Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!uw-beaver!milton!hlab From: dtj@sumac.cray.com (Dean Johnson) Newsgroups: sci.virtual-worlds Subject: Re: VR hardware questions Message-ID: <1991Jun25.000625.19611@milton.u.washington.edu> Date: 24 Jun 91 22:46:20 GMT Sender: hlab@milton.u.washington.edu (Human Int. Technology Lab) Organization: University of Washington Lines: 72 Approved: cyberoid@milton.u.washington.edu In article <1991Jun24.195408.13585@milton.u.washington.edu>, mark@cs.ualberta.ca (Mark Green) writes: > >In article <1991Jun24.153351.13571@milton.u.washington.edu>, dtj@sumac.cray.com > (Dean Johnson) writes: > >> Since pounding on the moderator (sorry Bob!) about the lack of "reality" in >> this Virtual Reality group, I realized that I have done little help the >> situation. It is now time for me to stop bitching and start working! >> >> 1. Does anybody have any idea what the cost of a plain Polhemus emitter (the >> thing on the top of the eyephones) costs all by itself, not including the >> boards, etc. that go with it? I am trying to get a handle on what it would >> cost to prototype other devices, presuming that you have bought atleast >> one "full boat" system. > > I'm not sure why you would want this. The source and sensor are relatively > easy to fabricate. The Polhemus itself is relatively old technology > and could be improved greatly if it was reimplemented using current > handware devices. For the technical details on the Polhemus see the > Sept. 1979 issue of IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic > Systems. Because I know little or nothing about hardware and the underlying technology, but I'm hoping that it would be trivial to mount an emitter on something other than an eyephones unit. I am looking at the polhemus as a black-boxe and I want to staple them ;^) to something else. Additionally, I am hoping that using existing mechanisms, the amount of programming (and debugging) is minimal. >From a totally hardware naive perspective, if reimplementing the polhemus in newer technology was easy, why hasn't someone done it? At least I haven't seen it done. I don't mean that to sound like I am being critical of the statement, but I do express my skepticism. Thanks for the reference, it gives me somewhere to start working on opening the blackbox. > >> 2. Does anybody have any experience with drivers and interfaces to the >> dataglove, other than through the Macintosh and "Body Electric". Someone >> *has* to have tried to hook it up to a Sun or something like that. Even >> instances where you hit a "show-stopper" is of great help. Perhaps we >> can get a collaborative effort going for the DG like is going on with >> the PowerGlove. > > For several years we have used a client-server model for driving the > DataGlove. One process runs on one of our SGI workstations and interface > with the DataGlove using the standard serial protocol. This process > handles all the low level details of the interaction with the DataGlove. > The user process uses a subroutine library to communicate with the > server process. The user program can reside on any of the workstations > on our laboratory. Communications between the two processens is through > TCP/IP over an ethernet. Yep, that is exactly what I am interested in! Having done that, have you seen any improvement in the speed in interacting with the world? I guess what I am looking for is whether or not the Mac is a bottleneck to the overall system? This leads to question of world building and controlling software, did you "roll your own" or are you using some commercial package? -- -Dean Johnson Software Berserker/Rabid-Prototyping Specialist Tools, Libraries, and Commands Group Cray Research Inc. Eagan,MN (612) 683-5880 [MODERATOR'S NOTE: Do I detect some value to the newsgroup? Hmmm? ;-)] n