Re: Microsoft attempts a holodeck [message #32722 is a reply to message #32721 ] Fri, 11 January 2013 11:52
Lance Corporal Hammer
Messages: 35Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Member
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 11:07:24 -0500, Steven L. wrote:> The "Illumiroom" was captured live on video--no post-production SFX were > used. > >
Re: Microsoft attempts a holodeck [message #32764 is a reply to message #32722 ] Fri, 11 January 2013 15:41
YourName
Messages: 366Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <1iwsxefybrp8o$.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni >, Lance Corporal Hammerstarfist@gmail.invalid > wrote:> On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 11:07:24 -0500, Steven L. wrote: >> >> The "Illumiroom" was captured live on video--no post-production SFX were >> used. >> >> > > Not a very reasonable subject for this post, or I must be missing the > part where they materialize tangible objects into the room. Can you > point me to the right part of the video for that?
Re: Microsoft attempts a holodeck [message #32815 is a reply to message #32764 ] Fri, 11 January 2013 18:01
Lance Corporal Hammer
Messages: 35Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Member
On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:41:53 +1300, Your Name wrote:> In article <1iwsxefybrp8o$.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni >, Lance Corporal Hammer > Schultz <starfist@gmail.invalid > wrote: >> On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 11:07:24 -0500, Steven L. wrote: >>> >>> The "Illumiroom" was captured live on video--no post-production SFX were >>> used. >>> >>> >> >> Not a very reasonable subject for this post, or I must be missing the >> part where they materialize tangible objects into the room. Can you >> point me to the right part of the video for that? > > The "Illumiroom" is simply Microsoft's hopeless copy-and-ruin-it (as > usual) answer to PlayStation's Wonder Book system and the slowly growing > fad for "Augmented Reality". Unless you use you Xbox in a totally empty > room, the surrounding furniture, wallpaper, etc. is always going to cause > issues.
Re: Microsoft attempts a holodeck [message #32816 is a reply to message #32815 ] Fri, 11 January 2013 18:30
YourName
Messages: 366Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <1rdzk73iwowpj.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni >, Lance Corporal Hammerstarfist@gmail.invalid > wrote:> On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:41:53 +1300, Your Name wrote: >> In article <1iwsxefybrp8o$.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni >, Lance Corporal Hammer >> Schultz <starfist@gmail.invalid > wrote: >>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 11:07:24 -0500, Steven L. wrote: >>>> >>>> The "Illumiroom" was captured live on video--no post-production SFX were >>>> used. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Not a very reasonable subject for this post, or I must be missing the >>> part where they materialize tangible objects into the room. Can you >>> point me to the right part of the video for that? >> >> The "Illumiroom" is simply Microsoft's hopeless copy-and-ruin-it (as >> usual) answer to PlayStation's Wonder Book system and the slowly growing >> fad for "Augmented Reality". Unless you use you Xbox in a totally empty >> room, the surrounding furniture, wallpaper, etc. is always going to cause >> issues. > > "Copy and ruin?" Are you seriously accusing MS of "copying" the idea > of projecting light on a wall as if Sony invented it? Gimme a break. > > It's certainly not an "attempt" to make a holodeck, either.
Re: Microsoft attempts a holodeck [message #32817 is a reply to message #32815 ] Fri, 11 January 2013 18:35
YourName
Messages: 366Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <1rdzk73iwowpj.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni >, Lance Corporal Hammerstarfist@gmail.invalid > wrote:> On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:41:53 +1300, Your Name wrote: > >> In article <1iwsxefybrp8o$.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni >, Lance Corporal Hammer >> Schultz <starfist@gmail.invalid > wrote: >>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 11:07:24 -0500, Steven L. wrote: >>>> >>>> The "Illumiroom" was captured live on video--no post-production SFX were >>>> used. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Not a very reasonable subject for this post, or I must be missing the >>> part where they materialize tangible objects into the room. Can you >>> point me to the right part of the video for that? >> >> The "Illumiroom" is simply Microsoft's hopeless copy-and-ruin-it (as >> usual) answer to PlayStation's Wonder Book system and the slowly growing >> fad for "Augmented Reality". Unless you use you Xbox in a totally empty >> room, the surrounding furniture, wallpaper, etc. is always going to cause >> issues. > > "Copy and ruin?" Are you seriously accusing MS of "copying" the idea > of projecting light on a wall as if Sony invented it? Gimme a break. > > It's certainly not an "attempt" to make a holodeck, either.
