Nsquared "Seamless Computing demo" shows the awesome things you can do with MS Surface, a tablet, ki - Polidicks

Eugh, all Microsoft technology. More lock in!

[QUOTE=Mingebox;32031828]Another demo of it's capabilities: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUFkb0d1kbU[/media][/QUOTE] That's one fucking gigantic picture (uncrop haha)

Wow, stark industries is quickly becoming reality. Hopefully, in the near future: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbj3XSvDyw8[/media]

So do any of the effects from 1:04 to 1:30 have a purpose or is it just made up bs to look cool

Beep beep enhance WAVY THING

Bill........... Show me the floor plan.

This is incredibly stupid and the entire blueprints and home decorating crap is horribly specific and there might be 1 person who would ever want to use it, and honestly it just seems like some crap that someone thought would happen in the 80's

Next thing you know this is used to design homes and buildings.

Fuck 3d rendering. That star trek-like screen and integration between the devices is fucking brilliant.

What happens if you buy two surface units, put one upside down on top of the other, and tell each to scan

Smells like massive bullshit.

nullsquared is that you?

[QUOTE=Zeke129;32038065]What happens if you buy two surface units, put one upside down on top of the other, and tell each to scan[/QUOTE] A blackhole opens up and swallows everything within 20m of the Surfaces?

God damn Australian software companies making these bullshit claims.

Seems like a bunch of hacky bullshit glued together into one big useless mess

Guys, this is just a script of the things you can do with their technology. What you should care about are not the flashy effects and retarded crap, you should care about the seamless integration between different technologies using technologies like Silverlight and how can they produce more immersive, inteligent interfaces for users.

[QUOTE=Jelly;32038401]God damn Australian software companies making these bullshit claims.[/QUOTE] Name more than two.

[QUOTE=Disfunction;32026991]It's misinformed because UD isn't impossible, its been done many times before. If you want papers on how it works and some videos of other companies doing it look up "sparse voxel octrees" because it's the exact same thing. So thats true, thats fact, and can be demonstrated as such. On to this video. Theres no back side of the lamp that's ever seen, only the 1 angle. Even if it could grab depth information and uses data from both cameras, it wouldnt have enough information (or resolution) to build that model of the lamp. It's impossible. To build the data behind, the computer would need to make judgements about the missing data. And a database of objects wouldn't work either since there's just far too many objects in the world to even bother making models for all of them, and searching a database by data from an image is a difficult task. A little off topic but for anyone interested, some videos of other sparse virtual octrees, to show that 1) Its not impossible at all and its a well documented technique, and 2) the guy that presents the videos is a smug bastard, and this isn't some sort of secret company algorithm he invented in his laboratory or something: Made by a guy at ID to see if if it's feasable for IDs next engine or so: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpEpAFGplnI[/media] And one that NVidia put out using cuda: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpfaFrazOn4[/media][/QUOTE] did you even watch those videos? how are they even comparable to what euclidian put out, and look at the FPS on the nvidia one, you realize the UD tech was running on the cpu of a laptop right? get out. its like you didnt even watch the interview. and, is it me, but or is that bottom video raytracing?

[QUOTE=Mattk50;32056116]did you even watch those videos? how are they even comparable to what euclidian put out, and look at the FPS on the nvidia one, you realize the UD tech was running on the cpu of a laptop right? get out. its like you didnt even watch the interview. and, is it me, but or is that bottom video raytracing?[/QUOTE] UD is raytracing, brother. Well, a subset of raytracing, [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volume_ray_casting]raycasting[/url]. Raycasting through an octree-like data structure. Because thats way faster than raytracing polygons or fixed size voxels. In case you don't know, one of the advantages of an [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octree]octree[/url], other than speed, is that it can keep dividing itself up into smaller and smaller elements, so as to theoretically give you unlimited detail. Its more or less the exact same algorithm and data structure as used in those videos. Also I don't know what your point is about the framerate on the 2nd one is. Its running on the GPU, casting more rays, and actually performing full raytracing, ambient occlusion and lighting, as opposed to casting 1 ray per pixel, at low resolutions, and at a lower framerate, which is exactly what someone would expect from a CPU implementation of an [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embarrassingly_parallel]embarrassingly parallel[/url] technique like raytracing. As for actual evidence its a [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sparse_voxel_octree]sparse voxel octree[/url]? Well they haven't outright said it, but... "Their system has been described, by others in the same field, as more correctly using Octree rendering methods." - [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclideon[/url] "They made a voxel renderer, probably based on sparse voxel octrees." - [url]http://notch.tumblr.com/post/8386977075/its-a-scam[/url] (a lot of the post is BS, especially that maths about the space it'll take up but still) "This is, in fact, an old technique usually referred to as a sparse voxel octree" - [url]http://www.gamebanana.com/threads/178192?vl%5Bpage%5D=LAST&mid=PostsList[/url] So a lot of industry insiders believe its a sparse virtual octree (Carmack believes it is as well, but I really cant be bothered finding the source for that one), which is compelling enough evidence. And then the fact that it would pretty much only make sense to be a sparse voxel octree. Pretty much the only practical voxel based technique around that could offer the unlimited detail and the speed that they get.

The only thing in this video I thought was remotely practical was the bit at the beginning where he puts his phone down and all the contacts and stuff spill out of it. Everything else looked incredibly laborious and complicated to use. It's a shame this four year old video still applies: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZrr7AZ9nCY[/media]

[QUOTE=Disfunction;32057063]UD is raytracing, brother. Well, a subset of raytracing, [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volume_ray_casting]raycasting[/url]. Raycasting through an octree-like data structure. Because thats way faster than raytracing polygons or fixed size voxels. In case you don't know, one of the advantages of an [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octree]octree[/url], other than speed, is that it can keep dividing itself up into smaller and smaller elements, so as to theoretically give you unlimited detail. Its more or less the exact same algorithm and data structure as used in those videos. Also I don't know what your point is about the framerate on the 2nd one is. Its running on the GPU, casting more rays, and actually performing full raytracing, ambient occlusion and lighting, as opposed to casting 1 ray per pixel, at low resolutions, and at a lower framerate, which is exactly what someone would expect from a CPU implementation of an [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embarrassingly_parallel]embarrassingly parallel[/url] technique like raytracing. As for actual evidence its a [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sparse_voxel_octree]sparse voxel octree[/url]? Well they haven't outright said it, but... "Their system has been described, by others in the same field, as more correctly using Octree rendering methods." - [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclideon[/url] "They made a voxel renderer, probably based on sparse voxel octrees." - [url]http://notch.tumblr.com/post/8386977075/its-a-scam[/url] (a lot of the post is BS, especially that maths about the space it'll take up but still) "This is, in fact, an old technique usually referred to as a sparse voxel octree" - [url]http://www.gamebanana.com/threads/178192?vl%5Bpage%5D=LAST&mid=PostsList[/url] So a lot of industry insiders believe its a sparse virtual octree (Carmack believes it is as well, but I really cant be bothered finding the source for that one), which is compelling enough evidence. And then the fact that it would pretty much only make sense to be a sparse voxel octree. Pretty much the only practical voxel based technique around that could offer the unlimited detail and the speed that they get.[/QUOTE] To bounce off this, the guy behind Unlimited Detail has basically been hiding under a rock for much of his life on graphics technology. So for him to say that what he is using isn't SVOs and isn't Raycasting and for him to be wrong about those two things, isn't very far-fetched, given his ignorance of terminology.

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;32027916]Ever heard of hyperbole[/QUOTE] hyper bowl funk yeah [img]http://puu.sh/54Or[/img]