I can imangine it... the thread of posts seen as a 3D structure!

    --
    - "Having a clean conscience is sign of bad memory"
  14. A measure of geekness by min0r_threat · · Score: 3, Funny

    "...it's only a matter of time before we're arguing here about what looks better in 3D, Gnome or KDE."

    Oh what joy! Proof I'm not a geek! My first thought was 3D pr0n. Gnome and KDE were the last things on my mind when I read about this.

    --
    ~~~~~~~~~ "I must create my own system, or be enslav'd by another man's." William Blake, Jerusalem.
    1. Re:A measure of geekness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      My first mental image was surfing to the wrong site with 3-d animated gifs of cum shots, and resisting the urge to duck.

      Does this make me a geek or not?

    2. Re:A measure of geekness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and since when do 3d porn fantasies stomp you down on the geek scale measurements?

    3. Re:A measure of geekness by liquidzoot · · Score: 1

      If you're here, don't deny it
      Geek Pride

  15. OperatingSystem Question by jlemmerer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Does the OS have to support this screen? I cant't imagine current operating systems of being able to handle this 3D effect native. Of course, they will supply windows drivers, but to really decide if gnome or kde look better you will propably need a linux driver. i just hope that they will release the architecture and drivers so that also the linux community can participate in the glorious 3D features. furthermore it would be of interest if (provided no drivers are present) the image looks blurry or if it just looks flat 2D.

    I mysql would appreciate a laptop featuring this "smoke screen" that was posted here in /. a few weeks ago, imagine, no display you have to flap open, a REALLY slim notebook and the geek factor to have a image to come out of virtually nothing..

    --
    ".Sig Stealer" was here
    1. Re:OperatingSystem Question by btgarner · · Score: 1

      Yes, the OS will need to support it.

      Just think how cool it will be when you get your first 3-D BSOD.

    2. Re:OperatingSystem Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Knowing Sharp and their product support for developers... it's going to have to be a reverse-engineered-hack :(

    3. Re:OperatingSystem Question by jeti · · Score: 1

      If you activate this feature on a normal OS, you will basically
      just loose half of the horiz. resolution as soon as you turn 3D
      on.

      But I think it's interesting that MacOS X uses, and Longhorn
      will use, 3D acceleration for their desktops. It should be
      relatively easy to extend the widget set with adequate
      depth buffer information and have it rendered in 3D.

      (Although it's not too fast to draw directly into depth buffers.)

  16. I already have my KDE desktop in 3D by borgdows · · Score: 4, Informative

    I use 3D-Desktop.

    It's is an OpenGL program for switching virtual desktops in a seamless 3-dimensional manner on Linux. With this program your desktop looks futuristiiiic and you can impress your friends!

    1. Re:I already have my KDE desktop in 3D by Eric+Destiny · · Score: 0

      "This is UNIX, I know this!"

      --

      "The meek shall inherit the earth, the rest of us shall go to the stars." Isaac Asimov

    2. Re:I already have my KDE desktop in 3D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but will it get me girls? And if not, will it make my pr0n look more realistic?

    3. Re:I already have my KDE desktop in 3D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      you can impress your friends!

      It should come as no surprise that your friends are easily impressed.

    4. Re:I already have my KDE desktop in 3D by swb · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately it almost does the right thing. Instead of each desktop appearing to be on the outside of a shape, the desktops should be on the INSIDE of a multi-sided spherical shape.

      That way you could "back up" to see multiple desktops arrayed adjacent to each other, which in itself would be more meaingful if the surfaces of the spherical shape fit some multiple of desktops (like 4).

    5. Re:I already have my KDE desktop in 3D by orasio · · Score: 1

      3DWM is more like it. It uses VNC to map windows to surfaces, and uses a 3d environment that you can model and populate. Not quite ready (I doubt it will ever be) for mainstream use, but nice to play with, and useful for research.

    6. Re:I already have my KDE desktop in 3D by Zepalesque · · Score: 1

      Thank god, someone had the courage to make a Jurassic Park reference :)

  17. Actual image larger than the screen by Frans+Faase · · Score: 1, Funny

    The image at the bottom of the screen seems to suggest that it will actually show images larger than the screen size!!! This is not just 3D it holographic floating in the air.

  18. So how does it know ..... by peterpi · · Score: 2, Interesting
    .... what do display at what depth? Do windowing systems use the Z-buffer?

    Maybe I should just RTFA.

    1. Re:So how does it know ..... by Frans+Faase · · Score: 1

      The Z-buffer is used to determine which object is before which from a single point of view. For a 3D images you need to generate two separate images from two points of view (each with their own Z-buffer). I imagine that some of the 3D engines in graphic chipset could do this without additional programming effort.

  19. 3D desktops are new by AlecC · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Lots of people still think that there is nothing you can do on 2d Desktops that you cannot do on the command line. The 2D desktop is still settling in, 20 years or so after it ws first invented. I think a 3D desktop could well have a lot to offer.

    What you will need is an improvement on the mouse. One of the reasons that my real-world desktop is easier to use than my GUI desktop is that I can move my head to see how thinkgs are stacked. For example, I have a couple of MySQL manuals stacked; the upper is larger, so on a 2D desktop I couldn't see the lower. But a tiny move of my head shows me the spint of the lower. We will need to replicate that functionality before a 3D desktop really works.

    Actually, that functionality could be replicated on a 2D desktop - redraw a pseudo-3D desktop as move my viewpoint (Doom engin inside Windows?). So it is the mouse that needs improvement, not the screen.

    --
    Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
    1. Re:3D desktops are new by AndyElf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Pseudo 3D (since the medium is really 2D -- unless we're talking about that fog display) will unlikely be able to help you much there. The great benefit of your cluttered real 3D desktop is how wide and fully-emersing it is. I'd say that until your display is moved off a static point on top of your desk to somewhere where it is between you and the rest of the world (glasses? eye band? contacts? brain implant?) all of this 3D tinkering will be mostly eye-candy, not usefull enough...

      --

      --AP
    2. Re:3D desktops are new by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "Lots of people still think that there is nothing you can do on 2d Desktops that you cannot do on the command line. The 2D desktop is still settling in, 20 years or so after it ws first invented. I think a 3D desktop could well have a lot to offer."

      Why not aim for the best of both worlds? 3D CLI!

    3. Re:3D desktops are new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, that functionality could be replicated on a 2D desktop - redraw a pseudo-3D desktop as move my viewpoint (Doom engin inside Windows?).

      It's been done. There's a reason you haven't heard of it: it sucks.

      You don't want a better mouse to let you look from a different angle, you want to be able to tilt your head to look from a different angle. Even so, the current hierarchical 2d model is *better* than a real desktop, except that it's so small.

    4. Re:3D desktops are new by Zirnike · · Score: 1
      "What you will need is an improvement on the mouse."

      Have you ever used a spaceball? I do mechanical CAD design (among other things...) and I've found that the spaceball is probably the best input device for 3D stuff. I can 'grab' an object and spin it, zoom in on it, etc. almost as if it were sitting in my hand. VERY nice.

      And I used to play Descent with a Spaceorb, too. Dodging incoming fire in 6 axis can really mess with your opponent's heads. Then they screwed up and added mouse control to D3. Can't play it anymore. I prefer the 3D flight-sim style, where you couldn't turn instantly on a dime and actually had to think about what you're doing...

      --
      I'm not shy, I'm stalking my prey
    5. Re:3D desktops are new by Quince+alPillan · · Score: 1
      Lots of people still think that there is nothing you can do on 2d Desktops that you cannot do on the command line. The 2D desktop is still settling in, 20 years or so after it ws first invented. I think a 3D desktop could well have a lot to offer.
      Well, yes, this is true for LINUX where most of the programs or functionality for those programs are only available through the command line, but this is not always true for Windows.

      I know of no way to run 95% of the programs I use in Windows through command line. Not to say that there isn't a way :)
  20. Picture of Mebius by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Found it here:
    http://www.mobilemag.com/content/100/336/C2 020/

    1. Re:Picture of Mebius by DarlMcBribe · · Score: 1

      Clickable link Why did they just do a laptop? why not a develop a seperate monitor?

    2. Re:Picture of Mebius by irenetheno · · Score: 1
      I wouldn't be surprised if this ended up being vaporware.

      What, with a name like " maybe -us" and all.

  21. Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace by heironymouscoward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have this secret design (oops, posted it to Slashdot, now it can't be patented anymore) for a new workspace design, which depends on a 3D display.

    Basically you throw down objects you're working on, into concentric piles. The most important stuff stays 'hot', near you, while stuff you use less often gets gradually pushed further and further back.

    To open a document or web site you just click it, and it becomes 'hot' again. There's a little text box I can type keywords in, to find matching documents.

    That's about it. Replaces the hierarchical file system with something much closer to the way I work (and AFAIK, many creative people work).

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature
    1. Re:Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace by Zocalo · · Score: 1
      So, in effect, it's like Microsoft's "My Recent Documents", only with multiple levels of "recentness"? Sounds like a neat extension to the concept that would actually work quite well in conjunction with the vanishing seldom used menu items idea. You could have a menu with the "hot items", wait a second or two and the list expands to include the "warm" items. Add a couple of options at the top/bottom of the menu for "Search" and "Show all" and you're done.

      Do you know Python? Sounds like this would be a trivial thing to implement in a Karamba varient...

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    2. Re:Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, prior art never stopped the patent office before ;-)

    3. Re:Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Basically you're describing the "new" features in WinXP. Smart folders, smart program files, dialog boxes that ask you if you want to delete unused or extremely-rare used icons, etc etc. I'm sure it's in other OSes too, but immediately all the WinXP crap leaped to mind. If you're waiting for this kind of thing...it's already here

    4. Re:Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace by Max+Romantschuk · · Score: 1

      Replaces the hierarchical file system with ... the pile system? :)

      --
      .: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/
    5. Re:Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace by Lizard_King · · Score: 1

      If you patent the Most Recently Used algorithm, we're going to have some problems. That and my old comp sci. prof is going to hunt you down with an rpg.

      Interesting idea based on a fundamental comp sci theory.

      --
      "My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." - Jack Nicholson
    6. Re:Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace by mrtroy · · Score: 1

      Basically like a cache

      Which you would have a hard time patenting.

      --
      [I can picture a world without war, without hate. I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it]
    7. Re:Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace by misterpies · · Score: 1


      I'm afraid that's already been done. I read about it last year somewhere -- might have been a Xerox PARC development.

      --
      The author of this post asserts his moral rights.
    8. Re:Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace by sharkey · · Score: 1
      oops, posted it to Slashdot, now it can't be patented anymore

      Why not? Didn't someone patent the wheel recently in the US?

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    9. Re:Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace by imaginate · · Score: 1

      Y'know, this is always the kind of stuff that *sounds* like a good idea... and maybe it is, for you.

      But I've found that I can more quickly access files if I *know exactly where they are* than if the computer tries to put them in the "best" order for me.

      I've noticed with the recent windows abreviated menus that it's harder for me to find stuff, even if I use it often enough to appear in the "often used" section. It just means that I have to look for it every damned time rather than just knowing where it should be. I think this reflects how our brains are able to sift through information - for instance, in a menu, it's usually faster to go through tons of options if one knows where the particular option should be, than it is to try to find said option in a more chaotic, but abbreviated and sorted (however cleverly) list.

    10. Re:Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      I'm surprised people are mentioning XP. The first thing I thought of when I read this post was Apple's Pile System which I can't find a link to for the life of me. Basically it sorts things into graphical piles on the desktop, with more recent stuff near the top. You can kind of move the mouse through the stack and see what each thing is. It was on Slashdot a while ago, but I can't find it even with Google.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  22. possible uses... by shouldiswitch · · Score: 0, Funny

    I can imagine the new office assistant asking me if i want to write a letter in saying "hidehooooo !" and jumping around in 3D in front of me, leaving (virtual) brown marks everywhere. Tech stuff is good ! mm'kay ?

  23. Only an animated switch between desktops by Frans+Faase · · Score: 3, Informative

    This is really lame. It is only giving you an animation of switching between desktops, not a real 3D desktop. This has been done (much better) a long time ago by SGI, where they would have such an animation everytime you opened a folder. Makes your eyes dizzy after a while. These kind of animations don't add anything useful, just a gadget to show of to your friend. I bet that you could do the same in Windows.

    1. Re:Only an animated switch between desktops by shibashaba · · Score: 2, Informative

      theres the 3d window manager(3dwm.org) which does stuff like this(runs on linux, irix and nt at least). Also, the ggi project did some stuff with it too. This can actually do primitives and is being used to create 3d enviroments and virtual reality type stuff.

      --
      ---------- Open Source is capitalism applied to IP.
  24. Pics here!!!! by geektux · · Score: 4, Informative

    Some pics can be found here.........

    http://www.sharp.co.jp/mebius/index.html

    1. Re:Pics here!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      here is a mirror

  25. Some links by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    Just finished a writeup on this, so here are some links:

    my humble piece in norwegian

    some pictures down the page

    English explaination of the "parallax" technology

    Sharps own specification page

    It's only supprted by Windows XP sp1a, by the way.

    penhead

    1. Re:Some links by wembley · · Score: 1

      Batteries provide 1.3 hours of operation.

      1.3 hours. I think they missed the meeting on what the holy grail of laptop design is.

      --

      Share and Enjoy!

  26. About time too... by ContemporaryInsanity · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...those 2d laptops, put the bloody things down, you can't find 'em again. That extra dimensions gonna make all the difference.

  27. Sigh... by Jesus+IS+the+Devil · · Score: 2, Funny

    but it's only a matter of time before we're arguing here about what looks better in 3D, Gnome or KDE."

    Methinks CowBoyNeal has been deprived of sex for too long...

