The sheer unpredictability of the projection surface is another reason why I just don't see this as a consumer option. But if you imagine it in a pro video and/or enterprise setting (remember, education is basically a funny-looking enterprise market), real projector screens are either installed already or else they're an obvious investment.
This is not about grandma projecting her grandkids' photos onto medallion wallpaper.
If you target the pro market, you also have a lot more freedom on price than you'd otherwise have. As the quoted text from the AVS Forums points out, these are people who don't blink at spending $30k on a projector. You can be a price leader here without dipping down into eMac territory. Remember, the original Cinema Display was $4K, and it was considered a steal.
And since the screen issue is (presumptively) a solved problem, you can focus on what the real niggling issues with projectors are. As Kickaha points out, setup and calibration are common bugbears. The market for low-resolution (8x6, 10x7) projectors is saturated, but the market for HD projectors is still high-end enough - and of direct enough interest to Apple - to be a fertile market for an Apple entry.
I can see it happening. It doesn't have to be something that's deployed in dorm rooms over the world to be successful and meaningful. Pro video is booming, and every bone Apple can throw that market will directly and significantly impact their bottom line in the short term as well as the long term.
turn in 90° so that it mounts flat against the wall with a mirror that projects the image to the opposit wall. That way the bulk of the projector and light source can be as close to the wall as possible.
Thanks, as the old saying goes, "I know enough to be dangerous!" or in this case skeptical. It has been over 20 years since I have actually seen a home projection unit set up, and I know that things have advanced immeasurably since then, but I doubt to the point that it seams some people think Apple can achieve with such a product. Also I have heard horror stories of bulbs for some projectors costing a bit more than that $400 one, and they need replaced every few years. Its not like buying a Sony and having it run unattended for 10+ years.
Setup tech: You'd be surprised. 8 years ago I implemented an auto-calibration system for a military flight simulation system. Cockpit and projectors inside a 22' sphere, sphere a custom job at each site, never perfect, sags under its own weight over time. Calibration was a *BITCH*, and took about 10 hours. So we automated it.
A CCD camera scanned the sphere, building essentially a bump map of the interior, and then an image warping algorithm reversed the bumps in software so that what came out of the projector, when it hit the variances, looked perfect.
The whole calibration process took about 30 seconds.
That was eight *years* ago.
A saw a similar system at UIST last Nov in BC using commercial components.
The important thing is, this was all in software, for both systems, prior to rendering and prior to optics - the fuzzing effects you get from optical warping in most projectors was essentially zero. (Some aliasing, but Quartz handles that pretty nicely.) Toss in some basic optic warping, ala a digital mirror array, and you can get away with some pretty farout setups that simply are impossible using any projector currently on the market.
I'm sorry but this is all just utter cr*p. You have a saturated super-competitive market with all the big Jap players, a quickly evolving technology and the two big-ticket items, the LCD/LDP panel and the lamp, that Apple could have no possible leverage over. What is the freakin' point?
As of now there are only two projectors on the market that can actually do HD natively, a $50,000 Samsung LCD and £200,000 JVC I-LDA (type of DLP). There is no native HD DLP chip from Ti. All other projectors scale HD.
Bulbs still cost a pretty penny. Even the Sammy and all other DLP require bulb replacement with averages around $300. There's no getting around it unfortunately.
There are no $3499 1080P projectors. If Apple has some way to get there at that price they could make waves.
Setup tech: You'd be surprised. 8 years ago I implemented an auto-calibration system for a military flight simulation system. Cockpit and projectors inside a 22' sphere, sphere a custom job at each site, never perfect, sags under its own weight over time. Calibration was a *BITCH*, and took about 10 hours. So we automated it.
A CCD camera scanned the sphere, building essentially a bump map of the interior, and then an image warping algorithm reversed the bumps in software so that what came out of the projector, when it hit the variances, looked perfect.
The whole calibration process took about 30 seconds.
That was eight *years* ago.
