I stand corrected on "In reality, the aircraft has been in the same spot for far too long." It indeed looks like it was moving leading up to getting stuck. But even the article makes it clear is was hot but not extremely so. I suspect a combination of factors to be at work here least of which is global warming.
It is a matter of someone taking the next step. With today's tech you are right, but if card makers take the next step, 3d engines will follow.
I have always wondered why Nvidia or ATI are not in the 3D rendering engine business. I would think that they are best placed to get the most out of their hardware
Just about everyone that uses a multi screen setup uses 3 screens in order to avoid the bevel in the middle. Usually the left and right screens are angled inward as to for a viewing arc. That is actually not a bad idea. Especially if the angles are such that the optical axis of each screens intersect at the user viewing position.
BUT...
Eyefinity or Nvidia surround don't work that way. They simply fool the rendering engine in believing the aspect of the rendering context is much wider. The result is that the virtual camera in the game uses a wider angle lens (Not quite but it will do to make my point). This causes the edges of the left and right screen to look rather distorted. Adding more screens width wise is really not worthwhile.
What is needed is multiple 3D contexts like you can have in Microsoft Flight simulator where each camera looks at a slightly different heading. But, why bother to solve that at the game engine level. NVidia and ATI pay attention this tip is free!
It should be possible to build true multiscreen logic into graphics drivers. If NVidia can do stereo they ought to be able to render outputs at different angles. Not only that, each output should not even assume that the optical center is in the middle of the screen either. Enter head tracking logic.
I did lots of experiments with multiscreen and what it would take to have the ultimate multiscreen experience. I even wrote some demo software to prove the point in these old videos show that I made four years ago.
Do you use Dropbox, Google Drive or any of the other hundreds of file storing/sharing options out there? My new Samsung Galaxy S3 phone even has a dropbox app build in that I can't even get rid off!
World temperatures increased by a fraction of a degree but here we go, now airports are melting because of it. What an idiot conclusion telling me a lot of the mental state of the author.
In reality, the aircraft has been in the same spot for far too long. Additionally the consistency of the tarmac material might be sub-standard causing the melting point to be lower. I have seen roads here in New Zealand that had substandard tarmac on them turning to liquid in the hot sun. And New Zealand average temperate is actually dropping over the last decade.
I have taken to cloud storage in a big way and mostly quite like the convenience of it. But increasingly I am now forced to react whenever someone sneezes in Mountain View and decides to shut down something. I was affected by Google Pages to which I had links from all over the internet. I had some software downloads on that and the new Google sites is useless. It is not so much having to move my files, the problem is that other things link to it. Documentation refers to it. In the case of my free software, I could not be bothered to move the web-pages over to my server so I just deleted the whole lot. So, I you needed normal map correction software, Lightning fast image sharing through IM you are now missing out on my free software.
I used Buzz a little, it got shutdown too. Not too much of an issue but I was considering to put effort in creating a decent following on it. Glad I didn't. Also glad I never jumped on the Google Wave bandwagon either.
However, I have used iGoogle from the moment it became available and right until today that is my dashboard. The default home page on all my computers. In one view I can see my appointments, emails, slashdot, bookmarks, chat, Google menu bar and recent google documents. Where else can I have that?
So, now they shut that down and I am forced to change the way I do things to their time schedule. And this is really the tip of the iceberg. On Google+ I have a personal and business page. Growing a following takes effort and time but what if they shut that down? In a smaller sense the cloud is also starting to show the downsides.
They are forever "improving" the user interface experience. This means that from one month to the next I am never quite sure how to access my Adsense control panel or other account details. Stuff changes constantly, layouts and styles change and it affects my productivity.
There are real benefits to local software. Although unused, my old Office XP will still run on my windows 7 machine without me having to re-learn how to use the software all the time and forever hunting through menus to find back a feature that I am sure is there somewhere.
I used to blame Microsoft for never sticking to anything (Enter Silverlight) but in all honesty, their OS is remarkable. It will still run very old windows code and I think they do deserve to be recognized for that. In contrast, my new Galaxy S3 android phone will no longer run a $6 racing game I purchased for my Google Nexus One two years ago.
