Where there's a will (and a control freak), there's a way. Government isn't going to give up power that easy, I would expect some dangerous new automated monitoring systems are on the horizon. Along with some interesting countermeasures. We may start looking for browsers that will automatically surf dozens of unrelated sites for every site you browse just so that the collected data will be too erroneous to properly evaluate. Of course, that itself labels you a subversive...
We need a database of contradictory sites...
on
Privacy Machiavellis
·
· Score: 1
I think that would be a great browser feature-- it collects all the google search strings you enter, looks them all up in a "contradictory site" or "contradictory search" database, and when the system is idle, it browses the contradictory sites for equal time. Thus, when you browse that pro-Obama site, the system will automatically browse some anti-Obama site when it's idle. They'll collect all the info on you they want, but it'll all be completely bogus-- they'll average you out to be totally middle-of-the-road.
Or, you could even have a "slanted" database, that would deliberately add searches that would bias you the way you would like to be percieved, regardless of what you actually do on the computer.
The answer: The iPad proved a tablet shouldn't be a portable computer that happened to have its screen always exposed. Instead, a tablet should be something else. Apple got a lot of criticism early on for not making the iPad essentially a Mac OS X tablet computer [12], in the vein of the Windows tablet computers available -- but hardly used -- for the last decade.
The problem with this approach, is as soon as you start taking things away from a "portable computer," you start eliminating some of your marketplace. I have a pretty good use for a tablet, but the iPad ain't it, because they left in a bunch of stuff I don't need or want, and took out stuff I do want. For example, I do want wifi & a browser (preferrably, a CHOICE of browsers), but not cellular, especially any requirement of buying a phone data plan. I want at least 80G of storage, memory stick & usb interfaces (usb HOST). It should behave as a digital photoframe when it's otherwise idle (and have most of that 80G available for images & home vids to show guests). I want to be able to run custom apps, as one of my reasons for it is to have it as a "console" and super-remote for all my home automation and home security, so it needs to be able to run vidcam control software and tie into X10/Smarthome devices, etc. The screen should be AT LEAST 10", and if it had bluetooth (so I can either tie it into my Wiimote for even more simplified remote functions, or tie it into a wireless speaker system for speech feedback throughout the house), that would be stellar.
The iPad has SOME of these features, but is not really the right tool for my job. Just about all they really got right is the removal of the keyboard and mouse, the battery life and screen size. And the reason it's not right, is that Steve Jobs thinks he knows better than you do what you want out of such a gizmo. Well, he's wrong about that in my case. Clueless newbs who like shiny may snap them up, but such newbs don't always stay newbs forever, eventually they may grow into power users who have their own ideas what a computer should do for them, and won't just jump when Steve says jump.
I'll be waiting for the right Linux based machine when the price gets right because I know it can be made to do what I need it to do. What's really needed here, is not the one-size-doesn't-really-fit-very-many approach of Apple, but the more componentized approach that was used back in the heyday of the HiFi/Stereo system where you bought each component separately and assembled them in to what you want or need-- amp, tuner, turntable, tape player, CD player, EQ, speakers-- a standardized system where you can configure it to YOUR needs, rather than having to "conform" to what Steve thinks you need. That's the Apple way-- the computer doesn't conform to YOUR needs, you have to conform to IT'S needs. Only the starry-eyed newbs will fall for that, and not indefinately...
Simple solution - don't use tabs in browsers. The first thing I do to any browser I sit in front of, is to immediately disable the use of tabs. I have never understood why many people think they are a good idea - I think they break a heap of good UI principles.
HEAR HEAR. I've always hated browser tabs, for pretty much the same reasons. I suppose if you are running a browser on a system that doesn't do anything else but web browse, they're fine, but tabs should combine any function you might be doing, not just on the web (document editing, etc.) So on Linux and on Windows at least (and I suspect on the Mac as well), they're completely redundant and don't integrate with the OS very well in that regard (if you hadn't noticed, the TASKBAR implements the equivalent of tabs, and I move it to the left-hand-side of my screen so that there's more useful real-estate for that purpose). I gave up on Firefox for that reason, as while it supposedly has a tab disable, it is incomplete as pages still end up opening on tabs now and then-- I moved to K-Meleon, and while based on the Firefox source base it doesn't seem to have that problem...