    --

    eTrade SUCKS
    1. Re:Sigh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't it the other way around?
      Hint: porn watching isn't sex

    2. Re:Sigh... by wembley · · Score: 1

      Nah, I'm the poster and that was my editorial view. And I get plenty of sex, TYVM.

      --

      Share and Enjoy!

  28. Why a laptop by L-s-L69 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why has this been implemented in a laptop? If its as good as it seems I'd much rather see it been used in tv's/flat screen moniters first and surely this would be a far larger market than laptop users alone? Maybe im missing the point but a huge, 3d widescreen tv sounds pretty good to me!

    1. Re:Why a laptop by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      limited viewing area, control over the gfx chip choice and possibly other parts too.

      -

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:Why a laptop by DaveTheTriffids · · Score: 1

      Perhaps so that you can pick it up and peek around the corners of the object you're modelling? Beats having to get up and walk around your desk, and it's a lot easier than lifting a 50kg HDTV and moving that around....

    3. Re:Why a laptop by spectrokid · · Score: 1

      If you RTFA, the laptop sends different lightbeams to your left and right eyes. You can only do that if you are sitting straight in front. You won't be able to share that pr0n with your mother...

      --

      10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then

    4. Re:Why a laptop by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Why has this been implemented in a laptop?

      Because it makes for very impressive demos, and for most demos, you have to bring it somewhere.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    5. Re:Why a laptop by Zone-MR · · Score: 1

      LOL, no... the screen doesn't track the position of your head, so you cannoy in fact peek around objects. The image sent to your left and right eye is fixed, and the display is only effective when looking at it straight on... as with every similar technology, the 3d effect is only perceived.

      And it hasnt been implemented in laptops FIRST... Desktop 3d screens have existed for quite a while now, although they cost a fortune and are rarely used outside the graphics industry.

  29. Not dupe, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...any similarity?

    NEC to Introduce 3D Laptop Next Year?
    On August 30th, 2003 with 103 comments
    Hoon Mihn Fao writes "For those of you for whom 2D laptops are not awesome enough, next year NEC is coming out with a 3D laptop. No, you don't have to wear...
    Section: Articles > Displays , Hardware
    Score: 0.6

  30. Half horizontal resolution by rexguo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Be reminded that in 3D mode, the horizontal resolution is halved. That is, a 1024x768 display will show only 512x768 effectively in 3D mode. This is simply due to the implementation, where half of the pixels are sent to the left eye, and the other half sent to the right eye. The first to commercially offer autostereoscopic (the proper term for this) LCD is probably DTI, www.dti3d.com.

    --
    www.rexguo.com - Technologist + Designer
    1. Re:Half horizontal resolution by CriX · · Score: 1

      Is this true? Old fashioned reb-blue stereoscopy probably only reduces the area that will behave three-dimensionally by 10%. Meaning that an image only has to be far away enough from the border to allow the red or blue version. Is it true these autostereoscopic LCDs reduce the effective 3D area of the screen by 50% ?!

      That sucks if true but I doubt that it's correct. Parallaxing (my own word?) 2 pixels on extreme left and right of screen would make you cross eyed or even weirder which would have your eyes BOTH looking outward, hehe, funny to imagine. Plus the effective 3D image would appear to be inside your nose, haha.

      --
      Moderation: +1 pwnage
    2. Re:Half horizontal resolution by VDM · · Score: 1

      Resolution, not area. All the screen area is 3d, but, let's say, even pixels are for the right eye, odd pixels for the left. Said that, another possibility is to have one refresh cycle for the left and one for the right... so, same resolution but half refresh.

      Bye.

    3. Re:Half horizontal resolution by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 1
      Whilst this is true; in practice it will look better than that- the human visual system is good at combining two slightly fuzzy images and coming up with apparently sharper images. In other words, even though the resolution each eye sees is halved, you have two different sets of halved resolution so you will almost get the full resolution back.

      The big problem comes if the software doesn't antialias- then hard edges will be seen with one eye and not the other, and you will get headaches and stuff. Still, the human brain is fairly use to visual differences between the eyes- reflections of sunlight can often be seen with one eye and not the other due to the angles involved.

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    4. Re:Half horizontal resolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly what I thought when I read about this, which is why there is no reason to expect a 3D desktop any time soon.

      However, things that actually need 3D will benefit from the 3D mode. It'll also be nice for games.

  31. What about 3D digital cameras ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BAsicly connect two digital cameras separated by eyes distance and take two pictures. Such photos on such
    notebook would simply rock ...

  32. no they don't by RMH101 · · Score: 3, Informative

    the 3d information's all contained within the opengl layer, you just need to write appropriate video drivers.

    1. Re:no they don't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      the 3d information's all contained within the opengl layer, you just need to write appropriate video drivers.

      did you RTFA????

  33. got it by SHEENmaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I use OpenBox. I'm always one flick of the mouse wheel away from anything I need. If it's lost, I've got a categorized menu of windows available with a middle click on the background.

    The command line is better than any file manger I've ever seen, and it uses a hell of a lot less ram.

    I'd like to see Apple's Expose on such a display. It will zoom windows out to fit all of them one the screen for selection by the user.

    --
    You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
  34. Reduced resolution in 3D by Frans+Faase · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I understand that the resolution will be halved in one direction when using the 3D display mode. That might make it rather useless for normal use. Or can the 3D-effect also be switched on for certain regions of the display?

  35. Gnome or KDE? by Zog+The+Undeniable · · Score: 2, Funny

    It has to be KDE. Who wants to see a big grey foot poking out at them?

    --
    When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
    1. Re:Gnome or KDE? by kurosawdust · · Score: 1

      forget that - what about when I run the GIMP and am face-to-face with Wilbur?

    2. Re:Gnome or KDE? by yerdaddy_777 · · Score: 1

      Gnome will be the winner; have you seen all the foot fetish sights out there?

  36. Great! Now all we need is a way to control it. by Gldm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So what's going to be the breakthrough control interface for 3D like the mouse was for 2D? And don't point at one of those "3D mice" with the little eraser pointer for scroll on them either. Maybe one of the gyroscopic mice but I think I'd get tired of having to hold the damn thing up in the air 8 hours a day. Maybe something like the SpaceOrb 360, but I couldn't get any decent precision with that when I had one.

    Maybe someone should dust off the old NES U-force and find a way to integrate it into the laptop.

    --

    Introducing the new Occam Fusion! Now with sqrt(-1) fewer blades!

    1. Re:Great! Now all we need is a way to control it. by teslar · · Score: 1

      I would have thought the interface was obvious.... it will be the combination of a standard mouse with the W, A, S and D keys..... ;)

    2. Re:Great! Now all we need is a way to control it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wacom drawing tablets come with 4-D mice!

    3. Re:Great! Now all we need is a way to control it. by rdewalt · · Score: 1

      Not too far off. Don't laugh, but I think the "Power Glove" would be a far better device than the U-Force. I've had and coded up interfaces to both. Other than having to "bit-bang" the ports, the Power Glove was a rather robust 3d interface device. You could -almost- get decent precision with it, it had 3 "finger" buttons, each with three states (Open, partly closed, closed) a directional pad, ten digit buttons, and a few other things...

