Wearable Video iPod Display

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

SeatlePI reports (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/254134_ipodscreen02.html?source=iL) that a company which is currently is making video display products for the military and industry is moving into the iPod market.

eMagin Corp has developed a wearable headset video-system for Apple's latest video iPod. The video appears in front of the viewers eye with the impression of the 105-inch display from 12 feet away.

"Suddenly you've got this big-screen, movie-screen, home-theater experience, wherever you are," said Gary Jones, eMagin's president and CEO.

A photo demonstrating the unit can be seen here (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/photos/photo.asp?PhotoID=80576).

[MacFan782040]

Only 1 eye? That's lame...

[AoWolf]

That sound pretty cool to me. I wonder why just one eye though?

[crap freakboy]

Only 1 eye? That's lame...

Think you mean 1 leg...now thats lame.

[eneshelon]

the one eye displays actually work amazing, and give the effect that the screen is right in front of you, its like an optical illusion. also this makes it so that you can still monitor whats going on around you. soooo before you judge, try it out (i forgot what other consumer electronic had this implemented, but it worked great!)

im lookin forward to getting this, itll be a killer accessory for the video ipod! bring it on!

[Jesus]

^^ to you, I saw a headset similar once, not great is all I can say, and Apple won't want to use this display under its own branding. his will be too expensive and in my opinion, not very wearable. I mean, you have a thick cable running from your pocket into your sun glasses, that's not obvious at all.:rolleyes:

[freeny]

:eek: Holy hands free masterbation Batman!!:eek:

[poohat1000]

one eye? wont u get dizzy?

[macros]

very lame, not worth the front page...
Why not just tape 2 ipods to the head :rolleyes:

[d.perel]

That would be pretty sweet for an airplane ride or something, but I don't think the whole concept of wearable tv visors is new

[Xephian]

This would be pretty nice.

[MacFan782040]

I give them credit for creating this, but I doubt it'll be a big seller...

[Texas04]

I give them credit for creating this, but I doubt it'll be a big seller...

I agree, its great for the military to use with cameras on their guns... but for an ipod... not so much

[iRez]

LAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

ill wager my unborn children that only 10 of these will sell.

[kcmac]

Wow, that thing costs $500. And just imagine what you would also look like when you add the wiring for your earbuds or headphones!

[WeBleed4Real]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/dayart/20060102/450ipodscreen_garyjones.jpg

That just has "COOL" written all over it, doesn't it? ;)

Everyone say it with me..."Resistance is FUTILE!!!"

[vikolaf]

Why not make it for two eyes... Just tried closing one eye while leaving the other one open... Would get quite annoying after a few minutes...

[w_parietti22]

I dunno... first, its ugly. Also, The Seattle PI? not the most trustworthy Seattle paper.

edit-
Ok... I just read the Seattle Times... they have an article about it too.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002715899_btinterface02.html

It says that it is selling for $899! :eek:

[Lacero]

That just has "COOL" written all over it, doesn't it? ;)
I'd prefer corneal implants. That thing looks uber geeky.

Here's to the Crazy Ones http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=35452 (http://www.uriah.com/apple-qt/movies/think-different.mov)

[bmoorhouse]

I'd prefer corneal implants. That thing looks uber geeky.

Here's to the Crazy Ones http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=35452 (http://www.uriah.com/apple-qt/movies/think-different.mov)


I would definitely agree. Until now, however, the company has been building this thing to military specs, so it didn't matter. Now that they are going to start selling it to consumers, they need to figure out how to get the screen into a pair of sunglasses, which would look normal. . . . Now something like that might have a chance.

[WildCowboy]

Is this thing any better than Sony's Glasstron? I know that covered both eyes, but Sony did essentially the same thing years ago and it completely bombed.

[ZacMcCracken]

You will be assimilated
Resistance is futile!

[1macker1]

That is so lame.

[abysstare]

I think the concept is awesome, and that people would love it, and that it's probably actually pretty cool. HOWEVER, these folks obviously have a learning curve to get over when it comes to design and marketing. 1) For something this cool, I think they can come up with a better name than "eyebud." Please. 2) Sorry, but they're completely discounting the power of peoples vanity. The guy in that picture looks like a complete TOOL wearing that thing, and nobody's going to want to look like that. They need to either come up with a headset that only comes around from behind, incorporate the around the head design into a less conspicuous baseball cap, or, if they want to do this around the head design, GREATLY thin out at least most of what's all around the head to about the thickness of the cord itself. Then maybe.

Oh, and p.s., it might have been a smart move to have shown this being worn by a really hot model instead of the CEO.

[Porchland]

Looks sort of like the mind-control halo the Scientologists -- or whoever -- used on Tom Cruise in "Minority Report."

[Lacero]

Only 1 eye? That's lame...
No point using both eyes since the projected image is only two dimensional. Maybe they'll release a dual unit when Georgie boy gets his way with Dimensionalized™ 3D (http://www.videopost.com/pages/inthree6.html) cinema. Then there should be the demand.


Here's to the Crazy Ones http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=35452 (http://www.uriah.com/apple-qt/movies/think-different.mov)

[Ashapalan]

very close to the eye...

eye muscle fully contracted

eye muscle very tired
very quickly

manny years left to live

[maya]

Still pointless, you might as well hook up the iPod to a TV or something. If this thing is meant to be mobile, why not use the screen already built into the iPod. Oh I forgot, its so that you can pretend that you have a big screen in front of you. :rolleyes:

1. I wonder if it draws its power from the iPod or a separate battery pack. (not cool)

2. I wonder if the AV cable is going to be that thick. (not cool)

3. I wonder if the screen is going to look that prominent. (not cool)

4. I wonder if you have some sort of eye wear with only one eye patched. Can someone say, "ei matie" (not cool)


So far its on a "not cool" start, who knows its just a beta product and looks decent in the final release. I hope it allows the user to choose either a single or dual screen mode, and allows 3D imaging, that would be cool. ;) :)

[maya]

No point using both eyes since the projected image is only two dimensional. Maybe they'll release a dual unit when Georgie boy gets his way with Dimensionalized™ 3D (http://www.videopost.com/pages/inthree6.html) cinema. Then there should be the demand.


We seem to be thinking along the same line(s). :eek: :p :)

[maya]

very close to the eye...

eye muscle fully contracted

eye muscle very tired
very quickly

manny years left to live

ROTFLMAO, I wonder how this will work out for people who wear prescribed eye wear and do not like the feeling of contacts. :confused:

And at $500 USD I do not see this thing taking off, as it only does one thing. Maybe there are a lot of rich pubescent teens out there drooling over this. ;)

[gugy]

if you want to look like a dork wearing something like that, go ahead!:D

[Morky]

And you thought driving with a cell phone was bad...

[maya]

And you thought driving with a cell phone was bad...

Hey the healthcare system requires all the help they can get as far as funding goes. If someone is stupid enough to pay 500 USD for this and walk on the street while watching a video and gets into some sort of "situation" then they can fund the healthcare system for they stupidity. ;)

[JDOG_]

thought it needed a picture...

[pknz]

I think it could have potential if worked on so it looses that geekyness to it, that guy is holding a large brick behind the iPod too.

I just wonder how well an eye could focus on a screen that close to it, and whether that would entail more health issues have a screen so close.

But 105"!!!!:eek:

[emaja]

Only one eye not only because of it being a 2D image, but safety. I can imagine people wearing this walking around and bumping into people because they were paying attention to the video, and not where they were walking. If both eyes were covered, that would be even worse.

Idiots. People can't even talk on the phone and drive, can you image some Darwin nominee wearing this in the car?

[2nyRiggz]

that thing is ugly. i dont need to be looking like a geek....im already considered one....never will i wear that.

why do we need a one eye screen for the ipod when its doing good all by its lonesome. its too bulky.

garanteed to get mug in the subway..or beat up...pick whatever suit you


Bless

[Piarco]

Unless the iPod suddenly is able to output high-res video this thing is a complete waste of time. Wouldn't a 320x240 video look very poor on even a virtual 105" screen?

[mac n cheese]

thought it needed a picture...

If you've ever seen a klunky bluetooth headset on a guy and thought to yourself "Does he know what an idiot he looks like?"

Times that by ten, and square it, and you get the exact doofus rating of the eyebud. I'll throw my bet in that no more than 6 of these will sell. And 3 of the owners will end up in the hospital in some sort of bizarre masturbating accident now that porn found iPods.

I've seen inventions that were more lame, not many though.

Don't overlook that huge black brick he has attached to the back of his Video iPod.

[iMeowbot]

That sound pretty cool to me. I wonder why just one eye though?
Their full-face goggles (http://www.3dvisor.com/products.php) are really weird looking, kind of like some vacuum cleaner attachment, so maybe they're hoping that the white Borg variety will look a little less freakish.

[atari1356]

And at $500 USD I do not see this thing taking off, as it only does one thing. Maybe there are a lot of rich pubescent teens out there drooling over this. ;)

Well, if you compare it to prices of flat screen LCD/Plasma displays, $500 for a 105" display is a great bargain... of course, there is the dork factor, which means that most people wouldn't pay more than $100 for one. :D

[shyataroo]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/dayart/20060102/450ipodscreen_garyjones.jpg[/url][
That just has "COOL" written all over it, doesn't it? ;)

Everyone say it with me..."Resistance is FUTILE!!!"


I was just about to post that.

[liquidh2o]

for $500 I'll just stick with a portable DVD player and change.