I think there's a future in DIY ultrasonography-- the tech is not really all that complex, and you can probably get some used probes cheap via eBay to get started. Just be really careful if you're thinking of converting old microwave parts...
I just posted my thoughts about another one from 1980, the ad for the Vector Graphic System 3005, but now that I see this one, I bow to the superior entry... Only Microsoft could have the total lack of aesthetic sensibilities to come up with such a howler-- I should have known...
Nope, the winner is Vector Graphics, circa 1980
on
15 Vintage Tech Ads
·
· Score: 1
They missed it entirely. The Vector Graphic TV ad from the early 1980s is the most hilarious of all time, now just as it was then. I think it was the model 3005. It shows the machine up on a stage in front of a microphone addressing the excited press, saying, "And in conclusion, I'll only use my exceptional powers for the good of mankind." The camera then moves to a couple watching in the back, where one says "what a mind!" and the other says "what a body!" (I forget who said which, the man or the woman, but in either case, it was just totally over-the-top ridiculous). This would appear to be the associated print ad.
I probably have it on an old VHS tape somewhere, but I couldn't tell you where. If I ever run across it I'll have to upload it to YouTube. It beats all 15 in the original article here hands down, IMHO...
Microsoft seems to think that if you spend a lot of time talking about innovation you're actually doing it, while Apple tends to keep their mouth shut until it's done.
I've never really followed the arguments behind why everyone hates software patents.
One measure of ethics, is what would happen if everyone did it?
If all software was patented, there would BE no WWW. You couldn't just say there would instead be a "Microsoft Web" and an "Apple Web" and a "Linux Web" that couldn't all talk to each other because it would require violating software patents to do so, because each of them would be a "web" and someone would have that patented as well. At best, you'd end up with them all agreeing to license from each other making a cartel that will shut-out the up-and-coming little guys, because the barrier to entry would be too expensive. And of course, "free software" would be an oxymoron.
Software patents throw a huge monkey wrench into interoperability.
As long as you do not run the latest version of Firefox/IE/Adobe Flash/Adobe Acrobat Reader and you are at the wrong site at the wrong time, you get infected! And sometimes the latest version of that software is exploitable too.
I don't use Acrobat, I use one of the free alternatives. I use a proxy filter that screens all ad sites, scripts, and media players (even GIF animation) on all sites by default, unless I put them into a whitelist. I also use Process Guard to let me know when things are trying to run on my computer, and I don't even allow many "legit" things to run. I DON'T update things very often, and don't auto-update ANYTHING. Updates are only done for a few MS OS critical patches, which I hand pick and install individually after reading the security bulletins. I don't use IE or Firefox, but an old version of another browser, but it hardly matters because all of this constitutes a locked-down sandbox where a virus can't get near the browser.
I DON'T use antivirus. I also don't use a FIREWALL on my computer, though I do use one on my router. I've been doing this on several Windows systems (all XP) and they all run like a bat out of hell, since virtually all of the resource hogging stuff is disabled. I've been doing it like this for at least 5 years, and have never even seen a virus attempt, much less gotten infected. I have seen a lot of crap from Adobe try to muscle into my system, which is why I finally uninstalled Acrobat in favor of an alternative.
Antivirus software is like closing the barn doors after the horses have bolted. By the time the virus is in the database, it's old news and something new that hasn't made it into the database yet is the current threat. The whole concept of antivirus is fatally flawed, and there is a serious conflict of interest in the AV companies to actually produce something that works outside of a subscription (oh no, you need our latest AV defs!) model. If they sold that, they wouldn't be able to keep dinging you for regular updates. It's a scam that I think is at least as bad as the virus programs themselves, I doubt that a bot running on my system would make it perform any WORSE than running AV software on it does. I've been there, done that, and it turns my entire system into complete crippleware for no good reason.
I'd be willing to split the take with anyone who wants to chase down and cash in on these guys. Hell, even at $500/per, I can retire in just a few weeks...
I do agree that 2D -> 3D conversions of older films are the equivalent of colorizing a black and white film ted turner style, it shouldn't be done out of respect for the original film.
