CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · History & Society

D-Box Technologies

Motion effects company

Layered newspapers, civic records and oral-history reels arranged as chronological evidence
History and societyInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJun 15, 2026
Entity authoritySource title only
Source-derived summary

D-BOX Technologies Inc. is a Canadian haptic motion technology company based in Longueuil, Quebec. The company designs and manufactures motion and haptic systems for entertainment, simulation, and training industries. Combining haptic technology with actuators provides physical sensations in a virtual setting. As of July 2019, D-BOX seats were located at over 700 movie screens in 40 countries.

Editorial summary

“D-Box Technologies” enters the record as motion effects company. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what D-Box, Technologies and Motion can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewMost valuable as an event-and-institution map that identifies actors, dates and record creators for deeper historical inquiry. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2019—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around D-Box, Technologies and Motion.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“D-Box Technologies” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, D-Box, Technologies and Motion provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

Chronology, provenance and viewpoint should be read together before a broad social or political interpretation is accepted. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 15, 2026. The first chronological checks are 2019.

Critical limits

Institutional narratives can privilege the records that survived while minimizing voices that were never formally collected. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.

Best used for
  • Event chronology
  • Institutional context
  • Locating named record creators
Verify next

Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “D-Box Technologies”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow D-Box Technologies primary sources, D-Box Technologies archive and D-Box research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “D-Box Technologies”?
  2. What chronology connects this entry to wider political or social change?
  3. Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “D-Box Technologies” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.