Discussion in 'iPad' started by sootie, Apr 1, 2011.


Do you think this rumor is in reason?

  1. Plausible, within reason

    13 vote(s)
  2. Far Out Impossible

    39 vote(s)
  1. sootie macrumors member

    Jun 17, 2009
    I was just thinking. Along with the recent release of the Nintendo 3DS, no glasses technology in 3D devices has begun to emerge within the mobile market. LG and HTC have both announced 3D capable mobile devices. Just as the market opened up to dual core processors a trend emerges among tablets including the Hewlett-Packard has announced a WebOS tablet based on a dual-core Qualcomm Snapdragon processor. LG, Motorola and Samsung have announced Android tablets based on Nvidia's Tegra 2. And Research in Motion is ramping up a beta program for its Playbook tablet using a dual-core ARM Cortex A9 Omap 4430 processor from Texas Instruments.
    "This is the year for dual-core tablets, there's no doubt about that," as quoted fromhere

    With Apples current success, other companies are trying to do whatever they can to stop and apple is trying to level them out as well.


    back to what i was thinking. with rumors (pretty sure theyre not rumors, multiple sources have stated it ) of apple not announcing any new hardware at WWDC this year. So that could possibly mean that they will release an 3D iPhone in september or Apple could be shifting its focus to tablet computer and would wait and not release anything until first quarter 2012 and it would be an iPad3D followed by an iPhone3d.

    this is macrumors:apple:. what do you guys think of this one?:rolleyes:
  2. blevins321 macrumors 68030

    Dec 24, 2010
    Winnipeg, MB
    No clue as far as if they will. If they do, I won't be buying one. Ever.
  3. jwesty5 macrumors member

    Jul 30, 2010
    Not sure I'll ever feel the need to browse the macrumors forums in 3D. Ever!
  4. edk99 macrumors 6502a

    May 27, 2009
  5. Nishi100 macrumors 6502a

    Mar 27, 2010
    Exactly. It won't be in a million years because it'll be 4D by then.

    It's too expensive to do it no-glasses on the massive 9.7 inch screen; but, on the iPod Touch...
  6. Chupa Chupa macrumors G5

    Chupa Chupa

    Jul 16, 2002
    The day the iPad gets Nintendo 3DS style 3D is the day it officially jumps the shark. There are so many more useful, desirable things to add to the iPad before 3D is considered. 3DS is a result of Nintendo being desperate b/c the Touch killed the DS platform. Even my 5 y.o. nephew has a Touch instead of a DS. Parents do not like spending $20-35 for a single game. Nintendo's cash cow is dead.
  7. Pozz macrumors newbie

    Mar 25, 2011
  8. srobert, Apr 1, 2011
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2011

    srobert macrumors 68020


    Jan 7, 2002
    I'm not interested in "3D" (quotation marks intentional) until the technology is advanced enough to actually take parallax into account and allow me to focus my eyes at different depths in the image. What I've seen so far at the theatre just feels like a cheap trick to me.

    That's just my opinion on 3D for TV and movies. Even if the technology gets better, they would still have to convince me that a 3D interface for an electronic device is a real improvement and not just bells and whistles.

    Edit: If I remember correctly, Apple filed a few patents related to 3D displays over the years. So who knows.

    Edit 2: Anybody else noticed that when companies advertise 3D content or devices, they often show the image popping outside the edges of the screen's frame. To my admittedly limited knowledge, nothing on the market can do that. That technology falls into the realm of holography. I find this sort of misleading for the consumer. Then again, I'm not sure how else they could advertise 3D on a 2D screen. </rant>
  9. CAWjr macrumors 6502


    Jan 19, 2010
    Atlanta, GA
    no no no no No No No No NO NO NO NO!!!

    I hate this whole 3D fad & how everything is 3D these days. Let it die. And yes, I am speaking selfishly because I cannot see 3D due to an eye issue. The problem for me is that if so much technology becomes 3D, I am backed into a corner & most new technology is not usable for me.
  10. blevins321 macrumors 68030

    Dec 24, 2010
    Winnipeg, MB
    +1 - No matter how much I try, I cannot get the big aviator-3D specs to fit over my already-Coke-bottled lenses.
  11. RadicalxEdward macrumors 6502


    Mar 8, 2011
    Apple is all about ease of use. The only way theyd do 3D is no glasses, which right now looks crappy, cuts your resolution in half, and you have to have a switch to set how far away your eyes are from the screen. Hardly easy to use.

    3D is far far far from mainstream when it comes to actual use. Sure practically every new tv has it these days, but how many customers are actually using it. How much real content is there, and how much does it even add to the experience.

    Apple doesn't get into new markets. They go into well established markets in a new way and dominate. iPods weren't the first hard drive mp3 players, iPhones weren't the first touch screen smart phones, and the iPad wasn't the first tablet pc. 3d hasn't proven itself to be something people want and use on a regular basis and definitely not on a mobile device.
  12. dmaul1114 macrumors 6502

    Mar 12, 2011
    I can't see them doing it. Just seems like 3D wouldn't work well with a touch screen (yes, I know the 3DS has a touch screen--but do the 3D games use it).

    What good is the depth perception when you can only touch one area (the glass)?

    Anyway, I don't much care for 3D personally, so I'd have no interest in it in any case.
  13. KittyKatta macrumors 6502a


    Feb 24, 2011
    Apples already patented a 3D camera so I would guess this is definitely in their future. So once Apple does it then I'm sure we'll see people jump on the bandwagon and love it.

