I remember going to exactly one movie back in the 70s (or was it the early 80s?) where they handed out scratch and sniff cards to be used along with the movie. Funny thing... I can't even remember what that movie was now.
Can you imagine the scent for a show like "Judge Judy"? One part DMV, one part senior center.
Dirty Jobs (though I think that's long ended). <span style="font-family:'Apple Color Emoji';font-size:28px;line-height:normal;">????</span>
Is Ice Road Truckers still on? Sweaty semi cabins and parched ice… What all this reality show crap is doing on the "History Channel" is beyond me…
… Jersey Shore… <span style="font-family:'Apple Color Emoji';font-size:28px;line-height:normal;">????</span>
Or the cannonball jump scene into the mire -- from Slumdog Millionaire.
At one point 4:3 TV content was most common and we were able to move to 16:9 TVs. The 4:3 content just sat in the middle (or was stretched) until the programming caught up, but it did. At some point the concession to make the switch happened. I can't see that 16:9 will forever be the the aspect ratio for TV content simply because it's what we have now, especially as TVs grow in size.
I would agree with that, but until we get wall-sized TVs that can display multiple feeds on their surface wherever they want, 16:9 is the best compromise for all formats. I was mostly trying to dispel the unusual idea that because a lot of movies are 2.4:1 that somehow this really wide and thin aspect ratio would be good for TVs (or is coming soon to TVs). I think it far more likely that the TV will get so big that aspect ratio becomes irrelevant, before that happens.
Well, I don't know what's coming. We can all speculate, but there's one thing I can guarantee. It's going to be a whole lot of hoopla for something really lame.
Funny that that whole video was filmed in Sydney (except for the "Welcome to fabulous Las Vegas" sign). But I think that the TV is still rectangular - it's sitting on a plinth so it can rise above those that are looking up at it.
I remember going to exactly one movie back in the 70s (or was it the early 80s?) where they handed out scratch and sniff cards to be used along with the movie. Funny thing... I can't even remember what that movie was now.
Samsung isn't announcing a "completely new device" they are promising an "unprecedented new shape".
Sorry to bust that brain fart, now come back with a new shape.
I think he was suggesting that the shape is taller, like in the picture with the sheet over it. When you're not watching the top portion in widescreen you can switch to the whole screen and show portrait-aspect pictures.
Crazy, I know, because I suggested the same thing. Of course it won't happen but neither will anything else suggested in this time-wasting thread. Maybe we'll get back to real news soon.
Okay, wait, how can a projector make something that bright in THIS level of external light?
[VIDEO]
It can't because if it was that bright, it would be a health risk. I do think lasers are the way forward though:
[VIDEO]
I'd like to see a foldable or roll-up screen material that a laser system projects onto from behind. This way, it can be as bright as it needs to be like the laservue but compact enough to fit into a very small box.
If they can do 100" at 22" depth from a single source, say they had the 3 lasers at the base and fed optical dispersion controllers all over a sheet or foldable material via optical fibre, they could cover a 100" area with a 2" depth and about 60 controllers.
These controllers would just fire the incoming R/G/B light at about 200 angles horizontally and vertically to build up the image. Because they can all be in columns and the screen could collapse, the whole 100" screen could be folded down to be a box that is 3" x 9" x 50".
The same base control system can have multiple screens so it can be a single unit with multiple sizes. It can be a widescreen TV for normal use or a square screen when you need to show holiday snaps.
I'm sure you're excited about this...... ummm ......
t e l e v i s i o n ... (it is a TV, right?)
But, too be truthful, I don't give a rat's arse.
(images)
I can't say I understand when people use some warping of a company's name or product, or when they wish some future endeavor will be a failure. I sincerely want Samsung to release something spectacular next week at CES. I want it to be a game changer. I want it to immediately and instantly change the way we look at television. I want it to be something original that after it's been done seems like the only way to do it going forward. I want this from all vendors at CES.
We're all biased in the sense that all our experiences are subjective. Even our objective views are all had subjectively but that's getting a little too philosophical. What I'm trying to express is that I do love my Apple products — I think they are the best the market has to offer — but I don't care about Apple outside of what they can offer me just as they don't care about me outside of what I'm willing to buy from them. My bias is wanting the best tech possible every day for the rest of my life. If Samsung can pull television out of this mostly stagnant move into the future then I'm all for it.
That said, their history for innovating an entire product with seamless integration and a great user experience isn't good but I certainly won't ignore them if they can bring it. They certainly have the resources to compete with Apple if they can change their mindshare, which is far better than I give most other tech companies.
I can't say I understand when people use some warping of a company's name or product, or when they wish some future endeavor will be a failure
We're all biased in the sense that all our experiences are subjective.