      Time to break out your 80's NES toys, your VHS copy of "The Wizard", and see if you still have an old "ROB" to play with.

  37. How far do YOU sit from the display? by bo0ork · · Score: 2, Insightful
    From the dti3d website:

    "In fact, if you just sit directly in front of the display at about 30" away, as you normally do with any display, you will be in a position where you see 3D."

    Thirty inches (75 cm)? I don't know about you, but I'm more like fifteen inches from the screen. At 30 inches, I couldn't read the damn thing.

    --
    Does everything include nothing?
    1. Re:How far do YOU sit from the display? by billybob2001 · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I can't sit that close (15ins), cos I'd keep banging the end against the screen.

      You were surfing left-handed websites, right?

    2. Re:How far do YOU sit from the display? by Captain_Chaos · · Score: 1

      ...I'm more like fifteen inches from the screen. At 30 inches, I couldn't read the damn thing.

      Then you need glasses. Fifteen inches is way too close...

    3. Re:How far do YOU sit from the display? by bo0ork · · Score: 1
      Oh, but I do have glasses. =)

      And 15" may be pushing it. It's closer to 20". It's also a 20" flat panel display, so I'm not too worried about my eyes; that site does seem to say that it's OK to sit closer to FPD's.

      Exactly why aren't you supposed to sit close? I'd think that as long as I can read the text clearly, what's the problem?

      --
      Does everything include nothing?
    4. Re:How far do YOU sit from the display? by Captain_Chaos · · Score: 1

      Exactly why aren't you supposed to sit close?

      I don't know, but my guess would be that it is tiring for your eyes to continuously have to focus that close.

      If you have glasses and a 20" panel, shouldn't you really be able to read the screen at 30"? Perhaps you need different strength glasses?

    5. Re:How far do YOU sit from the display? by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > it is tiring for your eyes to continuously have to focus that close.

      Bingo. Your eyes weren't meant to focus on something that close for a long period of time. it stretches your eye (squashes it, really) to change the focal length between the retina & the cornea to make you focus. Your eye is only supposed to "squash" so much. That's why it starts to hurt most people when they cross their eyes.

      Of course, I'm no opthamologist (uh, that's right, yeah?), so if I made a mistake, someone please correct me.

  38. Oh My by topopardo · · Score: 0, Funny

    Just imagine the M$ Word clippo on 3D...

    1. Re:Oh My by HiQ · · Score: 1

      Could be worse: think of goatse and tubgirl in 3D ** shudder **

    2. Re:Oh My by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      now everytime you try to remove clippy, it goes:

      "Looks like you want to close me - lol"

      ..then clippy moves around a little and he's still around

      repeat

  39. Impact on eyes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just curious as to what, if any, impact this would have on your eyes since each one would be seeing a separate image therefore working a bit harder to make sense of it.

    I'm remembering the strain of looking at stereoscopic images and this sounds a bit like that.

    Any ideas?

    1. Re:Impact on eyes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just curious as to what, if any, impact this would have on your eyes..

      After a while, they fall out.

    2. Re:Impact on eyes? by RealErmine · · Score: 1

      Just curious as to what, if any, impact this would have on your eyes since each one would be seeing a separate image therefore working a bit harder to make sense of it. I'm remembering the strain of looking at stereoscopic images and this sounds a bit like that.

      It doesn't matter that the images are different for both eyes. Your eyes normally see two different images anyway (that's how you perceive depth). What matters is how good the software is at generating two different images that the brain will perceive as a 3D scene. Since 3D software has been around a while, I assume they could do this fairly well. The limiting factor would then be if the hardware can handle rendering 2 scenes at once at a decent framerate. In my experience, what makes your eyes hurt is the flicker.

      --
      Dewey, you fool! Your decimal system has played right into my hands!
    3. Re:Impact on eyes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can order replacements from Sharp's website.

    4. Re:Impact on eyes? by misterpies · · Score: 1

      >>what, if any, impact this would have on your eyes since each one would be seeing a separate image

      Erm, that's what happens anyway. It's your brain that puts the two different images together to create a 3-D single image. All 3D imaging systems (including reality) work by presenting each eye with a slightly different image. Except for those wierd stereogram postcards. No idea how they work, but they really give you eyestrain.

      --
      The author of this post asserts his moral rights.
    5. Re:Impact on eyes? by jeti · · Score: 1

      Only the perceived depth of the stereoscopic effect
      is different from the distance of the display - which
      you have to focus on.

      I'm not sure. That that could cause some kind of strain.

    6. Re:Impact on eyes? by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > I'm remembering the strain of looking at stereoscopic images

      If you mean that magic-eye stuff, this is a bit different. With "Magic Eye," you had to try to unfocus your eyes and move them in a way that feels unnatural, that's why it can hurt. This is more like watching a 3-D movie, because one image is seen by the right eye, and the other by the left, mimicing more naturally 3-D sight.

  40. Why this will NOT be popular by G4from128k · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most of the various current incarnations of 3-D displays contain an ugly, hard-to-resolve flaw. The display rendering routines must make assumptions about the location of each eyeball. Thus, they only create a proper 3-D picture when the person's head is front, center, level, the proper distance from the screen, and of normal eye spacing. Deviations in the position of the eyes from this sweet spot cause distortions in which the two views are inconsistent with the 3-D scene at best, and infusible at worst.

    Worst of all are deviations in the angular orientation of the viewer's head WRT the screen. 3-D displays assume that the separation between the eyes is left-right. If the person tilts their head, the images do not fuse properly and cause eye strain or double vision. The only solution is a 4 or 5-axis head tracking system, although a head-mounted 3-D display does provide a first-order correction to the angular orientation problem (it causes other problems, though).

    A secondary problem is that only one viewer can ever be in the "sweet" spot of the 3-D system. To create a proper 3-D view for the second person, the system needs to create a second pair of images that are different from those seen by the first person. Add another pair of eye and the need a second pair of images.

    3-D has been around for a decades in 3-D movies, computer displays, and VR, but it has never caught on. Its not that it does not work well enough to interest some of the people some of the time, it just doesn't work well enough to interest most of the people, most of the time.

    On the other hand, I could be wrong -- I never thought Window's would be popular either.

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
    1. Re:Why this will NOT be popular by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're bringing us all down with your techno mumbo jumbo. I am sure the designers have spent years thinking about the 3D details that you blew out your ass in 5 minutes.

    2. Re:Why this will NOT be popular by watzinaneihm · · Score: 1

      From the article linked to in the post
      Tokyo-based Sharp has been selling cellphones with 3-D displays for NTT DoCoMo, Japan's top mobile carrier, since November last year. They were so popular the feature is being introduced in notebook computers, Nakayama says.
      If it works with cellphones (come on who holds a cellphone at eyelevel, its almost always at chest or waist level when you read a text message) It should work for laptops, wouldnt it ? And the market is Japan rememeber ? They made pokemon popular!!

