Sorry for that weird topic title, but I can't actually put the problem in other words.
My Epson TW 5900 3D ready video projector fails to be recognized by the Wizard assistant set up in 3D stereo in nvidia config panel with 3D TV Play (not compatible with 3d nvision) ,although I got strictly no problems playing 3D bluerays and games on my ps3 and 3D mkv and few games on PC which don't require nvidia drivers to display stereo 3D like Sonic Generation and Crysis 2 for instance), but without any specific clue from nvidia and as I dig more into research about it , I have no choice but coming back again here to need some clear explanations :
- How different 3D TV play technology is from any other 3D 1.4 HDMI device like the PS3 for instance ?
I just don't get why nvidia which is well known for its quality products, frequent driver updates etc etc ... fails at delivering a technology that works universally and flawlessly with any 1.4 HDMI 3D device on the market ?
I understand that that 3D nvision has some specific requirements but what the hell is going on with 3D TV play ???? Shouldn't it supposed to be precisely easy to play and plug ??
- Is it really only a matter of license and big money ?
I remembered actually buying a 3D TV PLAY nvidia GPU PC PRECISELY to be able to use 3D technology why the hell can't I do that on one of the most recent device on the market, even fraggin 1080p 120Hz compatible like my TW?
Will I have to wait for EPSON to sign a big check to Nvidia in order to use the technology I actually PAID for ?
- Any advice to solve the ""Error in Stereo Driver, NvAPI_Stereo_IsActivated() returned 0 after stereo was enabled by default with Settings->setDefaultStartupMode(true)" problem with the wizard assistant set up is more than welcomed
This situation is extremely annoying and quite unacceptable especially regarding the price of the "3D tv play" DLC (yes it is a DLC and nothing else) that should be free for any consumer that purchase a 3D stereo GPU .
Sorry for that weird topic title, but I can't actually put the problem in other words.
My Epson TW 5900 3D ready video projector fails to be recognized by the Wizard assistant set up in 3D stereo in nvidia config panel with 3D TV Play (not compatible with 3d nvision) ,although I got strictly no problems playing 3D bluerays and games on my ps3 and 3D mkv and few games on PC which don't require nvidia drivers to display stereo 3D like Sonic Generation and Crysis 2 for instance), but without any specific clue from nvidia and as I dig more into research about it , I have no choice but coming back again here to need some clear explanations :
- How different 3D TV play technology is from any other 3D 1.4 HDMI device like the PS3 for instance ?
I just don't get why nvidia which is well known for its quality products, frequent driver updates etc etc ... fails at delivering a technology that works universally and flawlessly with any 1.4 HDMI 3D device on the market ?
I understand that that 3D nvision has some specific requirements but what the hell is going on with 3D TV play ???? Shouldn't it supposed to be precisely easy to play and plug ??
- Is it really only a matter of license and big money ?
I remembered actually buying a 3D TV PLAY nvidia GPU PC PRECISELY to be able to use 3D technology why the hell can't I do that on one of the most recent device on the market, even fraggin 1080p 120Hz compatible like my TW?
Will I have to wait for EPSON to sign a big check to Nvidia in order to use the technology I actually PAID for ?
- Any advice to solve the ""Error in Stereo Driver, NvAPI_Stereo_IsActivated() returned 0 after stereo was enabled by default with Settings->setDefaultStartupMode(true)" problem with the wizard assistant set up is more than welcomed
This situation is extremely annoying and quite unacceptable especially regarding the price of the "3D tv play" DLC (yes it is a DLC and nothing else) that should be free for any consumer that purchase a 3D stereo GPU .
I don't get it either. Nvidia claims its a quality assurance issue. So that they have the opportunity to test each device by hand. Honestly, I don't get this stance.
Whats a worse user experience? Hooking up your device and having either a slightly weak/extreme 3D effect. Or plugging in your hardware and not having it work at all?
I don't get it either. Nvidia claims its a quality assurance issue. So that they have the opportunity to test each device by hand. Honestly, I don't get this stance.
Whats a worse user experience? Hooking up your device and having either a slightly weak/extreme 3D effect. Or plugging in your hardware and not having it work at all?
