What a stupid question. I mean, VR isn’t popular and isn’t selling well. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/28/metaverse-off-to-ominous-start-after-vr-headset-sales-shrank-in-2022.html

Plenty of other articles to suggest this. Even fever people care about 3D

What is your definition of shit?

You seem to only speak in generalities. How are you drawing your conclusions? What data? What metrics?

Do all product categories start off as a success, or does it take time to refine the hardware? When the first computer was released, how many were sold? What about the second year? 10th year? What about smart phones? What about TVs? How long did these products take? Are there more TVs sold or iphones per year? What about microwaves? Laptops? Milk? What is your definition of shit? Compared to what? And why?

Yeah but that wouldn’t be a flying car, that’d be a helicopter welded to an car. It probably wouldn’t even be able to fly

[deleted]

Is the iPhone the only successful product?

What is your metric of successful?

[deleted]

Why is the iPhone relevant here?

How many VR headsets have been sold?

What is the definition of niche in this context?

3d modeling, CAD, architecture, gaming, art, medicine, so on.

Just read the article or watch a video on it. Every comment hating on this thing has been from ignorance. Go watch dave2d video on it. Stop arguing out of ignorance and stubbornness.

It is equivalent of people hating on VR and bringing up old Nintendo vr headset. It just showcases lazy, ignorant, and closemindedness..

You aren't the people who build the future. You are the people who quietly adopt when you realize how wrong you were. But no one will call you out then.

No. It is not the same. This is eye tracked. Think hologram, as you can look around the image a bit. Much brighter. Higher resolution.

Old 3d glasses tech was/is terrible. Inconsistent effect. Ghosting. Dark. Low resolution. Breaks if you are at the wrong angle or rotation, etc...

No.

No. They developed glasses free eye tracked 3d. Meaning. It maintains the 3d effect as you move around the image. Like a hologram. It is limited to one person basically at a time though. Makes for an awesome monitor. But not tv.

The problem is cost. If it was just a value add to a monitor. I'd rather have it, than not. I'd be willing to pay up to $200 premium.

[deleted]

No. VR Headsets use it.

And actually, bad 3d died. The type that uses glasses. Glasses free, eye tracked 3d hasn't been tried yet. But, for TVs this wouldn't work because of the eye tracking. Only one person at a time.

Better.

No they didnt.

No they didnt.

No glasses required. And the cameras track your eyes to maintain a proper 3d effect. You can look at objects from the side.

3D is how you see the world. Adding it is useful for many applications where getting a sense of human depth is useful.

And admitting your lack of an open mind, isn't exactly something to be proud of.

No they didnt.

>... Fusion 360...Not always able to see if a hole actually got pushed into a part properly when looking straight onto it because all of the material is the same color...without having to rotate the part...

I've never used Fusion360. Although it sounds like they need to improve on their pre-render shading in their visualisation windows.

But I can imagine having the additional benefit of the option of tilting ourselves just a little bit to check if the through-hole really made it through or not in our models, is not a bad thing to have.

Also gives us the additional excuse of the momentary-tilting-seated farting position. Haha!

There's not much tech info I could find, only about the downlink not the uplink from the phone. How does a 5 watt maximum non-directed transmission get to a satellite reliably?

Well sort of. I use Fusion 360 for instance. Not always able to see if a hole actually got pushed into a part properly when looking straight onto it because all of the material is the same color. So being able to make sure I cut a hole deep enough would be nice without having to rotate the part. And it might also help to see if a cut I made was too deep and intersected with another void when I didn’t want tit to. Or text I tried to extrude up from a face was pushed in instead. Stuff like that.

You do all this by telling the software the measurements but sometimes there is no substitute for visualizing it.

But... Even for hobbyist 3D printers, wouldn't getting the measurements be more effective as a judgement of depth for parts that would be produced/prototyped?