PrimeSense tech seen powering gesture controls for future Apple television products

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 43

    Thank you for your reply I didn't know about this. Good to know.

  • Reply 22 of 43
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,805member
    gqb wrote: »
    BIG difference between 'commercially available' and commercially successful'.

    Had IBM and BellSouth decided to pursue it no telling if or how successful they might have been. Part of the problem at the time was that Motorola reportedly wasn't anxious to build it and create a future competitor.
  • Reply 23 of 43
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

    will be controlled by gestures.

     

    Yes, gesture control… ON TOUCHSCREENS. Not waving around in midair like a lunatic. That doesn’t work, nor will it ever. Apple bought these guys for the underlying tech and the patents associated with the gestures they came up with.

     

    A loud clatter of gunk music flooded through the Heart of Gold cabin as Zaphod searched the sub-etha radio wavebands for news of himself. The machine was rather difficult to operate. For years radios had been operated by means of pressing buttons and turning dials; then as the technology became more sophisticated the controls were made touch-sensitive—you merely had to brush the panels with your fingers; now all you had to do was wave your hand in the general direction of the components and hope. It saved a lot of muscular expenditure of course, but meant that you had to sit infuriatingly still if you wanted to keep listening to the same programme.

    Zaphod waved a hand and the channel switched again. The music swirled and dived for a moment. Another voice broke in, presumably Halfrunt. He said: “Well, Zaphod’s jist zis guy you know?” but got no further because an electric pencil flew across the cabin and through the radio’s on/off sensitive airspace. Zaphod turned and glared at Trillian—she had thrown the pencil.


  • Reply 24 of 43
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,195moderator
    There have been some rumors about Microsoft possibly selling the Xbox division under new leadership. The problem with Microsoft is they are a business-oriented company and their products like Bing and XBox don't make much money at all. Some people see them as distractions from growing their more profitable products. For the past 3 years (2013, 2012, 2011), the income has been:

    Windows, $9.5b, $11.5b, $12.2b
    Servers, $8.1b, $7.2b, $6.1b
    Online (bing etc), -$1.2b, -$8.1b, -$2.6b
    Business (Office etc), $16.1b, $15.8b, $14.6b
    Entertainment (Xbox), $0.8b, $0.4b, $1.2b

    It's clear to see Microsoft's money-makers are their Windows, Office and server products. Bing is losing money and the Xbox doesn't make much money. Once they appoint a new CEO, they may decide to take the company in a different direction. This is one of those areas where the pursuit of growing profits conflicts with the designation of value. The XBox is one of the few products Microsoft makes that people genuinely respect their brand for.

    The television market is larger and there are stats here:

    http://bgr.com/2013/11/07/tv-market-worldwide-decline-2013/

    255m TVs in 2011, 238m in 2012, 226m in 2013. Samsung has about 25% of it and the next one down is LG at 16%, Sony around 10%. Apple sells about 2 million Apple TVs per quarter. If they did a gesture TV properly and could finally get rid of the remote, I could see that selling enough volume to match Sony's 10%. This would be 23m units per year worldwide or just under 6m per quarter. At $1000 per unit, this is $6b revenue and say just under $1.5b net profit.

    Laminated anti-glare OLED display, online VOD content, gestures and possibly a touch remote. Parental controls can be easy with a sensor as it can detect the size of people in front of the TV so if a small child walks into the view, it can restrict channels and content. If it detects a couple on the sofa, it can recommend romantic comedies and then secretly push an action movie onto the nearby iPad for the guy to watch.

    It's riskier making a TV than a set-top box but also a lot more profitable. It's hard to sell upgrades though. To make an entrance into the market, Apple has to make a big impact by doing something really well and then selling the next upgrade is even harder.
  • Reply 25 of 43
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,521member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    gqb wrote: »
    BIG difference between 'commercially available' and commercially successful'.

    Had IBM and BellSouth decided to pursue it no telling if or how successful they might have been. Part of the problem at the time was that Motorola wasn't anxious to build it and create a future competitor.

    If the dog hadn't quit runnin', it woulda been a race.
  • Reply 26 of 43
    crowleycrowley Posts: 5,635member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

     

    Yes, gesture control… ON TOUCHSCREENS. Not waving around in midair like a lunatic. That doesn’t work, nor will it ever. Apple bought these guys for the underlying tech and the patents associated with the gestures they came up with.


    I find it highly doubtful that PrimeSense, a company known for camera-captured 3D gestures have any notable patents in the contact-gesture area that Apple would be interested in.  Apple bought FingerWorks; they're already well-enabled with IP when it comes to multi-touch contact-gestures.

     

    Do you have any specific patents in mind that are informing this opinion?

  • Reply 27 of 43
    Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

    I find it highly doubtful that PrimeSense, a company known for camera-captured 3D gestures have any notable patents in the contact-gesture area that Apple would be interested in.

     

    I realize applying the camera gestures to a surface would probably require another patent, but doing so seems far more likely than dancing in front of a TV to turn it on or waving your hand above your phone to make a call. 



    Hasn’t Samsung tried that and found that not only does it not work but no one would want to use it anyway?

  • Reply 28 of 43
    crowleycrowley Posts: 5,635member

    What camera gestures are you thinking of?  How would you apply them to a contact surface?  And why would you need to spend $360bn to acquire some half-applicable patents that you'd need to reregister in a different medium anyway?

     

    I don't see this being likely at all.