In short: The big providers are their own worst cloud enemy because they keep changing the platform and rules of engagement. And don't give me the "But it is free what do you expect" argument. It is not free at all. I pay for it with information about me and exposure to adverts.
I have taken to cloud storage in a big way and mostly quite like the convenience of it. But increasingly I am now forced to react whenever someone sneezes in Mountain View and decides to shut down something. I was affected by Google Pages to which I had links from all over the internet. I had some software downloads on that and the new Google sites is terrible. It is not so much having to move your files. The problem is that other things depend on your process and those all are affected. In the case of my free software, I could not be bothered to move the web-pages over to my server so I just deleted the whole lot.
So, I you needed normal map correction software, Lightning fast image sharing through IM you are now missing out on my free software.
I used Buzz a little, got shutdown too. Not too much of an issue but I was considering to put effort in creating a decent following on it. Glad I didn't. Also gral I never jumped on the Google Wave bandwagon either.
However, I have used iGoogle from the moment is became available and right until today that is my control center. The default home page on all my computers. In one view I can see my appointments, emails, slashdot, bookmarks and recent google documents. Where else can I have that?
So, now the shut that down, I am forced to change the way I do things. And this is really the tip of the iceberg. On Google+ I have a personal and business page. Growing a following takes effort and time but what if they shut that down? In a smaller sense the cloud is also starting to prove downsides.
They are forever "improving" the user interface experience. This means that from one month to the next I am never quite sure how to access my Adsense control panel or other account details. Stuff changes constantly, layouts and styles change and it affects my productivity.
There are real benefits to local software. Although unused, my old Office XP will still run on my windows 7 machine without me having to re-learn how to use the software all the time and forever hunting through menus to find back a feature that I am sure is there somewhere.
I used to blame Microsoft for never sticking to anything (Enter Silverlight) but in all honesty, their OS is remarkable. It will still run very old windows code and I think they do deserve to be recognized for that. In contrast, my new Galaxy S3 android phone will no longer run a $6 racing game I purchased for my Google Nexus One two years ago.
In short: The big providers are their own worst cloud enemy because they keep changing the platform and rules of engagement. And don't give me the "But it is free what do you expect" argument. It is not free at all. I pay for it with information about me and exposure to adverts.
It would need a P2p style app on IOS and android that always runs in the background using NFC and bluetooth to discover hosts. You'd become a node in a sneaker network. Imagine how fast data replicates on school grounds and in busy shops. Lots of potential to link in local product promotions too.
I recall that replicating a desktop on a computer screen was the pinnacle of innovation. But the paradigm is shifting. There is no longer a lot of value in showing a big empty computer screen by default.
Don't forget the discussions about widgets for IOS that fills a screen with app icons like the old Windows 3.1 program manager used to do. Why fill a screen with icons that show nothing when you could display selected widgets instead.
But none of this is new. Remember desktop widgets and their "push" technology? The metro front end is just a front end. I am sure you can still have the old start button.
There has been a lot of talk about turning things around in schools. Meaning: Learn at new stuff at home at your own pace using digital media and make "homework" at school where there are peers and teachers to help out.
So, given that tablets are primarily for information consumption (As are all computers capable of) it stands to reason that students should have access to these things at home and not so much at school.
In a paradime where students practice in class, they require interaction with their peers and teacher rather then being isolated with earplugs in. They need collaborative hands on using whiteboards, paper and pencil. We are still at version 1.0 of the whiteboard pen so it is easy to manage and cheaper. Education cost is out of control already.
It seems to me schools are keen on tablets because they can feed then educational youtube videos at school thus taking a big load off themselves.
But the proliferation of so many different devices is not only causing problems for this particular software developer. The so called cross platform web-application is getting harder to test as well.
Windows (Various versions), Linux (Various versions), OSX (Various versions), Android (Various versions)
each running
MSIE (Various versions), Firefox (Various versions), Chrome (Various versions), Opera, Safari and many other browsers
And somehow developers are to write an application that runs on all these combinations. It is a bloody nightmare. I long to the days there was only windows with the Win32 API to write for. Good debuggers, great IDE's and mature software dev tools. At the moment it is one steaming pile of disjointed crap.
Well, I believe that normal flat TV screens are a great and social way to share visual information. A moving painting. I think it is much easier to have personal Head Mounted Displays for the full 3D immersion.