That said, their history for innovating an entire product with seamless integration and a great user experience isn't good but I certainly won't ignore them if they can bring it. They certainly have the resources to compete with Apple if they can change their mindshare, which is far better than I give most other tech companies.
Hey Sol, I agree, however, it WAS a spelling mistake and I thought WFT - I really DON'T care.
My experiences, as (once again) you pointed out correctly, ARE subjective....
to wit, I'm simply OLD and admittedly jaded in my philosophical view of technology, in particular, smasung
(see what I did there?), a 'manufacturing' company totally bereft of ANY innovation.
My recent experience was Christmas dinner for 17 guests, friends and family. All had 'smart-phones',
14 iPhones, 2 smasungs (sorry, can't help myself) and OMG A NOKIA! (geez I'm sorry, but a no-kia, WFT man?).
Both smasungs (I've corrected my spell-checker to include my new word and 7 of the iPhones had black silicone-type protectors...
From a short distance you could not immediately tell the difference between the 9 phones sitting on the table...
Sufficient proof to my subjective, idiosyncratic view that smasung are no more innovative than Japanese automotive companies were after WW2....
NOTE - if any of our members disagree, please be prepared for a 'discussion' bordering on WW3 ;-)
As you can see from these design papers our new TV is NOT a rectangle with rounded corners but a circle with squared sides. And it says Samsung at the top, not the bottom. Completely different your honor.
Hey Sol, I agree, however, it WAS a spelling mistake and I thought WFT - I really DON'T care.
[...]
OK, I clearly didn't pick up on the article's(?) misspelling. I will say that being old doesn't mean you have to remain set in your ways. I don't see myself buying anything from Samsung but that's doesn't mean I'm anti-Samitic* either.
* Trying to follow your WWII trend so I hope that comment doesn't offend anyone.
That said, their history for innovating an entire product with seamless integration and a great user experience isn't good but I certainly won't ignore them if they can bring it. They certainly have the resources to compete with Apple if they can change their mindshare, which is far better than I give most other tech companies.
Hey Sol, I agree, however, it WAS a spelling mistake and I thought WFT - I really DON'T care.
My experiences, as (once again) you pointed out correctly, ARE subjective....
to wit, I'm simply OLD and admittedly jaded in my philosophical view of technology, in particular, smasung
(see what I did there?), a 'manufacturing' company totally bereft of ANY innovation.
My recent experience was Christmas dinner for 17 guests, friends and family. All had 'smart-phones',
14 iPhones, 2 smasungs (sorry, can't help myself) and OMG A NOKIA! (geez I'm sorry, but a no-kia, WFT man?).
Both smasungs (I've corrected my spell-checker to include my new word and 7 of the iPhones had black silicone-type protectors...
From a short distance you could not immediately tell the difference between the 9 phones sitting on the table...
Sufficient proof to my subjective, idiosyncratic view that smasung are no more innovative than Japanese automotive companies were after WW2....
[SIZE=9px]NOTE - if any of our members disagree, please be prepared for a 'discussion' bordering on WW3 ;-) [/SIZE]
BTW - did I mention I'm old?
and
please do not take me seriously, I'm not worth it
;-)
nothing personal..........
I too, am old!
As with the innocence of youth, the senility of age brings certain advantages... I can choose which teat to suckle, and which not to suckle. I can befriend the repulsive, and ignore the attractive...
I can say and do what I want, and choose my friends and enemies.
I do not like Sammy… I do not like the way they operate! To me, they are only worth my ridicule.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii
It's already been tried in cinemas (amazingly) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smell-O-Vision
I remember going to exactly one movie back in the 70s (or was it the early 80s?) where they handed out scratch and sniff cards to be used along with the movie. Funny thing... I can't even remember what that movie was now.
Or the cannonball jump scene into the mire -- from Slumdog Millionaire.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
The projection systems are only getting better
http://www.engadget.com/2012/12/26/lg-hecto-laser-tv-projector-to-debut-at-ces-2013-promises-a-1/
Hecto laser? Don't stand there girly!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
At one point 4:3 TV content was most common and we were able to move to 16:9 TVs. The 4:3 content just sat in the middle (or was stretched) until the programming caught up, but it did. At some point the concession to make the switch happened. I can't see that 16:9 will forever be the the aspect ratio for TV content simply because it's what we have now, especially as TVs grow in size.
I would agree with that, but until we get wall-sized TVs that can display multiple feeds on their surface wherever they want, 16:9 is the best compromise for all formats. I was mostly trying to dispel the unusual idea that because a lot of movies are 2.4:1 that somehow this really wide and thin aspect ratio would be good for TVs (or is coming soon to TVs). I think it far more likely that the TV will get so big that aspect ratio becomes irrelevant, before that happens.
Well, I don't know what's coming. We can all speculate, but there's one thing I can guarantee. It's going to be a whole lot of hoopla for something really lame.
