I could take your point or I could believe that this chap knows his onions.

PhD at Edinburgh University, 1992:
Stable Segmentation of 2D Curves

Andrew Fitzgibbon is a senior researcher at Microsoft Research, Cambridge, UK. His research interests are in the intersection of computer vision and computer graphics, with excursions into neuroscience. Recent papers have been on the recovery of 3D geometry from 2D images, general-purpose camera calibration, human 3D perception, and the application of natural image statistics to problems of figure/ground separation and new-view synthesis.

He has twice received the IEEE's Marr Prize, the highest in computer vision; and software he wrote won an Engineering Emmy Award in 2002 for significant contributions to the creation of complex visual effects. In 2006 he was awarded the Roger Needham Award for his contributions to computer vision and machine learning.

He studied Mathematics and Computer Science at University College Cork and at Heriot-Watt University, and received his PhD from Edinburgh University in 1997, then spending 8 years at Oxford University's Department of Engineering Science before joining Microsoft in 2005.

I don't care if the guy is a Nobel Prize winning astronaut who has fucked Claudia Schiffer, that quote is wrong by the simple fact that the only mainstream hardware which can do a trillion of anything per second is a very fast GPU, and that's when counting very simple operations like a floating point calculation (and it's not even 30 trillion per second which would be required for doing it at 30 fps).

That is a quote directly from one of the pre E3 Natal Video presentations, it is not a misquote. He is a boffin and that is what he said. Maybe you should ping him and email and ask for clarification.

I don't need to ask for clarification, I know misleading market-speak when I see it.

A fast CPU can calculate some billions of simple operations per second. A very fast GPU can calculate a little bit more than a trillion even simpler operations per second.

To evaluate thirty trillion complicated operations (a body shape) per second requires nothing less than a supercomputer.

I read the article and it seems more of a preview of the possibilites Kinect offers in a perfect world then a preview of the actual product. I didnt played it so im saying that out of comparison to previews from other Video Game media.

The casuals are where Kinect is aimed at. 

M$ couldnt care less about what some Sony or Nintendo fans post on some forum where maybe only 4,000 people will read it.

This article here from CNN is exactly the sort of people M$ know must love Kinect.

They will suceed to many angry opposing fans across the net not able to understand why Kinect sells so well.

You sound ignorant.  He's probably referring to his algorithms that statistically cull a large number of possibilities to come up with the skeletal map.  The sensor doesn't do anything but feed it 3D and 2D data, the processing is done on the xbox.

I'd tell you to go to read his papers, but that'd probably be too much effort for you since you think you know more than he does about his work.  I'll take his word over what you think you know.

Yes that's exactly what I think he means... which you might have noticed if you read my earlier post in the thread.

Culling out trillions of impossibilities is very different from evaluating something trillions of times per second. The latter makes it look like you have very fast hardware, even if what you're doing amounts to simply picking one correct answer out of trillions possible (i.e. the calculator example I gave).

And please cut the crap like "you sound ignorant" without pointing out a mistake in what I'm saying.

You live in another world completely... Most person dont come here to give bad press to Microsoft but because they like video game and want to talk about it.

Soon as a positive Kinect article ops up the trolls start pointing fingers at Microsoft for bribing.