Exciting Kinect Stuff Already Coming Out

Just last week we learned that the Kinect had been hacked wide open and already we're seeing a flood of innovative stuff coming out. Jamie found a page with a lot of pictures and screenshots, and Engadget has more.

Comments

Too Cool

[intervex]

I can think of a lot of great uses for this technology.... I hope these hardware hackers keep it up

Re:Too Cool

[mangu]

Is the hardware really that much? Considering what current CPUs can do, with or without GPGPU, I wonder if the same effect couldn't be done with a couple of cheap webcams.

Re:Too Cool

[Aladrin]

And an IR emitter. And the software to make them work together.

The Kinect provides more than just a couple webcams.

Re:Too Cool

[Bert64]

Isn't that pretty much what kinect is?

Re:Too Cool

[jgtg32a]

I was under the impression that all of the "work" that the Kinect does is done in the software not so much the hardware and that the hardware itself is an over-glorified web-cam.

I really hope I'm mistaken, because the Kinect has a ton of potential

Re:Too Cool

[Anonymous Coward]

The hardware is quite a bit more than a glorified webcam. Check out this article for more information:
http://www.wired.co.uk/wired-magazine/archive/2010/11/features/the-game-changer?page=all&p=2

Re:Too Cool

[intervex]

I think the magic of the hardware is in the infra-red grid scattering as seen in the night-shot video in the link and (I believe, but correct me if I'm wrong) hardware level processing of that returned data from the camera... I'm sure similar setups could be engineered, but the problem is environmental control... In order to make something distributable, you'd have to find a supplier of the same light scattering system as the software author, the same webcam(s) and the placement of everything would need to be precise... The kinect is an all in one solution to that, available nearly anywhere, cost effective, and very predictable... My girlfriend is going in to Occupational Therapy and recently did a study on assistive technologies, the constant theme for all those devices was insane price points. If you follow the link in the article and watch the video of yankeyan and his object recognition technology mash up using kinect as the hardware interface, it opens a world of possibilities for open-source and very affordable assistive technologies using the kinect. Just like the NY Times article about the iPad helping those with disabilities, I think the kinect could be another low cost assistive technology platform in it's infancy.

Re:Too Cool

[dimeglio]

Looks like Kinect is basically a Wii but "backwards." On the Wii, the Wiimote is an IR receiver and the wiibar is the IR LEDs emitter. Like some have pointed out, what's interesting is the body recognition algorithm.

Re:Too Cool

[SuricouRaven]

The hardware also includes some of the work, but not all - it does some of the pre-processing of the images in order to reduce the load on the 360, which needs all the processor time for running games.

Re:Too Cool

[bluefoxlucid]

Quake was so fucking awesome on a 33MHz 486SX with no floating point unit.

Re:Too Cool

[am 2k]

I think the magic of the hardware is in the infra-red grid scattering as seen in the night-shot video in the link and (I believe, but correct me if I'm wrong) hardware level processing of that returned data from the camera...

Yes, it looks like all Kinect does is measure the size of each dot, as reflected back into a IR-sensitive camera (big dot = near, small dot = far). That means you can actually see the 2D grid resolution of the device in the night shot.

Re:Too Cool

[Labcoat Samurai]

What, exactly, is backwards? If the Kinect sensor is analogous to the Wii sensor bar, then what is analogous to the Wii remote? It would have to *also* be the Kinect sensor. Since there's only one device, there's nothing to reverse. And furthermore, it's kind of strange to compare the two when they're almost nothing at all alike. The Wii remote detects the relative orientation and distance of two dots. It's ingenious in its simplicity, no doubt, but it's a stone axe next to IR painting and reading an entire scene. The amount of data Kinect feeds is leaps and bounds beyond what the Wii remote feeds.

But you make an excellent point. None of that would matter if not for a functional body recognition algorithm. Otherwise it'd just be a nightvision 3D camcorder.... which is cool, I suppose, but has no particular gaming application. On the other hand, one could argue that a similar thing is what's interesting about the Wii. I mean, without the processing built on top, what use is knowing the distance between and relative orientation of two dots?

Re:Too Cool

[VortexCortex]

Quake was so fucking awesome on a 33MHz 486SX with no floating point unit.

No it wasn't. I had such a system. Doom was fairly awesome on it, but Quake (and even Hexen) ran like crap -- Not an awesome experience by any measure (unless you think studdering sound clips and a nifty 3D slide show make for an "awesome" game).

However, Quake was awesome on my Pentium 133mhz with 16MB of RAM...

Re:Too Cool

[Anonymous Coward]

assistive technologies, the constant theme for all those devices was insane price points.

I think the kinect could be another low cost assistive technology platform in it's infancy.

As someone who works in the medical technology field, I can tell you this isn't going to happen. Medical or assistive products won't be provided by state healthcare/medical insurance unless it's been FDA approved as such. The cost of getting a product past even the lowest level of FDA certification is enormous (especially when your "device" consists largely of uncertified tech produced by another company), and with a relatively niche customer market, it makes for an appreciable percentage of the end user price.

Re:Too Cool

[Timmmm]

It's not just a webcam. It's some kind of laser IR projector (NOT LEDs), and a monochrome IR webcam. The laser emits lots of points (see videos on youtube), which are somehow 'coded' according to primesense, and then the webcam somehow turns this into depth information.

I still haven't seen an explanation of that step though, and I can't work it out. Surely it's not just triangulation? It obviously isn't time-of-flight as some people have suggested.

By the way, I just had a great idea for how to get two Kinects to point at the same area in a stereo configuration - use active 3D glasses!

http://concentriclivers.com/misc/stereo_kinect.pdf

Re:Too Cool

[BoberFett]

And then people wonder why we spend so much money on healthcare.

"I'm sorry sir, but you're affordable medical device simply won't do. Come back after you've spent another $100M, and we'll talk."

Re:Too Cool

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the kinect could be another low cost assistive technology platform in it's infancy.

That was a good post, up until the last sentence.

Re:Too Cool

[SuricouRaven]

IIRC from so long ago:

Doom ran nicely on a 386.
Wolfenstein 3D ran nicely on a 386.
Wolfenstein 3D ran on a 286, but not nicely. There are some processors too slow for even that simple an engine. You had to reduce it to a fraction of the screen.
Hexen ran nicely on a P133, but I never tried it on less.

Re:Too Cool

[scdeimos]

The important technology in the Kinect is supplied by PrimeSense. (Microsoft supplied the case and packaging materials.) Their web site describes the operation of the depth-sensing system, including the Structured Light projection used:

http://www.primesense.com/

Re:Too Cool

[Timmmm]

The important technology in the Kinect is supplied by PrimeSense.

I know.

Their web site describes the operation of the depth-sensing system, including the Structured Light projection used

No it doesn't. However, thanks for the "Structured Light" keyword - wikipedia has an article about it with some links. It seems that it is just triangulation of the dots. Pretty amazing that it works as well as it does!

Re:Too Cool

[CityZen]

It's explained to some extent in PrimeSense's patent: WIPO Patent WO/2007/043036.

The processing chip knows the position of each dot as projected onto a plane.

Where the IR camera sees each dot depends upon what it (the dot) projects onto (due to the offset from the IR laser). For any given dot, it's just a matter of triangulation to find the depth of it.

The trick, however, is in identifying the dots it's looking at. For this, the processor has to look at the relative dot positions and try to match areas of dots to areas within its stored pattern.

This is also why the resolution is limited: it needs more than a couple dots projected onto the same surface in order to be able to recognize the pattern.

Re:Too Cool

[gwjgwj]

I think that the principle of operation is different. It projects a known pattern and then identifies the position of each dot as read by the IR camera. I think the pattern is similar to this one . Based on that it is able to compute the distance to every dot.

thx for helping us, Love M$

[alen]

this is cool and what's going to happen is M$ is going to take the code and use it to add new features to Kinect in future releases. just like apple does with iphone jailbreak code and JB'd features

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[O('_')O_Bush]

Like WGA?

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

what's going to happen is M$ is going to take the code and use it to add new features to Kinect in future releases

No they won't. Microsoft is notoriously unable to reuse free (as in libre) software that can't be repackaged into a binary that they can sell for $$$ without releasing the source code for. It's just impossible for them because of their very nature as a closed-source software vendor. Any GPL code out there will not be touched by Microsoft with a 10 foot pole.