      --
      .ACMD setaloiv siht gnidaeR
    3. Re:Why this will NOT be popular by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are wrong. I've seen one of these displays (in a freestanding LCD, not in a laptop) at Durham Uni. When you were in the sweet spot it looked 3D, elsewhere it simply looked flat - not distorted.

    4. Re:Why this will NOT be popular by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The display rendering routines must make assumptions about the location of each eyeball.

      Or it would read some input that you could adjust...

    5. Re:Why this will NOT be popular by meatspray · · Score: 1

      This particular screen technology has been around for a *VERY long time. It was purchasable over three years ago. If it's not popular by now, I'm certainly not holding my breath.

      2-19-2000 http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/02/19/121725 4&mode=flat&tid=137

      *And here's a quote from the first comment to the article:
      "Interesting side point: The press on this form of 3d vision on their web site dates back to 1994 so it's not exactly cutting edge (unless they've recently undergone a quantum leap forwards and I haven't picked up on this from the site). "--by fingal (49160) on Saturday February 19, @10:33AM (#1259484)

      incidentially here is a good article on how these work
      http://www.dti3d.com/technology.asp

    6. Re:Why this will NOT be popular by Quixadhal · · Score: 1

      Very true, and there's another problem with most of these 3-D technologies... they assume the viewer has equal vision in both eyes. In my case (and the case of lots of people I would think), this isn't true.

      My right eye is FAR stronger than my left, and so in most situations, my brain doesn't use my left eye unless there's peripheral information or confusing depth geometry. Hence, those 3D glasses never work on me, and I suspect this display will appear flat and fuzzy to people with similar uneven vision.

      As an aside, has anyone done any research into decoding the impulses from the optic nerve? Not that I'm eagre to have a "jack" in my skull, but if we could decode those, we could inject our own data at that point (popup ads would be painful though!)

    7. Re:Why this will NOT be popular by demo · · Score: 1

      I think someone tried to reverse engeneer the signal from a cats eyeball to the brain. I was mentioned on /. - try searching for it and you might find it.

      --
      ---
    8. Re:Why this will NOT be popular by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > I think someone tried to reverse engeneer the signal from a cats eyeball to the brain

      FYI, here it is from the BBC:

      Computer uses cat's brain to see.

  41. BSOD in 3d by Jenova · · Score: 1

    A BSOD in 3d will still end up looking flat...

    1. Re:BSOD in 3d by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > What's a BSOD?

      "Blue Screen of Death," Microsoft's stupid answer to a fatal error.

  42. Any relation to the NEC 3D laptop technology? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  43. Like the URL dropdown by jesterzog · · Score: 1

    I work that way a lot, too. One place where it's obvious is in me rarely using bookmarks for web pages. Instead, I use the url dropdown in my web browser where my most commonly and frequently visited websites are nearly always near the top without me having to actively bother saying I want them to be there.

    It falls over a little for less frequent things, like interesting websites that don't get updated very often and so I forget to go back to them.

  44. competition = lower price by WormholeFiend · · Score: 1

    if at least NEC and Sharp market 3d screens, then no one company will be able to own the market and demand whatever price they feel like selling it at.

  45. All people see in 2D by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1, Interesting

    All people see in 2D, at least the ones I know. Most that I've met even think in 2D. This 3D monitor should be interesting, but what kind of brain implants and neural retraining will it require? And, is the radiation used for scanning safe?

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
    1. Re:All people see in 2D by SenorMooCow · · Score: 1

      Last time I checked I had depth perception (the 3rd dimention). Does everyone you know only have one eye? If that is true then I am very sorry for your and thier loss.

      --
      I run a Debian/Kernel/Knoppix Mirror: (http|ftp|rsync)://debian.ams.sunysb.edu/
      apt-get @ > 5MBps == teh win!
    2. Re:All people see in 2D by ShinmaWa · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No... most people see in 3D. This is a fact I'm keenly aware of since depth perception is something that I lack. I do have both eyes, but my brain is incapable of using them together to form depth-percepted image. The result is that my brain just filters out one of the inputs -- usually my left eye since my right eye is dominant -- otherwise I have double-vision.

      The end result is that I can't throw nor catch for the life of me. Doorknobs are often hard for me when I'm tired. Stairs are hazardous to my health. I have to count the steps lest I miss one and I ALWAYS use the handrail. I've almost fallen on stairs twice in the last week alone. Bionoculars, red-blue 3D glasses, and stereograms screw with my brain's filtering ability and causes double-vision, so I can't use them either (unless I close one eye).

      I can safely say that this condition is found only in a small minority of population -- or else you'd find piles of bodies crumbled up on the landing of staircases :)

      --
      The /. Effect: Thousands of users simultaneously accessing a site to not read its content.
    3. Re:All people see in 2D by Xerithane · · Score: 1

      All people see in 2D, at least the ones I know. Most that I've met even think in 2D.

      You seriously need to stop looking at the computer screen so much.

      --
      Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
    4. Re:All people see in 2D by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1

      "All people see in 2D, at least the ones I know. Most that I've met even think in 2D. This 3D monitor should be interesting, but what kind of brain implants and neural retraining will it require? And, is the radiation used for scanning safe?"

      I would really like to have the dude who spent a mod point here chime in and tell us why he thought this was an 'interesting' comment.

    5. Re:All people see in 2D by bajjer31 · · Score: 1

      That is honestly one of the funniest things I have ever read, whether or not it is true. Thanks for the visual!

    6. Re:All people see in 2D by Dsal · · Score: 1

      I had something similar going on for a while. I had one dominant good eye and one eye that couldn't see well. For a long time, I had the exact same sort of problems. It made gym class pretty tough and I would trip on stairs a lot.

      Then in 10th grade I finally got around to getting a proper contact lens for the bad eye (parents finally got decent health insurance). Seriously, the moment they put that on I practically freaked out. The whole world was poppin' out at me. I must've looked like an idiot as I left the eye doctor's office. I was staring at the trees thinking, "Wow! They're soooo 3D!". It was pretty mindblowing to see what I was missing out on all that time and to finally see how other people see.

    7. Re:All people see in 2D by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > tell us why he thought this was an 'interesting' comment

      Hmmm, well, I guess in a REEEEEEEE[...]EEEEELY wierd way, the O.P. was right. If you take one eye, you see in 2D, so each respective eye sees in 2-D. It's just that our brain takes the two images and puts them together to create a 3D image. That, of course, assumes that by "sight" he meant vision and did not include what our brain interprets it as, which is obviously wrong. Wrong, because, without the brain, we would see squat.

    8. Re:All people see in 2D by Kinetix303 · · Score: 1

      You insensitive clod.

