Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
User Settings
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Report this Comment
Use this form to report the selected comment to the moderators. Reporting should generally be used only if the comment breaks forum rules.

20. Re: Morning Consolidation Jul 29, 2011, 15:54 Beamer
That wasn't directed at you and I'm talking about how consumers distinguish them when they are shopping, not the underlying technology.

And yes consumers have absolutely paid for 3D, particularly in the ~50" LED market where prices over the past year have stayed relatively tight despite feature sets being mostly stagnant. That was literally the point of 3D, trying to keep profit margins up.

For manufacturers it was less about margin and more about revenues. They wanted people to turn over their old systems, not necessarily spend more. There are very, very few TVs on the market where you can buy a version with or without 3D. Instead most manufacturers have a line in the sand, so to speak. Everything above has 3D, everything below does not. It is not the only distinguishing factor, just one of them. Again, all I wanted was a top of the line picture quality. Starting in 2010 that was impossible to get without also getting 3D. Any fully functioning, high quality 2D TV also included 3D. No avoiding it.
Music for the discerning:
Login Email   Password Remember Me
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.


Blue's News logo