We can still remember the days, not too long ago, that HD channels were but a sparse luxury. Now of course they're a dime a dozen, but you can still look onward to the next big thing, which
BSkyB is wagering will be
3D. The satellite broadcast is gearing up to launch a 3D television station next year to showcase movies, and sports -- the latter of which we're thinking will be the biggest draw. Any customer with a Sky+ HD box can receive the transmission, but you're also gonna need to look past that ragged old flat-panel HDTV and instead use a 3D-ready set and glasses. We can't imagine a huge demand for this anytime in the near future, but if the technology does take off, they'll be more than ready to capitalize.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
miko34 @ Jul 30th 2009 11:23PM
Polarized is better than anaglyph, but it still makes my eyes hurt after a while.
I'll wait for the wireless field sequential to become more popular.
They are ten times better.
Best would be no glasses at all, but hey it's still 2009.
Ben Holmes @ Jul 31st 2009 3:24AM
Many projectors on the market can/will support 3d via firmware upgrades.
Frankly, I think a projector is essential for 3d - the illusion is ruined any time an object hits the frame in 3d, and with a 3d TV, that happens all the time. I'm going to go out on a very shor wt limb here and say this will never be mainstream. After all, it's had about 50 years to take over in cinema.
Sky ARE serious about this however - considerable time and staff have already been committed for over 18 months.
DrXym @ Jul 31st 2009 5:02AM
3D is and will continue to be a gimmick for the forseeable future. There isn't enough content and there is no easy way to view it . Any TV that offers 3D it had better offer it as a value-add because no one is going to buy an overpriced set if its no good for normal TV viewing.
squiggleslash @ Aug 1st 2009 12:36PM
I agree with DrXym.
(That doesn't happen very often, so I felt the need to post that ;-)
Seriously, I don't even like watching stuff in 3D. Perhaps one day, when the technology is such it can beam different images to my retinas without the need for special glasses and viewing angles, then I'll be happy. As it is, 3D sucks. And while it may be cutting edge, and people who like gimmicks and new technologies are quick to jump on it, I suspect 90% of people out there feel the same way.
Tom W Browning @ Jul 31st 2009 6:51AM
Just me who thinks Sky should be putting cash spent here into improving their patchy service, dodgy hardware and software and poor selection of on-demand material rather than just increasing bloat?
Josh @ Jul 31st 2009 10:31AM
Do you get a bottle of Advil too?
Vidikron @ Jul 31st 2009 10:42AM
Ugh... I hate this 3D push. It's bad enough that it leaves most current HDTV owners SOL, but who the hell wants to wear 3D glasses just to watch TV (especially if you wear glasses and don't have contacts)? It's fine for the occasional movie or game, but all the time? Fuck that. Seriously, it's a headache inducing PITA.