Harrods and Currys fight over 3DTV claims

[Satellite News]

As the UK consumer prepares to go out and spend up to £3,000 pre-ordering a Sony 3D Television and the required equipment to produce a fantastic 3D image in the home, a row is emerging between suppliers.This row is nothing to do with price or service as the argument developing between top people’s store Harrods [...]

More: Harrods and Currys fight over 3DTV claims

[waqasahmed]

lol. Presumably, they both want to say something along the lines of first ever sellers of 3D TV's in the UK!

I wouldnt rush to buy a 3D TV at £3000
a) the running costs would probably be high, with them using quite a lot of power
b) there arent any 3D channels, though Sky will introduce those to us
c) Even when there are 3D channels, theyll be expensive and not worth the money until quite a while down the line
d) When it does become worthwhile to have a 3D TV, the price will have dropped to sub £1000
e) When they do become affordable, theyll also start to perfect the technology as they are doing to 3D TV's at the moment
f) 3D telly will probably be ridiculed the same way HD has today, meaning the need to perfect that piece of technology as well

If the price was affordable and the running costs were lower than current LED TV's, I may have thought about purchasing one, despite it being flakey technology. Running costs are my top priority, with the second being a (rhetorical) question-is there any affordable 3D content available?

Though me saying this, at the end of the day, consumers are generally gullible to say the least, with companies making them think they should buy a brand new 3D TV via advertising

[TheCoder]

Originally Posted by waqasahmed

b) there arent any 3D channels, though Sky will introduce those to us

I bet when they do, they'll claim 3D requires two channels so you have to have a double subscription.

One for each eye no doubt !