Also, if Microsoft wants to create high-tech apps for the Kinect, they have all the available R&D resources to do it on their own. There are a lot of very very smart people working for Microsoft, and if a bunch of unpaid hackers can turn the Kinect into something useful in a matter of hours, so can the Microsoft PhDs and code monkeys.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[alen]

only if you use the same code

once iOS 4.2 comes out it's going to have brightness control outside the settings app, similar to SBS Settings. Doubt apple will release the code since they made a lot of changes. all you have to do is take the code, change enough of it to make it look like your own and release it

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[UnknowingFool]

this is cool and what's going to happen is M$ is going to take the code and use it to add new features to Kinect in future releases. just like apple does with iphone jailbreak code and JB'd features

What makes you think that MS is going to do this in this case? Apple might add in these features to prevent people from jailbreaking phones; it won't stop people from using the Kinect on other platforms even if MS added in features. Also Apple makes a decent profit on every iPhone sold. MS might make a small profit on every Kinect but their larger strategy was dependent on the licensing revenue that exclusive Xbox games would provide.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Goaway]

Or, you know, just write it yourself. You think a brightness control is so hard to write that you absolutely have to steal it?

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[houghi]

and if a bunch of unpaid hackers can turn the Kinect into something useful in a matter of hours, so can the Microsoft PhDs and code monkeys.

It's not if the code monkeys can turn it into anything usefull, it is if the Marketing department can.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, if Microsoft wants to create high-tech apps for the Kinect, they have all the available R&D resources to do it on their own. There are a lot of very very smart people working for Microsoft, and if a bunch of unpaid hackers can turn the Kinect into something useful in a matter of hours, so can the Microsoft PhDs and code monkeys.

Then how come they have never been able to write a better OS than, say, Linux?

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Lumpy]

Well many "programmers" and companies have patented far simpler things because they are so unskilled they though it was hard.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

Then how come they have never been able to write a better OS than, say, Linux?

Look, I use Linux and I like it as much as the next guy, and I hate to break it to you, but Windows hasn't sucked since XP came out. It's actually a very decent and stable platform nowadays, and has been for a very long time.

The other thing is, most people think it's just natural that they can run Windows 7 on an 64-bit machine and run any old software made for XP-x86 or Vista, perhaps even Win 95 (I haven't tried) without problem. The level of backward-compatibility almost every release of Windows since 3.11 has managed to achieve is nothing short of amazing. Just ask a Mac guy who had to ditch his software collection every time Apple released a new MacOS... People don't give Microsoft enough credit for *that* marvel of engineering, because believe it or not, it works so well that people take it for granted. Me, it never ceases to amaze me...

This said, I prefer to run Linux for other reasons (chiefly that I can tinker, tweak it better than Windows and code for it without paying through the nose), but if I have work to do and Windows is the platform of choice, I use it because it works. I suggest you drop the Linux fanboi attitude if you want to be taken seriously when you talk about Microsoft.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[icebraining]

You are aware that most contributions to Linux are actually from paid employees, right?

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[alen]

apple's iOS is usually jailbroken before release, Apple doesn't care. they take the ideas and code that jailbreakers come up with and add them to their products. like the upcoming iOS 4.2 and changing the brightness without going to settings. it's a rip off from SBS Settings on jailbroken iphones

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Razalhague]

Companies don't patent things because they're hard, they patent things so that they can control their use.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[hedwards]

Generally, Apple reimplements other people's work. It's not a matter of ability, it's a matter of creativity. Very little of what Apple does is legitimately innovative. It's usually taking the next step after somebody else has done the hard work of creating a market.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[hedwards]

Incompetent management. Had they gone back to the drawing board with Win 98 and focused on stability, reliability and speed they'd be quite a bit further down the road than they are now. But since they chose to build their features on an unstable base they've had to fight with the perceptions of poor quality and stability for years. Rather than just bite the bullet, admit that it's the case and fix it. Resulting in them doing things in Vista and 7 which should've been done in ME and XP.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[hedwards]

They are, but it's different. There is no head Linux guy that tells people what they're going to work on if they want to draw a pay check. It's whatever the particular outfit needs fixed. Nothing wrong with that, but I'm guessing that the people that are paid to work on Linux in general without being there to fix specific problems that a company needs fixed is the minority.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[zmooc]

I'm still waiting for proper virtual desktops, focus follows mouse, a single interface for installing and upgrading apps and not having to copy my entire profile from the network when I log on to name a few.

Also, credit for binary backwards compatibility is not often given because it is simply not a problem in the open world. I don't care if the office version I bought 10 years ago still works; I simply install the latest version with two clicks. Not that I ever have to since I already get the latest versions of everything I need automatically for well over 10 years. Besides, most of that binary backwards compatibility is thanks to Intel, not Microsoft. It's not like it's that hard to keep supporting 1000 year old APIs.

Decent and stable don't necessarily make it better than, say, Linux. They just make things more decent and stable, which was about time. The only thing that would really make things _better_, is choice. Simply because "better" means something else to most people. And choice is something Windows still does not offer in large amounts.

Nevertheless, even though it still sucks, Windows has come a long way since 1995 but I still only use it when there's financial compensation;-)

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Yvan256]

Wide Graphics Array?

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[SuricouRaven]

9x was beyond saving. That's way they abandoned it with XP - threw out all the horribly unstable 9x ideas and instead converted what used to be windows NT/2k in order to replace it.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[MonsterTrimble]

The WGA was the single biggest reason I jumped ship for Linux - it was too big a pain in the ass to keep doing cracks. The only losses were my webcam,and my 24/7 availability of Civ4 and the original Call of Duty.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Marcika]

I'm still waiting for ...focus follows mouse...

A second of googling turned up this:

"Believe it or not, Windows does support focus-follows-mouse, though there is no GUI configuration exposing it. Instead you must edit a registry key and then log out and back in for the change to become effective. You can use regedit to edit the key. On Windows NT, set the following registry key to have a value of 1: HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Control Panel\Mouse\Active Windows Tracking On NT it has some bugs: some apps auto-raise on focus, and alt-tab doesn't move the mouse. On Windows 2000, XP, or 2003, you need to change a binary-valued registry key: HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Control Panel\Desktop\UserPreferencesMask This is a little-endian bitmask. For focus-follows-mouse, add the flag 0x1. For example, my XP SP2 laptop originally had a value of 9E 3E 05 80, which is 0x80053E9E. To activate focus-follows-mouse I changed to 0x80053E9F, or 9F 3E 05 80 in regedit. According to http://www.winguides.com/registry/display.php/18/ you can also achieve raise-on-focus by adding the flag 0x40. I haven't tested that as I don't like raise-on-focus."

As for virtual desktops, I'm using a decent open-source third-party add-on called Z-Systems Vista/XP Virtual Desktop Manager...

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[vegiVamp]

The hackers aren't encumbered by a bloated management structure.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[jonescb]

Linus is close enough to that "head Linux guy". He doesn't tell people what to do, but he decides what gets in the kernel and what doesn't.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Anonymous Coward]

You're a cheap fucker, aren't you.

Go ahead and try and justify pirating your copy of Windows. You know you want to.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[b0bby]

Look, I use Linux and I like it as much as the next guy, and I hate to break it to you, but Windows hasn't sucked since XP came out. It's actually a very decent and stable platform nowadays, and has been for a very long time.

I'd even say it hasn't sucked since 2000 came out - 2000 was really very stable and usable.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[dmmiller2k]

Companies don't patent things because they're hard, they patent things so that they can control their use.

Which boils down to "they patent things so that they can generate revenue from them". Follow the money.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Chyeld]

Microsoft can, and has, incorporate open sourced code into their products, and sometimes they've even done it legally.

A good portion of the original TCP/IP stack, and it's attendant utilities were based on BSD licensed code simply ported over. And while they later replaced the stack with their own code, the utilities for a long time were (and probably still are) essentially open source ports.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[mcgrew]

Work Gone Away

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Belial6]

I don't know... I think that using a green plus symbol to indicate a screen will be shrinking, and a garbage can to indicate that you want to take that prescious data out of your computer to keep it safe is pretty darn "creative".

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[mcgrew]

The level of backward-compatibility almost every release of Windows since 3.11 has managed to achieve is nothing short of amazing.

In the DOS days the backwards compatibility was excellent, but since Windows came out every time I upgraded, half of my apps (back then it was mostly games) wouldn't run at all, had no sound, or other problems. I had to make a special DOS boot disk to run Screamer 2 and quite a few other DOS games, as they required DOS. The disk burning software that came with the CD burner I bought with XP was completely trashed by XP; XP disabled it, and the disabling made it impossible to uninstall, and what's worse, every time I booted XP I gout one of those stupid little cartoon balloons reminding me it had disabled the software.

Windows hasn't sucked since XP came out.

Well, it hasn't sucked as much as earlier releases, but they still suck. There was a lot of functionality in Mandrake that Windows 7 still hasn't caught up with.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Charliemopps]

lol, as if Microsoft is going to give a shit about the license on the code.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[dintech]

Did you miss Vista? I apologise if you are one of Joseph Fritzel's children or Natascha Kampusch. That would be an almost reasonable excuse for believing that Microsoft have had a clean streak. Almost, but not quite.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[3vi1]

>> Microsoft is notoriously unable to reuse free (as in libre) software that can't be repackaged into a binary that they can sell for $$$ without releasing the source code for.

