I'm sure those of you who pay enough attention to commercials know about this by now:
http://www.samsung.com/us/3dTV/www.sams ... ex_ok.html

Personally, I see it failing. They'll be a few people who get it for the 3D aspect. Others might get it because they were planning on getting an HDTV, anyway. But the fact that it requires you wear 3D glasses to get the full effect is going to be its achilles heel. Even moreseo because the 3D glasses are battery-powered. And unless these glasses fit over corrective lenses, it's going to prove an issue for the fairly large population of the US that needs corrective eyewear. Besides, how many movies/TV shows are actually going to be made in 3D?

I could see Avatar selling most of these 3-d products. But aside from that, not too many 3-d titles come to mind.

It sounds a little gimmicky to me, and unless there's a way for people with eyeglasses to use them (like me), I'll pass myself.

Don't forget about the education market. There is now a whole line of 3D TVs, projectors, related products, software packages, and so on targeted at schools. Every time a new technology is released, schools spend/waste millions of dollars on it.

The sales pitch is that 3D will "engage students, increase test scores, blah, blah, blah". Same thing that was said about radio in class rooms. And TV. And then computers. Plus a hundred other ed-tech fads that have come and gone.

For what it's worth, I think radio, TV, and especially computers in schools have proven useful.

Useful to a point. But not worth the billions of dollars spent on new, unproven, ed-tech when proven methods of educating children are un/under-funded.

i just laughed at the whole thing. there isnt any reason to get a tv that isnt really 3d. why cant you use the glasses on a regular tv to get the same effect? i think its over hyped and too new a technology to be useful. this is why i bought my tv and ignored the 3d aspect. in 10 years when i want to replace my tv ill take a look at see whats on the market and decide if its worth it.

its a fad for the moment and i dont doubt the inital excitement will die down when people actually find out what the new tv is all about. separate glasses? rechargeable? not compatible with eye ware? ultra expensive? give me a break -_-

It is really 3D - there are just many different ways of accomplishing it. Using alternating images and glasses is one way.

The reason the glasses won't work on a regular TV is that 3D television requires the alternating of images for the left and right eyes. Typical TVs, following the NTSC standard, operate at 60 Hz, which isn't fast enough to create seamless 3D. In order to create the 3D effect, at least 120 Hz is required. The only thing that actually makes these TVs new and special is that their frame-rate has been doubled.

It's still just an over-hyped fad, imo.

my new tv has 240 hz refresh rate, yet its not 3d. i saw quite a few tvs with 120 hz while i was looking to buy mine and 3d tvs wernt out yet.

I'm far from an expert on 3D TV, but I think that the TV also has to have a special IR emitter that the 3D glasses sync to. I imagine that any TV at 120 hz and above can display 3D video, but it needs to have that IR emitter to be compatible with the glasses.

Don't take my work for it, though.

I'd just assume the glasses would have a button to turn them on. Otherwise, they'd cosntantly be on, waiting for some signal from the TV.