Originally Posted by longtimestalker
I doubt it and Active is selling under expectations. Passive from LG is now fixed and shows 3million pixels on the screen so there is really no advantage to the darker flicker prone more expensive active 3D.
You missed the point. The point is either active or passive work with all current 3D source signals and source equipment so both can continue to exist. Actvie vs Passive is not a format war because the glasses are not the format, they are a part of the display choice
, just like choosing between Plasma, LCD, DLP maybe in the future OLED etc.
A format war is when source equuipment and source signals are not comptiabible with each other.
BETA and VHS used different cassette devices that would not be interchangable but even if they used the same cassette, the actual method of organizing and recording the information on the magnetic tape was different. When you selected a format you also had to be supported by the content suppliers. If they did not supply content in your format you had nothing to watch. Same thing with Blu-ray vs HD-DVD.
The source formats and source devices have ZERO influnce on which type of glasses. The TV, if it is a full 3D TV, is what the glasses have to match, not the source signal or source device. If Plasma, LCD, DLP, OLED etc can all exist together, then Passive and Active can all exist together.
The main cost of the "format" going forward really will be the cost of the source signal. Each Blu-ray you rent or purchase, each download you get, each pay-per-view movie. THE FORMAT IS NOT THE GLASSES IT IS THE SOURCE SIGNALS AND DEVICES. The glasses are only important to the individual TV you purchase which normally is not a frequent purchase over the life of the TV
If you perfer passive, then buy passive; if you perfer active, then buy active - one does not need to win over the other. It is the incorrect pushing of this argument that is hurting the furthering of 3D TVs, not fact that there are two types of glasses systems.