No need to be walking around like we've been assimilated...yet.

[atari1356]

Here's a fun image taken from their website:

http://www.3dvisor.com/images/photo_inset2.jpg

(underneath the image it had the caption "DO NOT DRIVE while wearing the Z800 3DVisor ...or use your hair dryer in the shower."... well, duh... but then again, that guy looks like he's having so much fun driving while wearing it, if I had one I think I'd have to take it for a spin ;) )

[cycocelica]

I dunno... first, its ugly. Also, The Seattle PI? not the most trustworthy Seattle paper.

Please. I would rather read the PI than the Times.

With that said, I would never buy one of those, looks way too bulky and dorky. The idea is great, but they can do better.

[JW8725]

Focusing on something so close to the eye for prolonged periods of time cant possibily be good for the eye.

[SiliconAddict]

It will never go mainstream. Displays like this give people massive headaches after only a short while.

[Jesus]

I saw this on another website that sold similar things:

http://www.3dvisor.com/images/photo_inset1.jpg
The Z800 3DVisor puts you inside the game. (Flak jacket not included. )

I can imagine the court case,

'I thought I was getting a gun and a helmet with my visor :D :D

[woolfgang]

On one hand, you only need one eye to see out of most telescopes.

On the other hand, aren't people Vegging out enough? I live in NYC, and every day I see people with ipods and cell phones walk in front of cars. This is a lawsuit waiting to happen.

[Lacero]

And you thought driving with a cell phone was bad...
It be cool if navigational information could be overlaid on the goggles to help a driver, the same as how jet fighter pilots use a head-up display. But I think I'd rather see navigational information overlaid on the inside of the windshield, instead of wearing a unit.

It be cool to use this gadget on a plane. Who says you need to concentrate to use it. I hope people are not dumb enough to be watching videos while doing tasks.

Here's to the Crazy Ones http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=35452 (http://www.uriah.com/apple-qt/movies/think-different.mov)

[howesey]

very close to the eye...

eye muscle fully contracted

eye muscle very tired
very quickly

manny years left to live
Not really. It has a diopter so it is in focus as if it was at a distance. Also good for people that wear glasses as you can just change the diopter.

I can see IMAX changing to iMax. :confused:

[neocell]

These (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/16/orange_video_specs/) from Orange (http://www.orange.fr/content/ge/high/lunettes-video/lunettes-video.html) appear to be slightly more attractive, though I wonder how good they are and if we'll see them anytime soon. As long as they're trying

[ibook30]

Man - I can't wait to look like a jerk wearing one of these.., :D

[globalhemp]

Wow man, like technology from 1994! Virtual Vision was a Seattle area company that was funded in part by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen.

Nice article in Business Week, "Virtual Reality Bites (http://www.businessweek.com/1996/23/b347864.htm)" A 3-D goggle maker is scrambling to find customers.

At least Virtual Vision has two eyepieces. Images (http://images.google.com/images?svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&q=Virtual+Vision+) from Google.

Eric Pollitt, President
Global Hemp, Inc.

[FoxyKaye]

Everyone say it with me..."Resistance is FUTILE!!!"
Resistance is futile!

Still though - give that device time to miniturize, become part of a standard set of glasses, integrate with a portable computer, follow eye movements and respond to voice commands for navigation and use. Dunno, seems pretty cool - a lot of SciFi has folks wearing glasses that can display movies and online content, interface with computers and networks, and so on. I'd like to see this technology developed.

[vikolaf]

These (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/16/orange_video_specs/) from Orange (http://www.orange.fr/content/ge/high/lunettes-video/lunettes-video.html) appear to be slightly more attractive, though I wonder how good they are and if we'll see them anytime soon. As long as they're trying

If you live in France you already can.:cool: ..It is priced at EUR 299

[Phat_Pat]

we should use this image for a photoshop contest

[chopsuey158]

They look kinda nerdy to me, but that's alright. I don't know how often I would actually use them in public if I had them, but on trips and what not they would be great. Plus I bet they are super expensive.

[rdrr]

Studies found that continuous usage cause unnecessary facial trauma... :p

http://www.traversino.com/joe_maini_website/images_maini/marty_feldman.jpg

[iDM]

It seems kinda ridiculous to me. Would anyone really wear that in public? You couldn't walk down the street with it on because you'd have to watch everyone walking towards you with your other eye. You wouldn't use it at home because well if you could afford the thing you probably could afford a big screen TV anyway?

[Jopling]

Lets not forget that in addition to the dorky headset, you will also have headphones on. Also, the headset goes all away around the back of your head, what if you're on a plane, bus, bed, etc and you want to lay back? You have to deal with that too. Sunglass design is definitely the best way to go.

[ethernet76]

Focusing on something so close to the eye for prolonged periods of time cant possibily be good for the eye.

