sky 3d

VisionMan

VisionMan wrote: »

No. Its a dying fad, hence why Sky ditched the live channel. They're only trying to save face by keeping it available on demand and thats pay for. Less than 2% of users watched it. Hardly mainstream.

brewerdave wrote: »

...But do you not think that part of the problem was .........

Unfortunately not. As a platform it bombed, representing less than 10% of sales and with only 2% actually connected. Manufacturers lost a fortune on these sets and so did Sky for pushing it. 4K on the other hand is here to stay. Phase 2 UHD specs have been drawn up now and unlike 3D everyone wants a piece.

teddysmum

VisionMan wrote: »

Unfortunately not. As a platform it bombed, representing less than 10% of sales and with only 2% actually connected. Manufacturers lost a fortune on these sets and so did Sky for pushing it. 4K on the other hand is here to stay. Phase 2 UHD specs have been drawn up now and unlike 3D everyone wants a piece.

In the days of taped video (What's that?'ask the youngsters)Betamax was hailed as the future, but it didn't last long.

brewerdave

teddysmum wrote: »

In the days of taped video (What's that?'ask the youngsters)Betamax was hailed as the future, but it didn't last long.

Still got a Sony Betamax in the garage in a box !!!:rotfl:

Going back to original discussion, I thought that 1080p 3D passive sets only used 540 lines per polarisation(ie each eye) so not HD ??

teddysmum

brewerdave wrote: »

Still got a Sony Betamax in the garage in a box !!!:rotfl:

Are you as optimistic as my husband who refuses to throw out his ancient shoe box sized Motorola 'mobile', which he even recharges a couple of times a year? :rotfl:

[Deleted User]

Betamax was the superior technology. VHS won out because it had much more content and choice.

3D, on the other hand, has just been a failure and has had nothing to do with competition...

macman

Betamax also lost out because Sony refused to agree commercial deals with the ahem, 'adult' film producers in LA, whose output was to become a large part of the market for video sales. Allegedly.
JVC had no such qualms, and VHS wiped out the opposition.

VisionMan

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

Betamax was the superior technology. VHS won out because it had much more content and choice.

And it was cheaper (price is always a major factor) plus VHS had more recording time.

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

3D, on the other hand, has just been a failure and has had nothing to do with competition...

What little there was. The industry didn't throw its weight behind it because they didn't believe in it due to a number of factors - costly high end kit, limited choice and limited content. Plus the headaches it gave some people.

forgotmyname

Have all Betamax owners gone over to 3D TV's now? I must tell my dad if thats the case, he was Betamax man

almillar

Betamax owners moved on to have extensive HD-DVD collections.