Yeah, that'll *never* happen: http://port25.technet.com/archive/2009/11/13/update-on-the-windows-7-download-tool-or-microsoft-to-open-source-the-windows-7-download-tool.aspx

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[qmaqdk]

Look, I use Linux and I like it as much as the next guy, and I hate to break it to you, but Windows hasn't sucked since XP came out. It's actually a very decent and stable platform nowadays, and has been for a very long time.

That's why Vista was such a massive success, right?

...The level of backward-compatibility almost every release of Windows since 3.11 has managed to achieve is nothing short of amazing. ...

This may be a design choice by MS, but IMHO I think it's a mistake on their part. Keeping such levels of backwards compatibility let's programs, and by extension libraries, get stuck in a mid 90s architecture. Every once in a while they should've made a clean cut and made emulators for older versions of the OS.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[SkimTony]

Just ask a Mac guy who had to ditch his software collection every time Apple released a new MacOS....

The only commercial (i.e., binary-only distribution) software I've ever had to "ditch" when changing processor architectures on a Macintosh was Finale, not because the software stopped working but because the copy-protection scheme did, and as such the software could not be activated (and would only run in a 30-day trial mode). I've never had to forego software just because of an OS upgrade.

I would also suggest you have a funny definition of "without problem." For a good example, try installing and running Microsoft Access 97 on Windows XP SP3, much less Vista or Windows 7. Will it work? Eventually. Will it work "without problem"? I'm not sure it qualifies.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Anonymous Coward]

it never ceases to amaze me...

Yes, I too have the same amazement everytime I see the microsoft flag flying on bootup. I take a moment of silence in awe. You might say I bleed microsoft blood. /end sarcasm

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[mcgrew]

I'm still waiting for proper virtual desktops, focus follows mouse

KDE had focus follows mouse way back when, and I hated it with a passion. The mouse cursor is over where you're typing, you brush the mouse aside to get the mouse cursor out of the way and the window you're trying to type into loses focus.

I'm happy that it doesn't do this by default any more. I hated that feature with a passion. It's good that it's there for those like you who like it, but I found it not only useless but annoying. I want the focus to stay on whatever window the focus is already on unless I click a different window or alt-tab out of the window I'm in.

I don't care if the office version I bought 10 years ago still works

I do. A word processor is a word processor. I see no reason to upgrade an office suite to a later version, particlarly with Microsoft; they have a horrible habit of making different versions so different that when you upgrade to a new version with new features you'll never use you have to relearn the program all over again.

I simply install the latest version with two clicks

And another five hundred dollars. yes, installing the latest version of Firefox or Open Office makes sense, but upgrading any office software you have to pay for is just stupid unless you're so damned rich you carry enough cash around to buy a new car with.

Decent and stable don't necessarily make it better than, say, Linux.

They still haven't managed to match Linux's stability.

And choice is something Windows still does not offer in large amounts.

Windows doesn't offer choice at all, and that's where Linux really shines. You like the focus follows mouse and I hate it, yet we can both be happy. Some people love Gnome, some love KDE, everybody's happy.

Yes, Windows has come a long way, but it hasn't come far enough.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually XP was one buggy piece of shit when it was released. It only stopped sucking dick after sp2.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Anonymous Coward]

That must be the single most hilarious answer I've seen on /. for months. I could spend hours listing Win* faults and shortcomings, but that's too easy a shot. And I'm no Linux fanboi, mind you --- Linux just sucks less, and wastes less of my time, than most other OSes. But as usual, you mix up kernel, libraries, and applications. I was specifically referring to the kernel and core libraries, of course. And it is still a mystery that in spite of the thousands of engineers working at MS, they have never been able to come up with anything really innovative or robust as far as the OS is concerned.
Except, as you point out, backward compatibility. The same one that makes it possible to run 20-year-old viruses...
Of course, other, more sensible Oses, have a different notion of compatibility. You know, like "./configure; make; make install".
And speaking of compatibility, 15 years later, I am still laughing at the file format incompatibility between Word 5.1 and Word 5.1a.

So, in a nutshell, according to you, that corny backward compatibility thing is the only amazing feature brought by Microsoft? Man, even I wouldn't be so severe...

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[rhook]

Damn you're cheap, for less then it costs to purchase Windows you could just get a MSDN subscription and download all the MS software you want.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Anonymous Coward]

They still haven't managed to match Linux's stability.

If you have stability problems with Windows you need to test your RAM. The fact is that the current releases of Windows are more stable and secure than Linux, I cannot remember the last time my system locked up.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[rhook]

The only real issue with Vista was hardware manufactures not having drivers ready in time for its release, this is not something that you can blame on Microsoft.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Anonymous Coward]

nah, microsoft is shit, always has been BSOD anyone?

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[ShakaUVM]

>>The level of backward-compatibility almost every release of Windows since 3.11 has managed to achieve is nothing short of amazing.

Sure, like how MATLAB7 R14 doesn't work on Vista or Win7, meaning our licensed code (which only runs on that specific version of MATLAB - newer versions cause it to crash) will only run on XP or 2000.

Yeah, Microsoft talks a lot about how they made Barbie Horsie Adventures for MSDOS 5.1 work under Vista, but if they can't get fucking *MATLAB* to run, their backwards compatibility is all a pile of shit.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[mywhitewolf]

citation required, stability now days is very rarely up to the OS and more about drivers, hardware and 3rd party programs, i had nothing but stability issues with windows 7 64 bit, ran Linux 64 bit (can't remember which one, not important) without any issues at all. reinstalled windows 7 32 bit (as i was sick of trying to get 32 bit apps to work in 64,) and no more stability issues. i've also previously experimented with linux 32 bit & 64 bit previously and had nothing but problems. you can't really blame an OS for being used in ways it wasn't intended and wondering why stability is an issue?

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Anonymous Coward]

Just ask a Mac guy who had to ditch his software collection every time Apple released a new MacOS.

[citation needed]

We work very hard on backward compatibility, even including workarounds for *broken apps* to continue to let them work.. If you know about problems with software not working from one version to another, write up bugs at bugreport.apple.com

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess you have never worked for IBM. Most paid contributors contribute code that their managers have asked them to do. They are tracked (manager breathing down their necks, through project plans, etc).

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Goaway]

It's usually taking the next step after somebody else has done the hard work of creating a market.

Remind me again, who created that market that the iPad was in?

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Linuxmonger]

Wow, that's so simple and backward compatible, or at least backward.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[Linuxmonger]

More likely, they'll use the code to make the next version harder to hack - put in some sort of encrypted data stream that requires a proprietary .dll to decrypt, then cry foul when it gets hacked again.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[ArcherB]

It's usually taking the next step after somebody else has done the hard work of creating a market.

Remind me again, who created that market that the iPad was in?

Palm.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[MonsterTrimble]

I am cheap.

This was four years ago and I was refering to the WGA crack specifically. I doubt I would have stayed on windows much longer regardless, but WGA pushed me over the edge.

Re:thx for helping us, Love M$

[b0bby]

No, I didn't miss Vista - I actually ran the 64-bit version on my main machine at home for 2 years. It was stable, and while sometimes the UAC stuff was annoying it wasn't really an issue. I didn't go to Vista until SP1, so the driver issues had been sorted out. Just because a bunch of people whined about it doesn't mean it wasn't a stable, usable OS. I've only moved to 7 because I had a hard drive crash & since I was installing anyway it seemed to be worth it in order to access recorded TV from my living room HTPC.

And then theres also this telescreen thing

[lemur3]

The amusing and quite cleverly done telescreen kinect as an advertising tool jokes I read here on slashdot were quite fun to see!

But.....I was very bemused to see this today, reported elsewhere:

"Microsoft's Dennis Durkin voiced an interesting idea at an investment summit last week -- the idea that the company's Kinect camera might pass data to advertisers about the way you look, play and speak. "We can cater what content gets presented to you based on who you are," he told investors, suggesting that the Kinect offered business opportunities that weren't possible "in a controller-based world."

  And over time that will help us be more targeted about what content choices we present, what advertising we present, how we get better feedback. And data about how many people are in a room when an advertisement is shown, how many people are in a room when a game is being played, how are those people engaged with the game? How are they engaged with a sporting event? Are they standing up? Are they excited? Are they wearing Seahawks jerseys?

http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/15/microsoft-exec-caught-in-privacy-snafu-says-kinect-might-tailor/

yay?

Re:And then theres also this telescreen thing

[netsharc]

Why just data about the people.. it's got cameras, it can look at the whole room. What sort of cereal do they like? What paintings/posters of celebs/movies are on the walls, what magazine is on the coffee table, what brand is the condom wrapper the guy just pulled out as he's about to get it on with the girl on that sofa? And a few minutes after the condom was spotted the device might well conclude, he could use some "performance"-"enhancing" drugs!