After doing some searching today I could only find Sensics that makes high resolution HMD's the prices are just a little prohibitive. 20k and up. But like with anything scaling technology can bring the price down well under $500 I imagine.
If accurate head-tracking was performed like they do in the Razer Hydra motion controller you would have a winner. Lag free hi-res head tracking combined with a panoramic HMD would be no good for movies (Although I wonder if they should use it to keep the screen steady so you can scan the screen) it would do wonders for fps games.
Bouncing light off a screen is ok to deliver a moving painting but very ill equipped to deliver a personalized realistic 3D visualization. A personal viewer makes much more sense. Here is hoping personal video googles will take off after all. Now people are "trained" to watch 3D TV with shutter goggles this might not be such a stretch.
Yeah, that as a bit presumptuous I agree. "One way to solve..." would have been a better choice of words. Just tried to point out that you need to match focal depth with stereo depth. The way in which to do that is indeed open.
As an armchair scientist, I have been experimenting with screens for quite a while. Trying to plot out what factors are involved for 3D display and depth perception.
I have been following this whole 3D craze with dismay because TV builders have failed to address the fundamentals.
Stereo vision is only one aspect of 3D vision and in fact not even nearly as powerful as some other effects. Although there are many causing discomfort the light ray divergence is most relevant.
Your eye also tells you how far away something is by the amount of work it needs to do to bring it into focus. The lens in your eye bends incoming light rays so they focus on your retina similar to how a photo camera works. To get the best possible 3D effect in commercial flight simulators, they make use of collimated displays.
Consider the pixels on your LCD screen a light sources. Take a pixel and you can consider it to be a light point that radiates light in all directions. After all you want to see the screen at many viewing angles. So the light rays diverge and the lens in your eye needs to bring the rays that hit the eye together to focus on your retina.
A collimated display emits light rays that are more or less parallel. Your eyes can relax more in order to focus which is an very powerful depth suggestion.
Stereo vision and focal distance need to match in order to get rid of the worst nauseating effect. Stereo vision may suggest something is in front of the screen but your eye disagrees because it needs to focus on the screen. These two inputs are fighting each other continuously.
The only way to solve this problem is if we can build a display with an adjustable micro lens in front of each screen pixel. If we can control the light ray divergence from a single pixel in real-time then we can match the stereo vision with focal distance and finally get rid if this mismatch. Added benefit is that displays like this can be adjusted for your eyes so you can watch TV without your glasses. They would make really good computer monitors.
A pixel worth of imagery normally only contains R, G and B channels for Red, Green and Blue light that combine to any color. In addition each pixel needs a fourth channel indicating the depth of the pixel. You may find the focal depth powerful enough without the need for stereo vision. You can try this simply by closing one eye and look around and notice how your eye adjusts to things nearby and far away.
You're not a MS shill, quite impressed by your reasoned reply.
On TCP/IP. My point was that at the point the Internet hit mainstream MS failed to recognize it's significance. To be fair. I believe windows 95 did come with TCP/IP support but it was not enabled or installed by default.
I mentioned Virtual earth because it was a 3D world model introduced with a lot of noise and recently abandoned. I know that all these companies are struggling to make money of this stuff but MS looks fickle when they declare a standard and then walk away a few years later because nobody wants to play their game. Even with Google Earth the pressure is on because new technology is making 3D map generation easier and better as shown by OVI maps 3D
The word failed is probably a poor word to use. But when a company loses a decent market share (look at MSIE) and then decides to walk away from it it doesn't only affect them, it affects those that build on that technology. Choosing technology these days is as much about continuity as it is about feature and power.
"Windows 95 originally shipped without Internet Explorer, and the default network installation did not install TCP/IP, the network protocol used on the Internet." I recall there was a third-party app that made access to the internet easier and many ISP's would ship that on their promotional Diskette.
You got a point though, MS might do better on the server front. Yet, various multimillion dollar projects that I consult for have steered away from MS server technology such as Sharepoint.
Currently I am converting a rather old web application based on the ISAPI which acts as a plugin to IIS that obviously depends on IIS to run. My client has come to rely on this application heavily over the years and increasingly feels his business is exposed to risk and MS technology is dropped so easily. The new tools for this app will be based on open source mainstream products with a wide support base and a proven track record.
