h a l f b a k e r yactual product may differ from illustration
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Devise a protocol that allows you to put
an
image on a screen wirelessly (say over
bluetooth or WiFi).
Use this protocol to make you
television/monitor/laptop/digital picture
frame into a wireless canvas for everyone
watching it. Play videos/music from your
laptop/mobile phone/camera.
Show off
your holiday snaps or browse the web on
the biggest screen you have without
messing about with any cabling.
Add security to stop your next door
neighbour from adding graffiti to your
screen.
Philips DesXcape150DM Portable WiFi Display
http://www.mobilema...tent/100/341/C1653/
Pretty much as described. [phoenix, Jan 07 2008]
Eye-Fi
http://www.eye.fi/
It's a memory card, with wireless functionality. This means you can send your photos to your computer straight from your camera. If your TV was connected to a media PC then this would fit the bill. [Jinbish, Jan 10 2008]
wrt vga
http://duff.dk/wrt5...plete_VGA_Setup.jpg
linksys WRT54G modded to have VGA output [erlehmann, Jan 10 2008]
[link]
|
| |
50 years ago, when I was a young kid, _all_ images and sounds came to the TV wirelessly. But our 'phones all connected to the wall by wire! + |
|
| |
What [csea] said (apart from the 50 years bit). |
|
| |
You could make something similar to an iTrip but operating on TV frequencies. |
|
| |
Im not even going to google this, but would suggest [st3f] does |
|
| |
there has to be an exsisting protocol |
|
| |
Dunno about a specific existing protocol, but this concept comes up often in wireless personal area networking research scenarios: Dave receives a video stream to his mobile device; he would like to watch it on a larger screen; some service discovery mechanism indicates an available TV in the vicinity; Dave streams his video to the TV. Bob is Dave's uncle. |
|
| |
That's not to say it's baked though. |
|
| |
Interesting. What software would I need to
install on my laptop to play a video on
your TV? (welcome back by the way) |
|
| |
[evilpenguin - have googled but am
finding it difficult (so far impossible) to
find search terms that don't just bring up
wireless PVRs] |
|
| |
I think we're talking at cross purposes. I
want to be able to, while sitting on the
sofa, make my laptop (or my mobile
phone, or your mobile phone) play on my
TV. |
|
| |
I don't want you to be able to make my mobile phone play on your TV. |
|
| |
Back to the issue at hand; I understand it is a bandwidth problem as good quality video which won't look crummy on a large TV is a bit too much for blewtooth. |
|
| |
I've posted a link, but want to be quick to point out I'm not convinced there's enough bandwidth with WiFi (and certainly not Bluetooth) to accomplish everything at HDTV resolutions. |
|
| |
I'm off to visit the Consumer Electronics Show in LV tomorrow, and have some idea that this will be a hot topic. |
|
| |
I live in The Meadow and I wish I could go to CES (and SEMA). |
|
| |
Hold the horses people. [st3f], if all that you're wanting is to use a TV as PC monitor then we need a set-top box, such as the one [UB] describes that has a Wifi/BT interface and we can use some remote desktop-type software like VNC. Video could be imperfect at PAL/NTSC standard and HDTV standards are unlikely to work with such a setup. The same setup could be used with a higher bandwidth technology such as UWB. So I am inclined to say that the matter at hand is not bandwidth per se, we have decent video codecs and transmission protocols and even wireless technologies. |
|
| |
Sorry, [vince], if you thought I was meandering away from the point. I've been involved in telecomms projects that have this kind of thing as an example of ubiquitous services. The thing is, you can acheive these things in other ways: You don't need to transmit anything more than control messages over wireless , let alone a HDTV signal, to a TV. You only need to be able to re-route the stream from your mobile/other device to the TV. The original terminal doesn't have to be an intermediate node. Furthermore, that video stream with crappy resolution you were getting on your phone may have a bigger brother elsewhere in the network that would suit streaming to you TV. Matching services to devices and...
