Sharp  produced the first  glasses-free (using parallax barrier) 3D notebooks and PC monitors 7 years ago. In all that time of developing the technology what is the largest screen size that they have produced?

Furthermore, later this year they are planning to release their own four-colour 3D LED backlit sets requiring active shutter glasses to compete with the Sony, Samsung, LG etc.  If they expected their glasses-less technology to be applicable to large sets (40-60 inches) why do you suppose they have gone to the trouble of developing other 3D technology based on LED backlighting?

If you can show me any evidence of anyone working on large screen 3D displays using any technology that doesn't require glasses I would love to read about it and will happily admit I was talking BS, because I for one hate having to wear 3D glasses.

edit: I have no doubt that we will see large 3D TV without glasses at some point, but I have my doubts how soon it will be and whether it will use the same technology that's in the 3DS.

I thought it was too cheap!

http://www.markstechnologynews.com/2008/05/phillips-presents-3d-tv-without-glasses.html

sadly i can't find info about that ginormous 50 and 65 inch glasses-free 3D TV Sharp showed at some electronic convention about 2 years ago which was the first product that used their tech.

god, it's not even Nintendo's technology..don't you get it..there is no solution for what your talking about atleast for a bare min. 5 year's from now that even being optimistic. Even freaking sharp knows this the technology your describing does not exist yet to a price that people could buy at a reasonable price and even then it's still not going to be cheap enough in 5 more year's for that kind of price.

So from what we know, we can conclude that there are two alternative possible plans by Nintendo about 3D tech:

- either it just wants to be first on profitable 3D gaming and the best choice was doing it on portables because the best tech available for them is already glasses-free

- or, like Malstrom and others claim, its hidden agenda is to disrupt Sony's 3D TV business, kindly benefitting  glasses-free 3D techs' owners, that is Philips, LG, Sharp, Hitachi and whatever else, except Nintendo that doesn't produce screens, but it buys them from others... Interesting, THIS IS A BUSINESS PLAN!!! Investing billions not having its own interests as main purpose, but to benefit other companies! Yes, yes, it can only be the second option, the first one is too outlandish...

Edit @TomasPL: that 3D tech by Philips you gave a link about is very interesting, I was just thinking even before reading it that a tech that overcomes parallax barrier's limits could be based on lenses, prisms, or some other optical devices. Obviously, though, they currently are a lot more expensive than parallax barrier.

When I was little I was always told "Den som ger sig in i leken får leken tåla". It's all part of the game. If Sony can't take it, then maybe they should stop using the KB ads.

About the glasses. There's no way I will invest in 3D if you need glasses. I will just go with HD TV until glasses-free tv arrives.

When I watch TV or play games I want to be as comortable as possible. Having to wear glasses doesn't actually add to the comfortability.

If Sony were smart they should start pushing glasses-free 3D themselves.

Sony and all other TV manufacturers will start pushing glasses-less 3D TVs when the tech is efficient and affordable enough to be pushed into our living room in sizes over 3.5 inches (or sizes big enough to allow multiple viewers to look at the thing without getting a blurry picture). 

Right now, the best reports I've got about the current prototypes is that the viewing angle is of 30 degrees.  That's really not the kind of tech that can work in your living room with multiple viewers.  That is why the technology is better suited for portable devices at this point in time.  It wil get better down the road, but in its current form, it's just no good for a crowded living room.

This might be worth a look...

http://www.holografika.com/

haha, Nint didn't bash 3D glases, they just presented this as obsolete and answered the many calls of "we don't want glasses".

they have the perfect tech for 3D gaming, heck TVs using that tech would be great too... but you couldn't use them with other things.... though on the DS the effect can be turned up or down, so, why not on a regular TV??? (yes you need to sit at the focal point :p)

Very interesting, but holographic TRUE 3D is a completely different tech, largely incompatible with stereoscopic 3D, because it needs to be given full infos of the 3D scenes, not just two 2D projections of it per each frame like stereoscopy, so, while from the full 3D infos you need for true 3D you'll always be able to extract two 2D frames, if needed to send a back-compatible signal from new contents producing or playing devices to older displays, it's also obvious that once true 3D becomes affordable, stereoscopy is dead. True 3D broadcasting will require an awfully large bandwidth, though... Thinking about this, actually gaming could use holography sooner than anything else, as it generates 2D or 3D scenes from 3D descriptions much simpler and smaller than real world, even in the most graphically intensive  games, so only the short link between graphics card and display will require a significantly larger bandwidth than now, while playing and/or broadcasting holographic movies of real world scenes would require storing and retrieving and/or broadcasting of a far larger amount of data.