Originally Posted by *UFO*
It has nothing to do with the cost of 3D, it is simply the fact that the majority of consumers do not like, or do not care for, 3D tech. Including me. Vizio is simply trying to appeal to the masses. Why add something that wont get used? Yes, I understand there are people who love 3D and think its the best thing ever, however you would be a minority. Not to mention the possible health risks 3D proposes. Why expose children to something potentially dangerous? Heres a small article from Samsung: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/7596241/Samsung-warns-of-dangers-of-3D-television.html
The Samsung article refers to active
3D: "To view television in 3D, users wear special glasses which bombard the eyes and brain with a succession of flashing images that appear for a fraction of a second
And having tested both active and passive several years ago, I would never use active for exactly that reason - it was a poorly-conceived technology-of-desperation to begin with.
Passive works much better with the only drawback that resolution is sacrificed so that it is not true 1080p.
The problem with asking why Visio should not add something that won't get used is two-fold:
-it is not adding, it is subtracting. 2013 customers already get passive 3D, so this capability is being subtracted from 2014 customers.
-as the posts on this forum show, passive 3D does
have users (me included) and many of those users understood the limitation of the sacrificed resolution that could have been beautifully compensated for with a 4K panel to deliver 'true' 1080p passive 3D.
If Visio could have continued to deliver passive 3D for 'free', it was truly a boneheaded move to remove it. My suspicion is that 3D could only have been offered on the new FALD panels at a significant cost either in terms of engineering effort and/or development time and so I believe they probably made the right call.
How many features are delivered on your TV or your mobile phone that you never use? It is usually easier for OEMs to continue to offer that basket of features generation after generation than to put effort into pruning it back to the most essential set. I think 3D moved from being a 'must-have' feature in 2013 to an 'optional' feature in 2014 and those that could continue to offer it in 2014 at no additional cost/complexity did so while those (like Visio) that made ambitious technology moves that could not bring 3D along for free ditched it (for now).
I hope Vizios move allows Samsung and Sony to put the final nail in the coffin of active 3D and I also hope that if LG (and possibly Toshiba) continues with passive 3D because it costs them nothing, that passive 3D continues to be available and eventually makes its way onto these 4K panels. Even if only a single movie comes out every year that is worth watching in 3D, for the cost of a pair of polarized glasses (which is almost no cost), watching in passive 3D is an option worth having.
And honestly, I'm not sure how much more effort I want to put into this discussion of 3D - gaining FALD is far more important than losing 3D and the key question now is how effective the implementations are and what kind of PQ can be delivered at these phenomenal price-points...
I, for one, will be more than happy to forego 3D until whenever in exchange for getting a sub $2K FALD panel delivering plasma-like blacks and contrast this year.
-fafrdEdited by fafrd - 1/8/14 at 12:55pm