I'm somewhat, but not completely sympathetic with this viewpoint, especially with color which has the potential to mess up a print and could make it harder to find a non-colorized (non-messed-up) copy. But with 3D, it generally won't completely replace a non-3D version-- in fact, I would think if it were to become prevalent (which I doubt), I would think a blu-ray edition would likely contain a non-3D playback mode as well.
The reason I hedge on not converting older films, is that I do think there could be some classics that might be worth checking out in a 3D conversion, such as the original "Cabinet of Dr. Caligari," and I'm sure a little thought could dredge up a few others. In fact, possibly some really bad old movies might actually end up watchable in a 3D conversion...
Stiction problems weren't limited to Seagate. Pretty much every HD manufacturer has had a round of it at one time or another, AFAIK.
Yeah, that may be, but Seagate is the one I REMEMBER, because I lost some data in the process. Haven't had a drive of my own fail other than that, but once a drive gets a couple years old I upgrade it to something larger and stash the old one away as a "backup." I've got every hard drive I ever owned and that's since about 1980. Possibly not the best scheme, but it's been cost effective so far, but the only thing I've ever lost was that Seagate. I suppose some of the old ones may not work anymore but they did when they were taken offline, and if I haven't needed the data since then I probably never will...
Lastly, I've been told you have to spin up the HDD's every so often or the lifetime rating is even less then what they are rated for. Although I'm not sure I believe that part.
It's by no means unbelievable. Lubricant, rubber and plastic have this annoying tendency to degrade over time even if they're just sitting there. Metal actually does too, but perhaps not quite so quickly. And newer plastics aren't nearly as bad as they used to be, but I still don't trust their longevity that much just yet...
And some of us may remember the Seagate stiction problem they had with their lube at one point, if you powered down a drive sometimes it wouldn't spin back up because the lube had gotten just gummy enough to prohibit it (you had to bang it on a table to get it started). I haven't bought anything with the Seagate name on it since...
Can't tell if you're being tounge-in-cheek here. From my perspective, the USPS is doing pretty well. I much prefer them to (ugh) UPS, that's for darn sure.
I'm sure we all could come up with a nefarious government rationale for imposing high speed connections on everyone. Considering the source of the interest, perhaps it's they who want the bandwidth to get to you rather than the other way around...
The fact you can buy books through the internet without having to buy a mobile service is huge.
Oh impatient one-- only to those who don't wait 'til they're at the frikkin' AIRPORT before they start thinking about what kind of books they might want to read. I don't need a mobile service to buy books, my cable internet service works just fine for that, thank you very much. I'd just as soon not buy books on impulse.
The usual term is "stereo" or "stereo-3D." It's been around since shortly after the invention of photography.
I love stereo-3D myself, and have a collection of it in various forms including an antique Stereo-Realist camera that can take action stills in stereo. It's also quite easy to take stereo stills with any digital camera, providing there's no movement involved in the subject-- just by taking the picture, moving over about a foot, and taking another framed the same (and hopefully, with the same exposure). Viewing can be done with budget viewers from your LCD video monitor, side to side, or using the crosseye technique, etc.
That said though, I think in this case it's a cheap excuse to try to sell more BluRay players since the market just hasn't been taking off-- HD doesn't get you enough over SD DVD for many people to bother to spend the money (including me). Unfortunately, 3D will get the short-shrift it always does, and when it doesn't explode into an "everybody's gotta have it right now" craze, the producers will tire of spending money in the production for insufficient results. So we'll have a couple of wowzer stereo films (Avatar and one or two others, probably), but not enough to justify converting your entire video system over unless you've got too much money or you're a total gadget geek.
A "Ted Turner" could start taking old content and producing artificial plane-separated synthetic stereo from existing media, and that might pull it a long for a few more miles, but even then I seriously doubt it'll be enough to carry it along. And it likely won't be quite as easy or as cheap as "colorization" was, at least to do well.
I'd love to see stereo become mainstream, but we've been down this road before, and I don't see anything new here, just the dollars involved are bigger (which itself doesn't bode well, because for too many people, it's just non-essential)...
If stereo computer monitors got cheap enough I might get one of those so my 3D modelling work can be done in full stereo, but I don't get paid for that so I'm not willing to spend a whole lot over what a plain-old 2D monitor costs.
I'd like to see it, I really would, but I just don't expect it to happen. There's just not enough momentum. It looks to me like a last-ditch attempt for a few desperate folks in tinseltown to give the public a reason to pay more for their stuff. It's just not a good enough reason, frankly. And even if we weren't in a recession, and digital entertainment hadn't lost a whole lot of it's value over the last decade due to the glut of content and its distribution, I just don't see it becoming any more than an expensive parlor-trick...
1. Ask the programmers involved how long it will take them to complete their parts. Don't argue with them about the rationale, unless it's clear they're being overly optimistic (in which case, argue for them to increase their estimate).
2. Double or triple their answers (depending on the complexity of the project), because they're undoubtedly still too optimistic about their abilities, lady luck, and the inevitable unforseen.
What you definately DON'T want to do, is to ignore what they say and tell them when you need it. Otherwise, you'll get something like this: Programmers say it'll take 6 months, you want it in three and come up with "rational" arguments about how "it won't take as long as you think" or how it might be done "smarter." If you're lucky, you'll still get it in 6 months and the programmers will feel vindicated instead of guilty.
The goal at any large corporation is to leverage their market position,...
The problem here is Microsoft spent too much time trying to leverage their market position when they should have spent more of that time improving their quality. They seem to be of the opinion that quality doesn't matter if you have sufficient market share to squash the competition without it. The problem with that idea, is it's a short-term solution, eventually the quality problems will come back to bite you.
And "leveraging your market position," is a monopolization tactic, essentially a form of cheating that when it becomes the predominant corporate culture, undermines the ability to compete in markets where their market position is not so strong. It's a poor substitute for a better product.
Slashdot Mirror
Where there's a will (and a control freak), there's a way. Government isn't going to give up power that easy, I would expect some dangerous new automated monitoring systems are on the horizon. Along with some interesting countermeasures. We may start looking for browsers that will automatically surf dozens of unrelated sites for every site you browse just so that the collected data will be too erroneous to properly evaluate. Of course, that itself labels you a subversive...
I think that would be a great browser feature-- it collects all the google search strings you enter, looks them all up in a "contradictory site" or "contradictory search" database, and when the system is idle, it browses the contradictory sites for equal time. Thus, when you browse that pro-Obama site, the system will automatically browse some anti-Obama site when it's idle. They'll collect all the info on you they want, but it'll all be completely bogus-- they'll average you out to be totally middle-of-the-road.
Or, you could even have a "slanted" database, that would deliberately add searches that would bias you the way you would like to be percieved, regardless of what you actually do on the computer.
The answer: The iPad proved a tablet shouldn't be a portable computer that happened to have its screen always exposed. Instead, a tablet should be something else. Apple got a lot of criticism early on for not making the iPad essentially a Mac OS X tablet computer [12], in the vein of the Windows tablet computers available -- but hardly used -- for the last decade.
The problem with this approach, is as soon as you start taking things away from a "portable computer," you start eliminating some of your marketplace. I have a pretty good use for a tablet, but the iPad ain't it, because they left in a bunch of stuff I don't need or want, and took out stuff I do want. For example, I do want wifi & a browser (preferrably, a CHOICE of browsers), but not cellular, especially any requirement of buying a phone data plan. I want at least 80G of storage, memory stick & usb interfaces (usb HOST). It should behave as a digital photoframe when it's otherwise idle (and have most of that 80G available for images & home vids to show guests). I want to be able to run custom apps, as one of my reasons for it is to have it as a "console" and super-remote for all my home automation and home security, so it needs to be able to run vidcam control software and tie into X10/Smarthome devices, etc. The screen should be AT LEAST 10", and if it had bluetooth (so I can either tie it into my Wiimote for even more simplified remote functions, or tie it into a wireless speaker system for speech feedback throughout the house), that would be stellar.
