For all you 3-D's a gimmick people

[Eaglesfan9106]

So if 3ds such a gimmick the y dont we see in 2d? Lol just saying its not gimmick if anything its more realistic . Id rather see a picture and feel like im literally seeing it .just a thought lol so pretty much what yous are saying is everything u see is a gimmick my cents take it as u will

 

[chanchan05]

We dont see in 2d simply because the world we live in isnt 2d. D'oh.3D phones now a re a gimmick simply because the technology they are using to make it is flawed, its not real 3D, works bad, and you cant even brag about it. Each person has a different visual angle for what it works, and if you dont find that sweet spot, it causes headaches. Basically, its just so the manufacturers can say, hey our phone can do 3D! but at the level of todays 3D display technology, it isnt worth it to buy a 3D phone. Therefore its gimmick. Maybe in 3 years when they manage to make decent 3D displays.

 

[Eaglesfan9106]

Ehhh idk.. Looks pretty 3d to me I can focus clearly on any picture without a problem .I just dont see how its a gimmick its just as 3d as any movie in theatres ,and it only irritates ur eyes if ur literally staring at it for multiple minutes y you would do that idk .but thanks for the reply just trying to figure out why people are so fast to put it down when it looks great to me

 

[atg284]

I bought the EVO 3D for its processing power. The 3D was just an added bonus. I am blown away by the pictures and videos though! If it looks this good on my phone then I can wait to see them on a 3d tv/monitor.

All in all, I would choose a 3d phone over a similar spec'ed phone. It's that neat

 

[Gmash]

Noooooooo!!! Not this argument again!!! Please make it stop!

 

[chanchan05]

Ehhh idk.. Looks pretty 3d to me I can focus clearly on any picture without a problem .I just dont see how its a gimmick its just as 3d as any movie in theatres ,and it only irritates ur eyes if ur literally staring at it for multiple minutes y you would do that idk .but thanks for the reply just trying to figure out why people are so fast to put it down when it looks great to me

Thats the point, you cant use the 3D for extended period of times, you'll still be using the 2D display more often. Which in my book, is just a gimmik. A cool feature that you can enable whenever you want to, but not something you'd really need.

 

[Yeahha]

What is the need for it? Does it satisify a problem people have that has not been addressed?

Other technologies that have been incorporated in cell phones have addressed needs, such as not carrying multiple devices. That is why phones now have 3.5 mm headphone jacks and cameras. There is no real need to have a device display 3d. The technology is still in its infancy and there are no industry standards so currently having the ability to us it is gimmicky.

 

[takeshi]

So if 3ds such a gimmick the y dont we see in 2d?

Neither here nor there -- I think you're using flawed logic. The fact that we live in a 3D world and 3D being a gimmick on smartphones aren't mutually exclusive. If you like it, great -- enjoy it. It's a gimmick to me and this topic is a dead horse.

Reality and our perception of depth involves far more than just stereoscopic vision. We use many other visual cues that do not rely on stereoscopic vision to interpret depth.

Ehhh idk.. Looks pretty 3d to me I can focus clearly on any picture without a problem .I just dont see how its a gimmick its just as 3d as any movie in theatres

...and it's just as gimmicky as 3D in movie theaters.

and it only irritates ur eyes if ur literally staring at it for multiple minutes y you would do that idk .

Because I already look at my phone's display for multiple minutes. The real question is why would you assume that everyone else's usage is identical to your own? Never assume that your preferences/usage/etc are universal.

but thanks for the reply just trying to figure out why people are so fast to put it down when it looks great to me

For me, it offers no value. It offers no added functionality. I certainly find value in things that are simply aesthetic but the current crop of 3D smartphone displays do not fall into that category.

 

[EarlyMon]

What is the need for it? Does it satisify a problem people have that has not been addressed?

Other technologies that have been incorporated in cell phones have addressed needs, such as not carrying multiple devices. That is why phones now have 3.5 mm headphone jacks and cameras. There is no real need to have a device display 3d. The technology is still in its infancy and there are no industry standards so currently having the ability to us it is gimmicky.

What's the need for 4G? For Bluetooth? For GPS?

It's just another option.