Re:And then theres also this telescreen thing

[sherriw]

Am I the only one who thinks this is BAD? It better be opt in... because I really don't want an MS eyeball in my living room sending data back to whoever. Kinect data better stay in my local machine unless I give them permission...

Re:And then theres also this telescreen thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh no! I guess that means that I shouldn't use my Kinect anymore with my Xbox 360... is anyone coming out with any exciting stuff I can do with my Kinect, say on my Linux box, that doesn't require a closed-source driv-- oh wait, never mind.

Re:And then theres also this telescreen thing

[DrXym]

"We can cater what content gets presented to you based on who you are," he told investors, suggesting that the Kinect offered business opportunities that weren't possible "in a controller-based world."

Microsoft would be skinned alive if they did that. It's disconcerting enough when a Kinect / PSEye game takes a picture of you. Now imagine it sends that picture off to a remote server for analysis with or without the person's consent. For all MS know, people are standing there naked, or having sex, or their 2 year old kid is running around with no clothes, or people otherwise candidly enjoying the privacy of their own homes.

If ever the tech appeared Microsoft would be rightly hauled over the coals. Lawsuits would follow, the EU would get involved, and basically it would turn into a hellish nightmare of litigation.

So no its not likely to ever happen. Chalk it up to an extremely ill chosen example of what it could do, not what it will do. Even so, the capability to monitor or record is implied by all these devices. I wouldn't be surprised if Sony and MS have some way of enabling at least audio recording for dealing with complaints of griefing, harassment etc.

Re:And then theres also this telescreen thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, some Cyrillic text and a blue button that I'm not going to click!

Maybe I would have seen what you actually wanted me to see if I disabled NoScript for something named "uemo18bf3w.co.cc", but if you expect that on Slashdot you're crazy. Why don't you use some words to convey whatever this link was supposed to?

Re:And then theres also this telescreen thing

[The Great Pretender]

Well they are free to direct advertise zit cream, condoms Billabong clothing to my teenage son. He needs some style

Re:And then theres also this telescreen thing

[Chyeld]

I guess that means I should turn it off when we start Orgy Fridays back up.

Hey Microsoft!

[Eggplant62]

This is what is called innovation. This is people doing different things with your Kinect device than you had ever dreamed of yourselves. Sorry you didn't think of it all yourselves.

Re:Hey Microsoft!

[lemur3]

After seeing things like this: http://www.adafruit.com/blog/2010/11/14/hacked-kinect-is-now-a-3d-video-capture-tool/

I start to wonder if microsoft did/does have greater plans for this product later on in the future.... but now theyve had someone beat them to the punch.

My mind isnt well suited to imagining the types of uses this might be good for but after seeing the kinds of things people are doing with it already I have a hard time imagining microsoft didnt have some similar ideas.. and thought profiting off of them might be good.

Re:Hey Microsoft!

[cablepokerface]

This is what is called innovation. This is people doing different things with your Kinect device than you had ever dreamed of yourselves. Sorry you didn't think of it all yourselves.

That's right, because after hundreds of millions of dollars and years in the MS R&D department some of the most bright minds in computer science haven't thought of ANYTHING these hackers are doing. And, as we speak, they are in NO WAY developing further commercial uses for the device. Yup, they want to keep Kinect confined to 'Dance Central' forever.

douche.

I know how we can make this announcement look bad

[Chrisq]

I know how we can make this announcement look bad

"Microsoft's Dennis Durkin voiced an interesting idea at an investment summit last week -- the idea that the company's Kinect camera might pass data to advertisers about the way you look, play and speak. "We can cater what content gets presented to you based on who you are," he told investors,

Microsoft adds support for racial profiling!

Not really been hacked,

[Anonymous Coward]

but made available on other platforms (Linux, MacOSX, Windows).

  A real hack would be to upgrade its firmware so it can prepare and serve you some coffee when you show it that your an coffee cup is empty...

Re:Not really been hacked,

[Aladrin]

Actually, yeah, it was hacked. It was supposed to be protected from use like this, but someone figured out the protocol/handshake needed to start it up. They hacked it.

Re:Not really been hacked,

[UnknowingFool]

Depends on the meaning of 'hack'. This does apply to the general meaning. I actually think this is better than any firmware changes. Legally, all people have done is reverse-engineered a software driver. MS may threaten all they want with all sorts of nonsense like the DMCA, but these hackers are covered legally. Any modifications might have gotten into some more grey areas.

Re:i have an erection

[Carewolf]

im so excited and i just cant hide it

Well, I'm about to lose control and I think I like it.

So, you don't want me to stop you now?

Microsoft didn't get it

[Aladrin]

Microsoft really missed the boat here. Instead of producing an amazing new piece of hardware and selling it like crazy, they produced the hardware, locked it to a platform, and then threatened to sue anyone who used it without a pre-existing agreement with them.

This could have really gone crazy if they'd just released a little driver and maybe an SDK and let PC developers go crazy with it. They could even have charged more for the 'PC version' of it, just like they did with the XBox 360 controller, even though the only different was the CD that came with it.

Not that they can't do that now, but they missed the hype period... And that's really helpful when pushing a product.

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[js3]

They are a business. Their goal is to make money, not release cool things for hackers. What makes you think they don't have ideas for the kinect technology?

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[91degrees]

they produced the hardware, locked it to a platform, and then threatened to sue anyone who used it without a pre-existing agreement with them.

Who, specifically, did they threaten to sue?

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[gad_zuki!]

Exactly. I'm starting to dislike this narrative that has developed here, namely that MS doesn't know what it has and that they're going out of their way to stop people from hacking it.

1. I'm sure the researchers at MS know exactly what they have and that a lot of what you're seeing now has been in their labs for ages. Its just that MS isn't in the 3D video space and aren't trying to sell 3D video software for movie production or whatever.

2. From what I've read from the guy who built the first drivers, there isn't any crypto or other tricks to stop PCs from communicating with the Kinect. Its just a plain jane USB device.

3. At the end of the day the interesting parts of the Kinect are its software. If you wanted a stereo camera or something that could do 3D depth, there are items like this in the 3D space that do a hell of a lot more than VGA resolution.

4. MS is monetizing this technology again in Win8. Gestures are built into the OS, etc. Its not like Kinect doesn't have a future on the PC platform as a commercial device.

Oh well, back to your regularly scheduled "ZOMG MS IS EVIL!!" 2 minutes hate.

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[UnknowingFool]

This could have really gone crazy if they'd just released a little driver and maybe an SDK and let PC developers go crazy with it. They could even have charged more for the 'PC version' of it, just like they did with the XBox 360 controller, even though the only different was the CD that came with it.

MS could have done that but they have a vested interest in tying the Kinect to the Xbox like exclusive titles. Keeping the Kinect on Xbox only would guarantee that a large number of games would only be for the Xbox. For example, the game Dance Central can now be ported to PS3, Wii, PC, OS X, etc. If the Kinect was tied to Xbox, anyone wanting to play would have to own or buy an Xbox. They would have to buy the Xbox only title. Remember MS makes a little profit on each Kinect. They would make a lot more on game licensing. Now someone wanting to play the game can play on platform of their own choice and MS would not get any licensing revenue.

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[Lumpy]

Because they would have made MORE money.

This is the problem, they are running with blinders on.

Sell product X to Y users that have our Product Y... or sell product X to EVERYONE on the planet.

Selling to everyone is ALWAYS more profitable than locking it down. Only mentally retarded Low IQ Business degree holders and IP lawyers think the first is the most profitable.

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[ThirdPrize]

Cos like voice recognition, it has little use on the desktop. Still, it's USB isn't, so it will make its way to the PC eventually?

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[Anonymous Coward]

Keeping this hardware locked into their gaming platform for even a few months before others come out with clones is going to make them tons more cash. You don't seem to understand the console gaming market model.

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[spisska]

Exactly. I'm starting to dislike this narrative that has developed here, namely that MS doesn't know what it has and that they're going out of their way to stop people from hacking it.

But that certainly does appear to be the case, even though the Kinnect is sold with a healthy margin -- I recall seeing a hardware breakdown that suggested a build cost of around $55 to $60.

1. [...] Its just that MS isn't in the 3D video space and aren't trying to sell 3D video software for movie production or whatever.

A bit odd, considering Apple has been so successful at it. Microsoft's MO has always been to copy others' successes, particularly Apple's. Maybe they've just failed at this more spectacularly than they've failed at their other attempts to copy. (Hows that 'Plays For Sure' thing working out?)

Which is to say that despite years of effort and tens of billions in R&D, they're no more than marginal players in most of the 'spaces' they try to enter. It's all OSs, office suites, and business backends, and the clock is ticking in each of these areas.

I'll give you game consoles, although it will take several more generations of Xbox before the billions in development are paid off. Anyone other than MS, however, would have considered the Xbox project a failure years ago.

2. From what I've read from the guy who built the first drivers, there isn't any crypto or other tricks to stop PCs from communicating with the Kinect. Its just a plain jane USB device.

