Here in Vegas a “whose is bigger” contest has evolved throughout the years between Sony and the new king of tech, Samsung. From what I hear, when the booths are being booked for the next year and the rep from the CEA calls Samsung for how many sq. ft. they need, the response is always the same. “How many does Sony have?  We’ll take more”. This year appears to be no different.

Bear in mind … this is only a small part of their official area. Perhaps around 40%, if I were to give an educated guess.

Their booth probably had more than two hundred TV’s. And I didn’t find even a single set set that wasn’t a 3D or smart set. This was supposed to be the year of the “3D smart TV” … And I haven’t seen a new set yet that isn’t connected to the internet. But it’s really more like the year of the “3D” sets, in the TV field, that is. While everyone is pushing apps for TV’s, it’s really not all that new. After all, Samsung and LG sells “connected” refrigerators. (But really, do you need Pandora playing when you go for a Coke?)  Gosh, that’s a scary thought. A frig that knows what’s inside and starts playing commercials every time the door is opened. How about a screaming “Elsie the Cow” every time the icebox realized that it was low on milk?

But I digress … the 3D sets are getting better, buuuut, as before, there is NO content. (Hello Hollywood!!!)  When the big news in 3D broadcasts is that ESPN will have a talking head sports show in 3D … that’s a pretty blatant clue.

The glasses-free versions, as predicted, to put it bluntly … are simply awful. I started to get a wee bit nauseated watching one. (I will try to do a post showing the problems) And yes, the cheap passive glasses (polarized lensed), are not as good as the active glasses. The polarizing glasses, invented by Edwin Land of Polaroid fame, have been around since 1936. Why would a manufacturer, selling a $2000+ set, think that a buyer would be willing to sacrifice picture quality to save fifty bucks for a pair of cheaper glasses?

« »