It has nothing to do with how close the screen is to your eye.

It's more to do with where the the device requires you to focus. I don't think it's even reasonably possible to focus 3 inches from your face.

[neutrino23]

These (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/16/orange_video_specs/) from Orange (http://www.orange.fr/content/ge/high/lunettes-video/lunettes-video.html) appear to be slightly more attractive, though I wonder how good they are and if we'll see them anytime soon. As long as they're trying

Those look really nice. Reminiscent of Geordi's visor in STNG.

[ppc_michael]

Journeyman Project, anyone?

I wonder how long until someone tries watching it and driving at the same time.

[cwedl]

Trust me, if you had this on two eyes you wouldn't feel that well after a while!

[hob]

I was reading an interview a few days ago with Steve Jobs, Walt Mossberg, and a few other journalists at the... D3 Expo (or whatever they call it), from a few months ago. Steve was saying how he'd never have video on an iPod till you could do away with the need for having to display it on the unit itself.

Maybe they have something like this in the pipeline over at apple?

Journeyman Project, anyone?
Old school!! :D

[obeygiant]

Those look really nice. Reminiscent of Geordi's visor in STNG.


i guess geordi was really watching an iPod the whole time on TNG
http://www.space-debris.com/tng_levar.jpg
Levar BurtOWNED!

[amateurmacfreak]

I just sort of think of this as weird and not important. Who wants to sit around with a weird headset thing on with their iPod? I guess maybe on the subway or something, but really, I would never find this practical at all. I just don't think of this as some big Mac news thing.
Meh. I'm just bitter because I want more news about Intel at MWSF. :mad: :( :rolleyes: :)

[BRLawyer]

that thing is ugly. i dont need to be looking like a geek....im already considered one....never will i wear that.

why do we need a one eye screen for the ipod when its doing good all by its lonesome. its too bulky.

garanteed to get mug in the subway..or beat up...pick whatever suit you


Bless

Hahaha, I couldn't stop laughing...y're right, what a complete TOOL headset...only uebernerds can buy that crap...really wanna watch videos? Go to the theather or sit down and watch a DVD, goddamned!

[amateurmacfreak]

:eek: Holy hands free masterbation Batman!!:eek:
hmm. :-/ I think it's spelled masturbation. Yep, that's it. :rolleyes::p

[anikgol]

what a stupid piece of ****. typical capitalism. try to lure people to buy something they dont need at all. this is beyound silly.

[amateurmacfreak]

Times that by ten, and square it, and you get the exact doofus rating of the eyebud. I'll throw my bet in that no more than 6 of these will sell. And 3 of the owners will end up in the hospital in some sort of bizarre masturbating accident now that porn found iPods.

Roflmao. Thank you! :)

[dornoforpyros]

:eek: Holy hands free masterbation Batman!!:eek:


ummm if it's "hands free" than how are you suppose to...oh never mind

[m-dogg]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/dayart/20060102/450ipodscreen_garyjones.jpg

That just has "COOL" written all over it, doesn't it? ;)

Everyone say it with me..."Resistance is FUTILE!!!"

It sure does say cool...

Man, I'd be the COOLEST dork in school with that!!! I bet it would match my headgear nice too!!!

[tomsawyer]

So far i undestood, guys like us are the ones they are aiming at, and what I have read till now, they're shooting well past us. But it is just a step in the evolution of this technology, a couple of steps further down the road may be something groundbreaking.
What I'm trying to say is that altough I am as sceptical as most of u concerning this particular product, I am still thrilled at what has still come.
After seing an interesting documentary on blind people who can see again (admitedly 16*16 pixels) thanks to a digital camera implanted in their eye and connected to the area of the brain responsable for visual processing, I'd put my bet on that, longterm. (yeah, prepare to be assimilated :D)
Middleterm this is the accesoire for those who r a bit geekier than others.....and have the money to burn :D.

[cr2sh]

Wow... a 105" screen displaying 320x240.

Imagine the possibilities.

[iHateWindows]

That's just plain ugly!

[puuukeey]

All I have to say is OLEDS are the coolest stuff evar. too bad though, I have stock in universal panel. not emagin

[EricNau]

It'll be too expensive, I just know it.

And I would never wear it in public.

[mac n cheese]

It sure does say cool...

Man, I'd be the COOLEST dork in school with that!!! I bet it would match my headgear nice too!!!

Thank you for putting that picture up in this post again, I'm dying over here!

Are you sure this isn't part of a Saturday Night Live commercial, a headset that lets you watch behind you so you don't get "pantsed" or something. The voice over proclaiming, "Now hind sight really is 20/20"

I can't stop laughing....everytime I see the look on that dude's face, the 3 pound black brick on the back of the iPod, and that thing wrapping across his forehead. Truly the next generation of reality!