    9. Re:All people see in 2D by ayahner · · Score: 1
      Bionoculars, red-blue 3D glasses, and stereograms screw with my brain's filtering ability and causes double-vision, so I can't use them either (unless I close one eye)

      oops... You made a boo boo... binocs makes sense, but if you use one eye with stereograms, they get kinda dull.

    10. Re:All people see in 2D by ShinmaWa · · Score: 1

      oops... You made a boo boo...

      Yup... and I mispelled binoculars too ;)

      --
      The /. Effect: Thousands of users simultaneously accessing a site to not read its content.
    11. Re:All people see in 2D by ayahner · · Score: 1

      try closing one eye when you type...

    12. Re:All people see in 2D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you should try a applied kinesiology(AK)therapist! And if the first one cant help you, try another one!
      Good luck!

  46. Old VR glasses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is one thing that i've seen that seems much more practical then this form of stereo optic effect, but to be honest, i've only seen one model of VR glasses. Its resolution wasn't all that hot, we're talking the 640*480 range, had VGA / Svideo / RCA video support, and a built in pointing device based on your head movement and head butting was left click.

    Dispite this particular device's short commings, this really seems to be the proper way to get 3D. As far as adapting it to the current desktop, I know I had this image of a sorta surround desktop where head motion showed you a segment of the circle / sphere. Cool beans and a heell of alot easer to implemnt then a truly 3d desktop.

  47. Haven't thought about this enough, then. by Legal+Penis · · Score: 1

    Surgeons could model the organs they are about to cut into. Architects could see their building from any angle. Professional sports could use it for some kick-ass replay. The list goes on and on.

  48. Lots leading up to this by MobyDisk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There have been lots of articles leading up to this, and most of them are from Sony.

    My only question is "Why didn't they create a standalone LCD panel first?"

    1. Re:Lots leading up to this by Zone-MR · · Score: 1

      It's been done before (www.dti3d.com and others) for quite a while now, although its never really caught on much for the general public, perhaps because the price of "normal" lcd panels at the time was high enough, never mind specialised 3d panels which are little more than a cool toy. They have found limited use in the graphics industry tho.

  49. like those old 3D posters at the mall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So is this display just going to be a picture of random noise that you have to stare at for fifteen minutes - becoming increasingly angry as people walk up and say "Oh, there it is" - until the 3D image "pops"?

    ala http://www.chazpro.com/Images/games/3D.jpeg

  50. Or you could just buy a Magic Eye poster. by Channard · · Score: 1

    We've been here before with 3D glasses and a variety of other innovations that died quickly. True, this laptop may not need glasses, but I'm cynical as to it's real application. It might make consumers go 'Ooo! Shiny' but then I suspect the majority walk on by without putting down any hard cash. Plus unless Sharp can convince manufacturers that adding this feature to their games is worth the time and effort, I can see this dying a quick death.

  51. Re:Revolutionary... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [I post anymously because of some references in my message.]

    I don't understand why this comment is marked Redundant. There's another comment mentionning pornography, but it says nothing about revolution.

    Pornography has been leading the industry for years. The VCR use exploded with the venue of the porn tapes, not mentioning the anynomous mail delivering systems. In france, the Minitel was known for its "Pink" pages. Some years ago, I've seen statistics from a Global 200 company saying that 25% of their Internet bandwidth was used to transfer unappropriate content.

    Count how many actresses have used porn to get a foot in the movie industry (with more or less succes).

    Now the 3rd generation mobiles is driven by pornography (I've had friends in the mobile industry making presentations using porn as the first target for content transfer).

    You have areas in the world with millions of single men. China is a good example. That's a huge market. OK they aren't yet potential customers , but give it some years and it will reach them one way or another.

    You can be sure that 3D sceens will be driven by porn really quickly, the same as it was for webcams. In fact the author of the parent thread should have written his sentence the other way around: "another technology that will probably be revolutionized by porn"

    The only other industry driving the world is the weapons one these days. It's sad but almost true.

  52. 3D makes you stupid! by Bendebecker · · Score: 1

    Actually, it just gives me headaches.

    --
    There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
    most of us won't be able to afford it.
    -- Lemmy
  53. i don't think you know the details by lingqi · · Score: 2, Insightful
    hmm... actually i have one of the sharp 3D-screen phones, it's not that cool.

    wrote about it a little here, actually...

    the problem with the 3D thing is that it's very, very bad for text-viewing, at least in 3D mode - but then if you forfeit that, what's the whole point? and then you have such a limited view-space from which everything is 3D, so if you are playing, say, 3D games, you can't move your head at all for more than a couple inches each way.

    btw, to get the 3D thing you need te sacrifice half the pixel count (half of the pixels to one eye and half to the other eye) - so keep that in mind as well.

    over all, a neat lil trick, but i wouldn't sacrifice weight and size (especially thickness) of a laptop for something like this...

    --

    My life in the land of the rising sun.

  54. morons add more dimensions to planet/population, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    rescue initiative (formerly unknown, as the oil for babies program).

    actually, this works on several (more than 3) dimensions, & is already freely available to you/all (excepting, of course, the perpetrators of the ongoing whoreabull crimes against humankind).

    no, you're not seeing double. we'll do whatever it takes to help you/US survive the Godless assault on yOUR planet/population buy the whoreabull georgewellian fuddite corepirate nazi stock markup fraud execrable/walking dead. no problem.

    consult with/trust in yOUR creator. more breathing. vote with yOUR wallet. seek others of non-aggressive/positive behaviours/intentions. stop wasting anything/being frivolous. that's the spirit, moving you/US.

    for each & every of the creator's innocents harmed, there is a badtoll that must/will be repaid by you/us, as the aforementioned walking dead contingent will not be available to make reparations.

    take good care of each other. we're all we've got. we're here for you. the lights are coming up now. see you there.

  55. Sounds to me like... by mistermund · · Score: 1

    Lenticular Displays.

    You know those pictures that change as you tilt them or walk by. These displays were all the rage at SIGGRAPH this year, but IMHO, they weren't very good at displaying true "3D".

    Some various pics.

  56. Pile system by heironymouscoward · · Score: 1

    Yes, pretty much.

    If I had a free week and some skill with any graphics library, I'd hack it together.

    Imagine your desktop, piled with lots of random documents. Each document is a URL referring to a resource somewhere on the net, most of them local to you, some on your LAN, others on the Internet.

    When you create a new resource, the cluttertop simply throws a new icon somewhere on top of a pile. You can move it around as you like, especially in 3D space (closer, further from you).

    When you look at the space closest to you, you see concentric piles of the stuff you need to use the most.

    Let's see:

    - pile of stuff for my customers
    - pile of interesting web sites, /. near the top
    - pile that is all my 'interesting' incoming email, filtered by my personal agents
    - pile that holds all the digital photos I promised my wife I'd check through and get printed
    - etc.

    I guess something like three or four piles up front, with dozens of older ones receding into the infinite background space.

    Perhaps I can switch desktops occasionally. I might start a desktop per project, cool. Like a cat, I like to make a mess in one place for a whole, then find a new, clean one to start over again.

