Registered: May 2000
Location:
Posts: 321

http://www.freepetitions.com/cgi-bin/fpt/view.cgi?id=39
^ Petition-- sign and send to all relevant companies that you think could do it!

__________________
My processing power is contributed to
<a href="http://members.ud.com/services/teams/team.htm?id=E3894ECF-2FDA-4B0E-AD9E-45FEFF2D5AB6"><IMG SRC="http://members.ud.com/img/ud_logo_hdr_fff.gif"><a>
JOIN TODAY!

Registered: Dec 2000
Location:
Posts: 152

quote:

---

Originally posted by aquaboy
let's get back on topic guys. i have a portable tv and i just can't see it working. as it is, i have an antenna that i must reposition everytime i move. i can't see this as very functional in a visor. if it worked on a streaming principal, maybe. but with an antenna, no.

---

Registered: Jun 2000
Location:
Posts: 594

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff318
http://www.freepetitions.com/cgi-bin/fpt/view.cgi?id=39
^ Petition-- sign and send to all relevant companies that you think could do it!

---

__________________
"Great Spirits Have Always Encountered Violent Opposition From Mediocre Minds." -- Albert Einstein

Registered: Dec 1999
Location: "Children are a gift from God, they are a reward"
Posts: 1049

Back to the subject (I spent time on a really long response to your reply, dvICEt, but my computers' hard drive quit as I was finishing it, and I aint getting into whether TV is good or bad)
I see how one could be built, but what would be the actual use beyond 'cool'? Watching a TV program would not be pleasant. I don't think the Visor is capable of generating a TV quality moving picture. Also the fact remains that you can't control the how, what, and when of the content. Most areas also have very limited channels available.
As a listening device wouldn't a radio band module that got VHF/UHF, weather and shortwave be a better (and cheaper)alternative?
If you're always somewhere at a certain time when a favorite show is on and where you can get a signal, but don't have access to a TV, I can see the use. But if you are already at home, or on a computer you have better alternatives (an actual TV, or TV video card).
If you're roaming you ain't going to get a good signal as long as you're moving (ever try to use a TV in a limo or a RV?) so you'll have to plant yourself and do the twist and turn to get a decent signal.
(one note on 'educational' TV, both the channels you listen to dvICEt are cable aren't they? Unless someone is in a major (NYC, LA, etc.) area, the quality of the programming is not up to that level- around here it's more along the lines of 'talk' shows (Jerry Springer), local news, and infomercials. I'm willing to bet that I can glean more from a good book, or web research than I could from that level of UHF/VHF programming)

__________________
"I am a debtor both to Greeks and to Barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish."

Registered: May 2001
Location:
Posts: 16

Video on the Visor

A "TV-quality" moving picture. Hm. *grin* TV is one of the lowest quality moving pictures one can view (interlaced, low res, poor color, etc.) But I digress. Watching TV in a 160x160 window with (in my case) 2-bit grayscale does not sound pleasant.

But, I know there are legitimate applications for full-screen video on the Visor. (I just can't think of any.) Thus, I'm adapting some serious image compression algorithms I designed this summer for use in a VisorVideo format. Basically, it'll be optimized specifically for displaying video in a 160x160 space at 2-bit grayscale. (Is the VDlx actually capable of showing four shades of gray? Or is it just three, with a duplicate mapping to a single gray?)
This is the higher-priority of my projects, which currently include (if anyone is wondering):
1. This.
2. Adapting the Firecracker wireless X-10 transmitter for the Visor.
3. Developing some sort of Flash-based loader.
4. Saving the world.
5. Work.

Registered: Dec 2000
Location:
Posts: 152

Re: Video on the Visor

quote:

---

Originally posted by cbiffle
A "TV-quality" moving picture. Hm. *grin* TV is one of the lowest quality moving pictures one can view (interlaced, low res, poor color, etc.) But I digress. Watching TV in a 160x160 window with (in my case) 2-bit grayscale does not sound pleasant.

---

Registered: May 2000
Location:
Posts: 321

quote:

---

Originally posted by bkbk

Hey, I love that idea!
(As I signed, "Sorry to always have to keep the anonymity quotient up...." -- and sorry for the fake e-mail, etc. But at least I've cast my vote, right?)