As for there being no standards - ummm - well, no more than exists for 3D HDTVs, BD players and disks. You can take the Evo 3D, convert your legal 3D movies using Handbrake (just like is done for 2D movies) and they play fine on the device - and can output 3D via HDMI to a compatible TV.

It's glasses-free technology in its fourth generation from Sharp - hardly new.

And it's not made to be viewed by 80 people at once - it's designed to be viewed by one person, looking through a phone display. From the sweet spot. Exactly the way an audiophile listens to music or a videophile watches their big HDTV.

Viewed properly, it's a eyestrain-free experience, complete with depth or things popping far out from the screen (up to the movie producer).

And while the popular dialog tries to establish that 3D is for the lunatic fringe, the truth here is that smartphone surveys show that 3 out 10 prefer 3D, 3 out 10 think it's a waste, and 4 out of 10 don't much care if their new top-end phone has 3D or not, because they already don't expect to use all of the features anyway - so long as there doesn't appear to be a cost burden.

Taking last year's Evo 4G vs. the Evo 3D, the new model packs a dual-core processor, twice the ram, 4 times the rom, a higher resolution display, phenomenally better battery life - at the exact same price as the 4G (adjusted for inflation, it's actually cheaper).

That's been showing itself in the forums to satisfy that 40% nicely who won't use the 3D feature.

So, while the 30% of you thinking this is a gimmick are certainly right because opinions are never wrong (I actually believe that, that's not sarcasm), please notice that not all opinions (on either side of this fence) are fully supported by facts.

The facts are that the facts can be skewed to show 70% aren't in to 3D or that 70% are ok with 3D - but in the end, the lovers and haters are about an equally sized group and each group is outnumbered by the don't-cares.

As Gmash points out, this old chestnut keeps cropping up. Rather than close this one, I'm going to leave this open as the thread recurrence simply indicates that it's something people seem to want to hammer out, and that's good enough for me.

And with that, off comes the mod hat, on comes the user hat.

Rather than gimmick, I think it's a novelty. I would never, ever want to see The Maltese Falcon or Good Night and Good Luck in 3D. However - I have seen a few amusing things on YouTube in 3D and I'm no worse for the wear.

Some say 3D will die out (again, after all, it's been around before), while others say 3D is simply part of the natural evolution of display technology. That - I have no clue, time will tell.

I do know that I don't use Bluetooth and I do know that no one really makes my ideal phone (and probably never will due to costs). So, in today's market, I've not found a better phone for me, I'm totally happy with my purchase and the device.

And they threw in 3D along with Bluetooth, both of which are really just novelties to me - but didn't seem to increase the cost compared to competing models on other carriers.

 

[chanchan05]

I like debates. I personally think that its just a gimmick NOW that there arent enough apps and tech to justify the use of 3D other that it looks good (same for 4G, thats overkill IMO). Maybe when we have 3D video calling ?

Bluetooth however, makes for wireless connection, file transfer, streaming, basically eliminating the need for wires. Even without those, a simple file transfer between two phones without the hassle of emails, internet connection (note everyone has one), wires or whatever, for me justifies the need for bluetooth.

GPS. well helps in locating your position, helps you find places you might want to look for (a pharmacy perhaps, because you ran out of medications on the road?). What this does is decreases the need for a separate dedicated device. You wont bring a GPS always with you, but you'd always have your phone. You never know when you might have to look for that pharmacy/hospital/hotel due to an emergency. It may not be absolutely necessary on a phone, but great for emergencies and other possible needs.

As for 3D, well it allows for 3D pictures and videos. I understand that it looks nice, a nice feature to probably have, but its not a deal breaker IMO. Just a bonus. This is the kind of thing that I feel it wouldnt be advantageous to be an early adopter. Its pure eye candy. IMO us who feels that its not worth investing on is simply not interested in that kind of nonfunctional eye candy. For me it makes no difference if the picture/video I took was in 3D or not, what matters to me is that I captured the moment. As long as the pic is of nice enough quality and viewable, thats fine with me. Its a person to person basis. Which is why I also dont see all this hype about AMOLED vs LCD. As long as the thing is viewable under the sun and the resolution isnt bad, I couldnt care less about deep blacks. XD

I feel like this is the same as asking fanboys of either Apple or Android why... Its just a preference. What one likes may not be the same for others due to different needs.