A saw a similar system at UIST last Nov in BC using commercial components.
The important thing is, this was all in software, for both systems, prior to rendering and prior to optics - the fuzzing effects you get from optical warping in most projectors was essentially zero. (Some aliasing, but Quartz handles that pretty nicely.) Toss in some basic optic warping, ala a digital mirror array, and you can get away with some pretty farout setups that simply are impossible using any projector currently on the market.
First off the mirrors in current projectors are not digital mirror arrays as far as I know, so add that expense to the cost as well as the software development. What would that add to a projector, is it still feasable to come to market less than $4000 let alone $2000? It sounds good, but expensive to develop and you are still left with the picture quality being limited to the screen that it is projected on and the lighting conditions of the room. For the average consumer experience I would imagine that an LCD projector, LCos (?) or DLP front projector would be a more marketable and less expensive solution.
First off the mirrors in current projectors are not digital mirror arrays as far as I know, so add that expense to the cost as well as the software development. [\\quote]
That's precisely what DLP is... an addressable mirror array. Already an established technology, with economies of scale. Nice, eh?
Quote:
you are still left with the picture quality being limited to the screen that it is projected on and the lighting conditions of the room.
Screen geometry is handled as above, color (including lighting) is handled through ColorSync. The software is really pretty basic - IIRC, the flight simulator calibration system was done in about three months, beginning to end, with two of us working on it part-time. Cranking out a modern version of it wouldn't be a major undertaking at *all*, IMO. Few weeks, tops, for a good small team.
This really isn't rocket science - no other manufacturer has the basic tools at their disposal to do this as easily as Apple... or they just don't see the possibilities. Remember when the iPod came out? "What could they *possibly* bring to MP3 players?!?" Their tech, and their vision. They made it simple. Same here.
I'm not saying Apple *will* come out with a projector, just answering the "What could they possibly bring..." question. Answer: plenty, that would make projectors much easier to use. Possibly easy enough to justify for a larger consumer market than currently thinks of them.
One area you are forgetting that current projectors need improvement is noise. What if Apple had a new cooling technique that eliminated the fan? If the cooling technique was very good they could even run the bulb harder hence getting more brightness. This combined with a wireless connection (using pixlet compression?) could be enough to differentiate their product.
...I'm not saying Apple *will* come out with a projector, just answering the "What could they possibly bring..." question. Answer: plenty, that would make projectors much easier to use. Possibly easy enough to justify for a larger consumer market than currently thinks of them.
But can they do this for a price that will attract the larger consumer market? You are adding a number of features to the system. An adjustable digital mirror that can correct for surface irregualariaties on the fly via software, a color sensor that can adjust color on the fly via automating color sync. I do think that is would make a nice system, but automatic color calibration has yet to be built into any consumer or professional monitors or televisions that I know of, and the systems that are out there to calibrate monitors sell for $100+ retail, so add that to the cost of the system. This would make a good high end entry, and if Apple wanted to do this on a limited production run for the "glory" of doing it then more power to them, but I dont think it would add much more than that to the value of the company or the products that they offer.
One area you are forgetting that current projectors need improvement is noise. What if Apple had a new cooling technique that eliminated the fan? If the cooling technique was very good they could even run the bulb harder hence getting more brightness. This combined with a wireless connection (using pixlet compression?) could be enough to differentiate their product.
So what you are saying is that this is the same situation as when Apple brought out Airport at a 299 $ pricepoint when similar products were at 1000 $ pricepoint?
Was WiFi a consumer product at that time? Is WiFi a consumer product now?
I don't know who is talking most noncense, and I don't know if Apple is comming to market with such a device, but if they could do what they have done in the past with other products...wow.
Man, you just don't get it.
WiFi benefits virtually every person who uses a computer. Projection systems, even breakthrough, affordable ones from Apple, only benefit a tiny niche of pros and home theater enthusiasts. Using your "AirPort argument", Xsan should be a consumer product too.
