| steverhcp02 said: Actually i work pn plenty of new ideas. I do evidence based research to determine standards of practices for my university and propose it to boards, such as instilling saline in patients with tracheostomies. The benfits vs the negatives. I do this also at work in my pharmacy with Pyxis machine use and allocation of medications, supplies, loads and refills to get the most out of these machines for patient safety. The only difference is when i "work on new ideas" i have to present them as a means to step in a positive direction with proof and evidence as to why i feel they should be done to better promote the cause. Thus, i feel "scanning my face to go to my favorite channel" is probably the lamest most ill conceived and least beneficial thing ive ever heard. Everytime i turn my tv on i dont go to my favorite channel, how is putting my mugshot up, probably saying something to my TV any different, more benficial or more convenient than touching 3 numerical buttons? Why would i spend the cost of 20 remotes to do that when i can use what came with my TV for free? These are my points. Why would i use natal to read or use info on a tour im on, if im literate how is a pamphlet i can open to whichever section i want instantly less beneficial and convenient than operating a computer interface? Its just not convenient. Its cool, but WHY would it transition into a revolutionary change? These are my points, calling me negative, telling me i dont work on new ideas and to the other poster telling me im mudslinging for bringing up logical, fair questions yet receiving no answers other than "...well you dont own a 360 so shut it" or telling me to go to some 3rd world country if i want to make a difference all ignore the substance of my questioning and show a lack of debate skills and rationale for those questioning my posts. |
I understand where you're coming from. If you're dealing with medicine you're coming from a very conservative point of view. You deal with peoples lives and the first rule of medicine is first do no harm. I can understand someone from your perspective wanting to see pure and absolute proof that it benefits a majority of people who use it. The difference here is the consumer angle. Consumers don't just buy things because in absolute terms its better than what they have at present, theres a whole range of reasons hell even novelty is a big one.
Could you look at things from a new perspective? The world is changing and the way people interface with technology is changing. The flat screen LCD/Plasma TVs are large screen TVs which are quickly replacing the old CRT style televisions in peoples homes. In consumer terms its a revolution and within another 5 years you'd likely find that the vast majority of people have migrated away from CRT after over 60 years of use.
There are two key elements to what Natal would bring as a TV interface. The first is allowing the TV to act as more than a conduit for televised content. The remote is a good weapon but its usefulness is limited to essentially changing the channel. With an interface like Natal you can use the TV to get different sources of content through the internet or through data stored on a home server. You can use it for voice over I.P. , Video conferencing etc in a way that is simple and easy enough for everyone to use. Natal can act as a compliment to capabilities an HDTV already possesses.
The second is the remote itself. My Bravia remote has 53 buttons. The interface is bursting at the seams with buttons. There are also now more than 100 channels so the average person has to remember the channel numbers for up to a couple dozen stations they wish to view. Further to that people can now watch TV in spaces where having a remote isn't practical, such as the kitchen and all these remotes are simply clutter and an annoyance people put up with. Not only are people confused by all the different buttons but navigation is moving beyond what is practical with the remote control. In this respect Natal is the automatic transmission of the TV world. Purists may have disdain for it, but eventually all TVs will shed the remote control as the interface.
Tease.