 

[Yeahha]

I won't quote your entire post earlymon.

GPS, Bluetooth, and 4g have all been adopted to suit consumer needs/wants. We are always moving closer to having 1 mobile device to do everything that is what we have been telling OEM for ages.

I still contest 3d phone experiences are in the infant stages of development, consumer ready glasses free 3d technology has not been around long. Compare it to how long smartphones were available until they became mainstream. Currently I think 3d technology is a gimmick (although novelty does fit better) but all it will take is a good marketing push to make it mainstream.

Anything like the Droid campaign from Verizon or Steve Jobs telling the icrowd that 3d is the next big thing and 3d would be a requirement on most phones from then on.

I don't see it going away people have been trying to get it to work for years but now the technology is beginning to catch up it just needs to find it's niche.

 

[Eaglesfan9106]

Because I already look at my phone's display for multiple minutes

the only thing in 3d is pictures and some movies not the display your talking about.

 

[Frisco]

I've had to edit out too many remarks aimed at the person and not the issue at hand.

Please cool down, friends.

 

[chanchan05]

the only thing in 3d is pictures and some movies not the display your talking about.

But movies last for more than a few minutes.

 

[EarlyMon]

I watched the included movie, The Green Hornet, just to see.

It did a good job.

I think the point being made was that the display is clear, sharp, and color-neutral - very good - display when used for 2D.

If you don't go out of your way, you'd never know in normal use that it's anything other than a high quality normal screen.

 

[chanchan05]

What tech does the Evo 3D use anyway? I remember the LG using a tech where both eyes would see a different set of pixels when placed on your viewing sweet spot. Sure you see 3D but you also only see half the total pixel count (less sharp) than if you would use the 2D display.

 

[cds0699]

The real question is why would you assume that everyone else's usage is identical to your own? Never assume that your preferences/usage/etc are universal.

+1, well said. We each have our own feature set and options in a device that are important to each of us as individuals, and I respect that. I have never been the type to try to push my opinions on others, I'll state what I think but in the end I always recommend people decide for themselves.

3D could become a very cool feature, and im one of those that's kinda on the fence currently. I think it has potential and as technology develops and improves, it should become better and better.

I'm glad current Evo 3D owners are enjoying the feature

 

[Eaglesfan9106]

But movies last for more than a few minutes.

touche but theres a difference between a professional movie and a amatuer picture/video

 

[Bob Maxey]

The problem with 3D phones is they are, in my well-experienced and carefully considered opinion, a gimmick. Manufacturers are running out of new features, so some are hoping 3D will help carve out a bigger piece of the pie.

3D phones, in my well-experienced and carefully considered opinion arrived because there are so many 3D movies and TVs out there, so why not a 3D phone? Seems like the perfect time to give us a stereoscopic telephone.

Most of you kids (Smiley) do not live in a 3D world or have much 3D experience, so let me tell you that 3D makes a comeback every so often and then it goes away. We experience the expected ebb and flow of a way cool medium that can offer us far more than we are getting today.

Usually in the form of terrible movies that toss every possible thing at the audience. Then 3D goes back to sleep until next time, leaving in its wake a bunch of people that complain about eye strain or something else that has absolutely nothing to do with the medium; more often than not, it is caused by idiot projectionists and poorly made glasses.

There is a good chance for 3D to once again arrive in the marketplace. I do not think the solution is a 3D phone, however. Some manufacturers and movie producers like James Cameron seem to think they invented 3D.

3D has never totally died and the Internet makes it possible to find cameras, tools, and supplies for creating and projecting spectacular 3D images. Those images are not coming from a phone, however. Sharp optics, properly matched, in a film camera loaded with Kodachrome 25 and viewed with a quality viewer is the way to go. RIP Kodachrome, I miss you. Sniff, sniff, tears, sniff.

Regardless, I am glad 3D anything is back in the public eye. A good chance to sell 3D products to the masses, I guess.

Say, did you know ANY cell phone with a camera can take stereo images? And if you love video games, it is possible to create stereo images from the game? Another thread, perhaps.

Long Live 3D

 

[Bob Maxey]

I won't quote your entire post earlymon.