Re: Microsoft attempts a holodeck [message #32860 is a reply to message #32817 ] Fri, 11 January 2013 20:12
Lance Corporal Hammer
Messages: 35Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Member
On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:35:10 +1300, Your Name wrote:> It is one of the first steps towards a consumer-level Holodeck.
Re: Microsoft attempts a holodeck [message #32861 is a reply to message #32860 ] Fri, 11 January 2013 21:13
MITO MINISTER
Messages: 197Registered: August 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Jan 12, 10:12 am, Lance Corporal Hammer Schultzstarf...@gmail.invalid > wrote:> On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:35:10 +1300, Your Name wrote: >> It is one of the first steps towards a consumer-level Holodeck. > > No it isn't. The fictional technology to which you refer is, > according to modern scientific understanding, impossible to achieve > because of the heisenberg uncertainty principle and other various > realities. And projecting light on a wall, no matter how complex the > algorithm, no matter from which side of the wall, no matter how > intricate the environmental mapping, is still just light on a wall. > it's not a "holodeck." Even if the magical "project light into the > space in front of me without anything to reflect it but reflect it > anyway" were to come into existence, you are still not anywhere close > to the holodeck and it's *tangible* holographs. > > I don't understand Star Trek fans that want to look at every > incremental improvement in technology as some kind of "step towards > Star Trek stuff." This Xbox technology is an impressive form of light > projection, nothing more. > > -- > Hammer
Re: Microsoft attempts a holodeck [message #32884 is a reply to message #32860 ] Sat, 12 January 2013 00:15
YourName
Messages: 366Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <18jtdulodjoqm$.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni >, Lance Corporal Hammerstarfist@gmail.invalid > wrote:> > On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:35:10 +1300, Your Name wrote: > >> It is one of the first steps towards a consumer-level Holodeck. > > No it isn't. The fictional technology to which you refer is, > according to modern scientific understanding, impossible to achieve > because of the heisenberg uncertainty principle and other various > realities. And projecting light on a wall, no matter how complex the > algorithm, no matter from which side of the wall, no matter how > intricate the environmental mapping, is still just light on a wall. > it's not a "holodeck." Even if the magical "project light into the > space in front of me without anything to reflect it but reflect it > anyway" were to come into existence, you are still not anywhere close > to the holodeck and it's *tangible* holographs. > I don't understand Star Trek fans that want to look at every > incremental improvement in technology as some kind of "step towards > Star Trek stuff." This Xbox technology is an impressive form of light > projection, nothing more.