[quote name='cybereality' date='25 November 2011 - 03:40 PM' timestamp='1322235621' post='1332666']
I don't get it either. Nvidia claims its a quality assurance issue. So that they have the opportunity to test each device by hand. Honestly, I don't get this stance.
Whats a worse user experience? Hooking up your device and having either a slightly weak/extreme 3D effect. Or plugging in your hardware and not having it work at all?
[/quote]
[quote name='cybereality' date='25 November 2011 - 03:40 PM' timestamp='1322235621' post='1332666']
I don't get it either. Nvidia claims its a quality assurance issue. So that they have the opportunity to test each device by hand. Honestly, I don't get this stance.
Whats a worse user experience? Hooking up your device and having either a slightly weak/extreme 3D effect. Or plugging in your hardware and not having it work at all?
I had the same problem with a NAD receiver. What I did was following this blog post: http://blog.bagearon.com/?p=38
You basicly install a display driver saying your output is a Denon receiver that 3dplay supports. It worked perfectly for me :)
[quote name='bartlebooth' date='24 November 2011 - 07:49 PM' timestamp='1322196542' post='1332468']
- How different 3D TV play technology is from any other 3D 1.4 HDMI device like the PS3 for instance ?
I just don't get why nvidia which is well known for its quality products, frequent driver updates etc etc ... fails at delivering a technology that works universally and flawlessly with any 1.4 HDMI 3D device on the market ?
I understand that that 3D nvision has some specific requirements but what the hell is going on with 3D TV play ???? Shouldn't it supposed to be precisely easy to play and plug ??
- Is it really only a matter of license and big money ?
I remembered actually buying a 3D TV PLAY nvidia GPU PC PRECISELY to be able to use 3D technology why the hell can't I do that on one of the most recent device on the market, even fraggin 1080p 120Hz compatible like my TW?
Will I have to wait for EPSON to sign a big check to Nvidia in order to use the technology I actually PAID for ?
-[/quote]
It's pretty simple actually.
Nvidia must have checks and balances in place to protect it's lucrative 3D Pro Vision market. This is exactly why the 2nd generation of Nvidia 3D Vision glasses that were recently released, function using an IR sync signal.
They could have easily made them RF, but that is reserved for their lucrative pro market. It's the same with Displays, they need to control and seperate their consumer and pro markets. So enjoy what you get, left overs are better than going hungry.
[quote name='bartlebooth' date='24 November 2011 - 07:49 PM' timestamp='1322196542' post='1332468']
- How different 3D TV play technology is from any other 3D 1.4 HDMI device like the PS3 for instance ?
I just don't get why nvidia which is well known for its quality products, frequent driver updates etc etc ... fails at delivering a technology that works universally and flawlessly with any 1.4 HDMI 3D device on the market ?
I understand that that 3D nvision has some specific requirements but what the hell is going on with 3D TV play ???? Shouldn't it supposed to be precisely easy to play and plug ??
- Is it really only a matter of license and big money ?
I remembered actually buying a 3D TV PLAY nvidia GPU PC PRECISELY to be able to use 3D technology why the hell can't I do that on one of the most recent device on the market, even fraggin 1080p 120Hz compatible like my TW?
Will I have to wait for EPSON to sign a big check to Nvidia in order to use the technology I actually PAID for ?
-
It's pretty simple actually.
Nvidia must have checks and balances in place to protect it's lucrative 3D Pro Vision market. This is exactly why the 2nd generation of Nvidia 3D Vision glasses that were recently released, function using an IR sync signal.
They could have easily made them RF, but that is reserved for their lucrative pro market. It's the same with Displays, they need to control and seperate their consumer and pro markets. So enjoy what you get, left overs are better than going hungry.
Nvidia must have checks and balances in place to protect it's lucrative 3D Pro Vision market. This is exactly why the 2nd generation of Nvidia 3D Vision glasses that were recently released, function using an IR sync signal.
They could have easily made them RF, but that is reserved for their lucrative pro market. It's the same with Displays, they need to control and seperate their consumer and pro markets. So enjoy what you get, left overs are better than going hungry.
