Only 2% of UK consumers plan to buy 3D TVs
Discussion
Survey said:
A survey conducted by YouGov for Deloitte has found that just 2% of UK consumers plan to buy a 3D TV over the next 12 months, reports The Telegraph. In a survey of 4,199 consumers, only 89 said they planned to buy a 3D-enabled TV over the coming year. Consumers aged 25-34 are more likely to show interest, with 5% saying they planned to buy a 3D TV over the next 12 months. Those aged over 45 were the least likely (1%) to be planning to buy a 3D TV. The study that across the board, UK consumers showed little interest in buying new TV products or services, including web-enabled TVs and PVRs, with most interest shown in high-definition and flat-screen TVs (7%).
I can't say that this is particularly surprising.I think a lot more people will buy them when they have released them without the need for glasses. You look like a bunch of t
ts all sat there with daft glasses watching TV.
Toshiba seem to be leading the market in terms of designing a TV where you don't need glasses, and I think I read somewhere that they'll be releasing one within 2 years. That'll ps off folk who've just spent £2k on a 3D TV this year!
ts all sat there with daft glasses watching TV.Toshiba seem to be leading the market in terms of designing a TV where you don't need glasses, and I think I read somewhere that they'll be releasing one within 2 years. That'll p
s off folk who've just spent £2k on a 3D TV this year!Engineer1 said:
As many as 2% that's a fair bit higher than I'd have guessed. I'd imagine the recession and the fact that flat screen Tvs are still reasonably new, blu-ray still hasn't taken off neither has high definition means people won't rush to buy a potential "betamax".
I wouldn't call the current 3D TVs as a 'betamax'. They're still high quality, mostly LED, HD TVs, just with added 3D-ness. Even if 3D never takes off (which it won't in it's current format) then you're still left with a nice (rather expensive) TV.killsta said:
Engineer1 said:
As many as 2% that's a fair bit higher than I'd have guessed. I'd imagine the recession and the fact that flat screen Tvs are still reasonably new, blu-ray still hasn't taken off neither has high definition means people won't rush to buy a potential "betamax".
I wouldn't call the current 3D TVs as a 'betamax'. They're still high quality, mostly LED, HD TVs, just with added 3D-ness. Even if 3D never takes off (which it won't in it's current format) then you're still left with a nice (rather expensive) TV.t if they ever sort OLED out properly 
Engineer1 said:
As many as 2% that's a fair bit higher than I'd have guessed. I'd imagine the recession and the fact that flat screen Tvs are still reasonably new, blu-ray still hasn't taken off neither has high definition means people won't rush to buy a potential "betamax".
The 2% will be the career benefit scoungers who know there will be a way to get the state to pay for it.There is no way in hell specs 3D will catch on. Ever. Even 3D TV's that don't need the specs won't catch on unless they are roughly at parity in terms of price with normal TV's, or (like CRT's) normal LCD's are replaced by them wholesale. I really don't understand what the big manufacturers are hoping for here. By pricing additional specs at £100 or whatever they are they are guaranteeing failure.
A feel a bit of a tool wearing 3D specs when at the cinema, but in your own home? Not for me.
But the real epic fail as far as I can see is the style of the glasses. The ones given of at the flicks fit over normal glasses for people, like me who need glasses for distance. So far all of the 3D glasses I have seen to go with TV's are more like sports sunglasses, presumabley to make the wearer look less of a tool, so how I am going to fit my normal glasses under them then?
:???:
But the real epic fail as far as I can see is the style of the glasses. The ones given of at the flicks fit over normal glasses for people, like me who need glasses for distance. So far all of the 3D glasses I have seen to go with TV's are more like sports sunglasses, presumabley to make the wearer look less of a tool, so how I am going to fit my normal glasses under them then?
:???:
Dave_ST220 said:
killsta said:
Engineer1 said:
As many as 2% that's a fair bit higher than I'd have guessed. I'd imagine the recession and the fact that flat screen Tvs are still reasonably new, blu-ray still hasn't taken off neither has high definition means people won't rush to buy a potential "betamax".
I wouldn't call the current 3D TVs as a 'betamax'. They're still high quality, mostly LED, HD TVs, just with added 3D-ness. Even if 3D never takes off (which it won't in it's current format) then you're still left with a nice (rather expensive) TV.t if they ever sort OLED out properly It simply isn't cost effective and there are cheaper alternatives with similar specifications.
Gaming will drive 3D, when people start seeing FPS in 3D then it will gain inertia.
Plotloss said:
Gaming will drive 3D, when people start seeing FPS in 3D then it will gain inertia.
Nah, not enough potential market. I love FPS but I would never spend that kind money on a TV just to play it and I doubt that many other would either.All the time you have to wear glasses, it will never gain critical mass.
Personally, I have no plans to buy a 3DTV ever. I simply don't see the point. I has no appeal for me at all.
I just can't understand it really. 3D came around in a big way around 20 years ago wasn't it? And it failed, people just didn't see the interest in it. Now its back and I reckon it will go the same way.
When I went to Disneyland earlier this year they had reintroduced the Captain Eeo Michael Jackson film which was done in 3D, which demonstrates how long ago 3D was around. I can't really understand why its come back.
I've been informed that 3D without glasses is very tricky to achieve. I guess with enough money and research they will get around it though, if 3D is still in the limelight.
When I went to Disneyland earlier this year they had reintroduced the Captain Eeo Michael Jackson film which was done in 3D, which demonstrates how long ago 3D was around. I can't really understand why its come back.
I've been informed that 3D without glasses is very tricky to achieve. I guess with enough money and research they will get around it though, if 3D is still in the limelight.
Polarbert said:
I just can't understand it really. 3D came around in a big way around 20 years ago wasn't it?
I've just seen a bit of Jaws 3. There was a reason it failed, it was so spectacularly ste. It was like stopping the film and getting someone to run at you with a cartoon caricature of what you'd been seeing on screen a few minutes before. 
Same here.Gassing Station | Home Cinema & Hi-Fi | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff