Sharp Announces 3D Laptop 266
wembley writes "The Associated Press is running a story about a forthcoming Sharp laptop with a 3D screen. I can't find any pictures, but it requires no glasses, so you don't have to walk around looking like Biff's sidekick in Back to the Future. It comes with WinXP, but it's only a matter of time before we're arguing here about what looks better in 3D, Gnome or KDE."
All laptops are in 3D.. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:All laptops are in 3D.. (Score:2)
Re:All laptops are in 3D.. (Score:2)
Oh, in that case, find one of these things and display only a cross-section of the t dimension.
Re:All laptops are in 3D.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:All laptops are in 3D.. (Score:5, Funny)
But I didn't believe him - it was obvious he was just stretching the truth.
Re:All laptops are in 3D.. (Score:2)
Re:All people see in 2D (Score:4, Interesting)
The end result is that I can't throw nor catch for the life of me. Doorknobs are often hard for me when I'm tired. Stairs are hazardous to my health. I have to count the steps lest I miss one and I ALWAYS use the handrail. I've almost fallen on stairs twice in the last week alone. Bionoculars, red-blue 3D glasses, and stereograms screw with my brain's filtering ability and causes double-vision, so I can't use them either (unless I close one eye).
I can safely say that this condition is found only in a small minority of population -- or else you'd find piles of bodies crumbled up on the landing of staircases
Re:All people see in 2D (Score:2)
You seriously need to stop looking at the computer screen so much.
Re:All people see in 2D (Score:2)
I would really like to have the dude who spent a mod point here chime in and tell us why he thought this was an 'interesting' comment.
Re:All people see in 2D (Score:2)
Hmmm, well, I guess in a REEEEEEEE[...]EEEEELY wierd way, the O.P. was right. If you take one eye, you see in 2D, so each respective eye sees in 2-D. It's just that our brain takes the two images and puts them together to create a 3D image. That, of course, assumes that by "sight" he meant vision and did not include what our brain interprets it as, which is obviously wrong. Wrong, because, without the brain, we would see squat.
Ducking and Dodging (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Ducking and Dodging (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Ducking and Dodging (Score:2)
iirc some of the alternating shutting lcd-glasses thingys did this.
-
no they don't (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Ducking and Dodging (Score:2, Interesting)
My final year project was an AWT modeled on a 3D graphics card. The theory was you can use this second processor, the GPU (that's doing nothing normally) to move windows, render fonts and images, etc. You'd get alpha blending and all sorts of cool effects for practically free. Windows were hanging in 3D space and could cast shadows, even button shading was done properly using camera angles and lights.
It occurs to me that, with this technology I could dig out that old executable and find it actually in
Re:Ducking and Dodging (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Ducking and Dodging (Score:2)
Re:Ducking and Dodging (Score:2)
Re:Ducking and Dodging (Score:2, Interesting)
On a related note, you can buy Stereo LCD projectors [stereo3d.com], but most require special glasses that alternate between the left and right eye. On the normal LCD flatpanel display the light is polarized, so you can't use the polarized glasses trick.
pornography (Score:5, Funny)
It's a sad day when you hear the words "3D display" and the first thing that comes to mind is desktops wars, not pornography.
Re:pornography (Score:4, Funny)
Re:pornography (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally, I think 3d displays are still fads. Now if it were a 3d hologram display that replaced the flat screen, like the chess boards in Star Wars, then I think there is definat
Details (Score:5, Informative)
If you can't, look at the pretty diagrams and the stupid faked 3D photo.
Re:Details (Score:2)
No, please no. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:No, please no. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:No, please no. (Score:2)
I really liked those glasses.. (Score:4, Funny)
I for one welcome my 3D natalie portman.
-pm
A measure of geekness (Score:3, Funny)
Oh what joy! Proof I'm not a geek! My first thought was 3D pr0n. Gnome and KDE were the last things on my mind when I read about this.
OperatingSystem Question (Score:5, Interesting)
I mysql would appreciate a laptop featuring this "smoke screen" that was posted here in
Re:OperatingSystem Question (Score:2)
just loose half of the horiz. resolution as soon as you turn 3D
on.
But I think it's interesting that MacOS X uses, and Longhorn
will use, 3D acceleration for their desktops. It should be
relatively easy to extend the widget set with adequate
depth buffer information and have it rendered in 3D.
(Although it's not too fast to draw directly into depth buffers.)
I already have my KDE desktop in 3D (Score:4, Informative)
It's is an OpenGL program for switching virtual desktops in a seamless 3-dimensional manner on Linux. With this program your desktop looks futuristiiiic and you can impress your friends!
Only an animated switch between desktops (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Only an animated switch between desktops (Score:2, Informative)
Re:I already have my KDE desktop in 3D (Score:2)
That way you could "back up" to see multiple desktops arrayed adjacent to each other, which in itself would be more meaingful if the surfaces of the spherical shape fit some multiple of desktops (like 4).
So how does it know ..... (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe I should just RTFA.
Picture of Mebius (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.mobilemag.com/content/100/336/C
Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace (Score:4, Interesting)
Basically you throw down objects you're working on, into concentric piles. The most important stuff stays 'hot', near you, while stuff you use less often gets gradually pushed further and further back.
To open a document or web site you just click it, and it becomes 'hot' again. There's a little text box I can type keywords in, to find matching documents.
That's about it. Replaces the hierarchical file system with something much closer to the way I work (and AFAIK, many creative people work).
Re:Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace (Score:2)
Do you know Python? Sounds like this would be a
Like the URL dropdown (Score:2)
I work that way a lot, too. One place where it's obvious is in me rarely using bookmarks for web pages. Instead, I use the url dropdown in my web browser where my most commonly and frequently visited websites are nearly always near the top without me having to actively bother saying I want them to be there.
It falls over a little for less frequent things, like interesting websites that don't get updated very often and so I forget to go back to them.
Re:Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace (Score:2)
Pile system (Score:2)
If I had a free week and some skill with any graphics library, I'd hack it together.
Imagine your desktop, piled with lots of random documents. Each document is a URL referring to a resource somewhere on the net, most of them local to you, some on your LAN, others on the Internet.
When you create a new resource, the cluttertop simply throws a new icon somewhere on top of a pile. You can move it around as you like, especially in 3D space (closer, further from you).
When you look at the sp
Re:Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace (Score:2)
Interesting idea based on a fundamental comp sci theory.
Re:Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace (Score:2)
Which you would have a hard time patenting.
Re:Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace (Score:2)
I'm afraid that's already been done. I read about it last year somewhere -- might have been a Xerox PARC development.
Re:Now I can start on my 3D clutterspace (Score:2)
Why not? Didn't someone patent the wheel recently in the US?
WinXP crap (Score:2)
The GUI I'm thinking of is actually very simple. OK, I'm going to continue this in my journal.
Pics here!!!! (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.sharp.co.jp/mebius/index.html
Some links (Score:5, Informative)
my humble piece in norwegian [hardware.no]
some pictures down the page [digit-life.com]
English explaination of the "parallax" technology [sharp-world.com]
Sharps own specification page [sharp-world.com]
It's only supprted by Windows XP sp1a, by the way.
penhead
Re:Some links (Score:2)
1.3 hours. I think they missed the meeting on what the holy grail of laptop design is.
About time too... (Score:3, Funny)
Sigh... (Score:3, Funny)
Methinks CowBoyNeal has been deprived of sex for too long...
Re:Sigh... (Score:2)
Why a laptop (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Why a laptop (Score:2)
-
Re:Why a laptop (Score:2)
Because it makes for very impressive demos, and for most demos, you have to bring it somewhere.
Half horizontal resolution (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Half horizontal resolution (Score:2)
The big problem comes if the software doesn't antialias- then hard edges will be seen with one eye and not the other, and you will get headaches and stuff. Still, t
Reduced resolution in 3D (Score:2, Interesting)
Gnome or KDE? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Gnome or KDE? (Score:2)
Great! Now all we need is a way to control it. (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe someone should dust off the old NES U-force and find a way to integrate it into the laptop.
How far do YOU sit from the display? (Score:2, Insightful)
"In fact, if you just sit directly in front of the display at about 30" away, as you normally do with any display, you will be in a position where you see 3D."
Thirty inches (75 cm)? I don't know about you, but I'm more like fifteen inches from the screen. At 30 inches, I couldn't read the damn thing.
Impact on eyes? (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm remembering the strain of looking at stereoscopic images and this sounds a bit like that.
Any ideas?
Re:Impact on eyes? (Score:2)
It doesn't matter that the images are different for both eyes. Your eyes normally see two different images anyway (that's how you perceive depth). What matters is how good the software is at generating two different images that the brain will
Re:Impact on eyes? (Score:2)
is different from the distance of the display - which
you have to focus on.
I'm not sure. That that could cause some kind of strain.
