I've got two 3D televisions. Both passive 3D (can't get on with active 3D) and think they are brilliant but I don't use the 3D all the time. I think I'd rather have passive 3D than a glasses free tv where I lost the 3D effect momentarily if I moved my head too much. Passive 3D is really comfortable and the glasses are super cheap (same as cinemas). You don't care if you break them as replacements are so cheap. Glasses free 3d, passive 3d and active 3d can all co exist and use the same material so glasses free 3d can only help 3d in general. Also octulus rift and sony's vr headset will also help create 3D material. Yes those VR headsets will be a better 3d experience but 3d tv's are still better than 2d tvs. A sort of half way house between the two. I'm sure the future is VR headsets so don't expect 3D to be discontinued.

I'm still waiting for a source Kaizar. If you can't provide one then this thread should just be locked.

Your best thread yet, OP. I give it a 3 star out of D.

3D TV's were never a big hit so I don't see why a 3D TV without glasses will do well. I predict 4K TV's will never do well either just like OLED.

Glasses free 3D doesn't look like the savior of 3D any time soon. Sharp's 8K glasses free 3D tv didn't leave great impressions at CES.
http://gizmodo.com/sharp-8k-glasses-free-3d-eyes-on-future-is-hard-1497258592
So let's be straight up: The glasses-free 3D on this massive TV just doesn't work very well. The TV was cycling through scenes from The Life of Pi and Frozen. The difficulty with any 3D is viewing angles: As you go from a dead center viewing perspective to a wider and wider angle it looks worse and worse. I would argue that Sharp's prototype barely has a viewing angle. The 3D effect barely works. It just kind of looks like the TV is broken.

The Samsung version is still 3 years away from market, and also plagued by 9 preset view points.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/17/samsung-shows-off-55-inch-glasses-free-3d-tv-prototype/

Vizio did better but is not going to market anytime soon either.
http://techland.time.com/2013/01/16/what-happened-to-glasses-free-3d-tv
If it wanted to, Vizio could ramp up production within six to twelve months, but for now the company has no plans to turn the glasses-free 3D prototype into a commercial product. The main reason Vizio showed the prototype at CES was to gather feedback and decide whether to move forward.

It will be 4K with optional 3D glasses for now. Glasses free tech is too expensive with too many downsides.

The difference is 3D requires you to wear glasses and not everyone is comfortable with the stereoscopic effect.
Glasses free 3D tvs are expensive and have diminished picture quality and restricted viewing angles.
OLED faces production difficulties and still costs over $10K

While 4K is a natural step forward and is already hitting sub $1000 prices.

Unless its on the 3ds

Here. http://www.theverge.com/2014/1/6/5279150/vizio-announces-first-consumer-4k-tvs-kills-3d-support

I saw an interview around CES that mentioned they were putting their 3D R&D towards glasses free, but that it wouldn't be affordable for at least two more years.  Of course they actually showed a glasses free 3D at the 2013 CES, so who knows when or if they'll actually have a consumer product out there. 

Of course, killing 3D for their 2014 line doesn't really gel with the way Kaizar preaches the domination of 3D.

I've had a 3D TV for 2 years and although I feel compelled to buy 3D blu-rays "just in case" I still tend to just watch everything in 2D. Sadly Stereoscopic 3D has become a bit of a meh.