Silencer

October 15, 2010 at 10:24pm

We're not buying them because we think they're crap.  And we don't like the glasses.

Ashton2091

October 14, 2010 at 3:00pm

Well...they kind of have to become mainstream. Not because they're awesome (cause they're not), but because it only makes sense to continue making them. It's not a stand alone. It's a TV feature. I mean, look at computers for instance. Some laptops come with features that most couldn't care less about. But since the features are being integrated into something we use everyday, then it doesn't make sense to stop integrating those features. Imagine you're in a store looking at TVs and as you read the specs you're naming them off in your head. 3D will be one of those that you will expect to be there whether you care to use it or not. Now if it was a stand alone 3D box that made your TV 3D capable...then this would be a bit different. It's like when computers only came with CD-ROM. You had to pay a lot more for DVD. Well now if a laptop doesn't have a DVD Writer, we look at it like it's a BetaMax and ask "they still make these?". Does that makes sense?

deadsenator

October 14, 2010 at 11:42am

/rant on

This 3D thing really needs to function better.  You cannot cram this down our throats and make us buy a 3D teevee that requires glasses to use.  I wear regular glasses and only really have the use of one eye.  3D with glasses doesn't work for me.  I know I am only a small part of the population, but I hear loud cries from many others about having to wear 3D-enabling glasses. 

To me, the fix has to be a muti-layered panel approach that creates the 3D effect within the television itself without requiring any added spectacles or devices.  Simply put, it must be easy for the consumer.

Until this happens, I will continue with my "POS" 2D 3-yr old 60-inch and my 1-yr old 47-inch.  Televisions should last 5-10 years and I am not even halfway through that lifespan.  In 2014, I am willing to look if there are no silly spectacles to don.

/rant off

 

Obsidian

October 14, 2010 at 8:06am

I wear glasses already, I don't appreciate placing another pair of glasses over them to watch TV. Or put my contacts in to watch TV. Until there's a 3D standard there's no way I'd even consider getting a 3D TV. I realize that the price difference between non-3D and 3D TVs are $150~$300 but that's money that I can spend on some other component.

Plus 3D relies on physical media. Purchase/rental of physical media is on the decline. Until 3D is able to be delivered over Netflix I doubt it'll catch on.

I used to buy one DVD every 2 weeks minimum. I think now I'm down to buying one or two Blu Ray or DVDs every year.

According to PopSci we should also be piloting flying cars by the time 3D TVs are mainstream ...

samduhman

October 14, 2010 at 7:49am

Good luck to them. Even I someone who normally loves new tech refuse to go out and replace my current tvs. I've spent upwards of $3000 over the past 3 years getting new HDTVS. The glasses are another turnoff.

I Jedi

October 14, 2010 at 7:24am

A show of hands here, please. How many people ACTUALLY intend to one day own a 3D-TV, if the market offers the old regular 2D-format alongside 3D? Honestly, watching movies in 3D sounds cool, but it is not something I would want to constantly put funny glasses over my eyes again and again for.