Microsoft's Glasses-Free 3D Display

An anonymous reader writes "The Microsoft Applied Sciences Group has developed a new lens that lets you watch three-dimensional content without 3D glasses. The new lens is thinner at the bottom (about 6mm) than at the top (11mm) and steers light to a viewer's eyes via LEDs along its bottom edge. The 3D display uses a camera to track viewers so that it knows where to steer the light; the idea isn't new, but the required CPU power is now affordable and small enough to pull it off on a large scale."

Comments

Wow

[Seriousity]

The Blue Screen of Death will look awesome in 3D!

Re:Wow

[WrongSizeGlass]

The 3D display uses a camera to track viewers so that it knows where to steer the light

And the Blue Screen of Death will be looking back at you!

# of viewiers?

[B5_geek]

So this only works with one person?

Re:# of viewiers?

[Anonymous Coward]

RTFA

Microsoft's prototype display, however, can deliver 3D video to two viewers at the same time by presenting different images to their left and right eyes (one video for each), regardless of where they are. It can also show ordinary 2D video for up to four people simultaneously (one video for each person).

Re:# of viewiers?

[Sockatume]

Several people. They've discussed using it as a privacy screen or conversely to display different sets of information to different observers.

Re:# of viewiers?

[Jeffrey_Walsh VA]

It can also show ordinary 2D video for up to four people simultaneously Stop the presses! Bob, Joe, Sally: gather 'round my ordinary computer monitor with me and read what Ars Technica is reporting about a display that can show TWO DIMENSIONAL content to up to FOUR PEOPLE!

Re:# of viewiers?

[Cytotoxic]

Seconded! Sitting through crappy reality shows about fat people losing weight is neigh torture. She feels the same way about Stargate. So we compromise and watch her shows.

Re:# of viewiers?

[vegiVamp]

Good luck pushing your fancy 7.1 sound through headphones.

Re:# of viewiers?

[lorenlal]

ummm.... Slashdot?

Re:# of viewiers?

[fizzup]

If only we had some kind of Star Trek technology like Geordi Laforge's Visual Instrument and Sensory Organ Replacement (VISOR), but for ears. That way you could isolate what each viewer heard. We could call them Hearing Enhancement/Apportionment Device PHOr New Entertainment Service (HEADPHONES).

cool idea but why?

[Midnight's Shadow]

Ok, I'll admit it is a cool idea and cool tech. The thing about 3D that always drove me nuts were those glasses the never fit well over another pair of glasses so this is a step up but I'm still left asking, 'Why?'

I can't be the only one who just doesn't see the point of 3D and something like 10% of the population can't even see in 3D to begin with.

Re:cool idea but why?

[Combatso]

10% of the population can't even see in 3D to begin with.

10% of men are homosexuals, but people still sell pictures of boobs

Re:cool idea but why?

[Anne_Nonymous]

>> those glasses the never fit well over another pair of glasses

That's what 3D contacts are for. Well, that and freaking people out in the supermarket.

Re:cool idea but why?

[Donniedarkness]

And 10% of all makeup statistics are within 8% accuracy (90% of the time)

Re:cool idea but why?

[HopefulIntern]

In most populations (i.e. not San Francisco, Brighton, etc.) it is more like 2-5%

But your point still stands.

Re:cool idea but why?

[kalirion]

10% of men are homosexuals, but people still sell pictures of boobs

Are you implying that lesbians aren't interested in boobs?

Re:cool idea but why?

[beelsebob]

No, he's implying lesbians aren't men.

Re:cool idea but why?

[Man Eating Duck]

Way OT, but that reminds me of a quote from James Randi about coming out of the closet. From the end of this interview snippet:

And people often will say, "But you named your car Sophia, after Sophia Loren." A little blue Miata, a beautiful little jobbie. And they said, "Well, you keep on talking about Sophia Loren." And I say, "Yes. You see, I'm gay, but I'm not blind."

Re:cool idea but why?

[tlhIngan]

I have to agree with you. I was a bit confused by this sudden surge of 3D movies and tech in the last year. 3D has been around for so long, why is it suddenly being marketed so heavily now? I also do not see any real benefit from it; it seems to me like a silly gimmick.

Because people aren't going to theatres anymore. Whether by piracy or the rise of the home theatre, the movie studios need something to justify people going out to watch a movie rather than waiting for it on Blu-Ray and DVD. IMAX has 3D for what, at least a decade and a half now, but IMAX screens are few and far between (due to technical requirements that are quite onerous and limit seating capacity). But a regular theatre can be cheaply outfitted for 3D (and since they had to renovate anyhow for digital movie projection, it's a 2-for-1 shot).

The reason the tech is filtering down to home equipment is the same - people see it in theatres and (a few) want it in their homes as well. That, and there's no real new tech in TVs these days - you have your 240Hz refresh LCDs that get bigger and bigger every year and cheaper, but it's pretty much nothing new or innovative in TVs. Sure you have quad-1080p coming out, but with no programming in that format, it's not terribly useful at the moment. But people have 3D content available (somewhat), and they'll hopefully be wanting more.

Now, I see it as a gimmick as long as you need glasses for them because well, those glasses suck if you multitask. If you sit in front of the TV and watch it, they're fine, but if you read a book with a TV on, or do other things, it really sucks. And the proportion of people who don't multitask is getting smaller. But 3D movies, and 3D gaming is likely to take off since in both cases the user tends to put their full attention on the screen. Casual TV viewing, probably not.

Re:cool idea but why?

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope this means we are replacing all car analogies with boob analogies!

Re:cool idea but why?

[AusIV]

10% of men are colorblind, which boils down to about 5% of the general population. That said, the vast majority of colorblind people still see color, we just don't see it quite right. This gallery demonstrates how people with different types of colorblindness see various pictures.

Next is 3D with no screen

[aicrules]

Once Ben Affleck gets ahold of one of these, it's only a matter of time before another company announces a 3D screen minus the screen.

Re:Head tracking required

[Jorl17]

Well, the guy who made that *is* working for Microsoft now. Check his homepage: http://johnnylee.net/

The difference between Microsoft & Apple

[psergiu]

Microsoft: Here's our new tech. We have a single working prototype in the lab and maybe in 2-3 years (if ever) you will be able to buy a watered down version with less features than this one.

Apple: Here's our new tech. You can get-it from the Apple Store starting now.

Microsoft's tech might be cooler but guess who will have more sales ... By the time Microsoft would get this to market, there will be dozens of low-quality chinese knock-offs at 1/2-1/4 of the price but compatible with each-other and Microsoft's screens will use some kind of new and incompatible protocol.

I don't understand why Microsoft even bothers showing off all those very-cool-but-you-can't-have-them products.

Re:The difference between Microsoft & Apple

[PerfectionLost]

Apple is a bit more like--You can get it next June in the apple store, and oh man is it going to be broken for the first couple releases but we'll take your money anyways.

Re:The difference between Microsoft & Apple

[TheCycoONE]

My theory has long been that Microsoft hires people into these research positions to prevent them from coming up with something innovative for someone else that might disrupt their business strategy. These people are then given a decent salary to do whatever they want on whatever schedule; and as a bonus when they come up with something cool Microsoft could show it off for PR purposes (but never actually attempt to manufacture said item because it would just take away from their serious work.)

Re:The difference between Microsoft & Apple

[Monkeedude1212]

Funny, as I type this on my iPad, which has been flawless, I have to disagree with you.

Mine hasn't. I tried the iScale App, where you step on your iPad and it tells you how much you weigh. I've been having problems with my iPad ever since.

Re:The difference between Microsoft & Apple

[tophermeyer]

MS is just spreading the word about their new tech much earlier in the development cycle. Apple knows that it already has its fanbois standing in line to get whatever it is they come out with next, they don't have to worry about generating interest 2-3 years ahead of time.

MS likes the image of itself as an R&D innovator (whether or not they actually are, thats the image they like to portray). It is in their best interests for everyone to see their projects as the develop. Think of all the press time and attention they've gotten over Natal (now Kinect). That is free publicity, just for being open during their development process.

Re:The difference between Microsoft & Apple

[KnownIssues]

You're missing the point here. Microsoft is not a hardware company, unlike Apple, which is both hardware and software. Microsoft is a software company that invests in hardware research to create Proofs-Of-Concept to convince other hardware companies to build the hardware that Microsoft's NextProduct will depend on for cool-whiz-bang features.

When Microsoft sells a mouse, it's because it's a five-button mouse before five-button mice have caught on and it's not even because it's the first five-button mouse, it's because it defines the specs that Microsoft wants all the other hardware vendors to follow, not because it's innovative but because it makes the hardware work consistently on its OS. When Microsoft sells a keyboard, it's because it wants hardware makers to add that useless Windows key.

that movie was so bad

[circletimessquare]

i'll make you a deal: i'll make believe i didn't get the movie reference in your joke if you make believe you didn't make the joke, and we'll both make believe we never saw the movie. erase our memories as it were

More details about the technology

[baxissimo]

Found this presentation about the tech behind this: http://www.sidchapters.org/pacificnorthwest/meetings/apr01_09_presentation.pdf

There... Fixed that for you...

[denzacar]

Microsoft: Here's the tech we have bought off and patented recently.
We have a single working prototype in the lab and in about a year(ish), you will be able to buy a version with tacked on features you will have no use for, most of which won't even work as they should.

Apple: Here's the tech we have copied from someone else, tacked an 'i' in front of it and spit-shined it to appear cooler.
You can PAY for it right now at the Apple Store, and we will get it to you when we damn well please.

Oh... and one more thing - it will cost anywhere between 2 and 5 times as the competition's model, but it will come in Apple's signature iWhite and maybe some other iColors.
And it will cost half as much a month after it comes out. If you complain nicely, you will get a iGift-certificate for the fraction of the money difference that you can use to buy socks for your iPod.

The question is...

[zm]

... will it blend?

Re:Works for one person...

[RightSaidFred99]

Yeah, I mean this thing doesn't work for 1000 people right out of the gate?! Useless! And this fusion discovery they just made, it only produces 1% more energy than it takes in?! Useless!!