Confusing "cut back" with "stop"... maybe someone should take a few more English lessons?
Equally amusing is her little "VR next" comment. Her secret dream is that 4K, 3D and VR all fail. Problem here is the article says that the consumer interest shifts from 3D to 4K and VR.
Little reminder while I'm here... VR is 3D, just better than on a TV or even in a movie theater. 3D movies will continue to be released, but the way of watching them will change. 3D is here to stay.
Just more misinformed, lying, agenda filled, nonsense from her...glad to see I'm not the only one that has noticed this.
BTW, the reason I dislike 3D is I wear glasses, and putting glasses over glasses (which a good portion of the older audience wear) is just a bad idea, likely I'll run into similar issues with VR.
Why is 3d glasses over glasses a bad idea? I do it all the time and it works just fine, doesn't bother me at all. Maybe you are concerned that you look funny? In a dark movie theater?
3D TVs were stupid. VR is pretty awesome, current VR is kinda of bulky but hey, the internet was a clunky piece of turd when it first came out to the masses too.
Internet was clunky?
How?
It was slower via diaulup, but clunky?
Netscape and Alta Vista were pretty awesome for me.
BTW, the reason I dislike 3D is I wear glasses, and putting glasses over glasses (which a good portion of the older audience wear) is just a bad idea, likely I'll run into similar issues with VR.
Why is 3d glasses over glasses a bad idea? I do it all the time and it works just fine, doesn't bother me at all. Maybe you are concerned that you look funny? In a dark movie theater?
I also hate wearing glasses over my glasses. It works, but I don't find it comfortable and tends to give me a headache
I've owned a 3d tv for about 5 years now.. I've used the 3d twice.... ever..... bought it for the picture and other features. 3d is just a pita. have to have glasses for everyone watching etc...
Won't that be true for VR too? Except I expect VR headsets to cost a lot more than 3d glasses.
100% VR and watching movies with some 3d elements in it is...........
kinda diferent.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
3D TV never launched in the first place, just like VR, no one (almost no one) wants a pair of feather weight 3D glasses on them for 2 hours, let alone a VR head set. It's just a honey moon phase where people with low self esteem just want bragging rights and after a few months no one will give a damn about it. If VR was really the future, Nintendo would of launched it almost a decade ago after working and tweaking the Virtual Boy. Sometimes you just need to use common sense and look back a little. We live in a generation where people believe every picture on the internet, and that Futurama meme "I don't want to live on this planet anymore", is getting more and more accurate with every passing year.
3D TV never launched in the first place, just like VR, no one (almost no one) wants a pair of feather weight 3D glasses on them for 2 hours, let alone a VR head set. It's just a honey moon phase where people with low self esteem just want bragging rights and after a few months no one will give a damn about it. If VR was really the future, Nintendo would of launched it almost a decade ago after working and tweaking the Virtual Boy. Sometimes you just need to use common sense and look back a little. We live in a generation where people believe every picture on the internet, and that Futurama meme "I don't want to live on this planet anymore", is getting more and more accurate with every passing year.
but the pivot point isnt even the same between them regardless. can you pick up a block, and look under it, do a 180 turn and throw it at another person in 3D TV?
I dont think you can do ANY of that.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
When they have 16k 3d holographic image 3d, you can count me in.
so Augmented Reality is out for you...
AR... don't know until you've tried it. But sight is only one sense, imagine life if you couldn't feel anything. Not the kind of reality I'd like to spend a lot of time in.
A "Total Recall" type of experience is something that I could see being very plausible in the not too distant future.
When they have 16k 3d holographic image 3d, you can count me in.
so Augmented Reality is out for you...
AR... don't know until you've tried it. But sight is only one sense, imagine life if you couldn't feel anything. Not the kind of reality I'd like to spend a lot of time in.
A "Total Recall" type of experience is something that I could see being very plausible in the not too distant future.
BUT THE TECHNOLOGY CONTAINS GLASSES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
you just got finished saying...oh F it never mind!
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
When they have 16k 3d holographic image 3d, you can count me in.
so Augmented Reality is out for you...
AR... don't know until you've tried it. But sight is only one sense, imagine life if you couldn't feel anything. Not the kind of reality I'd like to spend a lot of time in.
A "Total Recall" type of experience is something that I could see being very plausible in the not too distant future.
BUT THE TECHNOLOGY CONTAINS GLASSES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
you just got finished saying...oh F it never mind!
A nice pair of sunglasses aren't annoying to me. It's something you can't judge until you've experienced it.
Oh, so mobile phones and the 3DS are obscure, untested, and expensive.
I would be willing to bet nearly everyone on this forum has at least one smart phone in their household. There are only about 2B of them in use world wide.
The 3DS isn't too shabby either, it's getting close to 60M units. Good odds that people lurking on these forums have one, since this is a gaming forum.
I'd definitely call that obscure, untested, and expensive.
*edit*
And what does women's apparel have to do with anything.
Oh, so mobile phones and the 3DS are obscure, untested, and expensive.
I would be willing to bet nearly everyone on this forum has at least one smart phone in their household. There are only about 2B of them in use world wide.
The 3DS isn't too shabby either, it's getting close to 60M units. Good odds that people lurking on these forums have one, since this is a gaming forum.
I'd definitely call that obscure, untested, and expensive.
*edit*
And what does women's apparel have to do with anything.
I am not following you.
I am suggesting AR and VR solution that contain well tested, fairly inexpensive, widely used solutions but with glasses.
You are suggesting for AR and VR solutions that are untested, extremely expensive and for the most part based on theory and not very practical in the mean.
what are you talking about?
SORRY I JUST WATCHED THE VIDEO!
you are comparing that to conventional AR....ok whatever bra
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
No, I showed 4 different ways to accomplish AR. None of which require strapping something over your face. Because you made a very bold (and incorrect) assumption that AR required you to wear glasses.
Two of which are pretty new or very much in development.
The other two, pretty common. And work today. They are in retail, and in mainstream devices. And despite both of those factors, haven't really taken off much - so if it's pretty common and works now, and something as passive as 3D hasn't really taken off, I don't see why something that requires a freakin' box strapped to your head and costs hundreds more will do any better. You suggest it's because you can "pick up a block and look under it" and ... I just don't really see that selling much, to be honest.
And to be more to the point, the cost/availability/status doesn't matter, that's all red herring thrown in there by you - I just challenged you on your incorrect assumption that all AR devices required glasses. You haven't exactly proven your assumption correct yet, but I provided not one, but four different sources that prove otherwise.
I really do wish you would read stuff sometimes, but that's a bit much to ask of the internet.
I'm am saying AR is better than VR, but that isn't my real point. My real point is that VR is very much niche, and if something that has practical applications, and has wide availability, and is readily accessible - like AR and 3D are now, and they haven't taken off, then VR has a snowball's chance in hell of doing better than either of those two have done. It has way too many strikes against it before it even gets up to bat, and it doesn't really bring anything more to the table. Besides, I guess, being able to pick up a block and look under it...
Comments
I self identify as a monkey.
Maybe you are concerned that you look funny? In a dark movie theater?
He/she/it hates higher resolution 4k TV's , 3D , and pretty much anything newer that they don't have.
I also hate wearing glasses over my glasses. It works, but I don't find it comfortable and tends to give me a headache
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
Nope because they re still making many movies with 3D, and I get to still see them in 3D.
100% VR and watching movies with some 3d elements in it is...........
kinda diferent.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
I have a VR headset but to be fair I have never seen a 3d TV. How does 3D handle the pivot point?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
can you pick up a block, and look under it, do a 180 turn and throw it at another person in 3D TV?
I dont think you can do ANY of that.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
When they have 16k 3d holographic image 3d, you can count me in.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
A "Total Recall" type of experience is something that I could see being very plausible in the not too distant future.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
you just got finished saying...oh F it never mind!
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
http://www.cnet.com/news/augmented-reality-contact-lenses-to-be-human-ready-at-ces/
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/projects/illumiroom/
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/pictures-story/657-best-augmented-reality-apps.html
There's 4 different ways of doing AR, none of which require glasses, or headsets.
*edit* I forgot the exclamation points for emphasis
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ok yeah AR with no glasses is going to go retail mainstream.
talk about picking the most obscure, most untested, most expensive, solution out there..
ok bra
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I would be willing to bet nearly everyone on this forum has at least one smart phone in their household. There are only about 2B of them in use world wide.
The 3DS isn't too shabby either, it's getting close to 60M units. Good odds that people lurking on these forums have one, since this is a gaming forum.
I'd definitely call that obscure, untested, and expensive.
*edit*
And what does women's apparel have to do with anything.
I am suggesting AR and VR solution that contain well tested, fairly inexpensive, widely used solutions but with glasses.
You are suggesting for AR and VR solutions that are untested, extremely expensive and for the most part based on theory and not very practical in the mean.
what are you talking about?
SORRY I JUST WATCHED THE VIDEO!
you are comparing that to conventional AR....ok whatever bra
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Two of which are pretty new or very much in development.
The other two, pretty common. And work today. They are in retail, and in mainstream devices. And despite both of those factors, haven't really taken off much - so if it's pretty common and works now, and something as passive as 3D hasn't really taken off, I don't see why something that requires a freakin' box strapped to your head and costs hundreds more will do any better. You suggest it's because you can "pick up a block and look under it" and ... I just don't really see that selling much, to be honest.
And to be more to the point, the cost/availability/status doesn't matter, that's all red herring thrown in there by you - I just challenged you on your incorrect assumption that all AR devices required glasses. You haven't exactly proven your assumption correct yet, but I provided not one, but four different sources that prove otherwise.
I really do wish you would read stuff sometimes, but that's a bit much to ask of the internet.
I'm am saying AR is better than VR, but that isn't my real point. My real point is that VR is very much niche, and if something that has practical applications, and has wide availability, and is readily accessible - like AR and 3D are now, and they haven't taken off, then VR has a snowball's chance in hell of doing better than either of those two have done. It has way too many strikes against it before it even gets up to bat, and it doesn't really bring anything more to the table. Besides, I guess, being able to pick up a block and look under it...
can't wait!