Home > Podcast > AVRant #138: Mac Love

AVRant #138: Mac Love

July 23rd, 2009

In case Clint didn’t get a chance to write the show notes, I just barely got the podcast posted before I headed out to the hospital with the wife. Follow me on twitter (timely pic Jeremy) for up to the minute info. Thanks for listening and don’t forget to vote for us at Podcast Alley.

Clint introduces his new title: NCISCISSSCIS which stands for: Not a
Consumer Interested in Silly Computers Interfering in Steve’s Superficial Slaughter of Common Internet Stupidity. We talk about Watchmen (now on Blu-ray), graphic novels, 3D movies and IMAX, 240Hz video processing, truly ‘retro” remote controls, inventions for people who don’t need their money (but we repeat ourselves…), the new cable company remote DVRs, budget AV receivers and which are the best deals (and which are NOT), Mac love… and… AND…. wait for it…. the NEW Audioholics 3.0 website. We don’t want to link it up directly, but it’s http://beta.audioholics.com:90 for those interested in checking it out before anyone else!

Play

When you just can't get enough Tom.

Liked it? Take a second to support AV Rant on Patreon!

Categories: Podcast Tags:
  1. David
    July 23rd, 2009 at 21:18 | #1

    I’m only half way through the podcast and I’m already all worked up. Haptic feedback not important in a touch screen interface?! Are you guys crazy? This is an extremely important feature, that allows you know when you’ve actually pressed a key that you couldn’t normally feel on a flat LCD surface.

    I’m not saying I would ever, in my wildest lottery winning dreams, pay $1500 for a remote, especially when you can get a touch screen phone with haptic feedback for $200, but haptic feedback is nothing to sneer at!

    Keylogger viruses are a problem. There are organized crime syndicates that trade in credit card information stolen online. But the solution to this problem is good antivirus software and careful browsing, not a $100 gadget.

    Finally, this is the part that I stop to podcast and write my own rant, Clint said he believes in natural selection, but not evolution. I really don’t know if I can take him seriously anymore.

    Time to listen to the rest of the podcast and see if you guys can get me even more riled up.

  2. jfalk
    July 24th, 2009 at 13:21 | #2

    Saw “Up” in Digital 3D and I had a very different experience, except for the fact that the five year old I was with wore her glasses for about 20 minutes too. It seemed purely enhancing, not gimmicky, with the exception of one or two scenes. I think it’s like any other innovation… Directors have to get used to it and figure out what works and what doesn’t. We’re the guinea pigs until they figure it out.

  3. Justin
    July 24th, 2009 at 16:18 | #3

    I saw Up in Digital 3D on a 4K setup. I thought it was gimmicky as well–same for all the previews. I would’ve preferred it to just be in 4K (drool) and not the silly 3D. 3D has its place, just not in movies like Up.

  4. Rob
    July 24th, 2009 at 23:32 | #4

    When I saw ‘Up’ in Digital 3D, all it did was serve to distract me from the movie experience during some moments. It was mostly during motion when the image would get a bit blurry or break up just a little bit. There were a couple of cool 3D moments, but I would FAR prefer to just see it the normal way. Animation like ‘Up’ looks nearly 3D without any 3D projection or glasses and I hate it when the viewing experience is, itself, distracting in some way to the point that I am pulled out of the story for a moment while I notice the distraction.

    Instead of 3D (with or without glasses) I would MUCH prefer to have head tracking! Head tracking basically makes it look as though you are literally just looking out a window! The effect is awesome and it beats the pants off of any “glasses-needed” 3D that I have ever seen.

  5. Spencer
    July 27th, 2009 at 18:39 | #5

    I’m so over 3D. It’s a movie. Give it to me 2D. I hate being stuck with the premium it costs to see one ($60 for an evening out with the family to see a movie in 3D in the theater? Puke.)and wearing the stupid glasses over my glasses and dealing with the smudges and pain and general lack-of-mobility-or-you-get-major-blur phenomenon is about enough for me to vomit. And that’s how I feel about that.

  6. Jon
    July 27th, 2009 at 23:26 | #6

    Rob,

    Have you seen the Wii video for head tracking on youtube? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw

    Congrats to Tom. Even if the “official” name isn’t Amp Andry, he’ll always be Amp to us!

  7. Rob
    July 28th, 2009 at 10:52 | #7

    Jon, heck yeah I’ve seen that video! And I LOVE what I see!

    Mr. Johnny Chung Lee was apparently a member of the team working on Microsoft’s Project Natal. And the Natal camera includes an IR camera – rather similar to the IR camera found in the Wii Remote. I dare say, it is not a huge leap to think that head tracking might be entirely possible with Natal!

    The problem, of course, is that the head tracking 3D effect only works for one person. Thus, it won’t work for a movie theatre and it wouldn’t work for local multi-player games where all players are looking at the same screen.

    But for something like Xbox Live, where each player is looking at their own, individual screen, there is every possibility of bringing head tracking!

  8. mperfct
    July 29th, 2009 at 17:02 | #8

    “I just barely got the podcast posted before I headed out to the hospital with the wife”

    I read that as “my wife was yelling at me to finish posting the podcast so I could drive her to the hospital. Good thing it uploaded on the first try!”

    Seriously though, congrats!

Comments are closed.