The iPad has SOME of these features, but is not really the right tool for my job. Just about all they really got right is the removal of the keyboard and mouse, the battery life and screen size. And the reason it's not right, is that Steve Jobs thinks he knows better than you do what you want out of such a gizmo. Well, he's wrong about that in my case. Clueless newbs who like shiny may snap them up, but such newbs don't always stay newbs forever, eventually they may grow into power users who have their own ideas what a computer should do for them, and won't just jump when Steve says jump.
I'll be waiting for the right Linux based machine when the price gets right because I know it can be made to do what I need it to do. What's really needed here, is not the one-size-doesn't-really-fit-very-many approach of Apple, but the more componentized approach that was used back in the heyday of the HiFi/Stereo system where you bought each component separately and assembled them in to what you want or need-- amp, tuner, turntable, tape player, CD player, EQ, speakers-- a standardized system where you can configure it to YOUR needs, rather than having to "conform" to what Steve thinks you need. That's the Apple way-- the computer doesn't conform to YOUR needs, you have to conform to IT'S needs. Only the starry-eyed newbs will fall for that, and not indefinately...
Simple solution - don't use tabs in browsers. The first thing I do to any browser I sit in front of, is to immediately disable the use of tabs. I have never understood why many people think they are a good idea - I think they break a heap of good UI principles.
HEAR HEAR. I've always hated browser tabs, for pretty much the same reasons. I suppose if you are running a browser on a system that doesn't do anything else but web browse, they're fine, but tabs should combine any function you might be doing, not just on the web (document editing, etc.) So on Linux and on Windows at least (and I suspect on the Mac as well), they're completely redundant and don't integrate with the OS very well in that regard (if you hadn't noticed, the TASKBAR implements the equivalent of tabs, and I move it to the left-hand-side of my screen so that there's more useful real-estate for that purpose). I gave up on Firefox for that reason, as while it supposedly has a tab disable, it is incomplete as pages still end up opening on tabs now and then-- I moved to K-Meleon, and while based on the Firefox source base it doesn't seem to have that problem...
I think there's a future in DIY ultrasonography-- the tech is not really all that complex, and you can probably get some used probes cheap via eBay to get started. Just be really careful if you're thinking of converting old microwave parts...
I gave up on Netscape because it turned into bloatware...
I gave up on Mozilla because it turned into bloatware...
I gave up on Firefox because it turned into bloatware...
See the pattern here? I'm done with these guys. It's clear they don't understand the "less is more" principle of design.
I just posted my thoughts about another one from 1980, the ad for the Vector Graphic System 3005, but now that I see this one, I bow to the superior entry... Only Microsoft could have the total lack of aesthetic sensibilities to come up with such a howler-- I should have known...
They missed it entirely. The Vector Graphic TV ad from the early 1980s is the most hilarious of all time, now just as it was then. I think it was the model 3005. It shows the machine up on a stage in front of a microphone addressing the excited press, saying, "And in conclusion, I'll only use my exceptional powers for the good of mankind." The camera then moves to a couple watching in the back, where one says "what a mind!" and the other says "what a body!" (I forget who said which, the man or the woman, but in either case, it was just totally over-the-top ridiculous). This would appear to be the associated print ad.
I probably have it on an old VHS tape somewhere, but I couldn't tell you where. If I ever run across it I'll have to upload it to YouTube. It beats all 15 in the original article here hands down, IMHO...
I second that motion, kill ugly popups. Or at least, delay them until there's sufficient pause in my typing...
Microsoft seems to think that if you spend a lot of time talking about innovation you're actually doing it, while Apple tends to keep their mouth shut until it's done.
I've never really followed the arguments behind why everyone hates software patents.
One measure of ethics, is what would happen if everyone did it?
If all software was patented, there would BE no WWW. You couldn't just say there would instead be a "Microsoft Web" and an "Apple Web" and a "Linux Web" that couldn't all talk to each other because it would require violating software patents to do so, because each of them would be a "web" and someone would have that patented as well. At best, you'd end up with them all agreeing to license from each other making a cartel that will shut-out the up-and-coming little guys, because the barrier to entry would be too expensive. And of course, "free software" would be an oxymoron.
Software patents throw a huge monkey wrench into interoperability.
Why are politicians so evil?
Evil, hell-- I'm just wondering why they have so much TIME on their hands...
As long as you do not run the latest version of Firefox/IE/Adobe Flash/Adobe Acrobat Reader and you are at the wrong site at the wrong time, you get infected! And sometimes the latest version of that software is exploitable too.
I don't use Acrobat, I use one of the free alternatives. I use a proxy filter that screens all ad sites, scripts, and media players (even GIF animation) on all sites by default, unless I put them into a whitelist. I also use Process Guard to let me know when things are trying to run on my computer, and I don't even allow many "legit" things to run. I DON'T update things very often, and don't auto-update ANYTHING. Updates are only done for a few MS OS critical patches, which I hand pick and install individually after reading the security bulletins. I don't use IE or Firefox, but an old version of another browser, but it hardly matters because all of this constitutes a locked-down sandbox where a virus can't get near the browser.
I DON'T use antivirus. I also don't use a FIREWALL on my computer, though I do use one on my router. I've been doing this on several Windows systems (all XP) and they all run like a bat out of hell, since virtually all of the resource hogging stuff is disabled. I've been doing it like this for at least 5 years, and have never even seen a virus attempt, much less gotten infected. I have seen a lot of crap from Adobe try to muscle into my system, which is why I finally uninstalled Acrobat in favor of an alternative.
Antivirus software is like closing the barn doors after the horses have bolted. By the time the virus is in the database, it's old news and something new that hasn't made it into the database yet is the current threat. The whole concept of antivirus is fatally flawed, and there is a serious conflict of interest in the AV companies to actually produce something that works outside of a subscription (oh no, you need our latest AV defs!) model. If they sold that, they wouldn't be able to keep dinging you for regular updates. It's a scam that I think is at least as bad as the virus programs themselves, I doubt that a bot running on my system would make it perform any WORSE than running AV software on it does. I've been there, done that, and it turns my entire system into complete crippleware for no good reason.
I'd be willing to split the take with anyone who wants to chase down and cash in on these guys. Hell, even at $500/per, I can retire in just a few weeks...
I do agree that 2D -> 3D conversions of older films are the equivalent of colorizing a black and white film ted turner style, it shouldn't be done out of respect for the original film.
I'm somewhat, but not completely sympathetic with this viewpoint, especially with color which has the potential to mess up a print and could make it harder to find a non-colorized (non-messed-up) copy. But with 3D, it generally won't completely replace a non-3D version-- in fact, I would think if it were to become prevalent (which I doubt), I would think a blu-ray edition would likely contain a non-3D playback mode as well.
The reason I hedge on not converting older films, is that I do think there could be some classics that might be worth checking out in a 3D conversion, such as the original "Cabinet of Dr. Caligari," and I'm sure a little thought could dredge up a few others. In fact, possibly some really bad old movies might actually end up watchable in a 3D conversion...
Stiction problems weren't limited to Seagate. Pretty much every HD manufacturer has had a round of it at one time or another, AFAIK.
Yeah, that may be, but Seagate is the one I REMEMBER, because I lost some data in the process. Haven't had a drive of my own fail other than that, but once a drive gets a couple years old I upgrade it to something larger and stash the old one away as a "backup." I've got every hard drive I ever owned and that's since about 1980. Possibly not the best scheme, but it's been cost effective so far, but the only thing I've ever lost was that Seagate. I suppose some of the old ones may not work anymore but they did when they were taken offline, and if I haven't needed the data since then I probably never will...
Lastly, I've been told you have to spin up the HDD's every so often or the lifetime rating is even less then what they are rated for. Although I'm not sure I believe that part.
It's by no means unbelievable. Lubricant, rubber and plastic have this annoying tendency to degrade over time even if they're just sitting there. Metal actually does too, but perhaps not quite so quickly. And newer plastics aren't nearly as bad as they used to be, but I still don't trust their longevity that much just yet...
And some of us may remember the Seagate stiction problem they had with their lube at one point, if you powered down a drive sometimes it wouldn't spin back up because the lube had gotten just gummy enough to prohibit it (you had to bang it on a table to get it started). I haven't bought anything with the Seagate name on it since...
Can't tell if you're being tounge-in-cheek here. From my perspective, the USPS is doing pretty well. I much prefer them to (ugh) UPS, that's for darn sure.