[/quote]
This is a rather complicated euphamism for greed. There are better ways to achieve market differentiation, and if Nvidia would be better served to sell drivers for 3RD party devices. They really don't gain too much from boxing out third party hardware since they don't also sell displays.
I'd be fine if I were able to buy a license for any display and glasses I so choose like tridef or iZ3D. I'd gladly pay $30-$50 per year for support too. I'm always willing to pay for a better product, but it's a shame that you can't use your display and glasses of choice.
OP you can also try iZ3D's drivers. They are a tad buggy but you get a free trial.
[quote name='D-Man11' date='25 November 2011 - 03:32 PM' timestamp='1322256772' post='1332783']
It's pretty simple actually.
Nvidia must have checks and balances in place to protect it's lucrative 3D Pro Vision market. This is exactly why the 2nd generation of Nvidia 3D Vision glasses that were recently released, function using an IR sync signal.
They could have easily made them RF, but that is reserved for their lucrative pro market. It's the same with Displays, they need to control and seperate their consumer and pro markets. So enjoy what you get, left overs are better than going hungry.
This is a rather complicated euphamism for greed. There are better ways to achieve market differentiation, and if Nvidia would be better served to sell drivers for 3RD party devices. They really don't gain too much from boxing out third party hardware since they don't also sell displays.
I'd be fine if I were able to buy a license for any display and glasses I so choose like tridef or iZ3D. I'd gladly pay $30-$50 per year for support too. I'm always willing to pay for a better product, but it's a shame that you can't use your display and glasses of choice.
OP you can also try iZ3D's drivers. They are a tad buggy but you get a free trial.
I really have a lough when people claim that some company is 'greedy'.
All companied are in the business to make money. As much as possible. There's no question about that.
You might want to argue that a good reputation can generate more money than a restrictive policy. But that's just that, an argument, not a fact.
For example, nVidia always tries to differentiate themselves from the competition by investing money in new ideas. Like SLI, CUDA/PhysX or now 3D Vision. Of course, they do that to increase their market share, why else would they [b][i]spend a lot of money[/i][/b]?
And then there are always people coming along, complaining that nVidia wants to milk their customers, that they are greedy because they want to get as much money as possible, that they should just allow AMD users to use their technology and so on.
nVidia would be more than stupid if they did that, and if you stop for a second, you really have to agree. You don't spend a lot of money on something and give it to your competition just like that, at least not right away. If you do that, you could have just saved the money you invested in that technology in the first place.
AMD, on the other hand, doesn't really spend much on new technology. They are usually just reacting to things nVidia places on the market (like SLI which they just adapted years later) or depend on the open source community or other companies to develop something similar (CUDA vs. OpenCL, 3DVision vs. AMD using iZ3D or TriDef etc.). And then they are cheered on by the community for being "open" and not the "bad restrictive" company, that nVidia supposedly is.
But in the end, if it weren't for this "bad company", we just wouldn't have any of these technologies... neither SLI/Crossfire, CUDA/OpenCL nor S3D. And that's just a fact.
I really have a lough when people claim that some company is 'greedy'.
All companied are in the business to make money. As much as possible. There's no question about that.
You might want to argue that a good reputation can generate more money than a restrictive policy. But that's just that, an argument, not a fact.
For example, nVidia always tries to differentiate themselves from the competition by investing money in new ideas. Like SLI, CUDA/PhysX or now 3D Vision. Of course, they do that to increase their market share, why else would they spend a lot of money?
And then there are always people coming along, complaining that nVidia wants to milk their customers, that they are greedy because they want to get as much money as possible, that they should just allow AMD users to use their technology and so on.
nVidia would be more than stupid if they did that, and if you stop for a second, you really have to agree. You don't spend a lot of money on something and give it to your competition just like that, at least not right away. If you do that, you could have just saved the money you invested in that technology in the first place.
AMD, on the other hand, doesn't really spend much on new technology. They are usually just reacting to things nVidia places on the market (like SLI which they just adapted years later) or depend on the open source community or other companies to develop something similar (CUDA vs. OpenCL, 3DVision vs. AMD using iZ3D or TriDef etc.). And then they are cheered on by the community for being "open" and not the "bad restrictive" company, that nVidia supposedly is.