See how he holds it up? Just like the "hands free" cable/earpiece on a cell phone. Does anyone know why people buy a hands-free, then hold it up in front of them while they walk like its a compass on an orienteering course?

I can just see some gimp wandering down the street with this menagerie strapped to his head, holding that brick up in front of him like a homing beacon locator, and all those cables/earbuds attached to his head.

This guy HAS to get together with the prosthetic dog nuts guy and come up with something!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9615545/ Great minds.....

[azzurri000]

They'd have to pay ME to wear that ugly thing.

[kalisphoenix]

This site really reminds me of Slashdot sometimes. Nobody wants to RTFA or, failing that, google for more information -- they just want to spout off like they're the first people to think of the crippling shortcoming to a given piece of machinery.

1. It's not going to make your eyes sore. You have to focus at a point a couple meters away in order to see the image clearly. Just like watching TV.

2. You're not supposed to be staggering around Frat Row wearing one of these things. It's for situations like extended airplane travel, chilling in a living room and watching Dark Side of the Rainbow or Echoes of the Infinite, and so on. You don't carry a bigscreen TV to the supermarket, so why in the hell would you wear this there?

3. I hate to tell you, but the only reason this looks greatly more idiotic than headphones is because you're used to seeing headphones everywhere. Audiophiles' headphones still look idiotic -- but the people wearing them don't give a ****.
http://us.st11.yimg.com/store1.yimg.com/I/gifts-and-gift-baskets_1873_28434851

4. The only serious problem that I see with it is the source resolution -- 320x240 (or whatever the iPod video resolution is) is not something I want to see blown up to 105". I'd expect, since 320x240 is old tech for wearable displays, that this device is at least nominally forward-compatible. Another possibility is that the finished version will have video-decoding capabilities of its own and use the iPod merely for storage, in which case it could play movies at a substantially higher resolution.

I've wanted a wearable display ever since I saw the LCD shutterglasses that could be used with a couple of the SGI machines. Then, as now, cost is prohibitive, but the more people buy them, the higher the chance that I can get a pair off eBay for a reasonable amount.

[bmoorhouse]

You guys complaining about having to focus on something that close to your eyes and trying to blow up low res info to 105" are not understanding this thing properly.

Focusing on it that close to your eyes is not a problem. It's just like looking through night vision goggles which are nothing more than two 1" sceens about an inch from your eyes. You set them properly and forget it. It's not a big deal.

As for the resolution, no one is puting 320x240 on a 105" screen. It says that it is comparable to watching a 105" screen from 20 feet away. It is kind of like squashing peoples heads between your thumb and pointer finger.

Finally, the geeky look . . . I have to agree with you all there. Of course, like someone else said earlier, headphones used to have the same effect too. So who knows.

[dongmin]

That would be pretty sweet for an airplane ride or something, but I don't think the whole concept of wearable tv visors is newI'd much prefer something like this:

http://www.nyko.com/img/nyko/products/large/MoviePlayeriPod.jpg

A portable 7" LCD screen with an extra battery pack for your ipod would be sweet. But before that happens, I'd like Apple to increase the video-out resolution to at least VGA quality.

[amateurmacfreak]

ummm if it's "hands free" than how are you suppose to...oh never mind
Um. Wow. I don't... get that. Agh. I feel so dumb and... stupid. :( :o :) But no, seriously, I don't get it... :o

[JesterJJZ]

Might be useful with my steadicam! :D

[illegalprelude]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/dayart/20060102/450ipodscreen_garyjones.jpg

That just has "COOL" written all over it, doesn't it? ;)

Everyone say it with me..."Resistance is FUTILE!!!"
bahahahaha
eskkellent!

[Dr. Dastardly]

Ok don't want to be a downer or anything but why is this on the front page? It has nothing to do with Apple. It's just some lame complay with a lame product that I can't see anyone purchasing.

Was this already answeared? I just got here.:p

[Norse Son]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/dayart/20060102/450ipodscreen_garyjones.jpg

That just has "COOL" written all over it, doesn't it? ;)

Everyone say it with me..."Resistance is FUTILE!!!"
One of the first posters asked why it was only one eye... Well, after seeing the picture from the Seattle PI newspaper I'm glad that it is. Can you imagine trying to lift your head if the thing had 2 screens...

My guess is that some slime-ball lawyer(s) somewhere are already greasing their palms and licking their hair (or would that be vice-versa) anticipating the RSI lawsuits over "Screen-Leaning Neck-Strain Syndrome" (SLNSS - pronounced "Silliness")...

[cr2sh]

You guys complaining about having to focus on something that close to your eyes and trying to blow up low res info to 105" are not understanding this thing properly.