    On a side note, I really dont understand the backlash against 3D. I understand it's a gimmick but it's one that usually has an On/Off option (or a non-3D Theater for movies) so why do people get so upset over the existence of 3D in new technology? Im on Sprint and if they dont get the iPhone 5 then I'll gladly buy the EVO 3D because, despite the 3D, it's an incredibly well spec'd phone.
  14. srobert macrumors 68020


    Jan 7, 2002
    As the old adage says…


    Attached Files:

  15. gescom macrumors regular


    Dec 31, 2007
    Westerville, OH.
    Yikes, that would be a real turn off if something like that came about. 3D has yet to appeal to me at all. I saw Avatar and sure it was neat but it still gave me a headache.
  16. dmaul1114 macrumors 6502

    Mar 12, 2011

    I don't get upset over it. I just choose to avoid it. I have no interest in buying 3D TV, and generally go see the 2D versions of things in theaters (or just wait to Netflix if it's only playing in 3D locally--which is rare since I'm in a major city).

    Unless it becomes unavoidable--movies etc. only in 3D--it's nothing to get upset over. And I don't see that ever happening.

    I will say, I have some friends who live in more rural areas and they have more legitimate gripes as they only have one theater with 6-8 screens within an hour or so of where they live and it only carries 3D versions. So the couple of them that dislike (get headaches etc.) are screwed out of being able to see some movies on the big screen since they can't do 3D and aren't will to drive over a 2 hour round trip to find another theater.

    So I guess that's a worthy reason of being upset!
  17. DeaconGraves macrumors 65816


    Apr 25, 2007
    Dallas, TX
    I understand the 3DS. It's primary (and almost only) use is as a gaming device. So 3D adds an additional benefit (or depending on your feelings, gimmick) to every game or app you would use with it.

    But I really don't understand the point of 3D phones/tablets. While there's clearly a benefit for games still, I don't see what purpose 3D would have in my mail app, or iCal, or Google Maps, or Pages or (and on and on and on). Sure there might be a "wow" factor for the first week or so, but it wouldn't be something I would want to play with on an everyday basis.

    And if I'm not going to use it almost everytime I use the iPhone or iPad, then I don't want to have to shoulder the price hike that would come with it.
  18. ClutchThese macrumors 65816


    Jun 25, 2010
    Alexandria, VA
    Bro, you hit that nail dead on! I couldn't agree more. That was their desperate attempt. While i do think this is a very plausable idea, i don't think it will ever amount to much more than an idea.
  19. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6


    Aug 17, 2007
    Neither do I.
  20. BergerFan macrumors 68020


    Mar 6, 2008
    Mos Eisley
    It'll never happen, because glasses-free 3D is gimmickry at it's finest and there's no ubiquitous take up. Also, it would have to work flawlessly and instantly, for it to have any prayer of being adopted by El Jobso.
  21. BergerFan macrumors 68020


    Mar 6, 2008
    Mos Eisley
    Agreed. Why do companies think, that what mobile devices need is useless smoke and mirrors(3D, overly-fancy transitions & UI etc) when no-one bothers with that on the desktop, where power and resources aren't a bottleneck?
  22. spiderman0616 macrumors 68040


    Aug 1, 2010
    Actually, there are many like you out there in the world that simply cannot see simulated 3D (both my dad and my wife for example), people that cannot see it are one of the big reasons it will never be the ONLY format, that is unless they come up with a method that you CAN see.

    I don't have any trouble seeing the 3D effects, but I don't care for it when gaming or watching TV at home. It starts making me a little car sick after about an hour, and the glasses royally piss me off.
  23. sootie thread starter macrumors member

    Jun 17, 2009
    people are always quick to yell out fad to something but 3D is a leap that has to be made. Maybe not this year or next year but eventually things will become 3D based. It just so happens that now the 3D technology is infantile and hardly usable but slowly but surely devices are allowing for 3D capable devices without glasses which is the first big step. I just have a feeling that one day Apple will announce a product in 3D but not just a 3D screen but the ability to make 3D content with the cameras. Then theyll make a 3 minute movie with Jony Ives and crew saying we didnt make it but we made it better and you'll love it. Of course there will be skeptics saying its useless and gimmicky, but those will probably be the same people who too talked down on the iphone upon its inception into the mobile phones market as well as the ipod touch nasayers and also the members of team ipad is a just an ipod touch XL:rolleyes:
  24. FranksWildYears macrumors regular

    Aug 1, 2010
    The 3DS works really well and due to the lack of physical buttons, will always be superior to any iPod or iPad for most gaming genres. It's a cool thing, but I concur that 3D phones/tablets will be pointless for the forseeable future. Having said that, if it arrives a few years down the line as a feature which, as on the 3DS, can be turned off easily, I wouldn't object - but it would still seem unlikely to serve any real purpose for most of the iPad's functions.
  25. jclardy macrumors 68040


    Oct 6, 2008
    The 3D effect on the 3DS only works if you are staring at the screen with your face directly parallel. If you are slightly offset the effect disappears.

    Seeing as one of iPad's big selling points is being able to share content with people around you really easily I don't see them putting a 3D screen in an iPad.

    That and the fact that it is fairly pointless. Yes, you can watch Avatar in 3D, but there hasn't been any other movie yet that doesn't use 3D in a gimmicky way.

    You could do 3D photos, but again, those are gimmicky. Want to print your 3D photo? Back to two dimensions. 3D right now is a new way to sell people all new stuff. Want to view your cameras 3D photos on your TV? Replace your old HDTV with a new 3D HDTV! And don't forget your 3D monitor, and 3D enabled laptop as well!

    3D will become useful when we can interact with our devices in 3 dimensions. A touchscreen only provides 2. You could sort of fake it using the accelerometer+gyroscope but I don't think it would be useful. Something along the lines of connect but hopefully more accurate and on a smaller scale.

Share This Page