Re:Impact on eyes? (Score:2)
Erm, that's what happens anyway. It's your brain that puts the two different images together to create a 3-D single image. All 3D imaging systems (including reality) work by presenting each eye with a slightly different image. Except for those wierd stereogram postcards. No idea how they work, but they really give you eyestrain.
Why this will NOT be popular (Score:5, Insightful)
Worst of all are deviations in the angular orientation of the viewer's head WRT the screen. 3-D displays assume that the separation between the eyes is left-right. If the person tilts their head, the images do not fuse properly and cause eye strain or double vision. The only solution is a 4 or 5-axis head tracking system, although a head-mounted 3-D display does provide a first-order correction to the angular orientation problem (it causes other problems, though).
A secondary problem is that only one viewer can ever be in the "sweet" spot of the 3-D system. To create a proper 3-D view for the second person, the system needs to create a second pair of images that are different from those seen by the first person. Add another pair of eye and the need a second pair of images.
3-D has been around for a decades in 3-D movies, computer displays, and VR, but it has never caught on. Its not that it does not work well enough to interest some of the people some of the time, it just doesn't work well enough to interest most of the people, most of the time.
On the other hand, I could be wrong -- I never thought Window's would be popular either.
Re:Why this will NOT be popular (Score:2)
Tokyo-based Sharp has been selling cellphones with 3-D displays for NTT DoCoMo, Japan's top mobile carrier, since November last year. They were so popular the feature is being introduced in notebook computers, Nakayama says.
If it works with cellphones (come on who holds a cellphone at eyelevel, its almost always at chest or waist level when you read a text message) It should work for laptops, wouldnt it ? And the market is Japan rememeber ? They made pokemon popula
Re:Why this will NOT be popular (Score:2)
2-19-2000 http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/02/19/12172 5 4&mode=flat&tid=137 [slashdot.org]
*And here's a quote from the first comment to the article:
"Interesting side point: The press on this form of 3d vision on their web site dates back to 1994 so it's not exactly cutting edge (unless they've recently undergone a quantum leap f
Re:Why this will NOT be popular (Score:2)
My right eye is FAR stronger than my left, and so in most situations, my brain doesn't use my left eye unless there's peripheral information or confusing depth geometry. Hence, those 3D glasses never work on me, and I suspect this display will appear flat and fuzzy to people with similar uneven vision
BSOD in 3d (Score:2)
Lots leading up to this (Score:4, Insightful)
My only question is "Why didn't they create a standalone LCD panel first?"
3D makes you stupid! (Score:2)
Sounds to me like... (Score:2)
You know those pictures that change as you tilt them or walk by. These displays were all the rage at SIGGRAPH this year, but IMHO, they weren't very good at displaying true "3D".
Some various pics [stereoscopic.org].
I saw a demo recently (Score:5, Informative)
The 3D effect is quite convincing however it has a few drawbacks. The biggest problem is you have to look at it from precice angles for the effect to work i.e. if you move your head from side to side you will see the screen go from real 3D to a blur, then inverted 3D, blur... This is especially troublesome if more than one person is trying to look at it at once. The second problem is that to show two images at once each image has only half the resolution of the entire display, making it look fuzzy compared to regular 2D displays.
For some reason the demo they had running only cycled through still pictures of 3D rendered scenes, no video or UI shots which makes me suspicious that these problems are even worse in those applications. It is cool technology no doubt, but it still has some problems to work out.
Ouch! (Score:3, Funny)
AAAH! MY EYES! IT'S BENDING MY EYES!!
I'll wait (Score:2, Insightful)
Proprietary 3D format? (Score:3, Interesting)
So, it uses some proprietary 3D format? It's junk then. Why not have it support OpenGL and DirectX?
I Had a TNT2 when they came out that had 3D glasses and worked perfectly with any OpenGL/DirectX graphics... why should this be different?
Re:Proprietary 3D format? (Score:2)
Too bad, since they're using an nvidia [sharp.co.jp] chip and nvidia has a stereoscopic display package [nvidia.com] already.
Linux support for the buton... (Score:2)
The question remains: Will the 3D-mode button only work with Windoze. The article says that it ships with Windoze XP.
That's nothing (Score:2, Funny)
3D Screen? Pwash! That's nothing!
My entire laptop is 3D! You can walk around it and see it from different angles and everything!
Related story (Score:2)
This is almost certainly related to this story [slashdot.org] from last year. Who thought they would actually bring it to market?
DNF almost ready now (Score:2)
Re:Only slightly 3D (Score:4, Informative)
This can't be very good for the viewing angle though, can it? You'd have to be sitting right in front of it.
Re:Only slightly 3D (Score:3, Informative)
Suspect it will work only at the right distance and have rotten viewing angles. OK for PDAs, not for home TV or big monitors where people want to mov
Re:Only slightly 3D (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Only slightly 3D (Score:2, Informative)
Holograms are kind of like those 3-d Magic Eye pictures you get, although a fair chunk more sophisticated. Essentially you choose a flat surface infront of your object, and work out everything (phase, intensity) about the light that passes through this surface on its way to your eye. You record this on a photographic film and, hey presto, the eye is fooled into thinking there's an object there when light shines on the pattern.
Their viewing angle sucks because there's an assumption - light "on the way to
Re:Only slightly 3D (Score:3, Interesting)
This has been around in print for years now; I guess it was only a matter of time before some bright spark applied it to screens.
I always thought that it would be particularly good for 3D Games.
Re:3D desktops suck. (Score:5, Insightful)
Just keep the normal desktop look and functionality, but use this to really give different windows on screen different depth. Visualizing stacking order would be a very informative cue, helping people make better sense of their desktop.
Another, related, use would be to make floating windows (such as panels and the like), really float in front. Done right, you would no longer feel that they take up screen estate (even though they still do), and be _less_ conspicuous when you aren't interested in them, and more conspicuous when you are.
i don't think you know the details (Score:3, Insightful)
wrote about it a little here [slashdot.org], actually...
the problem with the 3D thing is that it's very, very bad for text-viewing, at least in 3D mode - but then if you forfeit that, what's the whole point? and then you have such a limited view-space from which everything is 3D, so if you are playing, say, 3D games, you can't move your head at all for more than a couple inches each way.
btw, to get the 3D thing you need te sacrifice half the
Re:3D desktops suck. (Score:2, Insightful)
Floating windows would still take up just as much screen estate, I wouldnt be able to move my head to the left to see around the web browser i as using to see if i got a new email.
3D desktops are new (Score:5, Interesting)
What you will need is an improvement on the mouse. One of the reasons that my real-world desktop is easier to use than my GUI desktop is that I can move my head to see how thinkgs are stacked. For example, I have a couple of MySQL manuals stacked; the upper is larger, so on a 2D desktop I couldn't see the lower. But a tiny move of my head shows me the spint of the lower. We will need to replicate that functionality before a 3D desktop really works.
Actually, that functionality could be replicated on a 2D desktop - redraw a pseudo-3D desktop as move my viewpoint (Doom engin inside Windows?). So it is the mouse that needs improvement, not the screen.
got it (Score:3, Insightful)
The command line is better than any file manger I've ever seen, and it uses a hell of a lot less ram.
I'd like to see Apple's Expose on such a display. It will zoom windows out to fit all of them one the screen for selection by the user.
Re:3D desktops are new (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:3D desktops are new (Score:2)
Why not aim for the best of both worlds? 3D CLI!
Re:3D desktops are new (Score:2)
Have you ever used a spaceball? I do mechanical CAD design (among other things...) and I've found that the spaceball is probably the best input device for 3D stuff. I can 'grab' an object and spin it, zoom in on it, etc. almost as if it were sitting in my hand. VERY nice.
And I used to play Descent with a Spaceorb, too. Dodging incoming fire in 6 axis can really mess with your opponent's heads. Then they screwed up and added mouse control to D3. C
Re:3D desktops suck. (Score:3)
That would be easy to debate. Unfortunately, everybody suddenly becomes a minimalist when their precious CPU cycles are spent doing snazzier UI effects. Anything the UI does to tell you what the computer is doing is good. Remember when Win2k came out and the menus faded in and out? That was good. Did it use CPU cycles? Yes. Did it take longer for the menu to come up? Y
Use of 3D imaging is already implemented (Score:2)
Actually, I'm pretty sure that any current 3D game can use this technology fairly easily... lots of current games support 3D if you have LCD shutter glasses, or a dual-image HMD.
The game instructs the graphics card to render a 3D environment from a particular location on a map, from a particular height, looking in a particular direction. Lets see - x,y,z + pitch, roll, & yaw, right? Anyway, the card just has to alternately bump the 'y' coordinate back and forth a bit to generate two images, one for
Re:Biff's Sidekick??? (Score:3)
He was in both, and definitely in the 50's.