    This is the way my creative process works: the formal filing that hierarchical systems impose is no good at all, I need to throw down my junk and let time and energy filter the good stuff out.

    Ah, I'm going to have to sponsor a starving developer somewhere... It may mean selling one of my Porsches, but hey, the era of dot-com excesses is over anyhow, they tell me.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature
    1. Re:Pile system by key45 · · Score: 1

      Sounds kind of like the Personal Brain with some MRU sorting.

  57. WinXP crap by heironymouscoward · · Score: 1

    Big difference: the WinXP features are glued onto a model that I already find useless. In some respects it makes sense to "clean up" an over-complex hierarchical organization, but my idea is to avoid it entirely.

    The GUI I'm thinking of is actually very simple. OK, I'm going to continue this in my journal.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature
  58. old news... by Jimmy_Chi · · Score: 1

    deja vu...I could swear I've seen this story on /. a dozen times already...

    in other news - Jimmy Chi announces 3D laptop...no pictures yet, but let's discuss!

  59. Ewwww..... by Zobeid · · Score: 1

    According to the article: "The computer display produces 3D images by sending a slightly different image to the right eye and the left eye at once by bending them in different angles, according to Sharp."

    Ewwww! I don't *want* my eyes bent in different angles, that sounds painful. ;)

  60. BFD - My laptop is 4d by bodland · · Score: 0, Troll

    I fire up the G-Force visual in iTunes while listening to Groove Salad at 128k and I'm in the twighligt zone babay...

  61. I saw a demo recently by chrispl · · Score: 5, Informative

    I saw the Sharp 3D laptop on display at the 2003 IFA in Berlin. It works on the same principle, lenticular imaging, that has been used for years for 3D collectors cards and posters etc. The screen is covered with thin vertical stripes that redirect light coming off the screen, showing each eye a different image.
    The 3D effect is quite convincing however it has a few drawbacks. The biggest problem is you have to look at it from precice angles for the effect to work i.e. if you move your head from side to side you will see the screen go from real 3D to a blur, then inverted 3D, blur... This is especially troublesome if more than one person is trying to look at it at once. The second problem is that to show two images at once each image has only half the resolution of the entire display, making it look fuzzy compared to regular 2D displays.
    For some reason the demo they had running only cycled through still pictures of 3D rendered scenes, no video or UI shots which makes me suspicious that these problems are even worse in those applications. It is cool technology no doubt, but it still has some problems to work out.

    --
    What post? The one you're carrying inside your rusty innards!
    1. Re:I saw a demo recently by raindog2 · · Score: 1

      This Register article claims it uses 2 LCD panels rather than a single panel with a lenticular layer on top of it. That would at least take care of the horizontal resolution, though the "parallax barrier" they describe sounds the same as those lenticular trading cards.

  62. Ouch! by SharkJumper · · Score: 3, Funny

    The computer display produces 3D images by sending a slightly different image to the right eye and the left eye at once by bending them in different angles

    AAAH! MY EYES! IT'S BENDING MY EYES!!

  63. By the way... by RockBob · · Score: 1
    The computer display produces 3D images by sending a slightly different image to the right eye and the left eye at once by bending them in different angles, according to Sharp. The special screen has applications in architecture, medicine, science and gaming.

    The textured surface I was describing would do exactly what is described in the article.

    --
    I know, I know... I need to learn a little English.
  64. I'll wait by HomeGroove · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Nevermind that I don't have the money, but I'm weary to buy first editions of anything. The reason for the weariness is because I bought a 2000 Ford Focus (US first edition) and have had about 7 recalls on the car so far. So let 'em work out the kinks on this new technology and in the same time, drop the price a bit. Oh and get it on the Mac (then again, if it comes to Mac, the price will still be high).

    --

    ----
    Spam subject of the moment: Offshore account secrets -nashville disrupt

  65. Use of 3D imaging is already implemented by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

    Actually, I'm pretty sure that any current 3D game can use this technology fairly easily... lots of current games support 3D if you have LCD shutter glasses, or a dual-image HMD.

    The game instructs the graphics card to render a 3D environment from a particular location on a map, from a particular height, looking in a particular direction. Lets see - x,y,z + pitch, roll, & yaw, right? Anyway, the card just has to alternately bump the 'y' coordinate back and forth a bit to generate two images, one for each eye.

    I've played Half-Life like that, and it's kinda cool... the monitor I had to get to support 60Hz/eye was kind of expensive at the time, though.

  66. Proprietary 3D format? by zapp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Mebius now only has a small sample of 3D applications, such as an image of fruit and flowers and an animation of dinosaurs. But Sharp is hoping other companies will design 3D games and videos

    So, it uses some proprietary 3D format? It's junk then. Why not have it support OpenGL and DirectX?

    I Had a TNT2 when they came out that had 3D glasses and worked perfectly with any OpenGL/DirectX graphics... why should this be different?

    --
    no comment
    1. Re:Proprietary 3D format? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Strange. They're trying to get a locked-in niche market for their hardware, I guess.

      Too bad, since they're using an nvidia chip and nvidia has a stereoscopic display package already.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  67. been there, done that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stereographics (http://www.stereographics.com/products/synthagram /synthagram.htm) has had some really expensive, really high res multiple viewing zone lenticular displays for a while now. The 222 model is the high end, but the 202 comes in a 1600x1200, and doesn't cost more than a nice Porsche.

  68. Linux support for the buton... by twoslice · · Score: 1
    The $3,000 (U.S.) laptop switches back and forth between its 3-D feature and a regular display by a push of a button.

    The question remains: Will the 3D-mode button only work with Windoze. The article says that it ships with Windoze XP.

    --

    From excellent karma to terible karma with a single +5 funny post...
  69. this looks more interesting as a 3d display by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.io2technology.com/

  70. That's nothing by popo · · Score: 2, Funny


    3D Screen? Pwash! That's nothing!

    My entire laptop is 3D! You can walk around it and see it from different angles and everything!

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
  71. Windows XP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "...a forthcoming Sharp laptop with a 3D screen. It comes with WinXP"

    Glad it comes with Windows XP. XP rocks for all types of multimedia support.

  72. Biff's Sidekick??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was Griff's sidekick in Back To The Future II.

    1. Re:Biff's Sidekick??? by wembley · · Score: 2

      Check the link.

      He was in both, and definitely in the 50's.

      --

      Share and Enjoy!

  73. Maybe not... by pario · · Score: 1
    This new 3D display differs from traditional 3D devices in two important ways:

    (1) This display does not require special googles, which is a good thing because they can be very cumbersome.

    (2) With this device, the 2D and 3D modes can be toggled electronically, as mentioned in the original press release. 3D images do put strain on your eyes, but if you don't like that, you can always go back to the traditional 2D mode.

    As a side note, we usually do not share the screen of a laptop computer, so the last problem you mentioned is not a big issue in this case.

    I, for one, am very excited by this news, being a big fan of 3D movies. I cannot wait until the prices of these displays go down and I can actually get my hands on one of them....

