Non-Rechargable 3-D Glasses - What the What?

That was a response to the previous comment about televisions that use passive technology.

"Why cant I just use my 3D glasses from the movie theaters"

I hit "Add Comment" rather than "Reply" :p

Sorry for the confusion there!

Believe it or not 2 to 3 grand isn't insane for a tv (doesn't mean I can afford it though lol ;) ) Even older tv's like the Pioneer Kuro can easily run 4+ grand (it also is still considered one of the best tv's out there).

Given 3d tv's are newer tech the prices don't surprise me one bit. It will be expensive initially. In the next few years prices will drop.

Keep in mind these tv's aren't some low end tv's with a 3d feature, rather, extremely capable tv's with a 3d feature. Meaning even when 3d isn't on it would likely perform better than most low to mid range tv's on the market in 2d (I am generalizing of course). However, seeing 3d on these doesn't do too much for me given it seems everything seems pretty dim (becasue of the glasses), and for me to like it, it has to look really good. That is at least what I have seen with in-store demos.

Over the next few years this likely will simply be a feature in most mid range tv's (possibly even low end ones as well...referring to sub 600/700 dollar tv's) like it is in some high end ones currently.

Now what they should do is make bundle deals with the tv's with say, 4 glasses or so. When Blu-ray came out they allowed people to get free movies with their player to spark interest.

There is supposedly experimental displays that can disply 3d properly without glasses, but that is exteremly pricey.

However, even if 3d does improve, I don't necessarily want to use it all the time.

A good movie once in a while is fine with me, but other than that, I don't want to see every movie in 3d.

Edit: Also, this is a good thing too because it lowers the prices of non 3d displays.

If anything, the main problem 3d has now is lack of content. Prices will reduce over time.