While I understand what you're saying, you're completely ignoring the price factor of such tvs. They won't be cheap, thats for sure!

Quagmire · Jan 10, 2010 1:47 PM

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Lahure Kancha · Jan 10, 2010 1:58 PM

3D tv will take at least 5 years to be popular and household name. HD tv will go pretty strong by then.   To broadcast in 3 D the videos should be taken by multiple cameras. I doubt there are enough content at the moment in the world to be broadcasted in 3D. People still capture video on 2D. May be they can broadcast for few hours. Secondly it is bound to be very very expensive because those programs needs to get its production cost. Thirdly, I see the 3D tv products. Whichever 3D tv product i saw  be it Huyndai  or Sony. Those 3D tv needs special glasses to be seen in 3D. I wonder how many people would want to keep wearing glasses to watch the 3D TV.

no_quiero · Jan 10, 2010 4:55 PM

Just like any other *on-demand* technology, content delivery mechanism is equally as important as content providers/owners. Luckily, the Cable system that provides TV signals with Video On Demand or Switched Digital Video is capable of providing 3DTV signals to your home. So the wait time for the technology to come to your home, provided you demand for it, is LESS than you expected! And as always since it is a technology driven by demand than necessity and due to the popularity of HD technology and the whole avatar buzz, the content providers, cable equipment manufacturers, 3D tech companies and consumer electronics companies would work together with the standard bodies devising standard technologies for distribution of 3D TV over any medium to your home. The Set Tops that you use at your home are already 3D frame compatibles and the cable bodies are working close for interoperability and specifications to make your "wearing 3D glasses at home" dream a reality pretty soon.

Sleepless · Jan 10, 2010 5:28 PM

I am an undergraduate student working illegally in gas stations. I have to work day and night for my tuition fee, food and room rent. Hence, I can not afford it. I pass it.

donald_duck · Jan 10, 2010 9:06 PM

Forget high cost and production complexity; 3D is best viewed in HUGE screens and from a certain distance else the picture blurs. Who would want to engineer all that at home? And 3D goggles are eye-straining gadgets for many. At home, most would want to take TV viewing easily -  especially after a strenuous day at work. I would rather take my glasses off and view Anderson Cooper on a 2D lying down on my couch.  It will be like riding a roller-coaster to work - very exciting to do once in a while but not something you would want to do everyday. In summary, epic fail. No harm in experimenting though. Good luck, Panasonic!

Pret Aatma · Jan 10, 2010 9:13 PM

Much of the innovations like these come from exclusive demand from people. If it is cool to have a mini-phone-PC on your palm and revolve your world around it, it is cool to be busy with a 3D experience at home from a harsh day at work too. Anyway, I am not even debating if it is necessary or not or to what age groups and what not. Here is the research that surveys a bit onto the 3D Market. http://www.quixelresearch.com/...

Sleepless · Jan 10, 2010 9:50 PM

If you can wear condom, then why would it be a problem/hassle to wear tha tspecial 3D glasses?????

Ved555 · Jan 10, 2010 11:00 PM

Those glasses give me headache. So no for me. 

justforthistime · Jan 10, 2010 11:55 PM

I am Greating Ready for 3DHD LOL

CyberLegend · Jan 11, 2010 11:10 AM

Don't buy 3D TV yet unless you are very rich. It will be very expensive initially.

Power_Ranger · Jan 11, 2010 1:06 PM

I agree with donald_duck.

hussain_khan · Jan 11, 2010 1:11 PM