They're not interested in you buying their hardware without their software any more than you buying a white-box PC without a Windows license. I'm not sure their tactics from the '90s will work again.

3. At the end of the day the interesting parts of the Kinect are its software. If you wanted a stereo camera or something that could do 3D depth, there are items like this in the 3D space that do a hell of a lot more than VGA resolution.

Sure, but not in an off-the-shelf package that costs $200.

4. MS is monetizing this technology again in Win8. Gestures are built into the OS, etc. Its not like Kinect doesn't have a future on the PC platform as a commercial device.

Hee hee. I'll never get tired of Microsoft shills harping on the supposedly great stuff we'll see in the next edition of whatever. I don't know of any company ever that has so consistently over-promised and under-delivered -- and that behavior goes back to MS-DOS 1.0.

Remember how Longhorn was going to, like, totally change everything? Remember how WinFS was going to be revolutionary? Heck, remember how in the early '90s we were all going to be controlling our computers with voice commands?

It's coming in the next version of Windows, and it'll be, like, the most totally mind-blowing thing you've ever seen! Really soon now! Promise!

You should be happy with how many people hate Microsoft. Nobody will hate them when they are no longer relevant, and I don't reckon that's more than about five to ten years away.

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[spisska]

Selling to everyone is ALWAYS more profitable than locking it down. Only mentally retarded Low IQ Business degree holders and IP lawyers think the first is the most profitable.

Accountant: We're losing money on every unit we sell.

PHB: That's okay, we'll make up for it in volume.

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[Dunbal]

"Remember how Longhorn was going to, like, totally change everything? Remember how WinFS was going to be revolutionary? Heck, remember how in the early '90s we were all going to be controlling our computers with voice commands?"

I think it's amazing how you completely failed to mention that iPod-killer, the Microsoft Zune...

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[NatasRevol]

A few years ago, work did an AD conversion companywide. They hired a MS guy to go to each site, work with IT on scripts, etc to tie each machine in.

I remember talking to him about iPod vs Zune and iPhone vs Zune Phone. He assured me that the next version of each was going to practically put Apple out of business. I tried not to snicker too loudly.

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[spisska]

I tried to allude to the Zune with the 'Plays for Sure' comment -- I think it's important not just to point out MS' failures, but also what happens to people who get in bed with Microsoft.

And the potential list of world-changing developments that completely failed to change anything would just be too long.

E.g. The ribbon, tablets, WinCE, WebTV, MSN, Windows ME, Vista, the list goes on and on and on.

Anybody remember their Smart Watch?

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[neokushan]

If I recall correctly, Microsoft has mentioned in the past about releasing Kinect for the PC.
Still, by its very nature, Kinect is designed to be used in a Living room, in front of a Large TV for best results. Now, I know that most of us don't have 42" monitors and a 6x6m space in our offices, so perhaps that's the real reason why Microsoft is focusing on the causal gaming market. They've put a lot of research into this, so I wouldn't be surprised if we see the technology applied elsewhere eventually.

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[Anonymous Coward]

Because they would have made MORE money.

This is the problem, they are running with blinders on.

Sell product X to Y users that have our Product Y... or sell product X to EVERYONE on the planet.

Selling to everyone is ALWAYS more profitable than locking it down. Only mentally retarded Low IQ Business degree holders and IP lawyers think the first is the most profitable.

This isn't a strategy only used by "mentally retarded loq IQ business degree holders" it's been a pretty standard thing for a long time. Why do you think that is? Because when you do it right, you make a killing while putting in a lot less effort.

If Microsoft hit the marketing right for the Kinect they will increase the sales of Xbox's and all the assorted peripherals (controllers, cables, games etc.) as well - people who *really* want a Kinect but currently dont have an Xbox will buy an Xbox just to get this new functionality. Doesn't require any extra marketing for the Xbox itself - all they need to do is keep aggressively pushing the Kinect with the clear disclaimer that you need an Xbox to use it. It pushes the sales of many of their other existing products which they already have developed and that are already on the shelves.

If Microsoft were to open this up to all platforms, ("EVERYONE on the planet" as you said) they would sell more units of the Kinect - but it wouldn't boost the sales and brand awareness of their other products as much.

It's the same concept with "Flagship" games - did you see how aggressive (it was all over TV in prime time here in the UK) the marketing was for Gears of War? It wasn't Epic Games (the developer) that paid for most of that. It was Microsoft - the game was an Xbox exclusive at the time (PC version was released later). If they pushed this really awesome game and got everyone talking about it at the watercooler it would sell Xbox's.

While the Xbox commercially speaking is a flop by Microsoft's past standards, there are numerous other examples of people employing this strategy who have achieved great success. Microsoft in the early days with Windows / MS Office springs to mind. Want MS Office? Gotta buy Windows. That product relationship alone made them billions.

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember how this was the year of the Linux desktop? It works both ways.

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[Splab]

I know they have talked about making it tampering resistant, but downright threatened to sue? When did that happen?

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[Your.Master]

Selling to everyone is ALWAYS more profitable than locking it down.

This just isn't correct at all. Look at the history of the Mac. There are a million reasons you'd want to sell to a small market.

Re:Microsoft didn't get it

[Shados]

Unless, of course, its a loss leader, which is extremely common in the gaming hardware industry.

Immersive Sports Games

[digitaldc]

I am sure it will be coming out, but the coolest thing to do would be to make immersible sports games where your body controls the motions of the player and you get a workout in return.

Baseball would probably be the easiest to start with.

Re:Immersive Sports Games

[StuartHankins]

But won't they need to make a syringe controller too?

And?

[ledow]

So we have depth data, and webcam imagery of the same place. Where to go now? That's the problem - the field of image processing isn't actually that well developed that we can do things really useful with it. Sure, the hand-waving paint demonstration is cool but you could do that with a webcam ten years ago if you had the right algorithms. The Kinect only adds the depth-map through some (admittedly clever) physics but that just adds a third dimension that needs to be analysed, filtered, recognised and interpreted.

Yes, we can spot if someone has one hand or two in the air but we always could. We can follow a particular point of interest with some vague accuracy (watch where the bloke's hands go in that green-line-painting demo and what the software draws - they are often out by the whole width of a hand, and lag behind his actual movements) but we always could. We can colourise the images and make them look cool (black for near, pink for a bit away, green for a long way away) but again, that's always been available just with slightly different technology.

The problem we have is that hardware access and access to raw camera data is INCREDIBLY easy compared to actually doing anything useful with them. The green-line-drawing problem is no different to the 200-line VB app I saw in the 1990's that could do handwriting recognition from a shaky pen/mouse stroke - it works, mostly, if you don't need complete accuracy but it's still easily confused and why would you need to do that in the first place? The hard part is now actually interpreting that data and that relies on computer visualisation which is regarded in the same breath as "voice recognition" (which I have *never* got to work well enough for me and I don't have a particularly strong / incomprehensible accent). Yes, you can do a demo that you think looks useful but actually, apart from the odd toy project, there's not much substance underneath it all.

Yeah, you probably can write a quick Wii-Sports-a-like that's fun to play but you probably always could. And the difference is several dozen thousand lines of code to vaguely recognise a particular, fixed, object with limited parameters using what is essentially a webcam image with a little more data (involving processing several 640x480 and one 320x240 image in fractions of a second to obtain a particular data point), or just reading some single-axis acceleration data from a chip that spits it out (e.g. Wiimote) in a format you can use directly and provides roughly the same, if not better, accuracy when it comes to interpreting the correct movement.

The Kinect isn't anything special or revolutionary - sure, it's a nice toy and the depth-function is the best part, but that just adds a whole other dimension (actually a whole other 2D set of data because it obviously can do true 3D) to analyse and try to interpret - you coulda got that with a rapidly scanning laser or even just analysing two stereoscopic images properly. Certain filters and image-processing techniques can form edges, boundaries, object-approximations etc. from the resulting data but they always could and overall you still have to solve the vital problem - what to do with the existing data that you can't already do somehow? Follow hands for cool interactive-whiteboard-like presentations? I saw a multi-touch table at the Museum of London yesterday that did exactly that from a projected image and a single returned 2D webcam image. Follow some object to play pseudo-games? We've been doing that for decades but admittedly required things like reflective spots - Hollywood makes ENORMOUS such of such things, so they might be interested but chances are that this particular toy is way under-performing compared to something their technical guys could knock up in a real studio.

It's a good thing for independent toy-like games but look at the target market - someone who owns a Kinect and a PC (and presumably a 360, but not necessarily), knows it can be plugged into PC, has a knowledge of such independent projects and decide

Re:And?

[samjam]

I wanna see a bench of 4 drivers playing supertuxkart with cardboard cut-out steering wheels.

Re:And?

[martas]

we can't push image processing hundreds of years into the future

exaggerate much? really, you think it'll take hundreds of years to solve the vision problem?