  • Reply 29 of 43
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,493member
    I think a most likely use would be for augmented binocular vision in low light situations, and for people with diminished vision due to retina problems or glaucoma.

    For the wearable screens Apple already has patents on.
  • Reply 30 of 43
    gatorguy wrote: »
    One of the first, and perhaps THE first, commercially available touchscreen phones was the Simon from IBM. That was about 20 years ago.

    Phones you say. So this wasn't it:

    400
  • Reply 31 of 43
    flaneur wrote: »
    I think a most likely use would be for augmented binocular vision in low light situations, and for people with diminished vision due to retina problems or glaucoma.

    For the wearable screens Apple already has patents on.

    Excellent idea. Night vision in 3-D.
  • Reply 32 of 43
    stylorouge wrote: »
    Touch displays were first introduced by Microsoft as a Pocket PC even Tablet computers with a Stylus. Apple improved upon their technology. They took their existing technology to the next level. They might do it again with their version of Kinect.

    Doncha just love history-rewrites?
  • Reply 33 of 43






    What Marcus replied I am in shock that any one able to get paid $6824 in 4 weeks on the computer. have you read this site link..www.bar29.?om
  • Reply 34 of 43
    If you think that Apple is going to use PrimeSense technology to control an iPhone or iPad... I believe you are wrong. As others have stated, actual touching of the screen gives more precise and interactive control.

    I suspect that Apple will use the iPhone and iPad touch screen to control the PrimeSense tech -- 3D depth-sensor in conjunction with the higher-resolution camera on the back of the device.

    I posted 2 short videos on the other thread (shown below) that shows how this might work.


    Now here's where it starts to get interesting...

    I've been surfing around and it appears that the DSLR camera market is shrinking (as the point-and-shoot did before it). The major reason seems to be that for many (most?) uses, top-end smart phone cameras are good enough.


    Then, circa 2007-9, a technology called folding optics was developed -- where you can get high-quaity optical zoom from a lens that never moved or protruded from the front of a camera.

    Several cameras were built using this tech -- but they weren't successful!

    700  700  700

    http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/T10/T10A4.HTM


    Now, almost 5 years later, it may be possible to implement this tech in an iPhone or iPad with better quality at lower cost.

    If so, your iPhone or iPad could be your go-to camera for all but the most special cases:



    Here's the post from the other thread:

    I think Apple is more interested in what you will be able to do when you're in back of the camera rather than in front of it.

    I'd not make any large bets one way or another yet...other than consider buying more AAPL.


    Have a look at this:


    [VIDEO]
    0%[/VIDEO]


    Then consider a large view "camera" with a 64-bit APU and an M7 specialized Motion Chip -- that could concurrently display the HD Camera image and/or the 3D Depth-Sensed image....

    Where each object is uniquely (separately) identified and can be measured and interacted with...

    Then, consider the possibilities...


    I'll give you just one: Crowd Sourced Street/Aisle View for outdoor and indoor mapping.


    Edit:

    Then there's this:


    [VIDEO]
  • Reply 35 of 43
    danoxdanox Posts: 360member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    Had IBM and BellSouth decided to pursue it no telling if or how successful they might have been. Part of the problem at the time was that Motorola reportedly wasn't anxious to build it and create a future competitor.

     

    Motorola wasn't anxious to do anything long term. 

  • Reply 36 of 43
    You're finding some really interesting links and videos, Dick.

    One thing I just thought of... with technologies like PrimeSense, it should be possible to create an automated, intelligent traveling matte for special effects and computer graphics integration with the addition of z-axis information. Backgrounds could automatically be stripped and and replaced, for example everything in the shot past a marker or at a specified distance (sort of like how CGI techs will LIDAR scan a set to enhance match-move accuracy).
  • Reply 37 of 43
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stylorouge View Post



    Apple innovation again. Copying Microsoft.

    Microsoft did not invent the kinect. They had Primsense build it for them from tech invented by Primsense.  Apple simply bought the company.  The innovation will come with how Apple uses the tech from Primsense.   Just like how they used multiple sensors in there home button for TouchID so that there was no swiping of your finger.

  • Reply 38 of 43
    You're finding some really interesting links and videos, Dick.

    One thing I just thought of... with technologies like PrimeSense, it should be possible to create an automated, intelligent traveling matte for special effects and computer graphics integration with the addition of z-axis information. Backgrounds could automatically be stripped and and replaced, for example everything in the shot past a marker or at a specified distance (sort of like how CGI techs will LIDAR scan a set to enhance match-move accuracy).

    Yes!

    Apple Maps:
    1. select a building from overhead, say St. Patrick's Cathedral, NYC
    2. nearby surrounding buildings are masked out
    3. tour St. Patrick's in 3D without any obstructions


    Filming video with a "camera" with 3D Depth Sense
    1. isolate on the quarterback and a tight end
    2. mask out (blur, opacity) other players
    3. replay the highlight

    ...and the beat goes on
  • Reply 39 of 43
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    stylorouge wrote: »
    Touch displays were first introduced by Microsoft as a Pocket PC even Tablet computers with a Stylus. Apple improved upon their technology. They took their existing technology to the next level.

    Apparently, you can't tell or know the difference between resistive and capacitive touch screens. One isn't built on the other, it's a completely distinct technology.
  • Reply 40 of 43
    "However, the analyst doesn't expect that Apple will release a television set in the near future. If the company were to develop and sell its own TV set, such a device is "unlikely" to be released in 2014, he believes."

    Could this be the first time an 'analyst' is right about anything???
Sign In or Register to comment.