Like previous comments, you assume that I am one of those apple trolls. Not so, I don't have a single Apple device at home or at work. All of my PC's run a windows OS.
The point is that it no longer matters what OS you are running because applications move to the web. Never mind the OS, in fact even the web browser won't matter provided it is compliant with current standards.
I have never been open to use Linux because I don't want to deal with learning a new OS. But if all I interact with is a browser, then I don't care what OS is running underneath provided it does the job well.
Google's Chrome seems to go in that direction where there is logic between the browser and PC hardware that is becoming invisible to the user and irrelevant to the user. Modern laptops now often have a quick boot feature launching a quick shell (I suppose a flavour of linux) and a bunch of common apps among which a browser so in a way you can already buy a PC without paying the OS tax and have it functional out of the box.
Microsoft did not realize the significance of TCP/IP when they released windows 95 Microsoft rolled out their.net fat client platform still thinking fat clients is where it is at. Virtual Earth failed to compete with Google Earth Failed mobile phones Failed MP3 players
Feel free to add to the long list.
Siverlight is just a small blip because it did not get the uptake MS had hoped for. They do this all the time. They try to compete on all fronts and never excel anywhere. MS product path is littered with abandoned poorly executed ideas some of which might have made it if they only committed to it. I feel sorry for those software companies that put all their eggs in the MS basket because their.net codebase will in the not too distant future be obsolete too.
It should be clear to everyone that operating systems are no longer significant. Running fat clients locally is no longer where it is at. PC's and Laptops are no longer the core device on which applications run. So the MS tax (Windows) on every PC will come to an end. MS is already far too late to change their direction with Windows and if MS doesn't get onto the web based bandwagon with MS Office quickly they will lose that profitable market as well.
It is a pity but unavoidable that successful companies get too big and too slow to respond to changes. Although it is thanks to MS that computing has become so accessible to the masses. They failed to pay attention over the last decade and foolishly thought they could direct their market. Developers trusting anything that MS put out over the last 5 years will wish they had not, no matter the promised potential.
Google was the new kid on the block with some amazing innovation but look closely at Google today and you can see the same warning signals. It is only a matter of time before the next company will take over from them.
No matter what the range is, there is always someone who needs to go a little further. If the battery range is 1000 miles then this author is likely to whine that he wants to go 1200 miles.
It is not likely you have enough coins in your pocket to feed the hungry meter enough. Parking fees are increased dramatically all the time to "discourage" the use of motor vehicles. A fee of $5 for 30 minutes is very common here in sparely populated New Zealand. I can safely say I never have that much in coin with me. In fact I rarely have that much cash on me.
So, city councils come up with other schemes that will "Help" you to get rid of large amounts of money. Here in Auckland you can conveniently SMS your money to the greedy council while in other places you are forced to walk half a block to feed a banknote reader.
I suggest you consistently feed it some chewing gum whenever you pass.
I'm being marked as flamebait? The moderator must be one of the Obama worshippers. It is sad to see the USA destroying itself while the Obamessiah parades wide eyed in front of his teleprompter.
The UK guys asked for a good alternative to live. I gave him a very honest answer. Many people from the UK emigrate to New Zealand as do the clever ones from the USA.
It is no secret that New Zealand is rapidly becoming Ayn Rands Galt's Gultch.
New Zealand, the last Western bastion without a socialist government. (Well... in name anyway) We just had elections and kicked out the socialists while even the USA has embraced socialism/communism/totalitarianism under Obama. Damn, even the Aussies got damn socialist government.
Unfortunately we do have a democracy (Force by numbers) which unfortunately doesn't equate to freedom which is what you desire. The best country for you currently would be New Zealand but if the USA once day remembers what it's true foundations are and starts adhering to her constitution then the USA has got to be the best place for any freedom loving person.
Slashdot Mirror
I stand corrected on "In reality, the aircraft has been in the same spot for far too long." It indeed looks like it was moving leading up to getting stuck.
But even the article makes it clear is was hot but not extremely so. I suspect a combination of factors to be at work here least of which is global warming.