Originally Posted by hentaiboy
Okay, wait, how can a projector make something that bright in THIS level of external light?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dookie Howsre
Samsuckz new TV shape should be a huge asz since they're full of sh!t.
One of best comments I read in a long time...
But I think that the TV is still rectangular - it's sitting on a plinth so it can rise above those that are looking up at it.
Polyester
I think he was suggesting that the shape is taller, like in the picture with the sheet over it. When you're not watching the top portion in widescreen you can switch to the whole screen and show portrait-aspect pictures.
Crazy, I know, because I suggested the same thing. Of course it won't happen but neither will anything else suggested in this time-wasting thread. Maybe we'll get back to real news soon.
[VIDEO]
It can't because if it was that bright, it would be a health risk. I do think lasers are the way forward though:
[VIDEO]
I'd like to see a foldable or roll-up screen material that a laser system projects onto from behind. This way, it can be as bright as it needs to be like the laservue but compact enough to fit into a very small box.
If they can do 100" at 22" depth from a single source, say they had the 3 lasers at the base and fed optical dispersion controllers all over a sheet or foldable material via optical fibre, they could cover a 100" area with a 2" depth and about 60 controllers.
These controllers would just fire the incoming R/G/B light at about 200 angles horizontally and vertically to build up the image. Because they can all be in columns and the screen could collapse, the whole 100" screen could be folded down to be a box that is 3" x 9" x 50".
The same base control system can have multiple screens so it can be a single unit with multiple sizes. It can be a widescreen TV for normal use or a square screen when you need to show holiday snaps.
Look smasung (did I spell that correctly?)
I'm sure you're excited about this...... ummm ......
t e l e v i s i o n ... (it is a TV, right?)
But, too be truthful, I don't give a rat's arse.
Originally Posted by Marvin
I do think lasers are the way forward though:
75" and 85W?! I think that's impressive, at least. Wouldn't an LCD screen of that size be something like 225W?
I can't say I understand when people use some warping of a company's name or product, or when they wish some future endeavor will be a failure. I sincerely want Samsung to release something spectacular next week at CES. I want it to be a game changer. I want it to immediately and instantly change the way we look at television. I want it to be something original that after it's been done seems like the only way to do it going forward. I want this from all vendors at CES.
We're all biased in the sense that all our experiences are subjective. Even our objective views are all had subjectively but that's getting a little too philosophical. What I'm trying to express is that I do love my Apple products — I think they are the best the market has to offer — but I don't care about Apple outside of what they can offer me just as they don't care about me outside of what I'm willing to buy from them. My bias is wanting the best tech possible every day for the rest of my life. If Samsung can pull television out of this mostly stagnant move into the future then I'm all for it.
That said, their history for innovating an entire product with seamless integration and a great user experience isn't good but I certainly won't ignore them if they can bring it. They certainly have the resources to compete with Apple if they can change their mindshare, which is far better than I give most other tech companies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I can't say I understand when people use some warping of a company's name or product, or when they wish some future endeavor will be a failure
We're all biased in the sense that all our experiences are subjective.
That said, their history for innovating an entire product with seamless integration and a great user experience isn't good but I certainly won't ignore them if they can bring it. They certainly have the resources to compete with Apple if they can change their mindshare, which is far better than I give most other tech companies.
Hey Sol, I agree, however, it WAS a spelling mistake and I thought WFT - I really DON'T care.
My experiences, as (once again) you pointed out correctly, ARE subjective....
to wit, I'm simply OLD and admittedly jaded in my philosophical view of technology, in particular, smasung
(see what I did there?), a 'manufacturing' company totally bereft of ANY innovation.
My recent experience was Christmas dinner for 17 guests, friends and family. All had 'smart-phones',
14 iPhones, 2 smasungs (sorry, can't help myself) and OMG A NOKIA! (geez I'm sorry, but a no-kia, WFT man?).
Both smasungs (I've corrected my spell-checker to include my new word
From a short distance you could not immediately tell the difference between the 9 phones sitting on the table...
Sufficient proof to my subjective, idiosyncratic view that smasung are no more innovative than Japanese automotive companies were after WW2....
NOTE - if any of our members disagree, please be prepared for a 'discussion' bordering on WW3 ;-)
BTW - did I mention I'm old?
and
please do not take me seriously, I'm not worth it
;-)
* Trying to follow your WWII trend so I hope that comment doesn't offend anyone.
Thanks mate,
You're an OLD? man after my own heart.
I too, am old!
As with the innocence of youth, the senility of age brings certain advantages... I can choose which teat to suckle, and which not to suckle. I can befriend the repulsive, and ignore the attractive...
I can say and do what I want, and choose my friends and enemies.
I do not like Sammy… I do not like the way they operate! To me, they are only worth my ridicule.
I fully support your position!