Technology does have the ability to enrich our lives and at a pace of change that continually blasts through all traditional rules for adoption. It used to be true that a new product, especially one of an electronic genre, would require as much as one generation, or about twenty years, too be fully absorbed into the mainstream of life. Radio, television, and even personal computers fell in line with this general rule of the road. But, in today’s ultra-modern age of the Internet, Google, and Facebook, social change has pushed down the accelerator.
One case in point is HDTV. This new technology all of the stages of early adoption even with high launch prices, continued interest while prices fell, and then full adoption by consumers, manufacturers, and network content providers in the span of only five years. At the Consumer Electronics Show (“CES”) of 2010, purveyors of upgraded television viewing were at it again, hoping for the same adoption response rate to “3D TV” offerings to consumers. We have come along way with technology. Can you imagine what it was like for people to have air conditioning in their homes for the first time. Air condition repair palm coast and many other companies were able to take advantage of this new technology to make money.
“3D TV” was supposed to be the big story for CES 2010. Panasonic, LG, Samsung, Sony, and a few smaller panel makers had obviously invested billions in the technology from the look of futuristic demonstration booths. The viewing experiences, however, varied across the spectrum from decent to suspect. The oft-repeated phrase by many was “under-whelmed”, but many suppliers also presented a smaller LED approach that displayed what the future might bring in order to remind viewers that the technology has only begun with plasma screens and may evolve to something compelling down the road.
No one was rushing to their respective forex brokers to buy Yen for any of these units just yet, the primary reason being that you had to wear battery-powered “shutter glasses” to view the three-dimensional effects. The glasses tune into a signal from the TV and alternate frames between each eye to produce the desired “3D” effect, the major drawback generally noted by every potential early adopter at the conference. The glasses are expensive, run by rechargeable batteries, and not the lightest things around.
A recent study published this April confirmed what was already surmised as the obstacle retarding rapid “3DTV” adoption. “In the earliest days of HD, price was clearly the number one concern for people who might otherwise have an interest in the technology, but in 3D we have this added wrinkle of the glasses,” said Ross Rubin, an NPD analyst who wrote the report, when comparing the evolution of HDTV to 3D TV.
In January, CES 2011 “under-whelmed” attendees once again. Producers appear to be divided into two camps, one supporting active shutter glasses and the other, lightweight “passive” glasses. Yes, there is work behind the scenes on glass-less technology, but current versions only work on very small screen types, more suitable for confined video game playing.
“3DTV” will evolve since these versions can “mimic” a normal TV. The technology will happen, regardless of consumer demand. This new technology isn’t as grim as the mortgages that people are struggling with due to the struggling economy. Only time will tell if new technology actually takes off