2010—or was it 2009—was supposed to be the year of 3D, and it was in a way. The 3D movie mega-hit Avatar played from December 2009 into 2010. We saw our first commercially available 3D HDTVs and, according to reports, these first 3D TVs flew off the shelves, if something that weighs upwards of 75 pounds can fly off anything. Now, however, we're staring at the start of the critical holiday buying season and the outlook for 3D is not all that good.
As reported earlier in a recent study from DisplaySearch News, the 3D TV market isn't growing at the rate manufacturers had hoped. But don't worry, folks, 3D TV is sure to become "mainstream" by 2014. Talk about lipstick on a pig.
Personally, I don't think we need 3D TV. However, with HDTV about as high-def as it's ever going to get before it reaches a level where the human eye probably can't perceive the difference, television manufacturers are desperate for consumers to embrace this next big thing. Too bad they went about delivering 3D to the market in all the wrong ways.
If there's one thing consumers won't put up with, it's the fracturing of the basic television-viewing experience. Not only do all current 3D TVs require glasses, they're not all using the same ones. Some knuckle-head manufacturers are even charging extra for these glasses, which may only work with a fraction of today's 3D TVs. Imagine if you bought glasses that only focused on buildings and signs but not cars and people.
Yes, I know, some well-heeled consumers with money to burn ran out and bought up all of these 3D sets as soon as they arrived at retailers. I saw one report that put 3D HDTV sales at over $55 million. That sounds like a lot, but much less so when compared to the multi-billion dollar business that is TV sales (somewhere in the neighborhood of 50 million TV sets are sold in the U.S. each year). These early adopters probably wouldn't care if the 3D HDTV viewing experience required a full, 3D-immersion body suit. Average consumers, I think, are not so anxious to pay for 3D. Seriously, why would manufacturers think it's okay to only charge extra for some glasses, and ask for as much as $150 a pair, when the economy is still struggling to emerge from The Great Recession?
I always believed that this first phase of 3D HDTV was not the way we would ultimately experience innovation on our HD sets. Wearing special glasses to consume any TV content at home is ridiculous. I recall buying my kids a Laser Tag game where they could run around and shoot each other. Part of the toy involved a set of goggles that offered a sort of heads-up display for intelligence from your Laser Tag gun. The kids still pick up the guns occasionally, but they stopped using the annoying goggles almost immediately.
Even with the best 3D HDTVs I've heard complaints about the weight of the special glasses. I've been wearing regular glasses almost all my life and I always shop for lightweight lenses and frames; otherwise, my face hurts at the end of the day. Now I'd have to wear my own glasses and these special 3D glasses, as well? With more than half the U.S. population wearing glasses, it's no wonder 3D TV sales have turned sluggish.
On the other hand, I guess we all might have gotten used to wearing the stupid 3D glasses if two things hadn't happened. The first is the near non-existence of 3D content. Where are the disks? Where are the shows? I know there are a handful of movies available for purchase and some sports events have enjoyed 3D broadcast, but that's it. The second big issue is the one I expected all along: Toshiba and others are developing 3D HDTVs that don't require special glasses.
Didn't anyone else see that coming? I feel sorry for all the early adopters who paid a premium for these lovely sets. At least the 3D HDTVs are all backwards compatible with standard 2D content, and when consumers lose or break those annoying glasses, they'll probably never miss them anyway. Anyone else who heard this news essentially hit the brakes on the 3D buying process and said, "3D without glasses? That's what I want. I'll just wait for that to arrive." Who is going to pay a premium for a 3D HDTV this holiday buying season when they'll be able to get a 2D, 1080p Internet-ready set for a steal on Black Friday?
Will 3D TV be ubiquitous by 2014? Maybe, but what's more likely is that our little romance with 3D is just about over. You see, the 3D movies are all tanking and even the next Harry Potter film, which was already advertised as arriving in 3D, will instead play on thousands of movie screens across the country in glorious 2D. We'll probably see another 3D surge in five or 10 years, but I, for one, am happy to see this one go. Buh-bye.
Get on Lance Ulanoff's RSS Feed.
Follow me on Twitter! http://twitter.com/LanceUlanoff
More Lance Ulanoff:
• Learning to Draw on the iPad
• How to Get More Followers on Twitter
• New HP CEO Should Follow Apple's Lead
• RIM's PlayBook: More Tablet Excitement and Confusion
• Stop Using Windows XP, Please
• more
No comments:
Post a Comment