Wednesday, December 23, 2009

iPhone repair fun!

Before you laugh, realize that taking things apart and putting back together has always been a way of life for me. Sometimes I even end up without parts left over.

My iPhone 3G has had this distracting crack across the top half of the screen for the longest time. Nothing to impair functionality, just annoying. Well, lucky me, I have found something even more annoying than that.

I found on ebay the replacement glass/digitizer panel and a toolset for around $15 bucks. I thought, hey, why not give that a try. I also found a video on the Internet that shows just how easy it is to do your own repairs.

By following the video instructions meticulously, I ended up with brand-new uncracked, unscratched glass on the front panel... and a big black blotch on the LCD panel where the Safari icon lives, and a crack all the way from there to the top edge. Oh no! The video plainly shows using the plastic tool to gently lift the LCD panel away from the front assembly. What it doesn't show is that you also need to flex the little clips on each side, so that it will freely come out when lifted. As soon as I lifted it the first time I heard two distinct sounds: the "crack" of the LCD panel and at that same instant the gurgling in my stomach as the realization hit me.

I put it all back together, amazingly the thing still works, though the colors are wacky and some stuff I just can't see.

Well, the same ebay seller also has the LCD panels for around $30 bucks, plus I now have the complete knowledge of how to do this type of repair. Official Apple-sanctioned training classes would probably run me more than $45 so I guess it will be ok. And maybe I can recoup my costs by doing the same repair for friends and associates. I've just got to live with this nasty looking screen until the part gets here. What fun!

Saturday, November 28, 2009

RealD 3D: all I can say is WOW

I've just seen my first RealD 3D movie: Disney's "A Christmas Carol" starring Jim Carrey. $10.25 for a matinee feature crawling with kids, but even so, worth every penny.

Not only is it actually a good movie, one of the most faithful to the original Dickens text that I've ever seen, I have to say the 3D effect is an awesome addition. Only a couple of times did I notice any kind of picture quality issue and that could be attributable to my mild astigmatism. Of course there was the usual obligatory amount of 3D effect just because it's a 3D movie (several scenes where the viewer flies through the streets of London, as ordinary objects fly past), but even that did not detract from the story.

The technology is, to the best of my recollection, identical to what was being shown in demo form at EPCOT back in 1984. It blew me away back then, and I am equally awed by it now. I'm really amazed it took 25 years to become mainstream. Whenever a home version with the same quality is available, I will buy it. But I have my doubts of this happening for a while, as long as the theatres can keep it exclusive they will. The surcharge is produced purely by market forces (Mrs Pepper got her Bachelor's degree in marketing so I know a little bit about this).

  1. Right now 3D is just about the only innovation that is exclusive to the movie theatres. Everything else: digital, HD, surround sound, projection, greasy popcorn, we can do all that at home, usually better and less expensive than they can. 3D will get us to go to the theatres because it's really good this time around, and it's not available at home at any price.
  2. Even when the movie is out on DVD and BD, if it's 3D at all it will be reprocessed to use some inferior technologies. 3D with red and blue glasses is, without a doubt, absolutely awful. If you want to see it in 3D, you need to see it in the theatre.
  3. Assuming enough quality content is produced, this technology will eventually be accepted as "mainstream" to the point that it will be produced for the home theatre demand that I alluded to (the day RealD 3D is available for my home I will go and buy one). Especially if consumers resist buying the DVD/BD releases because they are not available in 3D.

As far as the technology used it really doesn't look that difficult or expensive. Again the price is "whatever they want" because of the current exclusivity. While at the theatre I observed the equipment in use.

  • it appears to be the exact same digital projectors they've had for a while. No gold plating that I could see (inside joke for Satelliteguys forum readers).
  • a polarizing filter in front of the lens. This filter must have some electronics in it as I can see a wiring harness running from it to somewhere, probably whatever is actually playing the movie.
  • The movie is apparently alternating left and right versions, with the polarizing filter synchronized to the alternating frames. And the glasses cause each eye to see only one of the two images. Remove the glasses and you see the expected distortion with "close" or "distant" objects.

I forsee a RealD 3D compatible BD player, and an addon polarizing filter for your home projector, in the not too distant future. A similar polarizing screen overlay for a flatscreen TV might also be doable, but probably quite expensive because of the necessary size. Prebuilding the polarizing technology into new TVs might eventually be a less expensive option. Here's hoping that the technology will continue to mature into something we will eventually see in our homes and used with broadcast television.

Browsing the RealD website, it does appear that some "Pro" products are available including a Mitsubishi DLP television and the 3D equipment, starting around $3800, and RealD has plans to enter the home entertainment market or work with the existing companies in that market. I'm definitely looking forward to buying one of these.

Thursday, September 17, 2009

Yeah, I've been busy.

I have a life and a job, so I don't get to make updates here as frequently as I would like.

Friday, June 12, 2009

What's up with Al Jazeera?

Al Jazeera English, which can be viewed at 97W on Ku-band FTA, had been broadcasting a letterboxed stretched image for a few days. This was apparently just an oversight and was corrected pretty quickly.