Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.



2x tv

Twice the TV
  (+9, -1)(+9, -1)
(+9, -1)
  [vote for,

Watching tv with the misses is great... until you want to watch bloodsport and she wants to watch the notebook.

I propose the 2X TV. Take a normal 3d TV, Now you both wear glasses but instead of showing a stereoscopic image, you each get to watch your own channel. Throw in a pair of wireless headphones and you've doubled your tv experience for the same price. Bars could show two difference football games at the same time (when glassessless technology comes out)

metarinka, Nov 30 2011

One DVD Two Movies
[xaviergisz, Nov 30 2011]

Tele for Two
[xaviergisz, Nov 30 2011]

GameShare Goggles
[xaviergisz, Nov 30 2011]

4-Way Television
[xaviergisz, Nov 30 2011]

Double TV
[xaviergisz, Nov 30 2011]

picture in picture http://en.wikipedia.../Picture-in-picture
[xandram, Nov 30 2011]

Split-screen solution http://www.youtube....watch?v=v28Qx8WDbTw
[MaxwellBuchanan, Dec 01 2011]


       I think you're getting the basic point bigsleep....
metarinka, Nov 30 2011

       Giving you a rough time Bigsleep, it got submitted accidentally without the description. I'll invite you over to my house to drink a pint and watch tv, I'll even let you pick the channel...
metarinka, Nov 30 2011

       picture in picture does this...(without glasses)
xandram, Nov 30 2011

       //Bars could show two difference football games at the same time (when glassessless technology comes out)//
The 'glasses-less' is for 3D, showing 2 images at the same time to everybody, and typically for a small set of fixed viewpoints.
For '1 screen/2 views', you must have glasses of some sort; typically active LCD glasses, so the TV can send the timing signal. It could be done with polarised glasses, but you would need 3 different pairs, depending on whether you were watching 3D, imagestream 1, or imagestream 2.
neutrinos_shadow, Dec 01 2011

       Can't we just buy another TV?
Alterother, Dec 01 2011

       Definitely a rerun.
tatterdemalion, Dec 01 2011

       So, a 3D TV can be used to provide 3 dimensions to one viewer (3 x 1 = 3), or two dimensions to 2 viewers (2 x 2=4). Something's wrong here.
MaxwellBuchanan, Dec 01 2011

       One dimension to each of three viewers?
pocmloc, Dec 01 2011

       That was my point. You get more value for fewer dimensions - 1 x 3D =3, but 2 x 2D=4. So, how many 1D viewers could you accommodate?
MaxwellBuchanan, Dec 01 2011

       Actually, allowing for Time, I guess it's 1 x 4D = 4; 2 x 3D=6.
MaxwellBuchanan, Dec 01 2011

       There is also another way to accomplish this [link].
MaxwellBuchanan, Dec 01 2011

       If both of them displayed the same cup of coffee...
RayfordSteele, Dec 01 2011

       Oh, sorry, well six hundred and twenty five, of course!
pocmloc, Dec 01 2011

       //The 'glasses-less' is for 3D, showing 2 images at the same time to everybody, and typically for a small set of fixed viewpoints. No.   

       The glassessless tv's provide two different images to the eye at once. small screens like the 3ds use prismatic lenses, big ones still aren't feasibl.e   

       But nothing dictates that the images have to converge a few inches are part for stereoscopic viewing. you could just as easily have the images converge several feet apart so one side of the couch or bar could watch one image, the other side another image.
metarinka, Dec 02 2011

       1D viewers are already catered for. A standard definition PAL TV signal resolves on the screen as 576 lines, so you could have the same number of 1D viewers. They might have a little trouble keeping track of which line was theirs, but you could help sort that out with sunglasses spray-painted black and a thin line scratched across them.
kodabar, Dec 02 2011

       So, nothing to do with multiple cross-dressers?
AbsintheWithoutLeave, Dec 02 2011

       [marked-for-deletion] redundant, sorry!
jutta, Dec 02 2011


back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle