The computer (desktop) would transmit wirelessly an MPEG4 stream of the display in realtime (it would have a dedicated MPEG4 chip for encoding). The "monitor" would then have some kind of MPEG4 decoder chip in it, and would display that video on screen.
For testing, I took a 12 second video clip at 720x480 and encoded it in MPEG4 at the highest bit setting (which was 2048 kbits/sec or 256k/sec), and 30 FPS. The resulting file took 24 seconds to encode. Now if we had a dedicated MPEG4 encoder chip in the computer, I am sure we could do this encoding in realtime. And a 256k/sec file could stream over the current Airport (which does about 1300 k/sec peak), so easlily doable over the new 54 MBit wireless standard. There is plenty enough bandwidth left to send signals back to the computer to tell it to move the mouse, and such (only question is how close to realtime could that happen...)
Is any of this possible you think, or am I just way out there?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm no expert, but that sounds reasonable (except for the real-time encoding, I don't honestly know). If that is good enough quality, then that might be a reasonable solution. How did it look?
Obviously, this would only be suited to small screen resolutions and refresh rates. 1024 or 1280 at 75Hz still isn't realistic.
[quote]Originally posted by Transcendental Octothorpe:
<strong>
I'm no expert, but that sounds reasonable (except for the real-time encoding, I don't honestly know). If that is good enough quality, then that might be a reasonable solution. How did it look?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Looked virtualy the same as the source footage. I am no video expert, so someone with more quality sense should speak up.
<strong> [quote]
Obviously, this would only be suited to small screen resolutions and refresh rates. 1024 or 1280 at 75Hz still isn't realistic.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If I did 720x480, then 800x600 isn't out of the question (if given everything else and this would work).
Sorry, the self hovering flat Panel with vibrating base station isn't expected until 2007... <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
it's the newest edition of the "InfiniteLoop" newsletter... take this little tidbit as you wish (pure speculation)...
"...whilst flicking through a my copy of MacUser UK a couple of weeks ago, the editorial caught my eye. This is interesting. Very interesting actually. Pasted for your convenience:
Are you a corridor warrior? Do you spend your time moving around the office, pad of paper in hand, taking notes? If so, Microsoft has something to sell you: the Tablet PC.
Comdex, the world's biggest computer show, was the launch site for Bill Gates' latest attempt to crack the handwriting recognition market, and it was awash with them from almost every computer maker bar one - Apple.
The Tablet PC, like an oversized Newton, will disappoint early adopters. It will probably find its way into the Hall of Ridicule, which also contains such classics as Bob, the 'friendly' interface that no one liked. Where it differs from the Newton is in its technology: Tablet PCs run Windows XP with a veneer of handwriting recognition on top. The applications are regular ones, such as Word, Excel and Outlook. Newton, on the other hand, threw out the rulebook for operating system design. It even tried a bit of artificial intelligence, interpreting the phrases you wrote into actions.
OK, so trying to write 'call Bob' occasionally led to you seeing 'cake ball' on the screen, but at least it was an attempt to determine what a person wanted from an intelligent pad of paper. And that's what is so disappointing about the Tablet PC - it's just another PC, thanks to Gates' decision to use Windows XP with few changes.
Even the most ancient Newton was more ambitious and ultimately more fulfilling than this. The problem was that the concept was too far ahead of the technology. Handwriting recognition was, by the time of the MessagePad 2000, pretty decent, but the machine needed to either be smaller (Palm sized) or larger (tablet sized) in order to make sense. And it was wildly expensive.
So instead imagine a tablet that borrows the best concepts from the Newton: handwriting recognition that works, some intelligence about what you write and a core notebook metaphor. Now imagine it is based on Mac OS X, so it can run all your favourite applications. Equip it with AirPort and Bluetooth. Wrap it all in great industrial design. Oh, and throw in 10 to 15-hour battery life, compared with Tablet PC's three-hour maximum. Does that sound like something you'd want?
It certainly sounds like something Bill Gates would want, and there's nothing that scares Gates more than someone else making a product he would like. Which leads me to wonder about the Tablet PC, which looks like a product produced in a rush. Why, given that this is a new product area, would Microsoft want to rush something out?
Unless, of course, Gates knew that a competitor - one renowned for innovation and great industrial design - was coming out with something in the same area. Something that was so far ahead of what Microsoft could do, it was better to launch Tablet PC early and try and dominate the market than to wait and do it well. Now who could that competitor be?
personally... i don't think apple would come out with a standalone tablet.. because it would just be too similar to their current laptops and people in my experience would rather use a laptop with a keyboard....
what i do think is that apple will start implementing INKWELL features into their displays ... and by that i mean screens that can accept input from a "tablet pen" ...
i also think that the next logical innovation for the iMac would be to integrate this technology on a removable screen that would operate on a futre wireless airport protocol ...
let us not forget apple hasn't updated it's airport line in quite a while .. i wonder if any current/emerging wireless technologies would permit real time video transmissions to a detachable 15-17" lcd...
The speculation about a PDA-Phone hybrid by Apple is starting to sound much more plausible now as a result of all this stuff...I was just talking to someone the other day about how incredible the Newtons were for their time. It would make sense for Apple to reincarnate this in some refined form. The iMac with an Inkwell-enabled display, if offered in a separate deal from all the others - perhaps just for graphics pros or people who wanted one specifically, would be interesting to see. I wouldn't want my family to have one, though -- too big a risk of some kid jabbing his/her finger and/or stylus through the LCD. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Been lurking around this site for six months now. I'm not usually the posting type?I'm a self confessed, twelve sandwich eating, fat-assed, lazy bastard?But this ridiculous thread spurred me into action.
This supposed 'new imac' looks like a chrome plated turd, protruding from somebody's butt-cheeks, eminating shit particles out into the atmosphere.
i can only assume the floating screen, is a tool used to shield the rest of the world from the 'fragrant offering' emitted by it's base.
I've read some stupid things on this site, but this has got to be up there with the best of them???
Your metaphor is not appreciated. Yes, the machine is blatantly fake, but this website is not based on any representations presented therein being genuine. The thread had other good conversation going on, but I'm afraid it should see its end after such distasteful commentary.
After a quick look over at MOSR,where the 19" iMac rumor is sloughed off, I remembered a CNET article about Sharp and Toshiba producing 3D LCD screens for 2003. <a href="http://news.com.com/2100-1040-978499.html"; target="_blank">CNET</a>Maybe with the 15" going away, we'll see something like a standard 17" and a 3D 17"? Makes the french rumor of an overpriced FP iMac a little more plausible. Now if you could detach a 3D... Naw.
Comments
<strong>
Would it be possible to do something like:
The computer (desktop) would transmit wirelessly an MPEG4 stream of the display in realtime (it would have a dedicated MPEG4 chip for encoding). The "monitor" would then have some kind of MPEG4 decoder chip in it, and would display that video on screen.
For testing, I took a 12 second video clip at 720x480 and encoded it in MPEG4 at the highest bit setting (which was 2048 kbits/sec or 256k/sec), and 30 FPS. The resulting file took 24 seconds to encode. Now if we had a dedicated MPEG4 encoder chip in the computer, I am sure we could do this encoding in realtime. And a 256k/sec file could stream over the current Airport (which does about 1300 k/sec peak), so easlily doable over the new 54 MBit wireless standard. There is plenty enough bandwidth left to send signals back to the computer to tell it to move the mouse, and such (only question is how close to realtime could that happen...)
Is any of this possible you think, or am I just way out there?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm no expert, but that sounds reasonable (except for the real-time encoding, I don't honestly know). If that is good enough quality, then that might be a reasonable solution. How did it look?
Obviously, this would only be suited to small screen resolutions and refresh rates. 1024 or 1280 at 75Hz still isn't realistic.
<strong>
I'm no expert, but that sounds reasonable (except for the real-time encoding, I don't honestly know). If that is good enough quality, then that might be a reasonable solution. How did it look?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Looked virtualy the same as the source footage. I am no video expert, so someone with more quality sense should speak up.
<strong> [quote]
Obviously, this would only be suited to small screen resolutions and refresh rates. 1024 or 1280 at 75Hz still isn't realistic.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If I did 720x480, then 800x600 isn't out of the question (if given everything else and this would work).
<strong>
Sorry, the self hovering flat Panel with vibrating base station isn't expected until 2007... <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
-S
<strong>No it's a Symbian.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Let that one stew for a while and see if anyone else gets it.
[ 12-26-2002: Message edited by: pscates ]</p>
<strong> <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
<img src="confused.gif" border="0">
it's the newest edition of the "InfiniteLoop" newsletter... take this little tidbit as you wish (pure speculation)...
"...whilst flicking through a my copy of MacUser UK a couple of weeks ago, the editorial caught my eye. This is interesting. Very interesting actually. Pasted for your convenience:
Are you a corridor warrior? Do you spend your time moving around the office, pad of paper in hand, taking notes? If so, Microsoft has something to sell you: the Tablet PC.
Comdex, the world's biggest computer show, was the launch site for Bill Gates' latest attempt to crack the handwriting recognition market, and it was awash with them from almost every computer maker bar one - Apple.
The Tablet PC, like an oversized Newton, will disappoint early adopters. It will probably find its way into the Hall of Ridicule, which also contains such classics as Bob, the 'friendly' interface that no one liked. Where it differs from the Newton is in its technology: Tablet PCs run Windows XP with a veneer of handwriting recognition on top. The applications are regular ones, such as Word, Excel and Outlook. Newton, on the other hand, threw out the rulebook for operating system design. It even tried a bit of artificial intelligence, interpreting the phrases you wrote into actions.
OK, so trying to write 'call Bob' occasionally led to you seeing 'cake ball' on the screen, but at least it was an attempt to determine what a person wanted from an intelligent pad of paper. And that's what is so disappointing about the Tablet PC - it's just another PC, thanks to Gates' decision to use Windows XP with few changes.
Even the most ancient Newton was more ambitious and ultimately more fulfilling than this. The problem was that the concept was too far ahead of the technology. Handwriting recognition was, by the time of the MessagePad 2000, pretty decent, but the machine needed to either be smaller (Palm sized) or larger (tablet sized) in order to make sense. And it was wildly expensive.
So instead imagine a tablet that borrows the best concepts from the Newton: handwriting recognition that works, some intelligence about what you write and a core notebook metaphor. Now imagine it is based on Mac OS X, so it can run all your favourite applications. Equip it with AirPort and Bluetooth. Wrap it all in great industrial design. Oh, and throw in 10 to 15-hour battery life, compared with Tablet PC's three-hour maximum. Does that sound like something you'd want?
It certainly sounds like something Bill Gates would want, and there's nothing that scares Gates more than someone else making a product he would like. Which leads me to wonder about the Tablet PC, which looks like a product produced in a rush. Why, given that this is a new product area, would Microsoft want to rush something out?
Unless, of course, Gates knew that a competitor - one renowned for innovation and great industrial design - was coming out with something in the same area. Something that was so far ahead of what Microsoft could do, it was better to launch Tablet PC early and try and dominate the market than to wait and do it well. Now who could that competitor be?
Ian Betteridge ? editor, MacUser UK"
what i do think is that apple will start implementing INKWELL features into their displays ... and by that i mean screens that can accept input from a "tablet pen" ...
i also think that the next logical innovation for the iMac would be to integrate this technology on a removable screen that would operate on a futre wireless airport protocol ...
let us not forget apple hasn't updated it's airport line in quite a while .. i wonder if any current/emerging wireless technologies would permit real time video transmissions to a detachable 15-17" lcd...
just speculation of course ...
This supposed 'new imac' looks like a chrome plated turd, protruding from somebody's butt-cheeks, eminating shit particles out into the atmosphere.
i can only assume the floating screen, is a tool used to shield the rest of the world from the 'fragrant offering' emitted by it's base.
I've read some stupid things on this site, but this has got to be up there with the best of them???
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
That was quite a display of $10 words.
And this thread is gay too. Except for the streaming vid convo which is quite cool.