|
irstupid said: [...] No one will even consider a 3D tv until things like tv shows and sports are in 3D. But then second has to do with 3DS, if this hits off and gets mass market recognition even, let alone people buy it. But it will make people think, why buy a 3D tv that I need glasses when sooner or later a tv will have no glasses? So people will further wait on buying a 3D tv, because they don't want to deal with glasses. |
Saying "No one will even consider a 3D tv until things like tv shows and sports are in 3D" is as wrong as saying "No one will even consider a HD TV until things like tv shows and sports are in HD". In my country, the point when more HD-capable TVs were sold than non HD-capable TVs was already four years ago, but even today less than 10% of owners of HD-capable TVs in my country actually enjoy HD television. Some wanted HD to fully enjoy the graphics from their PS3 or Xbox 360. Others wanted HD because of the excellent quality of Blu-Ray movies. But the majority simply bought their HD-capable TV because they wanted a flatscreen and wanted it to be prepared for the HD future too.
In the early days of flatscreen TV, there were actually a lot of flatscreen TVs with HD display panels that were in fact not capable of displaying HD graphics because they had no DVI or HDMI port. Such devices completely disappeared from the market within a very short time, for one reason: The additional cost for making such devices HD ready was very low for the manufacturers. The display panel was capable of showing HD graphics anyway, pretty much all they had to do was add a HDMI port. Very soon people did not buy non-HD-ready TVs anymore even if they did not have any HDMI devices at that time. And that's because people liked the idea of HD graphics even if they could not enjoy them yet, and since there was hardly any difference in price why should they take a model that isn't HD ready?
It will be very similar with 3D TVs. If the display panel supports at least 120Hz, the additional cost for being "3D-ready" will be extremely low. The shutter glasses are probably what's most expensive, and even those are actually very cheap to manufacture. They try to sell them for $100 and more, but I guess the costs for producing them is around $5. And with more and more video games being 3D, more and more hollywood blockbusters being sold on 3D Blu-Ray discs and since some channels have already begun to broadcast sports events in 3D, there is definitely a demand.
And as for "TVs that don't need glasses": 3D TVs that only need polarized glasses or no glasses at all are way more expensive to manufacture because you cannot use the same display panels that are built into standard HDTVs. And models without glasses already exist, but
a) they are extremely expensive, far beyond $10000 at the moment and chances are they will stay very expensive for quite a few years
b) their 3D effect is in fact worse than those of models with shutter or polarizied glasses
-> The only reason 3D TVs will not become mainstream soon is that most people have just bought a new TV. But just as it was with "HD-ready" TVs, in a very short time the majority of TV sets will be "3D-ready" just because very soon the difference in price will be next to zero.
