- Easy Access to US, UK Streaming Services From Anywhere - August 18, 2012
- 5 Fresh Android Games Released in 2012 - July 5, 2012
- Google Chrome Explodes On To iOS, Puts Desktop Experience In Your Pocket - June 30, 2012
I may be one of the few left on the planet that is underwhelmed (and often annoyed) by the 3D-everything craze. I understand that it is the current reality of the video and gaming world, and I admit that 3D-TV tech is pretty cool, but I really don’t need all of my media to pop out of the screen at me. Plus, it hurts my sensitive, near-35 year old eyes — and I don’t like to wear the glasses. That said, it appears that Sharp is attempting to address at least the latter part of my whining with the advent of their new 3D cell phones.
You heard me right, 3D cell phones. The Galapagos 003SH and 005SH are the latest iteration of the Android handset, and sport the nifty, no glasses, 3D-screen tech that is reported to be used in the upcoming Nintendo 3DS.
The tech itself is both innovative and awesome, there is no question of that. It uses a parallax barrier system that specifies where it directs light (to the left or right eye) via a series of vertical slits. This creates a sense of depth and allows for a 3D environment on an otherwise normal LCD screen — again, without special glasses. By all reports, the effect is stunning, and Engadget reports that there are already some mobile games publishers on board (Capcom will be bringing Mega Man, Resident Evil, and Ghosts ‘n Goblins to the new devices).
Like I said, this is some pretty cool tech — but is it necessary? PDA screens are already hard on the eyes. Do we really need to add another layer that will have people staring even harder at their screens? Is it even necessary to have 3D gaming on a cell phone — or anywhere? I mean, it’s not like its an interactive hologram or anything like that — though that is getting closer, too.
What do you think about the latest innovation in mobile and 3D technology? For? Against? Happily indifferent? Tell us why in the comments?
Evan Kline says:
I hear you. I’m not even sold on 3D in televisions, let alone on handsets. I wish I could remember where I heard it, but I heard some home theater guy say that extreme high definition TV is actually more like the human eye really sees, than is 3D. But I guess they need a new gimmick to push.
November 5, 2010 — 12:36 pm
Bobby Travis says:
Yeah, I say again that the tech is cool — but that doesn’t make it necessary.
November 5, 2010 — 12:45 pm
Kosmo @ The Soap Boxers says:
Dude, I don’t even have HDTV, much less 3D. 3D for my cell phone? I’m guessing that would cut into battery life, so that’s a no.
Also, with so many people using their phones while driving, I’m not sure how good of an idea 3D phones are.
I wonder how long we keep calling these devices cell phones. For many people, the ability to actually make a call seems secondary to other functions.
November 5, 2010 — 2:13 pm
Bobby Travis says:
I can no longer live without my HDTV — but it’s really more about the size of it (including the thinness) than the HD content. I like HD, but can live without it, overall. I’m definitely not a videophile.
I can’t imagine that 3D gaming while driving would be more dangerous than testing while driving, but I suppose that the extra toy-factor could cause the morons of the world to give into temptation…
November 5, 2010 — 2:47 pm
Anthony Russo says:
I actually want to get an HDTV when I get my next TV (which I am very due for). I like the idea of a 3D TV but just now there just is not enough need for it yet. Another couple of years and it will be a good investment.
As for on my phone…Meh. Might be cool to have, but not willing to pay a premium for it yet. Kind of like the TVs. Not enough content to make sue of it for another year or so.
Anthony
November 5, 2010 — 8:44 pm
Bobby Travis says:
I hear you, Anthony. Now, if the 3D TV was a no-glasses experience, that might it more interesting to me. It would probably still screw with my eyes, though.
November 5, 2010 — 10:42 pm
Kosmo @ The Soap Boxers says:
I think I’m one of the few people that just aren’t impressed by HDTV. We were at someone’s house watching football on HDTV ove the weekend, and there honestly was not an appreciable difference between the HDTV and the 10 year old 27″ standard definition at home (because of this article, I was paying extra attention).
I’m not very graphically oriented, though, so my experience may not be typical. The abstract things (the actual plot of a movie, as opposed to what’s physically on the screen) tends to appeal to me more.
November 8, 2010 — 9:43 am
Evan Kline says:
That’s interesting, Kosmo. Just out of curiosity, what size was your friend’s HDTV? I really have a hard time watching standard def now on anything over 40″, although it really is a personal thing I guess. On something REALLY big, the difference is glaring.
November 8, 2010 — 5:22 pm
Bobby Travis says:
I can definitely see the difference, especially on a larger tv. The fact remains, though, that a good movie is still a good movie, even in SD, so I agree with you there. And some things, like talk shows, are scary in HD — Conan O’Brien used to look like a wee little leprechaun standing in my living room. It was eerie…
November 9, 2010 — 10:11 am
Kosmo @ The Soap Boxers says:
35ish inches? Not huge, but bigger than my TV.
I wonder if it’s related to my inability to mentally rotate images (http://www.thesoapboxers.com/a-mind-laid-bare/). That seems to mess with a few things, and maybe that is one.
I guess I could actually mention it to my eye doctor at some point. I’m not overly concerned.
On the topic of 3D … there was a story about designed 3D glasses in USA Today. The author told the readers that “real life will continue to be in 2D.” Oof. My vision might not be perfect, but I do perceive real objects in three dimensions :)
November 10, 2010 — 2:37 pm
Bobby Travis says:
Lol! Myself, I only perceive life in one dimension…
November 10, 2010 — 4:39 pm
Evan Kline says:
35 might be on the side of being too small to notice much of a difference, so don’t fault your eyes just yet. Yes, I know – hard to believe we’d see the day where 35 inches is considered small. My first HDTV was 40 inches, and that is small compared to what all my friends have.
November 11, 2010 — 1:17 pm
dave says:
Bobby, Ive read rumours that Nintendos 3D tech will eventually migrate to TVs. This is good! Apparently its really stunning to behold and works with out glasses.
November 6, 2010 — 3:19 pm
Bobby Travis says:
That would be interesting to see, Dave. Nintendo really got the whole motion sensitive gaming thing going — maybe they will skip 3D TV and go right to holographic gaming. Now that would be cool!
November 6, 2010 — 3:43 pm