Focusing on it that close to your eyes is not a problem. It's just like looking through night vision goggles which are nothing more than two 1" sceens about an inch from your eyes. You set them properly and forget it. It's not a big deal.

Have you looked at the photo of this guy? You would not be looking at TWO 1" screens... you'll be looking at ONE 1" screen. That does create an issue of focusing, when you understand it properly. :rolleyes:

Do me a favor, flip open your cell phone... hold the LCD about an inch from your eye and open both eyes... can you focus on the screen?

As for the resolution, no one is puting 320x240 on a 105" screen. It says that it is comparable to watching a 105" screen from 20 feet away. It is kind of like squashing peoples heads between your thumb and pointer finger.

By that same notion, it'd be the same as a 1050" screen that's 200 feet away. Who cares? The source resolution is still 320x240. It's nothing like squashing peoples heads between your fingers... they're using a multiplier to make it seem less crappy. Lying with ratios.

In fact, this example has one other subtle inconsitency. A 105" screen that's 20ft away can be seen with both eyes. This thing sucks. Wastland this trash, please.

[Norse Son]

I would definitely agree. Until now, however, the company has been building this thing to military specs, so it didn't matter. Now that they are going to start selling it to consumers, they need to figure out how to get the screen into a pair of sunglasses, which would look normal. . . . Now something like that might have a chance.
They should work with Oakley - now that would be cool design...

But why stop there; give it "translucent gradient lenses", so they double as sun glasses, darkening as you go outside. And if they're OLEDs (not LCDs) you don't have to worry about backlighting. Just add some control-software so the video pauses and the screen-image fades when you want to look at something in the "outside world".

I can see some intrepid scammers trying to get a seeing-eye dog so they can just watch videos wherever they go... I hope they don't add "virtual force-feedback" controls, and allow you to play video games... People would think you were having a seizure.....

(Please, no hate mail for that last paragraph!)

[snaildog]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/dayart/20060102/450ipodscreen_garyjones.jpg

seems Bill Murray has already endorsed the product

[Norse Son]

I think it could have potential if worked on so it looses that geekyness to it, that guy is holding a large brick behind the iPod too.

I just wonder how well an eye could focus on a screen that close to it, and whether that would entail more health issues have a screen so close.

But 105"!!!!:eek:
The side effects make me think of Hot Shots (1st one), starring Charlie Sheen, where John Cryar's character has "Walleye Vision"... A lot of people will be buying the optional Michelin Man suit.

[javiercr]

Is this thing any better than Sony's Glasstron? I know that covered both eyes, but Sony did essentially the same thing years ago and it completely bombed.

I'm happy somebody remembered the Glasstron!

[Norse Son]

Here's a fun image taken from their website:

http://www.3dvisor.com/images/photo_inset2.jpg

(underneath the image it had the caption "DO NOT DRIVE while wearing the Z800 3DVisor ...or use your hair dryer in the shower."... well, duh... but then again, that guy looks like he's having so much fun driving while wearing it, if I had one I think I'd have to take it for a spin ;) )
Yeah, well let's also hope that he's not playing Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas while he's behind the wheel...

[Norse Son]

Those look really nice. Reminiscent of Geordi's visor in STNG.
Sorry to be an asP, but I kinda-sorta-really hope you had to at least Google the spelling of "Geordi" from STNG... Especially when we're dealing with a product that looks so "Borg-esque"...

[maya]

Yeah, well let's also hope that he's not playing Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas while he's behind the wheel...

If he is, can someone give me a heads-up of his location. ;)

I shall stay on a different route. :D

[Damien]

could this be apples next product line :P

[dernhelm]

Wow... a 105" screen displaying 320x240.

Imagine the possibilities.

My thoughts exactly. What is the point of virtualizing so large a display for so few pixels?

[dernhelm]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/dayart/20060102/450ipodscreen_garyjones.jpg

seems Bill Murray has already endorsed the product

<grin> Never even noticed the resemblence until you posted this, but yup, if it isn't Bill himself, it's his brother...

[windowuser82]

That is -very- ugly but it seems very "Apple Fan" to me. Different, "advanced".

To any /. readers; doesn't the photo look a LOT like their Bill Gates "Borg" icon?

[Mechcozmo]

Idiots. People can't even talk on the phone and drive, can you image some Darwin nominee wearing this in the car?

Already illegal. Its illegal to listen to earbud/headphones while you drive anyway. Music is OK but you need to be able to hear the road noises too. But people play rap in their cars loud enough to be illegal I guess... :rolleyes:

[AUBPsych]

Meh...wouldn't be caught dead with that on.

[amateurmacfreak]

ummm if it's "hands free" than how are you suppose to...oh never mind
oooooooooooh. I get it. *lightbulb goes on* you aren't talking about the eyebud are you??:rolleyes: :)

[supersoundgeek]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

SeatlePI reports (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/254134_ipodscreen02.html?source=iL) that a company which is currently is making video display products for the military and industry is moving into the iPod market.

eMagin Corp has developed a wearable headset video-system for Apple's latest video iPod. The video appears in front of the viewers eye with the impression of the 105-inch display from 12 feet away.