But in the end, if it weren't for this "bad company", we just wouldn't have any of these technologies... neither SLI/Crossfire, CUDA/OpenCL nor S3D. And that's just a fact.
My Epson TW 5900 3D ready video projector fails to be recognized by the Wizard assistant set up in 3D stereo in nvidia config panel with 3D TV Play (not compatible with 3d nvision) ,although I got strictly no problems playing 3D bluerays and games on my ps3 and 3D mkv and few games on PC which don't require nvidia drivers to display stereo 3D like Sonic Generation and Crysis 2 for instance), but without any specific clue from nvidia and as I dig more into research about it , I have no choice but coming back again here to need some clear explanations :
- How different 3D TV play technology is from any other 3D 1.4 HDMI device like the PS3 for instance ?
I just don't get why nvidia which is well known for its quality products, frequent driver updates etc etc ... fails at delivering a technology that works universally and flawlessly with any 1.4 HDMI 3D device on the market ?
I understand that that 3D nvision has some specific requirements but what the hell is going on with 3D TV play ???? Shouldn't it supposed to be precisely easy to play and plug ??
- Is it really only a matter of license and big money ?
I remembered actually buying a 3D TV PLAY nvidia GPU PC PRECISELY to be able to use 3D technology why the hell can't I do that on one of the most recent device on the market, even fraggin 1080p 120Hz compatible like my TW?
Will I have to wait for EPSON to sign a big check to Nvidia in order to use the technology I actually PAID for ?
- Any advice to solve the ""Error in Stereo Driver, NvAPI_Stereo_IsActivated() returned 0 after stereo was enabled by default with Settings->setDefaultStartupMode(true)" problem with the wizard assistant set up is more than welcomed
This situation is extremely annoying and quite unacceptable especially regarding the price of the "3D tv play" DLC (yes it is a DLC and nothing else) that should be free for any consumer that purchase a 3D stereo GPU .
/discuss/help the angry guy please
My Epson TW 5900 3D ready video projector fails to be recognized by the Wizard assistant set up in 3D stereo in nvidia config panel with 3D TV Play (not compatible with 3d nvision) ,although I got strictly no problems playing 3D bluerays and games on my ps3 and 3D mkv and few games on PC which don't require nvidia drivers to display stereo 3D like Sonic Generation and Crysis 2 for instance), but without any specific clue from nvidia and as I dig more into research about it , I have no choice but coming back again here to need some clear explanations :
- How different 3D TV play technology is from any other 3D 1.4 HDMI device like the PS3 for instance ?
I just don't get why nvidia which is well known for its quality products, frequent driver updates etc etc ... fails at delivering a technology that works universally and flawlessly with any 1.4 HDMI 3D device on the market ?
I understand that that 3D nvision has some specific requirements but what the hell is going on with 3D TV play ???? Shouldn't it supposed to be precisely easy to play and plug ??
- Is it really only a matter of license and big money ?
I remembered actually buying a 3D TV PLAY nvidia GPU PC PRECISELY to be able to use 3D technology why the hell can't I do that on one of the most recent device on the market, even fraggin 1080p 120Hz compatible like my TW?
Will I have to wait for EPSON to sign a big check to Nvidia in order to use the technology I actually PAID for ?
- Any advice to solve the ""Error in Stereo Driver, NvAPI_Stereo_IsActivated() returned 0 after stereo was enabled by default with Settings->setDefaultStartupMode(true)" problem with the wizard assistant set up is more than welcomed
This situation is extremely annoying and quite unacceptable especially regarding the price of the "3D tv play" DLC (yes it is a DLC and nothing else) that should be free for any consumer that purchase a 3D stereo GPU .
/discuss/help the angry guy please
Whats a worse user experience? Hooking up your device and having either a slightly weak/extreme 3D effect. Or plugging in your hardware and not having it work at all?
Whats a worse user experience? Hooking up your device and having either a slightly weak/extreme 3D effect. Or plugging in your hardware and not having it work at all?
check my blog - cybereality.com
I don't get it either. Nvidia claims its a quality assurance issue. So that they have the opportunity to test each device by hand. Honestly, I don't get this stance.