Re:And?

[91degrees]

This is actually something you could conceivably do with the eye-toy. You'd need to print a specific pattern on each wheel but once that's done it's pretty easy to search for circles and see which ones match the reference.

Re:And?

[ThirdPrize]

From the UI perspective it is like a big multi touch screen that works in 3d. It probably has a few "gestures" built in, a bit like iOS. A good source of first gen games would be converting some of them iPhone games over to it. As long as you can have something similar to the "finger off screen" event then i'm sure most of them would be fairly easy to port.

Re:And?

[ledow]

47 times a day.

And I think computer vision is something too simplistic at the moment - it's image filters, edge detection and tweaking of tolerances. Useful for counting sperm to the nearest half-million, but not something that'll approach human-levels of interpretation of the image until, well, the computer is convincingly human. If the Turing Test were to comprise of questions about "what's in this image", it'll be solved in the same time that the plain-line-of-text Turing Test will fool most people into thinking it's actually human.

Re:And?

[vlm]

we can't push image processing hundreds of years into the future

exaggerate much? really, you think it'll take hundreds of years to solve the vision problem?

We will always be able to move the endpoints.

Can your new camera interpret a scene like an artist or a professional photographer so as to give correct advise? Not just bring the camera lens into focus but now provide framing, make up, clothing, and posing advise?

Oh you did that in 2030, well, I've decided its freaking useless unless you can select a specific artist or pro photographer, perhaps Salvador Dali or Ansel Adams.

Oh, you did that in 2040, well, I've decided its freaking useless unless it has virtual community mode. "Camera, I command thee to take a picture worthy of 4chan".

Oh, you did that in 2050, well, I've decided its freaking useless unless it intelligently creates and trolls the virtual community for you based on its view of the scene in front of its lens, next to the "upload to facebook" button I want a "troll 4chan" button on my camera.

etc

Re:And?

[91degrees]

You need that third dimension to do intersting stuff. Thr touch table actually used the third dimension. It was a very crude 1 bit Z-representation (finger is/isn't touching the screen) but without that you're a lot more limited. A finger painting application is very limited if you can't take the brush of the paper. Adding a camera adds more than a z position. It adds an image of the player as well. It is a camera after all. You can do fun stuff with that.

Re:And?

[ledow]

Actually the table I was talking about was much more simplistic and seemed to just detect a "tap" motion by a quick change in size of the hand (camera was mounted above). Thus a quickly-shrinking hand blob was seen as a "click". It has problems with some small children's hands who hadn't got the hang of holding their palm flat under the image at that moment (so the camera sees an entirely-too-brief sideways images of a hand become a flat hand and doesn't know to interpret it as a "click").

Putting your hand two feet above the table so it cast a shadow on the bit you wanted (projector was mounted right next to camera) and dipping it quickly produced the same "click" response as actually tapping the table that the image was projected on (which was a bit of white MDF).

Re:And?

[bluefoxlucid]

If you can do that in 2030 I'll be impressed.

Re:And?

[tepples]

I've decided its freaking useless unless you can select a specific artist or pro photographer, perhaps Salvador Dali or Ansel Adams.

Software to turn a photograph into the style of a specific artist already exists. See: GIMPressionist. I also seem to remember a web site to which one can upload a face shot and it'll turn a white man black, turn a young girl older, turn a photo into manga style, etc., but Google is failing me as to its name.

Re:And?

[91degrees]

Ah, right. I assumed it would be the IR camera mounted behind the screen type table and some trick which I'm guessing involves an extremely shallow depth of field to make sure fingers are only visible when actually on the screen. Although I wonder if it does work by image size. The way I see it, if the camera is slightly offset then it can determine how far away your hand is by comparing the offset of the image from the projected reference.

Which museum was it? I feel an urge to visit.

htpc

[falldeaf]

I can't wait until a stable, generic driver comes out for it that sees gestures! I'll use it to control my tv in place of the wii-mote. :)

Re:htpc

[Lumpy]

You control your TV with a wiiMote?

do you shake it up and down to change channels?

wave side to side to raise volume?

I think the IR remote that came with the tv is far better than looking like a fool waving your arms around.

Re:htpc

[falldeaf]

Haha, not quite. I don't use the accelerometer sensor. The buttons on it change the channel and volume, etc. And when I'm in browser mode the IR camera functionality on allows me to use it like a mouse/pointer device. Also, when I'm using the snes emulator I can connect the classic controller to it and play the games like they were meant to be played! Take that shitty IR remote! Although, full disclosure, since I've moved from mythtv to boxee after comcast allowed me to buy internet without cable tv, I'm using my android phone instead.

Re:htpc

[pantheonwhaley]

That is so true. And I always forget where I left my arms, or they fall down in between the cushions.

Re:htpc

[vlm]

Take that shitty IR remote!

I was never able to solve the problem of "turn the TV on and off" "adjust the surround sound amplifier" etc so I'm stuck with the programmable shitty IR remotes on my mythtv boxes... Is there any wiimote solution to that general class of problem? (beyond the obvious, epoxy the wiimote to the back of a IR control, etc)

Re:htpc

[falldeaf]

Yah what you need is one of these guys: http://www.google.com/search?q=pc+ir+blaster The Wii-mote is basically just working like a fancy keyboard for me. An IR blaster will get your computer talking to all your IR only components.

Re:htpc

[Lumpy]

Those solutions are found with buying non crappy hardware designed by monkeys banging on keyboards.

TV with RS232 control or Discreet IR on and off commands. and a Surround sound AMP that has rs232 control.

Even my DVD player has RS232.

Problem is, device makers like to hide the fact their IR control or RS232 control is junk or useless. Sony products are a crap shoot, LG were good up until the last release, now they are crap. Panasonic and Kenwood still have real control, but you never know when they decide that designing a good product is a bad idea and switch to making things crappy.

Merantz 4003 dvd player is awesome, but discontinued, the new ones are crap or overpriced. Sony BLuray used to have discreet ir on and off, the latest model did away with the discreet on and off.

Look for integrator friendly devices. this means fishing in high end integrator forums.

Re:htpc

[vlm]

OK interesting that could work.
There are some obvious race conditions. To switch back from wii input to mythtv input on the TV I'd need to select the mythtv input on the mythtv... well I suppose if anything is seen from the wiimote, I could send an IR blast to switch the TV's input. Except adjusting volume on the amplifier. Plenty of if then to program in...

"Kinect for Windows"

[gmurray]

I'd like to point out the fact that they called the product "Kinect for Xbox 360" means its highly likely they are planning on releasing a "Kinect for Windows" at some point. Along with support for the kinect being used as a multitouch input driver for Windows (7/8). But its nice we are getting a head start.

No.

[AcidPenguin9873]

Um, how about the fact that Microsoft came out with the Kinect in the first place? Isn't that pretty innovative? We wouldn't have a headline that reads "Exciting Kinect Stuff Already Coming Out" if not for a previous headline that read "Microsoft Releases Exciting New Input Device That They Spent R&D Money On For The Last Couple Years".

Sorry, but just because MS didn't fully develop and support everything someone in a dorm room can think of at the launch of their brand new hardware product doesn't mean they lack vision or innovation or whatever. Anything they release has to be supported in SDKs, APIs, be tested, etc., and that costs money and time. It's great that people are hacking it and coming up with new things to do with it, and I don't know why they tried to lock it down, but it's not locked down anymore, so who gives a crap?

Re:No.

[Anonymous Coward]

One word: EyeToy.

No innovation. This is just MS taking existing technology and hyping it up beyond belief again, and the technology isn't even that impressive to begin with. It's laggy, imprecise and horrible for any real application, just like the EyeToy, the Wiimote, and Sony's wand-thing.

"Oh, you just hate new technology, if it were up to people like you we'd still be back in the stone age." NO. I'm 100% for new technology, but only if it was GOOD technology. Pushing garbage on us and calling it roses is just stupid. Fix your technology to be useful first, THEN hype it up and release it. It's taken new television technology forever to get to a point where it's acceptable to view without horrible blurring/motion tearing and horrible colors, and we've basically wasted our time and money on older ones.

Get it RIGHT first, THEN release.

Re:No.

[BobMcD]

One word: EyeToy.

No innovation. This is just MS taking existing technology and hyping it up beyond belief again, and the technology isn't even that impressive to begin with.

I own an EyeToy and I'm here to tell you you're vastly overestimating what it can do. Saying that it and the Kinect are the same thing is either intellectually dishonest or vastly uninformed. It is, at a minimum, an EyeToy that can do depth and body tracking. These alone are significant enough to put it in a new class of device.

It's laggy, imprecise and horrible for any real application, just like the EyeToy, the Wiimote, and Sony's wand-thing.

