i was joking, cause i figured he woudl come in and say "i found a deal and only paid $50 for the glasses through this place"  or my dad's cousins kid works a this place and cut me a deal, ect.

whenever price is brought up as something too expensive people always jump in and say "you can get it here or i got it for this, ect."

The main point is, those retail prices are there, if no one was buying them they wouldn't be that priced.  Most of all sales are retail prices and saying "you can get this 3dtv, these 4 glasses and this 3d player for this cheap" is bullshit, because that is not how 95% of the people buying these thigns are buying them, or should say not buying them

I'm thinking that the price of 3d TVs, glasses, cameras, etc will fall over time as the technology gets cheaper and expect Blu-rayesque results from this, that it will be kind of a big thing, but not overwhelmingly great for Sony.

Also, the 3d push is a pretty smart move, now that blu-ray is the standard for HD storage, 3d movies will basically require blu-ray, so when 3d grows, so will blu-ray.

i feel like we heard this same thing abotu HDTV's and Blu Ray players not a year ago.  you know the whole HDTV's will go down in price and blu ray players will go down in price and ect.

hell i still dont' know a single person who owns a blu ray, every single person i know that has a blu ray player whether an actual player or ps3 only rents

most people just recently upgraded and are being told again right awy to upgrade?  sorry if to me I am assuming they are going to say F that and wait it out for 10 years to upgrade to wahtever is then

but yea until glasses are like < $20 there is no way thsi catches on

as just said a house full of kids and your going to have to worry about giving them $100 plus glasses.  ha have fun handing them over, and then worry about loosing them, sitting on them, scratching them and so on. 

Even with close friends, you can tell that if they have expensive glasses that they are very watchful of you looking at them and want them back soon.  You know like with Oakleys and stuff, and now they are going to hand over a handful to their firends to watch a sporting event while drinking alcohol?

To me besides 3D being expensive to just start, it just seems like a high risk entertainment

Intel global revenue is around $10 billion per quarter.

I think?  I think it's about right for early adopter tech. Let's consider how long it's taken to adopt HD TV. I bet anything that it's adoption rate will be slower. I also bet glasses based 3D TV will be dead at the point when it would make serious market penetration in favour of new glassless tech. Then REAL adoption of 3D will begin.

There was a medium before DVD. used similar tech, but the discs were the size of an old record style. these were Laserdiscs.  It was great tech and beat DVD to the market, but the size was inconvenient. Tape cassettes beat out records because of convenience. CD beat out Records because of convience. Technology MUST be convenient for it to be acceptably adopted as part of your living life style. 3D glasses work for movies because movies are not part of your normal living lifestyle.

I think finally. These TV producers are going to spend to much money in the wrong direction for 3D TV. Much like the other media format Laserdisc. Just remember even even early adopters bought laser disc. Early adopters buy any new technology just for the sake of the technology. It's the masses that buy tech for convenience.

The year is 1993 darling

Yay! Now I don't have to make a logical and well thought out post! Woooooot!

In any case in the short term I expect the passive glasses to win out over the active glasses because they are easier to wear, cheap and don't run out of batteries at the absolute wrong moment, especially in sizes above 40" because its easier to fit in the required pixel density if you do line by line polarisation.