A photo demonstrating the unit can be seen here (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/photos/photo.asp?PhotoID=80576).


http://www.joefire.com/psglibrary/misc/ghetto_handsfree.jpg

Here's another good one to go with that brilliant concept...or better yet how about just duct tape your iPod to your forehead...and voila-the "Eye Pod"!!!

C'mon guys-Really?!!!

[Counter]

:eek: Holy hands free masterbation Batman!!:eek:

OMG and the masturbation Robin!

[FreeState]

I dunno... first, its ugly. Also, The Seattle PI? not the most trustworthy Seattle paper.

edit-
Ok... I just read the Seattle Times... they have an article about it too.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002715899_btinterface02.html

It says that it is selling for $899! :eek:

You do realize the Times and the PI are owned and operated by the same company now (and has been since the late 80's)?

[nagromme]

Sony's Glasstron units didn't give a screen that big, but they did show it to both eyes. I'd rather have that.

Still, this is a neat first step towards something I'd like better. (And cheaper.)

[bousozoku]

Is this thing any better than Sony's Glasstron? I know that covered both eyes, but Sony did essentially the same thing years ago and it completely bombed.

I remember that, and Olympus also had one that gave the impression of a larger 62 inch display but for $500 and $700, they certainly didn't do well, even considering the cost of 50 inch and 62 inch projection t.v. sets at the time.

Wasn't there a problem with seizures? I remember a certain video game "head-sole" that you wore over your eye that was withdrawn from the market for medical reasons.

[jthrasher]

:eek: Holy hands free masterbation Batman!!:eek:

so... does this mean you'll only go blind in one eye then with this gadget? :D

[AtariMac]

The problem with wearable computing devices is that you look like a moron. Heck, i can't even stand to look at the schmucks with the bluetooth phone connectors in their ears.

You just end up looking like you either want to be Britney Spears or work at the Gap.

[Timothy]

You do realize the Times and the PI are owned and operated by the same company now (and has been since the late 80's)?

Not true. The two papers have a joint-operating agreement whereby they share printing presses and other aspects of the production/distribution of the papers, but they are separately owned with entirely different content staff.

[jayscheuerle]

Have you looked at the photo of this guy? You would not be looking at TWO 1" screens... you'll be looking at ONE 1" screen. That does create an issue of focusing, when you understand it properly. :rolleyes:


To understand it properly, you need to realize that you're not focusing an inch away from your head. You're focusing 10' away–that's what the optics do (think of looking through binoculars or a telescope). So, you COULD be focusing on your movie with one eye AND be focusing on something else 10' away with the other at the same time.

[sk3pt1c]

i don't see the point in wearing this piece of ***** on your head having it connected to an ipod nano for example.no use whatsoever!!!are you that bored you can't tilt your head down to look at your ipod screen????
so lame! the only cool thing with ipod is that jacket/coat that has an ipod in an inside pocket and a small screen with controls on the sleeve that you can use to see what's playing(if you're deaf and you can't hear it-in which case you shouldn't have bought an ipod) and go through the songs, which is something really cool to have when you're snowboarding or something
but this is total utter crap!!!
it's not like you're flying a jet and you need split second information given to you by this thing, it's a bleeping mp3 player for intercourse's sake!!!

[iSaint]

Only 1 eye? That's lame...

Hey, perfect for me! I'm partially blind in one eye anyway!!

[thogs_cave]

I'd prefer corneal implants. That thing looks uber geeky.

I'm actually interested in it for another reason. An eye disease has left me with ring scotomas in both retinas. I have central and peripherial vision, but nothing between. I'm wondering if this would allow me to watch movies again. (I can't look at big screens because I miss too much information. I may be the only person in America who has been buying *smaller* TV's....)

I contacted the company to see if I could try one out.

[quigleybc]

This is the greatest thing I've heard in a long time


Amazing,

if you think this is a dumb idea, then you're nuts..

[jayscheuerle]

This is the greatest thing I've heard in a long time


I imagine you don't get out much then! :p

[bmoorhouse]

Have you looked at the photo of this guy? You would not be looking at TWO 1" screens... you'll be looking at ONE 1" screen. That does create an issue of focusing, when you understand it properly. :rolleyes:

Do me a favor, flip open your cell phone... hold the LCD about an inch from your eye and open both eyes... can you focus on the screen?



By that same notion, it'd be the same as a 1050" screen that's 200 feet away. Who cares? The source resolution is still 320x240. It's nothing like squashing peoples heads between your fingers... they're using a multiplier to make it seem less crappy. Lying with ratios.