Projectors display content (images video and PowerPoint/Keynote files), they DO NOT display interfaces. The idea of the average consumer using any projector at any price point to directly manipulate an operating system or software application is ridiculous.
WiFi benefits virtually every person who uses a computer.
How do you figure that? I don't know the numbers for adoptions rates, but I'd guess that the vast majority of Mac users don't use wifi.
Quote:
Projection systems, even breakthrough, affordable ones from Apple, only benefit a tiny niche of pros and home theater enthusiasts. Using your "AirPort argument", Xsan should be a consumer product too.
How many people use iSight? Again, the vast majority of Mac users don't use that either. Maybe some people would think it would be cool to plug their Mac or iPod into an easy-to-use Apple projector and watch videos on the wall or a screen. It's not like everyone is going to buy one, but if it's as many as buy the iSight, maybe they'd do it.
And I don't buy all the " but the white balance won't be perfect!" arguments. They're the same kind of arguments audiophiles make about AAC purchased through iTunes. I use a projector all the time at work, and I'm sure the conditions aren't perfect, and I don't set it up perfectly, but you know what? Unless you're a hometheaterphile, it looks great.
This is *crude* compared to what would be possible with the projector handling the setup... and this set him back five figures plus the custom software and time.
Projectors are taking over this department - people can't ditch their CRTs or LCD panels fast enough after trying one.
It actually may lead to longer life if the bulb could be cooled properly. Air-cooling is not a very efficient cooling method.
irfoton
My statemnt was off the cuff, and not really accurate. It depends on the type of light that is used, and the sturdiness of the fillament. For example, a Halogen light requires a high operating temperature so cooling it might actually be detramental to the life of the bulb while it might increase the life of an incandescent bulb. I'm not sure what type of bulbs that projection TV's use, but I doubt that they are incandescent. However the bulbs are designed to operate at the temperatures that they produce within a given space and a minimum amount of air flow. It think that the other components would be more sensative to the high temperatures that are put off than the bulbs themselves.
Seriously, the image he sees is, even though farther away, as crisp and clear as a near display. IIRC, he calculated that it's equivalent to him having two 27" displays on his desk, given the size of the projected images and their distance.
We'll just have to agree to disagree on a philosophical level then. To me, that article is all the more proof that Apple should stay as far away as possible from selling such a system to a consumer. What a top heavy, clumsy mess.
Okay you clearly know little about how a projector is setup nor projector optics. In the case of projectors and more to the point projector lenses (optics) DISTANCE DOES MATTER. Place the projector too far from the SCREEN (not wall - see below) and the picture could end up being too HUGE... Place the projector too close to the SCREEN and the image could end up being to tiny
Gotta narrow room your gonna have a small picture. Gotta long room and the projector either has to be mounted in the middle of the ceiling OR if you do move it all the way back it'll be too big.
Okay I'll admit that SOMEDAY you'll be able to transmit HDTV over home wireless networks but till the specs are hammered out you can't very well release a product on them.
What the heck are you talking about... PROJECTORS NEED POWER period end of sentence. Try running a 2000 lumen+ projector on battery power - heh you wouldn't even get past the FBI warning!
Ah so you have white off white or light grey (some say grey is the best) paint on your walls?!?! Well thats great for you but for the rest of the world who has paneling, wallpaper and or some other non-whitish colored wall THEY WILL NEED A SCREEN.
I'm all for it but unlike you I wouldn't mock and dismiss MAJOR PROBLEMS that someone pointed out. I'd want and NEED to know all of the major problems and if one of them happens to KILL the idea then so be it - the sooner you know something is DOA the less money wasted.
So to sum up the major issues...
Optics are indeed a major issue - lens grinders can custom cut a lens for 'short throw' or 'long throw' but everything has a tradeoff and you can have it 'just work' for everything no matter what the distance and screen size and optics ain't cheap!
Video signal to the projector - okay I'll admit that wireless will SOMEDAY deal with this - just aint gonna happen this year (or maybe even next) unless the IEEE 802.15.3 WG went into overdrive (not to mention the chip makers).