GPS, Bluetooth, and 4g have all been adopted to suit consumer needs/wants. We are always moving closer to having 1 mobile device to do everything that is what we have been telling OEM for ages.

I still contest 3d phone experiences are in the infant stages of development, consumer ready glasses free 3d technology has not been around long. Compare it to how long smartphones were available until they became mainstream. Currently I think 3d technology is a gimmick (although novelty does fit better) but all it will take is a good marketing push to make it mainstream.

Anything like the Droid campaign from Verizon or Steve Jobs telling the icrowd that 3d is the next big thing and 3d would be a requirement on most phones from then on.

I don't see it going away people have been trying to get it to work for years but now the technology is beginning to catch up it just needs to find it's niche.

I'll assume you are talking about the current state of the art as far as telephones is concerned when you say, "consumer ready glasses free 3D technology."

The idea of glasses free viewing has been with us for many decades. I recall several attempts at a lenticular system that ultimately failed. Re: the Nimslo. Terrible quality and costly to print.

Decades before that we had Eastman Kodak's XOGRAPH process. Spectacular to be sure and costly, without a doubt.

Just want to keep the facts out there. But you are correct, a glasses free 3D camera phone is an infant. Let us hope the infant grows and is not aborted.

 

[A.Nonymous]

I remember the Virtual Boy. Gave a 3D gaming experience. Really took off too. Oh wait....

 

[dpeagle]

all you people calling 3d a gimmick need to read the post in the link below. how soon people forget that less then 10 years ago people were calling cameras in phones a "GIMMICK TO SELL SERVICE". (Re: My Camera Phone is Awful - -Gimmick to sell Service: News Discussion Forum: Digital Photography Review)

 

[A.Nonymous]

all you people calling 3d a gimmick need to read the post in the link below. how soon people forget that less then 10 years ago people were calling cameras in phones a "GIMMICK TO SELL SERVICE". (Re: My Camera Phone is Awful - -Gimmick to sell Service: News Discussion Forum: Digital Photography Review)

As the person in that posts states, the camera was awful. It brought no value to the phone and wasn't close to being competitive with any of the digital cameras out there. Now, cell cameras have improved to where they really are just as good as any non-DSLR camera on the market. They've come from novelty to something that adds value.

As Bob reminded everyone, 3D seems to pop up about once a decade or so and everyone fawns over it, then realizes it's gimmicky and gets bored with it.

 

[chanchan05]

all you people calling 3d a gimmick need to read the post in the link below. how soon people forget that less then 10 years ago people were calling cameras in phones a "GIMMICK TO SELL SERVICE". (Re: My Camera Phone is Awful - -Gimmick to sell Service: News Discussion Forum: Digital Photography Review)

3D in phones NOW is a gimmick. Camera on phones THEN was a gimmick. Did you own a camera phone then? I did, when the 7650i was newly released. The pictures were what, 100x100 pixels or less? And the only way to export them from the phone was MMS. Pretty useless I would say, especially when compared to today's cameras on phone's where technology has gotten to the point where they are actually USEABLE and ELIMINATES A NEED to carry a separate camera for most people. I just got the girls in school saying ooohhhh...

Maybe 10 years from now, 3D could be a necessity in a phone. But NOW, its a gimmick.

 

[dpeagle]

3D in phones NOW is a gimmick. Camera on phones THEN was a gimmick. Did you own a camera phone then? I did, when the 7650i was newly released. The pictures were what, 100x100 pixels or less? And the only way to export them from the phone was MMS. Pretty useless I would say, especially when compared to today's cameras on phone's where technology has gotten to the point where they are actually USEABLE and ELIMINATES A NEED to carry a separate camera for most people. I just got the girls in school saying ooohhhh...

Maybe 10 years from now, 3D could be a necessity in a phone. But NOW, its a gimmick.

- first off, my first cell phone was a fujitsu pocket commander circa 1987. it was analog service through cellular one. no digital service, sprint, att, verison, or tmobile. when you make a comment like "maybe in 10 years 3d could be a necessity in a phone". say that. by calling it a gimmick, what you are actually saying (just as the poster in the link) is that the tecnology of that feature currently is not yet refined. that is much different then describing a feature as a gimmick.