Re: Microsoft attempts a holodeck [message #32885 is a reply to message #32884 ] Sat, 12 January 2013 01:59
MITO MINISTER
Messages: 197Registered: August 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Jan 12, 2:15 pm, YourN...@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote:> In article <18jtdulodjoqm$....@starfist.thorsfinni >, Lance Corporal Hammer > > > > > > Schultz <starf...@gmail.invalid > wrote: > >> On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:35:10 +1300, Your Name wrote: > >>> It is one of the first steps towards a consumer-level Holodeck. > >> No it isn't. The fictional technology to which you refer is, >> according to modern scientific understanding, impossible to achieve >> because of the heisenberg uncertainty principle and other various >> realities. And projecting light on a wall, no matter how complex the >> algorithm, no matter from which side of the wall, no matter how >> intricate the environmental mapping, is still just light on a wall. >> it's not a "holodeck." Even if the magical "project light into the >> space in front of me without anything to reflect it but reflect it >> anyway" were to come into existence, you are still not anywhere close >> to the holodeck and it's *tangible* holographs. > > Whatever utter crap you want to delude yourself with. :-\ > >> I don't understand Star Trek fans that want to look at every >> incremental improvement in technology as some kind of "step towards >> Star Trek stuff." This Xbox technology is an impressive form of light >> projection, nothing more. > > Then bugger off to another newsgroup. Yet another moronic idiot to ignore.. :-\
Re: Microsoft attempts a holodeck [message #32920 is a reply to message #32884 ] Sat, 12 January 2013 07:40
Lance Corporal Hammer
Messages: 35Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Member
On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 18:15:05 +1300, Your Name wrote:> In article <18jtdulodjoqm$.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni >, Lance Corporal Hammer > Schultz <starfist@gmail.invalid > wrote: >> >> On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:35:10 +1300, Your Name wrote: >> >>> It is one of the first steps towards a consumer-level Holodeck. >> >> No it isn't. The fictional technology to which you refer is, >> according to modern scientific understanding, impossible to achieve >> because of the heisenberg uncertainty principle and other various >> realities. And projecting light on a wall, no matter how complex the >> algorithm, no matter from which side of the wall, no matter how >> intricate the environmental mapping, is still just light on a wall. >> it's not a "holodeck." Even if the magical "project light into the >> space in front of me without anything to reflect it but reflect it >> anyway" were to come into existence, you are still not anywhere close >> to the holodeck and it's *tangible* holographs. > > Whatever utter crap you want to delude yourself with. :-\ >> I don't understand Star Trek fans that want to look at every >> incremental improvement in technology as some kind of "step towards >> Star Trek stuff." This Xbox technology is an impressive form of light >> projection, nothing more. > > Then bugger off to another newsgroup. Yet another moronic idiot to ignore. :-\
Re: Microsoft attempts a holodeck [message #33012 is a reply to message #32920 ] Sun, 13 January 2013 00:37
Wiseguy
Messages: 242Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Lance Corporal Hammer Schultz <starfist@gmail.invalid > wrote inr22pzirrzozl.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni : > On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 18:15:05 +1300, Your Name wrote: > >> In article <18jtdulodjoqm$.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni >, Lance Corporal >> Hammer Schultz <starfist@gmail.invalid > wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:35:10 +1300, Your Name wrote: >>> >>>> It is one of the first steps towards a consumer-level Holodeck. >>> >>> No it isn't. The fictional technology to which you refer is, >>> according to modern scientific understanding, impossible to achieve >>> because of the heisenberg uncertainty principle and other various >>> realities. And projecting light on a wall, no matter how complex >>> the algorithm, no matter from which side of the wall, no matter how >>> intricate the environmental mapping, is still just light on a wall. >>> it's not a "holodeck." Even if the magical "project light into the >>> space in front of me without anything to reflect it but reflect it >>> anyway" were to come into existence, you are still not anywhere >>> close to the holodeck and it's *tangible* holographs. >> >> Whatever utter crap you want to delude yourself with. :-\ > > I suppose if you can't explain how a projector gets us "close to a > holodeck" you can just call what I say crap. > >>> I don't understand Star Trek fans that want to look at every >>> incremental improvement in technology as some kind of "step towards >>> Star Trek stuff." This Xbox technology is an impressive form of >>> light projection, nothing more. >> >> Then bugger off to another newsgroup. Yet another moronic idiot to >> ignore. :-\ > > Let's see if I understand you: someone worthy of participation here > must: > > 1. Think William Shatner invented the cell phone, > 2. Think Microsoft is stealing holodeck technology from Sony, > 3. Hate Abrams' Trek movies. > > Your a special kind of Trek fan, aren't you? >
Re: Microsoft attempts a holodeck [message #33039 is a reply to message #33012 ] Sun, 13 January 2013 06:23
MITO MINISTER
Messages: 197Registered: August 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Jan 13, 2:37 pm, Wiseguy <epw...@yahoo.com > wrote:> Lance Corporal Hammer Schultz <starf...@gmail.invalid > wrote innews:r22pzirrzozl.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni : > > > > > >> On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 18:15:05 +1300, Your Name wrote: > >>> In article <18jtdulodjoqm$....@starfist.thorsfinni >, Lance Corporal >>> Hammer Schultz <starf...@gmail.invalid > wrote: > >>>> On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:35:10 +1300, Your Name wrote: > >>>> > It is one of the first steps towards a consumer-level Holodeck. > >>>> No it isn't. The fictional technology to which you refer is, >>>> according to modern scientific understanding, impossible to achieve >>>> because of the heisenberg uncertainty principle and other various >>>> realities. And projecting light on a wall, no matter how complex >>>> the algorithm, no matter from which side of the wall, no matter how >>>> intricate the environmental mapping, is still just light on a wall. >>>> it's not a "holodeck." Even if the magical "project light into the >>>> space in front of me without anything to reflect it but reflect it >>>> anyway" were to come into existence, you are still not anywhere >>>> close to the holodeck and it's *tangible* holographs. > >>> Whatever utter crap you want to delude yourself with. :-\ > >> I suppose if you can't explain how a projector gets us "close to a >> holodeck" you can just call what I say crap. > >>>> I don't understand Star Trek fans that want to look at every >>>> incremental improvement in technology as some kind of "step towards >>>> Star Trek stuff." This Xbox technology is an impressive form of >>>> light projection, nothing more. > >>> Then bugger off to another newsgroup. Yet another moronic idiot to >>> ignore. :-\ > >> Let's see if I understand you: someone worthy of participation here >> must: > >> 1. Think William Shatner invented the cell phone, >> 2. Think Microsoft is stealing holodeck technology from Sony, >> 3. Hate Abrams' Trek movies. > >> Your a special kind of Trek fan, aren't you? > > You'll have to excuse "Your Name." Whenever someone disagrees with him > he pouts, throws a temper tantrum and draws childish faces on the wall. > > Then he calls the other person delusional.
Re: Microsoft attempts a holodeck [message #33051 is a reply to message #32816 ] Sun, 13 January 2013 09:24
Wiseguy
Messages: 242Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
YourName@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote inYourName-1201131230510001@203-118-187-135.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz : > In article <1rdzk73iwowpj.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni >, Lance Corporal > Hammer Schultz <starfist@gmail.invalid > wrote: >> On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:41:53 +1300, Your Name wrote: >>> In article <1iwsxefybrp8o$.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni >, Lance Corporal >>> Hammer Schultz <starfist@gmail.invalid > wrote: >>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 11:07:24 -0500, Steven L. wrote: >>>> > >>>> > The "Illumiroom" was captured live on video--no post-production >>>> > SFX were used. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>>> Not a very reasonable subject for this post, or I must be missing >>>> the part where they materialize tangible objects into the room. >>>> Can you point me to the right part of the video for that? >>> >>> The "Illumiroom" is simply Microsoft's hopeless copy-and-ruin-it >>> (as usual) answer to PlayStation's Wonder Book system and the >>> slowly growing fad for "Augmented Reality". Unless you use you Xbox >>> in a totally empty room, the surrounding furniture, wallpaper, etc. >>> is always going to cause issues. >> >> "Copy and ruin?" Are you seriously accusing MS of "copying" the idea >> of projecting light on a wall as if Sony invented it? Gimme a break. >> >> It's certainly not an "attempt" to make a holodeck, either. > > I'm saying Microsoft saw the PlayStation's WonderBook system and > decided they would (as usual) simply steal the idea and then "improve" > it with their (also as usual) hopeless incompetent additional > "features". >
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