<someone please shoot me before I go off on one...> |
|
| |
Over the Christmas break, someone here got the collection of Linux boxes he has at home to stream content wirelessly to his TV via his new PS3. This makes me think the PS3 should be marketed not just as a Blu-Ray player, but also as a wireless content aggregator for your TV. |
|
| |
That sounds *very* interesting...<rubs hands in evil genius fashion> |
|
| |
I have a ARCHOS 605 Wifi if that closely counts. |
|
| |
This was discussed this morning on NPR in reference to some products being presented at the upcoming Technology show in Nevada. The timing on this idea would suggest that this is a WICTHISITM. and should be deleted. |
|
| |
Transfer protocols are in their infancy, and still adequate for this. Privacy is in its old age. Bluetooth pairing, Wi-fi handshaking, all for naught! Eli Binham and his team have proven the weaknesses. Not implementable by the majority, but getting that way. |
|
| |
The problem here lies not with the production and implementation of a transmission protocol. It is with ownership of content. Screen to user interface is the rubicon. Once you cross it, that is that. Like the endless ideas here about protectile ownership. Mark the person that fired the shot, mark the shot that came from the gun, mark the gun. The technology for firing a bullet was released on humanity a few centuries ago. Any technological tracing will be fruitless as the antagonist will revert to previous technology. "There is no turning back" ~ Pink Floyd (Learning to Fly)
|
|
| |
Opening a sytem (proprietary) to widely manufactured standards only happens when a technology is old. You could build your own one if you need to, but proposing it as a standard will meet with some resistance. |
|
| |
//This was discussed this morning on NPR// |
|
| |
Is that a European radio station? |
|
| |
NPR=National Public Radio (US), member- and sponsor-supported radio network focusing on news an background reporting rather than, say, uptempo pop tunes interrupted by ads. Different NPR stations have different specific programming mixes - it's a good idea to name the actual show. |
|
| |
Or maybe skinflaps really meant to point out that st3f, being British, is unlikely to have listened to NPR, even though a lot of it is available as a podcast, and of course other places may have reported on the same show. |
|
| |
When I refer to something I've heard in the real world, I often try to just point it out as a conincidence and leave the confirmation of the source, if appropriate, to the author of the idea if they recognize an inspiration later. People tend to overestimate the significance of coincidences; I may misunderstand the post or the real-world thing; and I'd hate to falsely accuse someone based on incomplete information. |
|
| |
Yes, I think that you have summed that up jutta. |
|
| |
hacked wrt + vga + vnc = baked |
|
| |
Thanks for the defence, Jutta. This idea
is entirely homebrewed and, talking to
friends, seems to be one that many
people are simultaneously and
independently coming up with.
Hopefully that means this will be
emerging as a product sometime soon. |
|
| |
As Jinbish points out a computer with a
TV card and a copy of VNC goes most
of the way there. Maybe that's what
UnaBubba was talking about, too. |
|
| |
Hopefully there will be some
development in this area and someone
will productise it so that (physically)
pointing your mobile device at a display
unit and seeing the image you want
displayed will become the normal and
expected response of the interaction of
a mobile device and a display unit. |
|
| |
//It's a bit like trying to justify that a few people who know what they are doing is worth 100 monkeys once the process enginering has taken root.//
Replace 100 monkeys with x monkeys, and then, yes, that is the truth of it. Why else would Monsanto and the like produce high yeild, non-germinating crops, withhold patent rights, litigate on certain DNA sequences found on neighbouring farms, etc? Why do Pfiser spend more on litigation of patent infringements, than R&D? The *cost* was in the intellectual property phase, production and processing can be left to a bunch of monkeys with a recipe. |
|
| |
I actually was not implying the poster heard about it on NPR. I was referring to the technology show that is in the news world wide and has been discussed for several days before the post appeared. Note also that I did not MFD the idea, only suggested that the timing was incredibly coincidental and that perhaps, if it was a WICTTISITM, that the poster might remove it, if it was not so then they are now aware of it. |
|
| |