It is a matter of someone taking the next step. With today's tech you are right, but if card makers take the next step, 3d engines will follow.
I have always wondered why Nvidia or ATI are not in the 3D rendering engine business. I would think that they are best placed to get the most out of their hardware
Just about everyone that uses a multi screen setup uses 3 screens in order to avoid the bevel in the middle. Usually the left and right screens are angled inward as to for a viewing arc. That is actually not a bad idea. Especially if the angles are such that the optical axis of each screens intersect at the user viewing position.
BUT...
Eyefinity or Nvidia surround don't work that way. They simply fool the rendering engine in believing the aspect of the rendering context is much wider. The result is that the virtual camera in the game uses a wider angle lens (Not quite but it will do to make my point). This causes the edges of the left and right screen to look rather distorted. Adding more screens width wise is really not worthwhile.
What is needed is multiple 3D contexts like you can have in Microsoft Flight simulator where each camera looks at a slightly different heading. But, why bother to solve that at the game engine level. NVidia and ATI pay attention this tip is free!
It should be possible to build true multiscreen logic into graphics drivers. If NVidia can do stereo they ought to be able to render outputs at different angles. Not only that, each output should not even assume that the optical center is in the middle of the screen either. Enter head tracking logic.
I did lots of experiments with multiscreen and what it would take to have the ultimate multiscreen experience. I even wrote some demo software to prove the point in these old videos show that I made four years ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBdtPz2V_vY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ku76aHq3pps
(Sorry about the cheesy sound track)
And still we are stuck with dumb distorted multi monitor widescreens!
Do you use Dropbox, Google Drive or any of the other hundreds of file storing/sharing options out there?
My new Samsung Galaxy S3 phone even has a dropbox app build in that I can't even get rid off!
World temperatures increased by a fraction of a degree but here we go, now airports are melting because of it. What an idiot conclusion telling me a lot of the mental state of the author.
In reality, the aircraft has been in the same spot for far too long. Additionally the consistency of the tarmac material might be sub-standard causing the melting point to be lower. I have seen roads here in New Zealand that had substandard tarmac on them turning to liquid in the hot sun. And New Zealand average temperate is actually dropping over the last decade.
(Re-post because I posted in the wrong thread)
I have taken to cloud storage in a big way and mostly quite like the convenience of it. But increasingly I am now forced to react whenever someone sneezes in Mountain View and decides to shut down something. I was affected by Google Pages to which I had links from all over the internet. I had some software downloads on that and the new Google sites is useless. It is not so much having to move my files, the problem is that other things link to it. Documentation refers to it. In the case of my free software, I could not be bothered to move the web-pages over to my server so I just deleted the whole lot. So, I you needed normal map correction software, Lightning fast image sharing through IM you are now missing out on my free software.
I used Buzz a little, it got shutdown too. Not too much of an issue but I was considering to put effort in creating a decent following on it. Glad I didn't. Also glad I never jumped on the Google Wave bandwagon either.
However, I have used iGoogle from the moment it became available and right until today that is my dashboard. The default home page on all my computers.
In one view I can see my appointments, emails, slashdot, bookmarks, chat, Google menu bar and recent google documents. Where else can I have that?
So, now they shut that down and I am forced to change the way I do things to their time schedule. And this is really the tip of the iceberg. On Google+ I have a personal and business page. Growing a following takes effort and time but what if they shut that down? In a smaller sense the cloud is also starting to show the downsides.
They are forever "improving" the user interface experience. This means that from one month to the next I am never quite sure how to access my Adsense control panel or other account details. Stuff changes constantly, layouts and styles change and it affects my productivity.
There are real benefits to local software. Although unused, my old Office XP will still run on my windows 7 machine without me having to re-learn how to use the software all the time and forever hunting through menus to find back a feature that I am sure is there somewhere.
I used to blame Microsoft for never sticking to anything (Enter Silverlight) but in all honesty, their OS is remarkable. It will still run very old windows code and I think they do deserve to be recognized for that. In contrast, my new Galaxy S3 android phone will no longer run a $6 racing game I purchased for my Google Nexus One two years ago.
In short: The big providers are their own worst cloud enemy because they keep changing the platform and rules of engagement. And don't give me the "But it is free what do you expect" argument. It is not free at all. I pay for it with information about me and exposure to adverts.