Power to the projector is the 2nd major issue - just about everyone who has a projector in use in a 'home theater' agrees that ceiling mounting is the way to go since you don't have to worry about someone sitting in front of the projector lens. Power near the projector IS a major issue and you can't realistically transmit power wirelessly (students of Tesla - yea yea I know thats not 100% true but I'm talking UL approved consumer electronics)
Third is screen cost and installation. Anyone even 1/2 serious about using a projector to watch movies etc owns (or has built) a screen for it - sure you can 'get by' viewing it on a wall so long as its 'off white' or light grey (better blacks I hear) but a screen will always give you the BEST experience.
Dismiss them if you like but these issues ARE the main reason why 97% 98% heck maybe even 99% of the fellow AI members here don't have a projector.
Dave
I'm sure I know next to nothing about projectors, other than what I can read on the internet, your absolutely right. So we agree that the room matters and that every surburban house in America qualifies. That should put an end to the whole "is there a market because the rooms needs to fit" talk.
Now, about the whole wireless thing. I have about zero understanding of how much bandwith such a device would need to transmit a signal wireless, as I said before, I only know what I can read on the net. Sony has announced a wireless projector http://www.overclockersclub.com/?read=7764008 is it good enough quality? I have no idea but there are others. Search on google. Maybe I misunderstood something?
About the powerthing I wasn't implying the thing could somehow operate WITHOUT power no wonder you got a bit hazy over that one, but it just startled me that you could somehow see this as an obstacle? It's just a cable??? peace ! (good one about the FBI warning )
Ok so the screen thing was a bit educational, thanks. I'll never understand how a white piece of paper on a roll can cost 2000 $ ? Is that what we are talking about here....? Or did I missread something?
Apple had little interest in this IF we all had projectors, remember this. There are problems to be solved, but I haven't heard any yet that I can't imagine them solving. Who would have believed that anyone could make the Cube, before Apple did? ...seriously.
I'm truely sorry if you felt mocked by my post, I apologize to you. Let's move forward with the "how could it be done, I want to believe" that's the mindset at Apple I tell ya' 8)
Comments
This is not about grandma projecting her grandkids' photos onto medallion wallpaper.
If you target the pro market, you also have a lot more freedom on price than you'd otherwise have. As the quoted text from the AVS Forums points out, these are people who don't blink at spending $30k on a projector. You can be a price leader here without dipping down into eMac territory. Remember, the original Cinema Display was $4K, and it was considered a steal.
And since the screen issue is (presumptively) a solved problem, you can focus on what the real niggling issues with projectors are. As Kickaha points out, setup and calibration are common bugbears. The market for low-resolution (8x6, 10x7) projectors is saturated, but the market for HD projectors is still high-end enough - and of direct enough interest to Apple - to be a fertile market for an Apple entry.
I can see it happening. It doesn't have to be something that's deployed in dorm rooms over the world to be successful and meaningful. Pro video is booming, and every bone Apple can throw that market will directly and significantly impact their bottom line in the short term as well as the long term.
Originally posted by DaveGee
Nicely summed up homenow!
Thanks, as the old saying goes, "I know enough to be dangerous!" or in this case skeptical. It has been over 20 years since I have actually seen a home projection unit set up, and I know that things have advanced immeasurably since then, but I doubt to the point that it seams some people think Apple can achieve with such a product. Also I have heard horror stories of bulbs for some projectors costing a bit more than that $400 one, and they need replaced every few years. Its not like buying a Sony and having it run unattended for 10+ years.
Setup tech: You'd be surprised. 8 years ago I implemented an auto-calibration system for a military flight simulation system. Cockpit and projectors inside a 22' sphere, sphere a custom job at each site, never perfect, sags under its own weight over time. Calibration was a *BITCH*, and took about 10 hours. So we automated it.