I'm sure we all could come up with a nefarious government rationale for imposing high speed connections on everyone. Considering the source of the interest, perhaps it's they who want the bandwidth to get to you rather than the other way around...
The fact you can buy books through the internet without having to buy a mobile service is huge.
Oh impatient one-- only to those who don't wait 'til they're at the frikkin' AIRPORT before they start thinking about what kind of books they might want to read. I don't need a mobile service to buy books, my cable internet service works just fine for that, thank you very much. I'd just as soon not buy books on impulse.
I can't be bothered to set the clock on my camera, let alone enter personal data.
Not a problem on CELL PHONE cameras!
The usual term is "stereo" or "stereo-3D." It's been around since shortly after the invention of photography.
I love stereo-3D myself, and have a collection of it in various forms including an antique Stereo-Realist camera that can take action stills in stereo. It's also quite easy to take stereo stills with any digital camera, providing there's no movement involved in the subject-- just by taking the picture, moving over about a foot, and taking another framed the same (and hopefully, with the same exposure). Viewing can be done with budget viewers from your LCD video monitor, side to side, or using the crosseye technique, etc.
That said though, I think in this case it's a cheap excuse to try to sell more BluRay players since the market just hasn't been taking off-- HD doesn't get you enough over SD DVD for many people to bother to spend the money (including me). Unfortunately, 3D will get the short-shrift it always does, and when it doesn't explode into an "everybody's gotta have it right now" craze, the producers will tire of spending money in the production for insufficient results. So we'll have a couple of wowzer stereo films (Avatar and one or two others, probably), but not enough to justify converting your entire video system over unless you've got too much money or you're a total gadget geek.
A "Ted Turner" could start taking old content and producing artificial plane-separated synthetic stereo from existing media, and that might pull it a long for a few more miles, but even then I seriously doubt it'll be enough to carry it along. And it likely won't be quite as easy or as cheap as "colorization" was, at least to do well.
I'd love to see stereo become mainstream, but we've been down this road before, and I don't see anything new here, just the dollars involved are bigger (which itself doesn't bode well, because for too many people, it's just non-essential)...
If stereo computer monitors got cheap enough I might get one of those so my 3D modelling work can be done in full stereo, but I don't get paid for that so I'm not willing to spend a whole lot over what a plain-old 2D monitor costs.
I'd like to see it, I really would, but I just don't expect it to happen. There's just not enough momentum. It looks to me like a last-ditch attempt for a few desperate folks in tinseltown to give the public a reason to pay more for their stuff. It's just not a good enough reason, frankly. And even if we weren't in a recession, and digital entertainment hadn't lost a whole lot of it's value over the last decade due to the glut of content and its distribution, I just don't see it becoming any more than an expensive parlor-trick...
1. Ask the programmers involved how long it will take them to complete their parts. Don't argue with them about the rationale, unless it's clear they're being overly optimistic (in which case, argue for them to increase their estimate).
2. Double or triple their answers (depending on the complexity of the project), because they're undoubtedly still too optimistic about their abilities, lady luck, and the inevitable unforseen.
What you definately DON'T want to do, is to ignore what they say and tell them when you need it. Otherwise, you'll get something like this: Programmers say it'll take 6 months, you want it in three and come up with "rational" arguments about how "it won't take as long as you think" or how it might be done "smarter." If you're lucky, you'll still get it in 6 months and the programmers will feel vindicated instead of guilty.
The goal at any large corporation is to leverage their market position, ...
The problem here is Microsoft spent too much time trying to leverage their market position when they should have spent more of that time improving their quality. They seem to be of the opinion that quality doesn't matter if you have sufficient market share to squash the competition without it. The problem with that idea, is it's a short-term solution, eventually the quality problems will come back to bite you.
And "leveraging your market position," is a monopolization tactic, essentially a form of cheating that when it becomes the predominant corporate culture, undermines the ability to compete in markets where their market position is not so strong. It's a poor substitute for a better product.
Hmm-- you can get an iPad and few iPhones for less than $599. Cheaper than I thought. My scrabble board cost me $0.99 at a local thrift store.