I have taken to cloud storage in a big way and mostly quite like the convenience of it. But increasingly I am now forced to react whenever someone sneezes in Mountain View and decides to shut down something. I was affected by Google Pages to which I had links from all over the internet. I had some software downloads on that and the new Google sites is terrible. It is not so much having to move your files. The problem is that other things depend on your process and those all are affected. In the case of my free software, I could not be bothered to move the web-pages over to my server so I just deleted the whole lot.
So, I you needed normal map correction software, Lightning fast image sharing through IM you are now missing out on my free software.
I used Buzz a little, got shutdown too. Not too much of an issue but I was considering to put effort in creating a decent following on it. Glad I didn't. Also gral I never jumped on the Google Wave bandwagon either.
However, I have used iGoogle from the moment is became available and right until today that is my control center. The default home page on all my computers.
In one view I can see my appointments, emails, slashdot, bookmarks and recent google documents. Where else can I have that?
So, now the shut that down, I am forced to change the way I do things. And this is really the tip of the iceberg. On Google+ I have a personal and business page. Growing a following takes effort and time but what if they shut that down? In a smaller sense the cloud is also starting to prove downsides.
They are forever "improving" the user interface experience. This means that from one month to the next I am never quite sure how to access my Adsense control panel or other account details. Stuff changes constantly, layouts and styles change and it affects my productivity.
There are real benefits to local software. Although unused, my old Office XP will still run on my windows 7 machine without me having to re-learn how to use the software all the time and forever hunting through menus to find back a feature that I am sure is there somewhere.
I used to blame Microsoft for never sticking to anything (Enter Silverlight) but in all honesty, their OS is remarkable. It will still run very old windows code and I think they do deserve to be recognized for that. In contrast, my new Galaxy S3 android phone will no longer run a $6 racing game I purchased for my Google Nexus One two years ago.
In short: The big providers are their own worst cloud enemy because they keep changing the platform and rules of engagement. And don't give me the "But it is free what do you expect" argument. It is not free at all. I pay for it with information about me and exposure to adverts.
It would need a P2p style app on IOS and android that always runs in the background using NFC and bluetooth to discover hosts. You'd become a node in a sneaker network. Imagine how fast data replicates on school grounds and in busy shops. Lots of potential to link in local product promotions too.
I recall that replicating a desktop on a computer screen was the pinnacle of innovation. But the paradigm is shifting. There is no longer a lot of value in showing a big empty computer screen by default.
Don't forget the discussions about widgets for IOS that fills a screen with app icons like the old Windows 3.1 program manager used to do. Why fill a screen with icons that show nothing when you could display selected widgets instead.
But none of this is new. Remember desktop widgets and their "push" technology? The metro front end is just a front end. I am sure you can still have the old start button.
There has been a lot of talk about turning things around in schools. Meaning: Learn at new stuff at home at your own pace using digital media and make "homework" at school where there are peers and teachers to help out.
So, given that tablets are primarily for information consumption (As are all computers capable of) it stands to reason that students should have access to these things at home and not so much at school.
In a paradime where students practice in class, they require interaction with their peers and teacher rather then being isolated with earplugs in. They need collaborative hands on using whiteboards, paper and pencil. We are still at version 1.0 of the whiteboard pen so it is easy to manage and cheaper. Education cost is out of control already.
It seems to me schools are keen on tablets because they can feed then educational youtube videos at school thus taking a big load off themselves.
But the proliferation of so many different devices is not only causing problems for this particular software developer. The so called cross platform web-application is getting harder to test as well.
Windows (Various versions), Linux (Various versions), OSX (Various versions), Android (Various versions)
each running
MSIE (Various versions), Firefox (Various versions), Chrome (Various versions), Opera, Safari and many other browsers
And somehow developers are to write an application that runs on all these combinations. It is a bloody nightmare. I long to the days there was only windows with the Win32 API to write for. Good debuggers, great IDE's and mature software dev tools. At the moment it is one steaming pile of disjointed crap.
Well, I believe that normal flat TV screens are a great and social way to share visual information. A moving painting. I think it is much easier to have personal Head Mounted Displays for the full 3D immersion.
After doing some searching today I could only find Sensics that makes high resolution HMD's the prices are just a little prohibitive. 20k and up.
But like with anything scaling technology can bring the price down well under $500 I imagine.
http://sensics.com/technology/breakthrough.php
If accurate head-tracking was performed like they do in the Razer Hydra motion controller you would have a winner. Lag free hi-res head tracking combined with a panoramic HMD would be no good for movies (Although I wonder if they should use it to keep the screen steady so you can scan the screen) it would do wonders for fps games.
Bouncing light off a screen is ok to deliver a moving painting but very ill equipped to deliver a personalized realistic 3D visualization. A personal viewer makes much more sense. Here is hoping personal video googles will take off after all. Now people are "trained" to watch 3D TV with shutter goggles this might not be such a stretch.
Thanks for that deep insight. Slashdot worthy.
Lol 1000 years from now they will think the star-wars movie script was some kind of bible.
Yes, that is another important one. I have been doing some experiments on that as you can see in this video on my youtube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBdtPz2V_vY
Yeah, that as a bit presumptuous I agree. "One way to solve..." would have been a better choice of words.
Just tried to point out that you need to match focal depth with stereo depth. The way in which to do that is indeed open.
As I wrote on Gizmag:
As an armchair scientist, I have been experimenting with screens for quite a while. Trying to plot out what factors are involved for 3D display and depth perception.
I have been following this whole 3D craze with dismay because TV builders have failed to address the fundamentals.
Stereo vision is only one aspect of 3D vision and in fact not even nearly as powerful as some other effects. Although there are many causing discomfort the light ray divergence is most relevant.
Your eye also tells you how far away something is by the amount of work it needs to do to bring it into focus. The lens in your eye bends incoming light rays so they focus on your retina similar to how a photo camera works. To get the best possible 3D effect in commercial flight simulators, they make use of collimated displays.
Consider the pixels on your LCD screen a light sources. Take a pixel and you can consider it to be a light point that radiates light in all directions. After all you want to see the screen at many viewing angles. So the light rays diverge and the lens in your eye needs to bring the rays that hit the eye together to focus on your retina.
A collimated display emits light rays that are more or less parallel. Your eyes can relax more in order to focus which is an very powerful depth suggestion.
Stereo vision and focal distance need to match in order to get rid of the worst nauseating effect. Stereo vision may suggest something is in front of the screen but your eye disagrees because it needs to focus on the screen. These two inputs are fighting each other continuously.
The only way to solve this problem is if we can build a display with an adjustable micro lens in front of each screen pixel. If we can control the light ray divergence from a single pixel in real-time then we can match the stereo vision with focal distance and finally get rid if this mismatch. Added benefit is that displays like this can be adjusted for your eyes so you can watch TV without your glasses. They would make really good computer monitors.
A pixel worth of imagery normally only contains R, G and B channels for Red, Green and Blue light that combine to any color. In addition each pixel needs a fourth channel indicating the depth of the pixel. You may find the focal depth powerful enough without the need for stereo vision. You can try this simply by closing one eye and look around and notice how your eye adjusts to things nearby and far away.
You're not a MS shill, quite impressed by your reasoned reply.
On TCP/IP. My point was that at the point the Internet hit mainstream MS failed to recognize it's significance. To be fair. I believe windows 95 did come with TCP/IP support but it was not enabled or installed by default.
I mentioned Virtual earth because it was a 3D world model introduced with a lot of noise and recently abandoned. I know that all these companies are struggling to make money of this stuff but MS looks fickle when they declare a standard and then walk away a few years later because nobody wants to play their game. Even with Google Earth the pressure is on because new technology is making 3D map generation easier and better as shown by OVI maps 3D
The word failed is probably a poor word to use. But when a company loses a decent market share (look at MSIE) and then decides to walk away from it it doesn't only affect them, it affects those that build on that technology. Choosing technology these days is as much about continuity as it is about feature and power.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_95
"Windows 95 originally shipped without Internet Explorer, and the default network installation did not install TCP/IP, the network protocol used on the Internet."
I recall there was a third-party app that made access to the internet easier and many ISP's would ship that on their promotional Diskette.
You got a point though, MS might do better on the server front. Yet, various multimillion dollar projects that I consult for have steered away from MS server technology such as Sharepoint.
Currently I am converting a rather old web application based on the ISAPI which acts as a plugin to IIS that obviously depends on IIS to run. My client has come to rely on this application heavily over the years and increasingly feels his business is exposed to risk and MS technology is dropped so easily. The new tools for this app will be based on open source mainstream products with a wide support base and a proven track record.
Like previous comments, you assume that I am one of those apple trolls. Not so, I don't have a single Apple device at home or at work. All of my PC's run a windows OS.
The point is that it no longer matters what OS you are running because applications move to the web. Never mind the OS, in fact even the web browser won't matter provided it is compliant with current standards.
I have never been open to use Linux because I don't want to deal with learning a new OS. But if all I interact with is a browser, then I don't care what OS is running underneath provided it does the job well.
Google's Chrome seems to go in that direction where there is logic between the browser and PC hardware that is becoming invisible to the user and irrelevant to the user. Modern laptops now often have a quick boot feature launching a quick shell (I suppose a flavour of linux) and a bunch of common apps among which a browser so in a way you can already buy a PC without paying the OS tax and have it functional out of the box.
Microsoft did not realize the significance of TCP/IP when they released windows 95 .net fat client platform still thinking fat clients is where it is at.
Microsoft rolled out their
Virtual Earth failed to compete with Google Earth
Failed mobile phones
Failed MP3 players
Feel free to add to the long list.
Siverlight is just a small blip because it did not get the uptake MS had hoped for. They do this all the time. They try to compete on all fronts and never excel anywhere. MS product path is littered with abandoned poorly executed ideas some of which might have made it if they only committed to it. I feel sorry for those software companies that put all their eggs in the MS basket because their .net codebase will in the not too distant future be obsolete too.
It should be clear to everyone that operating systems are no longer significant. Running fat clients locally is no longer where it is at. PC's and Laptops are no longer the core device on which applications run. So the MS tax (Windows) on every PC will come to an end. MS is already far too late to change their direction with Windows and if MS doesn't get onto the web based bandwagon with MS Office quickly they will lose that profitable market as well.
It is a pity but unavoidable that successful companies get too big and too slow to respond to changes. Although it is thanks to MS that computing has become so accessible to the masses. They failed to pay attention over the last decade and foolishly thought they could direct their market. Developers trusting anything that MS put out over the last 5 years will wish they had not, no matter the promised potential.
Google was the new kid on the block with some amazing innovation but look closely at Google today and you can see the same warning signals. It is only a matter of time before the next company will take over from them.
No matter what the range is, there is always someone who needs to go a little further. If the battery range is 1000 miles then this author is likely to whine that he wants to go 1200 miles.
It is not likely you have enough coins in your pocket to feed the hungry meter enough. Parking fees are increased dramatically all the time to "discourage" the use of motor vehicles. A fee of $5 for 30 minutes is very common here in sparely populated New Zealand. I can safely say I never have that much in coin with me. In fact I rarely have that much cash on me.
So, city councils come up with other schemes that will "Help" you to get rid of large amounts of money. Here in Auckland you can conveniently SMS your money to the greedy council while in other places you are forced to walk half a block to feed a banknote reader.
I suggest you consistently feed it some chewing gum whenever you pass.
I'm being marked as flamebait? The moderator must be one of the Obama worshippers. It is sad to see the USA destroying itself while the Obamessiah parades wide eyed in front of his teleprompter.
The UK guys asked for a good alternative to live. I gave him a very honest answer. Many people from the UK emigrate to New Zealand as do the clever ones from the USA.
It is no secret that New Zealand is rapidly becoming Ayn Rands Galt's Gultch.
New Zealand, the last Western bastion without a socialist government. (Well... in name anyway) We just had elections and kicked out the socialists while even the USA has embraced socialism/communism/totalitarianism under Obama. Damn, even the Aussies got damn socialist government.
Unfortunately we do have a democracy (Force by numbers) which unfortunately doesn't equate to freedom which is what you desire. The best country for you currently would be New Zealand but if the USA once day remembers what it's true foundations are and starts adhering to her constitution then the USA has got to be the best place for any freedom loving person.