On the first point, control with your body actually will always be more difficult than control with your thumbs. So 'horrible for any real application' is a completely false standard. Imagine a lag free, completely precise Street Fighter clone. You'll be whining that you can't actually kick as fast and high as Chun Lee, and it would therefore be a 'horrible application'. Therefore all you really NEEDED to do was say 'I prefer buttons'. Because that's all there really seems to be in here once you strip away the crap.

As to the list, Kinect has depth, with the others don't have, and Wii/Move require handheld devices which require power and wireless setup.

But you're absolutely right, none of these have buttons as a primary mode of play, so in that manner they're 'all the same'...

Re:No.

[BobMcD]

Oh, and I forgot the most important part: FEET!

Wii and PS3 lack those appendages, for the most part.

Re:No.

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought Microsoft just bought the IP:

http://onlygizmos.com/kinect-apples-loss-is-microsofts-gain/2010/11/

Re:No.

[trollertron3000]

Although I agree that MS has the capabilities to create the kinect, my understanding is it was actually created by a company called PrimeSense and sold to MS (after it was offered to Apple *chuckles*).

Re:No.

[Anonymous Coward]

One word: EyeToy. No innovation. This is just MS taking existing technology and hyping it up beyond belief again, and the technology isn't even that impressive to begin with.

I own an EyeToy and I'm here to tell you you're vastly overestimating what it can do. Saying that it and the Kinect are the same thing is either intellectually dishonest or vastly uninformed. It is, at a minimum, an EyeToy that can do depth and body tracking. These alone are significant enough to put it in a new class of device.

Yes, Kinect is more advanced than the EyeToy, but Microsoft still didn't innovate: the Kinect hardware is from an Israeli company that had been shopping it around for years (e.g. before the PS3 launched, it was rumored that Sony's "big announcement" would be that they had licensed that tech).

Re:No.

[BobMcD]

This argument splits hairs over the technical history of the hardware in order to prop up the original statement. I'm not compelled.

Parent stated, roughly, that 'EyeToy == Kinect' and therefore 'no innovation'.

Re:No.

[tibit]

Kinect doesn't do body tracking. It only provides an image with depth information, a tracking library on XBox does the model fitting and provides the estimated body configuration via an API.

Targeted Ads

[kenp2002]

For many who loath the idea of targeted ads I would assume many, if not most of those people are single. As a married old fart I can attest that A little intelligent ad targeting is nice. I for one get tired of feminine product advertisements because the wife uses my computer occasionally for shopping. Please, feel free to use the Kinect to determine if I am in fact: Male, Fat or Skinny, cheerful or pissed off. Because:

A: If I am male, I don't need tampon ads
B: If I am fat, don't advertise Big Macs, advertise weight loss because last I checked, fatties know where BK and McDs are. And no it's not your genetics, it's because you are irresponsible with your health. A predisposition just means you have to work harder. Thermodynamics proves this; your lack of responsibility, low self esteem, and discipline does not change the laws of physics.
C: If I am in a good mood try selling me a Beach Boy's collection. If I am pissed off Rammstien might be a better choice.

Re:Targeted Ads

[cayenne8]

"A: If I am male, I don't need tampon ads

B: If I am fat, don't advertise Big Macs, advertise weight loss because last I checked, fatties know where BK and McDs are. And no it's not your genetics, it's because you are irresponsible with your health. A predisposition just means you have to work harder. Thermodynamics proves this; your lack of responsibility, low self esteem, and discipline does not change the laws of physics.

C: If I am in a good mood try selling me a Beach Boy's collection. If I am pissed off Rammstien might be a better choice."

How about:

D: No more fuckin' Ads.

You *do* know about AdBlock Plus for the browser, right?

Also...tell the bitch to get on her own computer. Hell, she might *accidentally* delete some of your better pr0n links.

:)

Re:Targeted Ads

[vlm]

You're crosswatching too much. Crosswatching is not some psuedo-christian thing, its the TV watching equivalent of cross dressing.

They already target advertising extremely aggressively. We have DVRs so I only see flashes of commercials, but it seems my wifes soap operas don't advertise many video games and I don't see many feminine products advertised on the embarrassingly named syfy channel.

There are entire genres of TV shows I don't see ads for, don't know that exist (at least from my TV viewing), such as dancing with famous people, or musical high school children.

If you like... those kind of shows... hey, thats OK, but you can't demand they change their whole product lineup just for one guy on slashdot.

Re:Targeted Ads

[Anonymous Coward]

What do TV watching habits have to do with anything?

I think you may be confused. The GP was talking about targeted Ads on the computer, not on TV.

Re:Targeted Ads

[Splab]

Wouw, you should spent some time reading up on subjects, and perhaps think about your posts before putting your head so far up your arse.

If B applies then why does A apply? In A you say cater to those who needs it, in B you say don't? Also, have that tiny little brain of yours ever wondered why the ladies in tampon commercials are so pretty? Those commercials aren't targeted at your wife, they are for the men, we have no idea what to buy, so when the shoppinglists says tampon, your brain will serve up pretty little lady in advertisement for named brand.

Also on a related note, "fatties" are very much fighting their genetically programmed cravings. Good for you that you steered around that pit, now lets see what all those years of smoking, drinking and inhaling polutted air is doing for your health?

Re:Targeted Ads

[vlm]

What do TV watching habits have to do with anything?

Its an obvious example of how targeted ads are an inevitable result of consuming targeted media.

Doesn't matter if its watching oprah or going to oprah.com in FF, you're going to see chick products in the ads. I think people pretty much understand thats how it works on TV, but the original poster seems surprised thats how it works on a website.

Re:Targeted Ads

[cayenne8]

"A: If I am male, I don't need tampon ads

B: If I am fat, don't advertise Big Macs, advertise weight loss because last I checked, fatties know where BK and McDs are. And no it's not your genetics, it's because you are irresponsible with your health. A predisposition just means you have to work harder. Thermodynamics proves this; your lack of responsibility, low self esteem, and discipline does not change the laws of physics.

C: If I am in a good mood try selling me a Beach Boy's collection. If I am pissed off Rammstien might be a better choice."

How about:

D: No more fuckin' Ads.

You *do* know about AdBlock Plus for the browser, right?

Also...tell the bitch to get on her own computer. Hell, she might *accidentally* delete some of your better pr0n links.

:) "

Ouch!!

Someone out there must not like AdBlock , eh?

Re:Targeted Ads

[Anonymous Coward]

For many who loath the idea of targeted ads I would assume many, if not most of those people are single. As a married old fart I can attest that A little intelligent ad targeting is nice. I for one get tired of feminine product advertisements because the wife uses my computer occasionally for shopping. Please, feel free to use the Kinect to determine if I am in fact: Male, Fat or Skinny, cheerful or pissed off. Because:

A: If I am male, I don't need tampon ads
B: If I am fat, don't advertise Big Macs, advertise weight loss because last I checked, fatties know where BK and McDs are. And no it's not your genetics, it's because you are irresponsible with your health. A predisposition just means you have to work harder. Thermodynamics proves this; your lack of responsibility, low self esteem, and discipline does not change the laws of physics.
C: If I am in a good mood try selling me a Beach Boy's collection. If I am pissed off Rammstien might be a better choice.

Are you sure your not on your period?

Re:Targeted Ads

[CyprusBlue113]

So then why the hell does Spike have ads like that during Die Hard?

Its not all targeted, sometimes its just to fill the slots.

Re:Targeted Ads

[Anonymous Coward]

For many who loath the idea of targeted ads

What about those who are loath to spell loathe that way?

Re:Targeted Ads

[mcgrew]

B: If I am fat, don't advertise Big Macs, advertise weight loss because last I checked, fatties know where BK and McDs are.

If you're morbidly obese they should direct you to an Ihop. My dad visited yesterday and took me there, and JESUS, I ordered an omelette and the damned thing must have had a half a dozen eggs and a pound of meat and cheese, with two pancakes and a bowl of fruit on the side. I don't see how anybody weighing less than 400 pounds could have choked all that down.

Re:Targeted Ads

[mcgrew]

Whoever modded you "troll" should NOT get mod points, ever.

Instead of telling her to get her own computer, well, Christmas is coming up. Buy her one!

Re:Targeted Ads

[cbhacking]

To address his complaint about the ads he sees from his wife's shopping:

Why is she using your account? Multi-user operating systems have been mainstream for the last decade, and have existed for decades before that.
Why is she using your browser? If you don't want ads targeting her, try having her use a different ad-delivery platform (web browser).
Why are you seeing targeted ads at all? Filter out tracking cookies.
If you block ads altogether from sites that serve ones for stuff you don't want, you'll have a nicer web experience.

Re:Targeted Ads

[KozmoStevnNaut]

If the fatties were fighting their genetically programmed cravings, they wouldn't be so goddamn fat. They're putting in the least amount of effort possible, a token effort just so they can say "it's not my fault I'm fat, I'm doing everything I can to fight it" when in fact they're not doing a damn thing.