I think there are a lot of good ideas on both sides of the issue in this thread -- I'm surprised it turned out so robust!
One thing I wanted to touch on about the "valuelessness" of TV (and much of radio, I guess -- and, er, I suppose ALL the media today!), just "listening to TV" as if it were radio anyway, poor quality of reception, etc...
I can see where I'd find value in just 1 sec. of TV -- if I could just screen-shot something. Y'know, like those important infomercial names & addresses, etc.
Seriously, from time to time I do see something on the tube that's "important enough to write down, but not enough for me to make the effort to get off my butt & find a pen, etc." -- so I'll hit the VCR rec. button. But that's if I'm lucky enough to have a tape in, etc. And LATER, it will only help if I can find the data on the tape, freeze the frame, and I still have to write it down.
I know it borders on HEINOUS at such an early stage to compare any "SW the TV SB may come w/" -- but look at the EM2; to me, much of the value of it is in the SW it comes with -- thumbnails, timer, etc.
I HOPE EM3 GIVES US BACK THE "ZOOM IN" feature that EM1 had (anyone know why they dumped it?). And I could see this extended functionality for a TV SB as well.
In fact, THE VISOR MAY CAPTURE MORE TV VIEWERS if the SW is great enough!!! (Er, well, let's not get carried away....)

Once more, I know it borders on HEINOUS at such an early stage, but I have an OLD (maybe 5 yrs!) Hauppauge TV card (MAYBE WE SHOULD APPROACH THEM ... uh, but I guess we'd have to show them a good financial basis for them to make the SB, eh?) that was about $79 or $99, or something. Mine didn't, but a sister card or 2 they made did like: freeze-frame / capture, monitoring 12 or 16 channels at once (er, which might get a bit tiny on a Visor, huh?), zooming, capture of closed-captioning text, etc.

Hey, it may be a tad pie-in-the-sky still (in even 2001? Weren't we supposed to have HAL 9000s by now?), but man, the more I reflect on a TV SB, the more I want one! It would be just ... so ... sweet ...

---

__________________
My processing power is contributed to
<a href="http://members.ud.com/services/teams/team.htm?id=E3894ECF-2FDA-4B0E-AD9E-45FEFF2D5AB6"><IMG SRC="http://members.ud.com/img/ud_logo_hdr_fff.gif"><a>
JOIN TODAY!

Registered: Jun 2000
Location:
Posts: 594

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff318

It doesn't publish your email on the site!

---

Jeepers, did you have to pull my whole quote just for that? I realized the e-mail and any / most other data would likely be unpublished, but I like to keep my paranoia at a comfortable level....

__________________
"Great Spirits Have Always Encountered Violent Opposition From Mediocre Minds." -- Albert Einstein

Registered: Jan 2001
Location: Midwest
Posts: 232

I went looking for a pocket color TV to use as a monitor for my video camera. Many have A/V inputs and can serve that duty well.

New color pocket TVs with a 2.5" or larger screen tend to cost >$200. Sometimes they are on sale.

At the Iowa City BEST BUY, I was looking at their assortment of pocket TVS when a salesman asked if he could help. I commented on how expensive they were, and he replied "Yes, and they don't get more than two channels in this area, either. You need to be hooked up to Cable or a satellite to get a decent array of channels."

I explained that I only wanted to use the pocket TV as a video monitor for my video camera, but they were too expensive. He perked up. "We get most of the ones we sell back within a few weeks when people realize they don't work well around here. Would you be interested in a reduced price on an out-of-package TV?" He showed me a case with at least 20 returned pocket TVs in it.

I settled on a Casio 2.5" active matrix LCD TV, normally $240, for $60. To prove to me that it would work as a video display, they opened a package of batteries and an A/V cable so I could hook it up to one of their display video cameras. Once I knew it would work and told them I'd take it, they threw in the batteries and cable for free.

My conclusion? Unless your area has a multitude of OTA broadcasters, you'll be disappointed with TV reception on your visor. I think simply providing video input so that a prism could be used as a color monitor for video cameras would be a more useful idea. Perhaps a module to receive the 2.4G A/V signal used in TV-Anywhere kits would be useful. Then you could watch any video signal (TV, DVD, VCR, Baby Monitor) your home emit on your Prism, anywhere within range.

Dave

__________________
There is nothing yet made by man that cannot be improved upon.

Registered: Jun 2000
Location:
Posts: 594

I definitely like that idea, too.
Good tale, Dave.

__________________
"Great Spirits Have Always Encountered Violent Opposition From Mediocre Minds." -- Albert Einstein

Registered: May 2001
Location:
Posts: 16

Side note: CASIO also makes a video-in-only LCD monitor, intended specifically for video-camera applications. They have it at the CASIO outlet here in town.

Though it sounds like it's too late. *grin*

Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Prison
Posts: 421

See my post

See my post 'more brilliant ideas' and you'll see why this would be an awesome module. You see, while it WOULD be grayscale, it would probably have a better picture than my PocketVision portable TV.


I think it should also tune in web-stations & radio.

__________________
<b><font size=1 color=teal>"Sorry about the whole thing about losing your life savings, but that Palmpilot is property of Enron, so please give it back"