In fact, this example has one other subtle inconsitency. A 105" screen that's 20ft away can be seen with both eyes. This thing sucks. Wastland this trash, please.

Actually, there are helicopter pilots that use NVG monoculars, And, don't forget this isn't a new design. It is a military device that has been being used successfully in the field, the only difference is now they are hooking it up to an iPod.

You have also obviously never used Virtual Reality headsets. I have and guess what, they have two low res screens an inch away from your eye. The result is not only that of a 105" screen but a panaromic view. Again, the technology works.

As for the cell phone example of yours . . . it's a cell phone. It's not designed to be viewed an inch from your eye. Do you think maybe these things are designed a little differently?

Finally, before you start mocking others, you should find out who they are. I already use similar technology in my work and can tell you it works. Sounds to me like you are the one who doesn't understand it properly :rolleyes:

[mlochm]

This IS the future... and I'd rather see apple bringing it to the forefront than anyone, but all in good time.... Imagine: a stylish set of sunglasses, that connected to your ipod/phone via bluetooth, which allowed you to get full instant access to the internet anywhere- with the same visual quality as your computer at home- HOLY CRAP- this is the future and it is knocking on the front door... Our familiar little scroll wheel will become a famlilar little trackpad, and laptops will be unnecessary for basic internet usage- All of a sudden you won't need a computer to recieve the full benefit of the internet- just these glasses, an ipod and a Cingular subscription... Whew- I can't wait!!!

[jayscheuerle]

This IS the future... and I'd rather see apple bringing it to the forefront than anyone, but all in good time.... Imagine: a stylish set of sunglasses, that connected to your ipod/phone via bluetooth, which allowed you to get full instant access to the internet anywhere- with the same visual quality as your computer at home- HOLY CRAP- this is the future and it is knocking on the front door... Our familiar little scroll wheel will become a famlilar little trackpad, and laptops will be unnecessary for basic internet usage- All of a sudden you won't need a computer to recieve the full benefit of the internet- just these glasses, an ipod and a Cingular subscription... Whew- I can't wait!!!

Ugh.. What an AWFUL scenario.. Better yet, let's surf the web while driving!! Filling one's head with external content 24/7 leaves precious little time for self-reflection, original thought, or social interaction. You're enthusing for a scenario which would be in the bleakest of Gibson's worlds. Be careful of what you wish for....

[mlochm]

Ugh.. What an AWFUL scenario.. Better yet, let's surf the web while driving!! Filling one's head with external content 24/7 leaves precious little time for self-reflection, original thought, or social interaction. You're enthusing for a scenario which would be in the bleakest of Gibson's worlds. Be careful of what you wish for....

Hey deep down if it were up to me- We'd all be self reflective genius' and computers would be unnecessary, but as it stands, most people are stupid, and couldn't give a **** about their part in a universal singularity. That being said, It would be helpful for the advancement of our society, to empower the idiots to protect themselves from the other idiots- and as much as you may or may not want to validate your college degree, in the future, it will be next to worthless... I say I am excited about it, because I personally could benefit from instant access to unlimited, fully open sourced knowledge. at the tip of my finger. Responsiblity always rests on the shoulder of the end user, and if you think think it is worth stifling the advancement of the human race because you might be TEMPTED to surf the net while driving, than I say you are the greater threat. In self reflection, you almost always reach a certain point- We are all human. If you dig deeper you can go so far as to say we are all one. If we weren't so fooled by our own perception of individuality, perhaps we could live in a better world, unfortunately this is not the case. I say lets plug up- We will be closer to the TRUTH than we are now. (granted it would be a poor digital facsimle of the truth, but it is still closer the purgatory we are now suffering...)

[jayscheuerle]

Hey deep down if it were up to me- We'd all be self reflective genius' and computers would be unnecessary, but as it stands, most people are stupid, and couldn't give a **** about their part in a universal singularity. That being said, It would be helpful for the advancement of our society, to empower the idiots to protect themselves from the other idiots- and as much as you may or may not want to validate your college degree, in the future, it will be next to worthless... I say I am excited about it, because I personally could benefit from instant access to unlimited, fully open sourced knowledge. at the tip of my finger. Responsiblity always rests on the shoulder of the end user, and if you think think it is worth stifling the advancement of the human race because you might be TEMPTED to surf the net while driving, than I say you are the greater threat. In self reflection, you almost always reach a certain point- We are all human. If you dig deeper you can go so far as to say we are all one. If we weren't so fooled by our own perception of individuality, perhaps we could live in a better world, unfortunately this is not the case. I say lets plug up- We will be closer to the TRUTH than we are now. (granted it would be a poor digital facsimle of the truth, but it is still closer the purgatory we are now suffering...)

William, is that you? :rolleyes: