Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Goggles Simulate 52-inch TV

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the now-that-rocks-my-world dept.

al-bob writes "Sony introduced at PC Expo a set of goggles that simulate a 52-inch monitor viewed from 6 feet away, including surround sound. Each color LCD display has a resolution of 180K pixels and they can be switched to see-thru and are AC/DC. Quite a cool bit of technology, but it costs $899! " Of course, $899 is a bargain for a 52 inch screen. The resolution isn't quite up to snuff for hi-res computing, but hopefully it isn't far off. I'm stoked to try a pair- but they won't be available until september. Update: 06/24 12:47 by CT : Sam Livingston mentioned that an 800x600 version will be available for $2600 too. Still cheaper than a 52" monitor...

6 of 65 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Call me with 720p or better... by jandrese · · Score: 3

    Where are you going to put a DVD on a system built around glasses? A DVD beanie? Why don't you put a propeller on the spindle to keep the system cool (temperature wise) while you're at it? :)

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.
  2. Really Low Res by lungofish · · Score: 2

    180k pixels puts this somewhere just below NTSC resolution. For reference, a 1024x768 monitor has 786,432 pixels next to this things 180000. Ntsc is around 512x384, or about 197k pixels.

    Not particularly impressive, esp. for 900 clams.

    I'm sure many others will point out that there are lots of headset type of displays out there better than this.

    In fact, the nice thing about this type of article is that you wind up with a list of lots of URLs to similar products.

  3. Computing/vs other Applications by prolix · · Score: 2

    Some people have mentioned that the resolution is pretty poor, with which I agree. But are you going to be connecting something like this to your video card? Probably not.

    Doesn't it make more sense to use it in other applications? I'm not sure what Sony had in mind when designing this, but it seems it would be better for these kinds of applications:

    1. Wearable computers. Ie; a device with a wireless Internet link. Are you going to try doing a multipage layout using goggles? Probably not. But what about checking your email? Sounds more likely, I guess.

    2. PDA-style apps: Palm meets goggles? Or, umm, Palm *in* goggles? Could be cool. You just go around wearing these goggles (should make for interesting scenes in downtown LA) that overlay your Palm screen with what you would normally see. Sounds pretty cool... no more groping for the holster on your belt. I'm not sure about data entry via this method, but still, could be cool.

    3. Television/etc...: 512x384 of true pixel resolution sure isn't bad for television watching. In fact, it is pretty good. Depending on the focus depth of the image, it could turn out that you'd enjoy this more than your present television set. Especially with surround sound embedded right in.

    Although I'm wondering how they've simulated a center channel speaker...

    --
    --globalnap.net, product of pure caffeine--
    1. Re:Computing/vs other Applications by killbill · · Score: 2

      Although I'm wondering how they've simulated a center channel speaker...

      I believe it would be unnecessary with a headphone type arrangement. The thing that limits dual speakers in open air from imaging an infinitely wide sound stage is the fact that the sound coming from the right speaker and intended for the right ear also wraps around the head and reaches the left ear. Same thing for the left side. The net effect of this is that the virtual soundstage is limited (short of special signal processing) to the width of the speakers.

      This is because the brain normally calculates the location of an object (width) by knowing the time delta between sound impingement on each ear (as the speed of sound is not infinite). The longer the time, with the known width of the head, the further to the side the virtual sound source is located. The brain is basically continually triangulating based on the known speed of sound, the delay between reception of the same signal, and the width between your ears.

      For headphones, the sound for each ear is delivered to each ear, with no spillover. This means the width of the virtual sound stage can be infinite, and is much more amenable to easy signal processing.

      The way the front to back location of sound is done by the brain is an even interesting.

      Sound is attenuated in a different way as it passes by the back side of your head and as it comes in past the back side of your ears then when it comes in the front. The combination of hair, facial features, and ear shape cause the high, middle, and low frequencies to be shaped differently (an example of this is that sounds from behind can sound "muffled").

      Your brain compares the differences in the frequency spectrum envelope received on each ear, and can make a pretty good guess at if it went past the back of your head or the front of your head.

      You can use signal processing to create this effect with two front speakers or with headphones, or you can add a third speaker behind on a different channel with a non manipulated signal and let your brain sort it out.

      So what are the implications of this uninvited rant?

      1) You would not necessarily need a third speaker for surround sound with a headphone like device.

      2) Neural nets can achieve amazing performance for some tasks.

      3) God was one hell of a good engineer.

      --
      Mathematically impossible requirements are technically not against policy.
  4. More information: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    http://www.sel.sony.com/SEL/consumer/ss5/home/camc order/camcorderaccessories/plm-a55_specs .shtml

  5. Ah yes, the Glasstrons by Ethan+Butterfield · · Score: 3
    Been out in Japan for a while. I had the chance to try them out at the Sony Style store in the new Metreon complex in SF yesterday, and I was rather non-plussed. They're ok for TV watching, but I could not use them for serious computer work for 8-hours in a row. The resolution is simply too poor, and the headset too uncomfortable.

    As for the article saying that they'd be available in September...um, they're available right now. If I wanted to drop $900 + tax, I could have walked home with one yesterday. Metreon had about 20 in boxes.

    One thing that wasn't mentioned is that the Glasstron demoed at PC Expo is only the low-end model. There is a second, higher-end (and much more expensive) Glasstron, the PLM-S700 PC. The PLM-S700 can do up to 832x624, and has a VGA connector in addition to the NTSC/PAL inputs. I haven't been able to take that one for a test drive, but the MSRP on it is $2600. You can see the specs on it at http://www.ita.sel.sony.com/produ cts/av/glasstron/.