A CCD camera scanned the sphere, building essentially a bump map of the interior, and then an image warping algorithm reversed the bumps in software so that what came out of the projector, when it hit the variances, looked perfect.
The whole calibration process took about 30 seconds.
That was eight *years* ago.
A saw a similar system at UIST last Nov in BC using commercial components.
The important thing is, this was all in software, for both systems, prior to rendering and prior to optics - the fuzzing effects you get from optical warping in most projectors was essentially zero. (Some aliasing, but Quartz handles that pretty nicely.) Toss in some basic optic warping, ala a digital mirror array, and you can get away with some pretty farout setups that simply are impossible using any projector currently on the market.
As of now there are only two projectors on the market that can actually do HD natively, a $50,000 Samsung LCD and £200,000 JVC I-LDA (type of DLP). There is no native HD DLP chip from Ti. All other projectors scale HD.
Complete b*llocks.
There are no $3499 1080P projectors. If Apple has some way to get there at that price they could make waves.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Bulbs: absolutely.
Setup tech: You'd be surprised. 8 years ago I implemented an auto-calibration system for a military flight simulation system. Cockpit and projectors inside a 22' sphere, sphere a custom job at each site, never perfect, sags under its own weight over time. Calibration was a *BITCH*, and took about 10 hours. So we automated it.
A CCD camera scanned the sphere, building essentially a bump map of the interior, and then an image warping algorithm reversed the bumps in software so that what came out of the projector, when it hit the variances, looked perfect.
The whole calibration process took about 30 seconds.
That was eight *years* ago.
A saw a similar system at UIST last Nov in BC using commercial components.
The important thing is, this was all in software, for both systems, prior to rendering and prior to optics - the fuzzing effects you get from optical warping in most projectors was essentially zero. (Some aliasing, but Quartz handles that pretty nicely.) Toss in some basic optic warping, ala a digital mirror array, and you can get away with some pretty farout setups that simply are impossible using any projector currently on the market.
First off the mirrors in current projectors are not digital mirror arrays as far as I know, so add that expense to the cost as well as the software development. What would that add to a projector, is it still feasable to come to market less than $4000 let alone $2000? It sounds good, but expensive to develop and you are still left with the picture quality being limited to the screen that it is projected on and the lighting conditions of the room. For the average consumer experience I would imagine that an LCD projector, LCos (?) or DLP front projector would be a more marketable and less expensive solution.
First off the mirrors in current projectors are not digital mirror arrays as far as I know, so add that expense to the cost as well as the software development. [\\quote]
That's precisely what DLP is... an addressable mirror array. Already an established technology, with economies of scale. Nice, eh?
Quote:
you are still left with the picture quality being limited to the screen that it is projected on and the lighting conditions of the room.
Screen geometry is handled as above, color (including lighting) is handled through ColorSync. The software is really pretty basic - IIRC, the flight simulator calibration system was done in about three months, beginning to end, with two of us working on it part-time. Cranking out a modern version of it wouldn't be a major undertaking at *all*, IMO. Few weeks, tops, for a good small team.
This really isn't rocket science - no other manufacturer has the basic tools at their disposal to do this as easily as Apple... or they just don't see the possibilities. Remember when the iPod came out? "What could they *possibly* bring to MP3 players?!?" Their tech, and their vision. They made it simple. Same here.
I'm not saying Apple *will* come out with a projector, just answering the "What could they possibly bring..." question. Answer: plenty, that would make projectors much easier to use. Possibly easy enough to justify for a larger consumer market than currently thinks of them.
irfoton
Originally posted by Kickaha
...I'm not saying Apple *will* come out with a projector, just answering the "What could they possibly bring..." question. Answer: plenty, that would make projectors much easier to use. Possibly easy enough to justify for a larger consumer market than currently thinks of them.