  74. Looks like Sharp is reading Slashdot by citizen6350 · · Score: 1

    This was a post on slashdot not too long ago: http://individual.utoronto.ca/iizuka/research/cell ophane.htm

    --
    "Sorry Im not more user-friendly."
  75. Requirements: by thung226 · · Score: 1
    Requirements:
    • 1.21 Gigawatts
    • Flux capacitator
    --
    -n-
    1. Re:Requirements: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jigawatts.

    2. Re:Requirements: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jigga-wha? Jigga-huh?

  76. Answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's only a matter of time before we're arguing here about what looks better in 3D, Gnome or KDE.

    Well, duh, KDE does.

  77. Here are some links to the product: by bladeohlsson · · Score: 1

    INFO ABOUT THE COMPUTER



    INFO ABOUT HOW THE 3D LCD WORKS



    Sorry for the lack of a translation, but I am an interpreter not a translator.

    blade

    --
    http://www.ohlssonvox.com
  78. You want find any pictures! by Lord+of+the+Fries · · Score: 1

    Becuase how would you see it with your 2D monitor silly!
    (This is a joke, designed to provoke an emotional response)

    --
    One man's pink plane is another man's blue plane.
  79. i wonder.. by gblewis · · Score: 0

    if microsoft is going to do anything with their 3d interface plans.

    in soviet russia, YOUR PANTS pour 3D GRITS down a petrified beowulf cluster of natalie portman's 3D laptops!

  80. sounds neat by TheLittleJetson · · Score: 1

    i'd like to see one when they come out, but i bet it gives you a headache to work with it too long... :-P

  81. Related story by Ctrl-Z · · Score: 1


    This is almost certainly related to this story from last year. Who thought they would actually bring it to market?

    --
    www.timcoleman.com is a total waste of your time. Never go there.
  82. Stick in the mud by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

    Okay, I'm going to be the old fart and piss all over this idea.

    Other than the eye-candy factor, what does this give anyone? With a *true* 3D screen, CAD and medical imaging applications would really benefit. But everything else would be visual masturbation.

    At least until we get 3D media. That's one of the two major problems. All of our media today is 2D. Our text documents are 2D. Our photos are 2D. Our quicktime movies are 2D. Maybe when we get 3D cameras and hollywood starts giving us 3D movies that do more than explore the boundaries of cheese, it might be different. But even then, 3D images are still static in that you can't rotate them beyond a few degrees.

    What about the actual work you and I do on our systems? I've heard a lot of people ruminate on 3D user interfaces. I think they're smoking crack. Yes, there's a lot of really cool eye-candy stuff you can get. But what about real usability? Programming the innards of a 3D spreadsheet would be a piece of cake. In essence, they already are. Programming the UI of a 3D spreadsheet would be a nightmare though. Can you imagine a usable 3D spreadsheet? Wouldn't today's 2D sheets stacked in z-order be incredibly more usable?

    The other major problem is the monitor itself. No matter how much you don't want it to be so, the monitor is still a 2D veiwport. Back when the primary output device of a computer was a 1D stream of text on a teletype or printer, line editors were king. But the 2D screen editor happened very shortly after the 2D monitor arrived. But there's no 3D monitor out there, so trying to put 3D data on a 2D monitor is as silly as running a 2D screen editor on a daisywheel printer terminal.

    Some other posts have mentioned the Star Wars chessboard. That's what we need before we go to true 3D interfaces: a true 3D display. Not a 2D viewport into a 3D world, but an actual 3D world we can walk around. That Star Wars chessboard might as well be 2D if your head is rigidly locked into a single position. All it gains you is depth perception.

    I fully expect 3D to become the norm as soon as we dump the monitor viewport for a real 3D desktop (that is literally a desktop), and start using more 3D data. In the mean time the current z-order paradigm of 2D images on a stack will rule. We might add some eye-candy to it, but it's still going to be 2D.

    --
    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  83. 3D Bio-Goggles? by tenchima · · Score: 1

    So, if we coat the new 3D Computer in beer, I wonder if we get 3D Beer Goggles?

    --
    If at first you don't succeed, so much for skydiving.
  84. DNF almost ready now by hesiod · · Score: 1

    Maybe this was the last piece of the "puzzle" to create Duke Nukem Forever! True 3D. Maybe I'm wrong!

  85. You?re wrong. by 888+Geek+Help · · Score: 1

    You?re wrong. Our brains/eyes are pretty good at aligning to make a good picture. Think of looking at an object close or far away. As you look at your finger 6 inches away your eyes are rather cross-eyed though the finger is in perfect focus. As the object is further away your eyes adjust and straighten out. The eye automatically finds that point where the images come into congruence. Another example: In those 3D pattern pictures there is actually a range of distances you can be from them. The trick is not being at the exact centimeter away but rather having your eyes crossed the correct amount. There will be some limitation one viewable angel and distances but not so much as to make them difficult to use. Our brains/eyes are pretty good at aligning to make a good picture. Think of looking at an object close or far away. As you look at your finger 6 inches away your eyes are rather cross-eyed though the finger is in perfect focus. As the object is further away your eyes adjust and straighten out. The eye automatically finds that point where the images come into congruence. Another example: In those 3D pattern pictures there is actually a range of distances you can be from them. The trick is not being at the exact centimeter away but rather having your eyes crossed the correct amount. There will be some limitation one viewable angel and distances but not so much as to make them difficult to use.

    --
    -888 Geek Help (888-433-5435)
  86. Can two people see the 3D image? by Form-o-Stuff · · Score: 1

    because if it's splitting the alternating lines down the path where MY eyes aren't, what's the guy to my left see? My left' eye's portion? That's weak. Wake me up when we have holo-screens.

  87. TV Screen by craigbeat · · Score: 1

    I used to work for Sharp building microwaves to find my college education. Whilst there, one of my supervisors said she was at the research labs in Oxford and they were working on the technology for use in televisions. This was many years ago, and at the time, a white dot had to be placed on the forehead in order to calibrate the screen so that distance and angle would not be a problem. It seems, however, that the current version of the technology does not do this: I wonder if that is a good thing or a bad thing?

  88. 3d movies, virtual cinema ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The article mentions making 3D video clips. Match this with the virtual cinema tech that helped make the latest Matrix movie. They seem fit for eachother.

  89. Technically... by csoto · · Score: 0

    that was Back to the Future, Part II. :)

    --
    There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
  90. Low-cost 3D screen viewing by DYKL · · Score: 1

    I get excellent 3D screen viewing with split parallel images. I use a loreo lite 3D viewer I got for two dollars.

  91. This is only the 1st by AndreyF · · Score: 1

    This is only the 1st time this has been made (I'm assuming, I know), but realise that as other companies jump on this idea, and the competition increases, you will be able to view things from more angles, etc.). Question: if a game works @ 120 FPS at the one angle it desplays, workin in 3d will cause the video card to rerender a different picture for every angle of the 3d image, slowing down the FPS how much?