I'm a test subject in an 6 month long experiment to determine if so-called "new nordic" food is more healthy than the average diet when eating to a "comfortably sated, but not full or stuffed" level at every meal. To do this, we pick up all of our food from a special store on the university campus in the amounts we think we need, within the boundaries of our particular test diet, of course. We aren't allowed to eat food from other sources.

The "average diet" which I'm getting looks a bit less healthy than my usual diet on paper, it's got less whole grains, less lean protein, more sugar and more fat than what I usually eat, but you know what? I've lost 1,5kg already, down from 95 to 93.5 in the span of one month of eating completely average foods. There are no "light" products and no sugar substitutes, either, everything is completely ordinary food.

I eat chicken, duck, beef, pork, pasta, potatoes, white flour, ordinary rye bread, white bread, butter, lunch meats, candy, chocolate, veggies, fruits, just about everything people normally eat. But you know why I'm losing weight? Because I'm eating less calories now that my eating habits come to light every single time I "shop" for groceries and I've found out that I actually ate between 110-115% of the calories I actually need every single day, even though I followed a reasonably healthy diet with lean meats and a fair amount of veggies.

I just ate too goddamn much of it, without even realizing it.

OpenCV

[Anonymous Coward]

A lot of this stuff is using OpenCV, which is an awesome computer vision library.

Re:I know how we can make this announcement look b

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft doesn't need your help to make it look bad.

I wonder

[PinkyGigglebrain]

How long it will be till TVs come with Kinects built in, and can't be turned off. It would be an advertiser's wetdream, and then the DHS could use it to monitor those who might be a "threat to national Security" (everyone).

_ _

Re:I wonder

[vlm]

Thats too much of an upgrade to keep calling it a Television. How about... a "telescreen" ? There is some prior art, err, literature...

Re:I wonder

[BobMcD]

How long it will be till TVs come with Kinects built in, and can't be turned off.

I dunno, how long until they outlaw electrical tape?

Re:I wonder

[shadowmas]

Better yet point the thing at a picture of goatse ;)

Re:I wonder

[Anonymous Coward]

there's always duct tape - it can fix anything!

Re:I wonder

[Brobock]

How long it will be till TVs come with Kinects built in, and can't be turned off. It would be an advertiser's wetdream, and then the DHS could use it to monitor those who might be a "threat to national Security" (everyone).

One word: Tape.

Re:I wonder

[Anonymous Coward]

nothing that a can of paint can't fix.

Re:I wonder

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd put the camera in the same area as infra-red receiver. But then you could just use undeveloped film. ;)

Re:I wonder

[Anonymous Coward]

How long until they start making your TV non-functional if the camera doesm't detect you?

Re:I wonder

[Anonymous Coward]

Electrical tape isn't going to help you when the camera(s) are embedded between he pixels themselves.

Re:I wonder

[herbivore]

They could simply make the TV non-functional if it does not detect you, and/or pass some sort of live action captcha. i.e. strike the pose shown to watch TV

Re:I wonder

[BobMcD]

How long until they start making your TV non-functional if the camera doesm't detect you?

lol

Honestly I had that thought, and I'll even go so far as to doom us all by suggesting it here...

What if they ditched the remote control and replaced it with a Kinect-style gesture system? Then they would only be able to peer into your livingroom if and when you wanted to change the channel, adjust the volume, etc. They'd sell it as 'better' because you'll never be able to lose the remote. Further they can integrate identity by allowing you to restrict your childrens' gestures, and indirectly accusing you of letting them watch porn if you don't use that feature.

Deep inside my mind lurks an evil dictator. Sometimes I scare myself.

Radiohead, House of Cards video

[backganon]

Some of the images remind me of that Radiohead video ("House of Cards") which was shot entirely without optic cameras, just sensors.

yes that file editing thing

[tizan]

That is why linux is not going to get into mainstream desktop as every thing you want to change you have to
edit some mysterious files...oh wait ..

Re:yes that file editing thing

[shutdown -p now]

People who don't understand what registry (or config file) is usually don't want focus-follows-mouse, either.

Re:yes that file editing thing

[mcgrew]

Some of us who do understand the registry and config files hate it, too. Linux makes it easy to impliment or disable that feature. Too bad MS doesn't.

NO, YOU ARE WRONG

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft did not produce a new amazing piece hardare. THey licensed (or bought) it from PrimeSense and then, using the technology, they developped some software (body recognition, gestures, basic figure recognition, etc) and a corresponding SDK/API for a specific platform (Xbox 360 SO FAR).

Now, neither you or I know what were the terms for licensing PrimeSense technology. Nevertheless, there is *nothing* preventing them to develop drivers and an SDK for Windows /in the future/.

I know your compulsive "I want it noooow mommmy" mind cannot cope with maybe 1 year or 2 years of delay, but the fact is that Microsoft will most deffinitely provide this technology for PCs in the future mainly *depending on the reception of the platform*

Shit... it might even be the case that PrimeSense licenses the technology to other company (e.g. Playstation or Nintendo) so that hey can use it and make competing SDKs.

Just wait.

Syncing multiple of them + 3D glasses + MMO

[wye43]

Virtual Reality is finally tangible on mainstream?

Patenting the flood of innovative stuff

[HalAtWork]

The flood of innovative stuff that's coming out could serve as prior art to upcoming patents surrounding this technology... Perhaps this will lower royalties and increase freedoms if we can figure out all the cool stuff first before it becomes patented.

Re:Patenting the flood of innovative stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

Odds are pretty low that they're not already filed for.

Open Source Trolling?

[dmt0]

what's going to happen is M$ is going to take the code and use it to add new features to Kinect in future releases

No they won't. Microsoft is notoriously unable to reuse free (as in libre) software that can't be repackaged into a binary that they can sell for $$$ without releasing the source code for. It's just impossible for them because of their very nature as a closed-source software vendor. Any GPL code out there will not be touched by Microsoft with a 10 foot pole.

So what if we write every possible iteration of code for Kinect and release it under GPL?

Minority Report

[Syberz]

I can't be the only one who sees that this device could bring us Minority Report like interface interaction?

Re:Minority Report

[shutdown -p now]

The early "concept videos" for Kinect (then still Natal) demonstrated precisely that idea. But it needs to become more precise to be actually usable for that.

Re:Minority Report

[Syberz]

I don't know about that, I'm sure that there are many applications where a system like that could be used where precision isn't a key factor, ex: sorting through a lot of pictures, sound/movie editing, animating characters (not their actual design/creation but just moving them around), viewing security camera feeds, etc.

Re:Minority Report

[shutdown -p now]

Maybe. If you haven't seen it, have a look at this video, from 2:13 to 2:50. It certainly looks like it is being considered.

Face of the Future

[Anonymous Coward]

but Google is failing me as to its name.

I think you're talking about Face of the Future.

Teaching Kinect to recognize objects on the PC

[Crystalus]

This video shows an interesting demo of someone teaching the computer how to recognize toys with Kinect as one of the sensors. The demo used all open sourced technologies that combines computer vision, speech recognition, and speech synthesis.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQ59dXOo63o

In other news...

[Lead Butthead]

Microsoft announces firmware update for Kinect... (not quite true, yet.)

Re:I know how we can make this announcement look b

[Anonymous Coward]

Races = people with differently colored skin... in the infrared range?

Or can it tell I'm white because I'm wearing a bow-tie? :)

Case in point: console devkits

[tepples]

Selling to everyone is ALWAYS more profitable than locking it down.

Then why don't Nintendo and Sony sell devkits for their consoles to everyone? Instead of having a semi-open model like Xbox 360 Indie Games and iPhone App Store, where anyone can buy a complete devkit for the price of a computer, the target device, and $100/yr, these companies perform a vetting process requiring all developers to have a dedicated office and "game industry experience" (which I understand as a prior commercial title on another platform).

Power Toy has been available since XP.

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft has had a Power Toy available that controlled this feature since XP.

Kinect + 3D TV/Monitor

[Gyorg_Lavode]

Get a Kinect paired with a 3D TV/Monitor to allow me to manipulate and visualize my network traffic in 3D? YOU SIR HAVE MY MONEY.

In general, Kinect may be just what it takes to turn the gimmicky 3D screens into a real tool. Coders! Start your IDEs!

And MS sells all of their Kinects

[Anonymous Coward]

As much as MS "does not approve" of this type of hacking, I tend to believe that the product sales won't be questioned just because they're not being used on an XBox.

Re:I know how we can make this announcement look b

[Warhawke]

I know how we can make this announcement look bad

I'll do you one better; I know how we can make this announcement look downright evil.

[...] Are they wearing Seahawks jerseys?

http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/15/microsoft-exec-caught-in-privacy-snafu-says-kinect-might-tailor/[...]

Are they under the age of 18 and playing half-naked in their room? Are they having sex while watching a movie when the parents aren't home? Microsoft engages in the monitoring of and sale of information abetting child pornography!