But can they do this for a price that will attract the larger consumer market? You are adding a number of features to the system. An adjustable digital mirror that can correct for surface irregualariaties on the fly via software, a color sensor that can adjust color on the fly via automating color sync. I do think that is would make a nice system, but automatic color calibration has yet to be built into any consumer or professional monitors or televisions that I know of, and the systems that are out there to calibrate monitors sell for $100+ retail, so add that to the cost of the system. This would make a good high end entry, and if Apple wanted to do this on a limited production run for the "glory" of doing it then more power to them, but I dont think it would add much more than that to the value of the company or the products that they offer.
Originally posted by irfoton
One area you are forgetting that current projectors need improvement is noise. What if Apple had a new cooling technique that eliminated the fan? If the cooling technique was very good they could even run the bulb harder hence getting more brightness. This combined with a wireless connection (using pixlet compression?) could be enough to differentiate their product.
irfoton
and a shorter life expectency for that $400 bulb.
irfoton
Originally posted by Zab The Fab
So what you are saying is that this is the same situation as when Apple brought out Airport at a 299 $ pricepoint when similar products were at 1000 $ pricepoint?
Was WiFi a consumer product at that time? Is WiFi a consumer product now?
I don't know who is talking most noncense, and I don't know if Apple is comming to market with such a device, but if they could do what they have done in the past with other products...wow.
Man, you just don't get it.
WiFi benefits virtually every person who uses a computer. Projection systems, even breakthrough, affordable ones from Apple, only benefit a tiny niche of pros and home theater enthusiasts. Using your "AirPort argument", Xsan should be a consumer product too.
Projectors display content (images video and PowerPoint/Keynote files), they DO NOT display interfaces. The idea of the average consumer using any projector at any price point to directly manipulate an operating system or software application is ridiculous.
Originally posted by Ensign Pulver
Man, you just don't get it.
WiFi benefits virtually every person who uses a computer.
How do you figure that? I don't know the numbers for adoptions rates, but I'd guess that the vast majority of Mac users don't use wifi.
Projection systems, even breakthrough, affordable ones from Apple, only benefit a tiny niche of pros and home theater enthusiasts. Using your "AirPort argument", Xsan should be a consumer product too.
How many people use iSight? Again, the vast majority of Mac users don't use that either. Maybe some people would think it would be cool to plug their Mac or iPod into an easy-to-use Apple projector and watch videos on the wall or a screen. It's not like everyone is going to buy one, but if it's as many as buy the iSight, maybe they'd do it.
And I don't buy all the " but the white balance won't be perfect!" arguments. They're the same kind of arguments audiophiles make about AAC purchased through iTunes. I use a projector all the time at work, and I'm sure the conditions aren't perfect, and I don't set it up perfectly, but you know what? Unless you're a hometheaterphile, it looks great.
If you've ever used a projector on the wall of your office, you'll never go back.
http://www.cs.unc.edu/~gb/office.htm
This is *crude* compared to what would be possible with the projector handling the setup... and this set him back five figures plus the custom software and time.
Projectors are taking over this department - people can't ditch their CRTs or LCD panels fast enough after trying one.
The biggest problem they have? Guess.
Setup.
Originally posted by irfoton
It actually may lead to longer life if the bulb could be cooled properly. Air-cooling is not a very efficient cooling method.
irfoton
My statemnt was off the cuff, and not really accurate. It depends on the type of light that is used, and the sturdiness of the fillament. For example, a Halogen light requires a high operating temperature so cooling it might actually be detramental to the life of the bulb while it might increase the life of an incandescent bulb. I'm not sure what type of bulbs that projection TV's use, but I doubt that they are incandescent. However the bulbs are designed to operate at the temperatures that they produce within a given space and a minimum amount of air flow. It think that the other components would be more sensative to the high temperatures that are put off than the bulbs themselves.
Originally posted by Kickaha
http://www.cs.unc.edu/~gb/office.htm
As a designer...YUCK! The screen is too far away.
Seriously, the image he sees is, even though farther away, as crisp and clear as a near display. IIRC, he calculated that it's equivalent to him having two 27" displays on his desk, given the size of the projected images and their distance.
