Oh no, I got you the first time. You're wrong, though, because that position isn't hypocrisy. A position itself can't inherently be hypocritical, only reasoning can be.

I hold that Sony's push for 3D on the PS3 (and PS4, if they do that) is stupid, but it's a good move by Nintendo on the 3DS.

3D on a console is an example of continuing to overshoot the market orders of magnitude greater than HD graphics was at the start of this gen, because 3D penetration is orders of magnitude lower. How many people own a 3D-capable TV and a PS3? Fifty thousand? Less? Much less? What is the projected penetration for 3DTVs by the time the next hardware cycle launches in a couple of years? Sony is providing a value incentive that few if any will be able to take advantage of due to prohibitive costs not associated with the system itself. They're tying the success of their 3D push into the adoption rate of 3DTVs before the technology has had time to mature or take hold.

Nintendo's 3D is inherent to the system itself, and requires no investment outside of the system. They are not overshooting the market unless the system itself is prohibitively expensive. More, they are undercutting Sony's initiative by providing a 3D experience for cheaper without the need for extra hardware, in a way that makes the use of 3D glasses look clunky before anyone's even had the attempt to get used to the latter experience. Nintendo's move is smart because it is self-contained, relies only on its ability to push its own hardware and software, and aggressively undermines Sony's effort.

That is why Sony's approach is dumb and Nintendo's is not.

For the record, 3D tech is awesome in general. It is not $4,000 of awesome.

For all the fluff you throw around we are still on different note and you are still missing the only thing I was trying to point out.

So again in a few words and simple sentence, this way it just might get through:

Sony - 3D - gimmick. Nintendo - 3D - awesome.

I'm not talking about business strategy, proper time to deploy given technology to masses, the right way to do it. Or which company's approach is dumb and which is smart. But the general idea that 3D was a gimmick, till Nintendo said it's in their future.

But you are right, I've used hypocrisy in the wrong context, as the correct word there would be simply fanboy.

You'r misrepresenting the argument, here.

Sony is oversooting the market with 3D in the PS3. There's only a few tens of thousands of people who can utilize it. It's analogous to the HD problem with the HD twins, only a couplpe of orders of magnitude worse.

Nintendo is waiting until a 30% adoption rate for 3D-capable displays before making a 3D-centric system. Timing and care in the console space is what separates Nintendo from Sony.

What? No. Listen, Sony's primary driving ability her isn't as an electronics provider, the only way to push tchnology is through value propositions where price is measured against benefit provided by content. Sony has to act as a content provider, not a tech provider, if they want to be able to push tech. Tech doesn't sell itself. Content does, when balanced out against the values of the consumer.

You're operating under the false assumption that Sony has the magical ability to get people ot adopt this tech just by putting it out there. They don't.

Nintendo is waiting for 30% penetration for a very speific reason - at that point, the value proposition of 3D will be high enough in comparison to the cost that it makes sense to go for it.

Your HD-DVD comment is both specious and outside the bounds of this discussion.

Why Squilliam, you minx.

Are those numbers America only? Even if they are, 10M is.... not quite 30%, I do not think? Maybe more like 10%?

For all the fluff you throw around we are still on different note and you are still missing the only thing I was trying to point out.

So again in a few words and simple sentence, this way it just might get through:

Sony - 3D - gimmick. Nintendo - 3D - awesome.

I'm not talking about business strategy, proper time to deploy given technology to masses, the right way to do it. Or which company's approach is dumb and which is smart. But the general idea that 3D was a gimmick, till Nintendo said it's in their future.

But you are right, I've used hypocrisy in the wrong context, as the correct word there would be simply fanboy.

Why Squilliam, you minx.

Are those numbers America only? Even if they are, 10M is.... not quite 30%, I do not think? Maybe more like 10%?

Show me any articles you have that actually support your supposition. Otherwise you have no grounds on which to make that assumption, in which case you're probably better off not trying to use it as a talking point.

They are worldwide AFAIK, especially as on the same page there was an 'expert prediction' for 20M 3DTVs worldwide by 2015. Even 10M in the U.S.A. would not translate to 10% of the households, I think there are more like 150M in America off the top of my head.

Isn't Sony providing the content though by producing 3D blockbuster games?

The business positions of Sony and Nintendo with regards to 3D are completely uncomparable, they are very different companies with very different objectives. Nintendo can afford to 'wait it out' on the 3D market where as Sony have wider implications than simply the success of SCE to consider.