Fri Oct 1 17:46:41 CEST 2004 aaron reichow areichow at d.umn.edu wrote:
Don't get me wrong- it looks like fun, but wouldn't a display with that low of res- 230 x 173- be a bit hard to use? And as some folks know, I'm a guy who uses all sorts of low res devices with Squeak, even down to 160x160... And I can't imagine that 230 x 173 would be much more than a pain in the butt.
But fun to have display glasses! :)
Yup, you're probably right, but the same company makes a "pro" model that's ONLY $899 for 800 x 600. Just more money.
And for the Croqueters in the bunch, or Croutons as I like to call them, they have 3D LCD shutter-type glasses and a head tracking device for ONLY $200 or so at http://www.edimensional.com. That seems pretty cheap to me. The glasses require a regular monitor, though, and won't work with an LCD display like a notebook's.
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
David Faught dave_faught@yahoo.com wrote:
And for the Croqueters in the bunch, or Croutons as I like to call them, they have 3D LCD shutter-type glasses and a head tracking device for ONLY $200 or so at http://www.edimensional.com. That seems pretty cheap to me. The glasses require a regular monitor, though, and won't work with an LCD display like a notebook's.
Not to mention that a 400MHz XScale simply won't produce crouton pleasing performance. My 600MHz desktop version does a crebitable 35mbc/s and 1.2msends/s which is fine - but a fast G5 or penti-thnigy watt-sucker will do 2-300Mbc/s etc. And have a floating point unit. And a graphics card with 3D assist hardware. You can't (yet) buy ARMs with that, thouhg I know people working on it.
tim -- Tim Rowledge, tim@sumeru.stanford.edu, http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim Useful random insult:- Both oars in the water, but on the same side of the boat.
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org