Don't knock it until you try it.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Pulver, I vehemently disagree.
If you've ever used a projector on the wall of your office, you'll never go back.
http://www.cs.unc.edu/~gb/office.htm
We'll just have to agree to disagree on a philosophical level then. To me, that article is all the more proof that Apple should stay as far away as possible from selling such a system to a consumer. What a top heavy, clumsy mess.
Originally posted by DaveGee
Okay you clearly know little about how a projector is setup nor projector optics. In the case of projectors and more to the point projector lenses (optics) DISTANCE DOES MATTER. Place the projector too far from the SCREEN (not wall - see below) and the picture could end up being too HUGE... Place the projector too close to the SCREEN and the image could end up being to tiny
Gotta narrow room your gonna have a small picture. Gotta long room and the projector either has to be mounted in the middle of the ceiling OR if you do move it all the way back it'll be too big.
Okay I'll admit that SOMEDAY you'll be able to transmit HDTV over home wireless networks but till the specs are hammered out you can't very well release a product on them.
What the heck are you talking about... PROJECTORS NEED POWER period end of sentence. Try running a 2000 lumen+ projector on battery power - heh you wouldn't even get past the FBI warning!
Ah so you have white off white or light grey (some say grey is the best) paint on your walls?!?! Well thats great for you but for the rest of the world who has paneling, wallpaper and or some other non-whitish colored wall THEY WILL NEED A SCREEN.
I'm all for it but unlike you I wouldn't mock and dismiss MAJOR PROBLEMS that someone pointed out. I'd want and NEED to know all of the major problems and if one of them happens to KILL the idea then so be it - the sooner you know something is DOA the less money wasted.
So to sum up the major issues...
Optics are indeed a major issue - lens grinders can custom cut a lens for 'short throw' or 'long throw' but everything has a tradeoff and you can have it 'just work' for everything no matter what the distance and screen size and optics ain't cheap!
Video signal to the projector - okay I'll admit that wireless will SOMEDAY deal with this - just aint gonna happen this year (or maybe even next) unless the IEEE 802.15.3 WG went into overdrive (not to mention the chip makers).
Power to the projector is the 2nd major issue - just about everyone who has a projector in use in a 'home theater' agrees that ceiling mounting is the way to go since you don't have to worry about someone sitting in front of the projector lens. Power near the projector IS a major issue and you can't realistically transmit power wirelessly (students of Tesla - yea yea I know thats not 100% true but I'm talking UL approved consumer electronics)
Third is screen cost and installation. Anyone even 1/2 serious about using a projector to watch movies etc owns (or has built) a screen for it - sure you can 'get by' viewing it on a wall so long as its 'off white' or light grey (better blacks I hear) but a screen will always give you the BEST experience.
Dismiss them if you like but these issues ARE the main reason why 97% 98% heck maybe even 99% of the fellow AI members here don't have a projector.
Dave
I'm sure I know next to nothing about projectors, other than what I can read on the internet, your absolutely right. So we agree that the room matters and that every surburban house in America qualifies. That should put an end to the whole "is there a market because the rooms needs to fit" talk.
Now, about the whole wireless thing. I have about zero understanding of how much bandwith such a device would need to transmit a signal wireless, as I said before, I only know what I can read on the net. Sony has announced a wireless projector http://www.overclockersclub.com/?read=7764008 is it good enough quality? I have no idea
About the powerthing
Ok so the screen thing was a bit educational, thanks. I'll never understand how a white piece of paper on a roll can cost 2000 $ ? Is that what we are talking about here....? Or did I missread something?
Apple had little interest in this IF we all had projectors, remember this. There are problems to be solved, but I haven't heard any yet that I can't imagine them solving. Who would have believed that anyone could make the Cube, before Apple did? ...seriously.
I'm truely sorry if you felt mocked by my post, I apologize to you. Let's move forward with the "how could it be done, I want to believe" that's the mindset at Apple I tell ya' 8)