Apple Patents Holographic TV Screen Tech

[Bluesclues]

This entire thread consists of nothing but "APPLE PATENTED SOMETHING THEY MUST BE PLANNING TO MAKE A SUPER-DUPER-EXPENSIVE RIPOFF OMG APPLE SUCKS LOL!" if that isn't bashing I don't know what is.

Odds are if this thread was about somebody else patenting the technology all it would get is "meh seems useless to me."

...I've read all the comments in this thread. The only ones that come even remotely close to what you're claiming are the ones saying that if/when Apple comes out with this TV it's going to be tremendously overpriced, which those people obvously find to be commonplace among Apple products. It's also an opinion, which you apparently have a problem with because they differ from your own.

So to answer your question from earlier, yes, that does make you a fanboy, simply because of the fact that you see a comment that doesn't automatically exclaim Apple's supposed greatness, and immediately jump on the "FAK DA PCZ, APPEL IS TEH GRAETZ! LONG LIVE SKYNET!" flaming bandwagon.

Also, as an EDIT: The guy you originally quoted was talking about the TV itself, and not Apple.

 

[Danpascooch]

Apple plans on combining the dome technology and 3D scanners to allow TVs to find their viewer's eyes, and beam the images straight to where they are. This would also allow use by multiple viewers, all without glasses.

So they want to make PIXEL SIZED refractors, that can CHOOSE WHERE THEY REFRACT THE IMAGES TO!? And they want to combine all of this with a 3-D scanner to locate left and right eyes!?

First of all, I still don't see how this will work for multiple people, I see how it could work for one person, but not for 2+

Secondly:

"This just in, the iTV is now out for a reasonable $75,000"

You are forgetting that the little "i" in front of TV adds and extra $24,999.

"This just in, the iTV is now out for a reasonable $99,999."

The way the patent system seems to be abused these days I have to wonder if they can actually demonstrate this as possible, or if some worker bee for them whipped up the idea on his lunch break and they went out and patented it.

My bet is it's the latter

 

[manaman]

Sounds cool...when will they make those iPad looking things where the buttons are holograms and you don't even touch anything except the hologram? I see it in so many movies (Avatar for one) but I haven't heard about it in reality.

I missed this post the first time I skimmed through thread.

One of the biggest complaints people (including myself) had when using the iPhone, and the like was the total lack of tactile feedback when using the touch screen. Attempts to solve that have been less then successful, about the best they have right now is a slight vibration when you touch the screen. It gives the illusion of tactile feedback. Even worse in the past they have tried projected interfaces, including a projected keyboard that would allow you to type on any flat surface. Turned into a huge flop even through technically it worked flawlessly. People just wanted to feel like they pressed something while typing.

Personally I don't think it's going to happen without some kind of glove you wear that provides some form of response when you manipulate a virtual object.

The way the patent system seems to be abused these days I have to wonder if they can actually demonstrate this as possible, or if some worker bee for them whipped up the idea on his lunch break and they went out and patented it.

My bet is it's the latter[/quote]

Reflectors have been around since the mid 80s. Texas Instruments stuck a bunch of tiny mirrors onto the back of a silicon chip, and a bit later introduced DLP technology in the form of slim line rear projection TVs and to this day sill produces them for use in a significant number of projectors. The reflectors are far smaller then pixel sized. Still manipulating refractors is another story. Still, have to wonder about it.

 

[Danpascooch]

Sounds cool...when will they make those iPad looking things where the buttons are holograms and you don't even touch anything except the hologram? I see it in so many movies (Avatar for one) but I haven't heard about it in reality.

I missed this post the first time I skimmed through thread.

One of the biggest complaints people (including myself) had when using the iPhone, and the like was the total lack of tactile feedback when using the touch screen. Attempts to solve that have been less then successful, about the best they have right now is a slight vibration when you touch the screen. It gives the illusion of tactile feedback. Even worse in the past they have tried projected interfaces, including a projected keyboard that would allow you to type on any flat surface. Turned into a huge flop even through technically it worked flawlessly. People just wanted to feel like they pressed something while typing.

Personally I don't think it's going to happen without some kind of glove you wear that provides some form of response when you manipulate a virtual object.

The way the patent system seems to be abused these days I have to wonder if they can actually demonstrate this as possible, or if some worker bee for them whipped up the idea on his lunch break and they went out and patented it.

My bet is it's the latter

Reflectors have been around since the mid 80s. Texas Instruments stuck a bunch of tiny mirrors onto the back of a silicon chip, and a bit later introduced DLP technology in the form of slim line rear projection TVs and to this day sill produces them for use in a significant number of projectors. The reflectors are far smaller then pixel sized. Still manipulating refractors is another story. Still, have to wonder about it.[/quote]

Just for the record, I don't think having the refractors is going to be the expensive part, I think AIMING them will be expensive, and aiming them at like FOUR SETS OF EYES AT ONCE will not only be insanely expensive, but in my opinion, impossible.

How do they plan to get this to properly refract to MULTIPLE VIEWERS anyway?

 

[manaman]

Just for the record, I don't think having the refractors is going to be the expensive part, I think AIMING them will be expensive, and aiming them at like FOUR SETS OF EYES AT ONCE will not only be insanely expensive, but in my opinion, impossible.

How do they plan to get this to properly refract to MULTIPLE VIEWERS anyway?

Silicon chips are capable of fast switching. So fast that they can use one light source, one chip, and a color wheel to project a full color, full 1080p image.

What I was implying however is that it's easy to do this switching when it's reflectors glued to a chip, but I don't really see how they are going to do it when it's refractors with a light source behind and viewers in front.

 

[Bad Jim]

The thing I love the most is that Apple will inevitably **** up the product, sell more than anyone else, and every other company will then in turn INTENTIONALLY **** up the product to make it look more like the Apple reject.

Seriously. A huge thanks to everyone responsible (ie everyone that owns any Apple product) for the fact that a few years ago I could modify my mobile phone in just about any way I want, and today, I cannot, DESPITE NOT OWNING AN APPLE PHONE. Oh, and the fact that I have to download an invasive, obtrusive, inefficient, space-devouring Sony program just to create playlists for my PSP (as opposed to, I don't know, copying a playlist file onto my PSP).

And a pre-emptive thanks to everyone responsible for making me have to download [brand] software to watch regular TV on my 3DTV.

I'm typing this on my Mac

I'm typing this on my PC, cursing my widescreen monitor and the fact that I'll never again be able to purchase one with a sensible 4:3 aspect ratio.

 

[anxu]

Their patent uses domes to reflex light from a projector, so this means it isn?t going to be in an iphone.
However, instead of using deflector domes, could uses lens infront of each pixel that allows the light to be directed in choosen direction.
This would make 3d possible without glasses and also would allow the required energy to be reduced as all transmitted light is going to a eye somewhere and not wasted, so instead of 12hrs you can use computer for 100hrs due to the screen using much less energy. Also can choose which set of eyes or who can see screen and allows for privacy,computer could project image of a office document to his eyes but a game to your own eyes or each person could watch a different movie on the same screen!