Originally Posted by JOHNnDENVER
Is the OP looking for the lowest cost to get where he wants to be?
I mean.... You can get a real nice high quality quality experience for a lot less than $20K.
Obviously not, just a philosophical discussion about what really matters, and how some items are under or overvalued relative to the whole. Sort of like how people are willing to pay more for a thinner TV. How did thinner ever become a performance metric for televisions? People will spend more to get a thinner TV, when that extra money could've went to a bigger TV instead (which although it might not be obvious, is a much more important measure of performance regarding how well you'll be able to see and appreciate the picture than thin-ness) The low-end glasses are sort of a joke, they're definitely the weak link in the chain. Even more so with passive tv's, how good do you expect the glasses to be for $5 each.... People will spend so much money on the other parts of the system, then want to go cheap on an obviously important part of the imaging chain. Luckily, 3D is probably only about 5% or less of viewing for most people, so they're still getting a stellar 2D experience from their systems, and for most systems there really aren't any better glasses options...