Whats a worse user experience? Hooking up your device and having either a slightly weak/extreme 3D effect. Or plugging in your hardware and not having it work at all?
[/quote]
[img]http://forums.macresource.com/smileys/iagree.gif[/img]
I don't get it either. Nvidia claims its a quality assurance issue. So that they have the opportunity to test each device by hand. Honestly, I don't get this stance.
Whats a worse user experience? Hooking up your device and having either a slightly weak/extreme 3D effect. Or plugging in your hardware and not having it work at all?
Benchmark your reflexes! *new*
You basicly install a display driver saying your output is a Denon receiver that 3dplay supports. It worked perfectly for me :)
You basicly install a display driver saying your output is a Denon receiver that 3dplay supports. It worked perfectly for me :)
- How different 3D TV play technology is from any other 3D 1.4 HDMI device like the PS3 for instance ?
I just don't get why nvidia which is well known for its quality products, frequent driver updates etc etc ... fails at delivering a technology that works universally and flawlessly with any 1.4 HDMI 3D device on the market ?
I understand that that 3D nvision has some specific requirements but what the hell is going on with 3D TV play ???? Shouldn't it supposed to be precisely easy to play and plug ??
- Is it really only a matter of license and big money ?
I remembered actually buying a 3D TV PLAY nvidia GPU PC PRECISELY to be able to use 3D technology why the hell can't I do that on one of the most recent device on the market, even fraggin 1080p 120Hz compatible like my TW?
Will I have to wait for EPSON to sign a big check to Nvidia in order to use the technology I actually PAID for ?
-[/quote]
It's pretty simple actually.
Nvidia must have checks and balances in place to protect it's lucrative 3D Pro Vision market. This is exactly why the 2nd generation of Nvidia 3D Vision glasses that were recently released, function using an IR sync signal.
They could have easily made them RF, but that is reserved for their lucrative pro market. It's the same with Displays, they need to control and seperate their consumer and pro markets. So enjoy what you get, left overs are better than going hungry.
- How different 3D TV play technology is from any other 3D 1.4 HDMI device like the PS3 for instance ?
I just don't get why nvidia which is well known for its quality products, frequent driver updates etc etc ... fails at delivering a technology that works universally and flawlessly with any 1.4 HDMI 3D device on the market ?
I understand that that 3D nvision has some specific requirements but what the hell is going on with 3D TV play ???? Shouldn't it supposed to be precisely easy to play and plug ??
- Is it really only a matter of license and big money ?
I remembered actually buying a 3D TV PLAY nvidia GPU PC PRECISELY to be able to use 3D technology why the hell can't I do that on one of the most recent device on the market, even fraggin 1080p 120Hz compatible like my TW?
Will I have to wait for EPSON to sign a big check to Nvidia in order to use the technology I actually PAID for ?
-
It's pretty simple actually.
Nvidia must have checks and balances in place to protect it's lucrative 3D Pro Vision market. This is exactly why the 2nd generation of Nvidia 3D Vision glasses that were recently released, function using an IR sync signal.
They could have easily made them RF, but that is reserved for their lucrative pro market. It's the same with Displays, they need to control and seperate their consumer and pro markets. So enjoy what you get, left overs are better than going hungry.
It can be supported via Nvidia 3D Vision, if the manufacturer submits it for certification and it meets their requirements.
BTW FYI 3DTV Play can only be reinstalled 5 times for people that buy it. http://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/2892
It can be supported via Nvidia 3D Vision, if the manufacturer submits it for certification and it meets their requirements.
BTW FYI 3DTV Play can only be reinstalled 5 times for people that buy it. http://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/2892
It's pretty simple actually.
Nvidia must have checks and balances in place to protect it's lucrative 3D Pro Vision market. This is exactly why the 2nd generation of Nvidia 3D Vision glasses that were recently released, function using an IR sync signal.
They could have easily made them RF, but that is reserved for their lucrative pro market. It's the same with Displays, they need to control and seperate their consumer and pro markets. So enjoy what you get, left overs are better than going hungry.
[/quote]
This is a rather complicated euphamism for greed. There are better ways to achieve market differentiation, and if Nvidia would be better served to sell drivers for 3RD party devices. They really don't gain too much from boxing out third party hardware since they don't also sell displays.
I'd be fine if I were able to buy a license for any display and glasses I so choose like tridef or iZ3D. I'd gladly pay $30-$50 per year for support too. I'm always willing to pay for a better product, but it's a shame that you can't use your display and glasses of choice.
OP you can also try iZ3D's drivers. They are a tad buggy but you get a free trial.
It's pretty simple actually.
Nvidia must have checks and balances in place to protect it's lucrative 3D Pro Vision market. This is exactly why the 2nd generation of Nvidia 3D Vision glasses that were recently released, function using an IR sync signal.
They could have easily made them RF, but that is reserved for their lucrative pro market. It's the same with Displays, they need to control and seperate their consumer and pro markets. So enjoy what you get, left overs are better than going hungry.
This is a rather complicated euphamism for greed. There are better ways to achieve market differentiation, and if Nvidia would be better served to sell drivers for 3RD party devices. They really don't gain too much from boxing out third party hardware since they don't also sell displays.
I'd be fine if I were able to buy a license for any display and glasses I so choose like tridef or iZ3D. I'd gladly pay $30-$50 per year for support too. I'm always willing to pay for a better product, but it's a shame that you can't use your display and glasses of choice.
OP you can also try iZ3D's drivers. They are a tad buggy but you get a free trial.
Done.
All companied are in the business to make money. As much as possible. There's no question about that.
You might want to argue that a good reputation can generate more money than a restrictive policy. But that's just that, an argument, not a fact.
For example, nVidia always tries to differentiate themselves from the competition by investing money in new ideas. Like SLI, CUDA/PhysX or now 3D Vision. Of course, they do that to increase their market share, why else would they [b][i]spend a lot of money[/i][/b]?
And then there are always people coming along, complaining that nVidia wants to milk their customers, that they are greedy because they want to get as much money as possible, that they should just allow AMD users to use their technology and so on.
nVidia would be more than stupid if they did that, and if you stop for a second, you really have to agree. You don't spend a lot of money on something and give it to your competition just like that, at least not right away. If you do that, you could have just saved the money you invested in that technology in the first place.
AMD, on the other hand, doesn't really spend much on new technology. They are usually just reacting to things nVidia places on the market (like SLI which they just adapted years later) or depend on the open source community or other companies to develop something similar (CUDA vs. OpenCL, 3DVision vs. AMD using iZ3D or TriDef etc.). And then they are cheered on by the community for being "open" and not the "bad restrictive" company, that nVidia supposedly is.
But in the end, if it weren't for this "bad company", we just wouldn't have any of these technologies... neither SLI/Crossfire, CUDA/OpenCL nor S3D. And that's just a fact.
All companied are in the business to make money. As much as possible. There's no question about that.
You might want to argue that a good reputation can generate more money than a restrictive policy. But that's just that, an argument, not a fact.
For example, nVidia always tries to differentiate themselves from the competition by investing money in new ideas. Like SLI, CUDA/PhysX or now 3D Vision. Of course, they do that to increase their market share, why else would they spend a lot of money?
And then there are always people coming along, complaining that nVidia wants to milk their customers, that they are greedy because they want to get as much money as possible, that they should just allow AMD users to use their technology and so on.
nVidia would be more than stupid if they did that, and if you stop for a second, you really have to agree. You don't spend a lot of money on something and give it to your competition just like that, at least not right away. If you do that, you could have just saved the money you invested in that technology in the first place.
AMD, on the other hand, doesn't really spend much on new technology. They are usually just reacting to things nVidia places on the market (like SLI which they just adapted years later) or depend on the open source community or other companies to develop something similar (CUDA vs. OpenCL, 3DVision vs. AMD using iZ3D or TriDef etc.). And then they are cheered on by the community for being "open" and not the "bad restrictive" company, that nVidia supposedly is.
But in the end, if it weren't for this "bad company", we just wouldn't have any of these technologies... neither SLI/Crossfire, CUDA/OpenCL nor S3D. And that's just a fact.