http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/ Engadget Comments for XpanD X103 3D glasses universally compatible with 3DTVs, but not all wallets http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/
you're doing it wrong.]]>Mar 17th 2010 1:01AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/
........at least until glass-less3D is perfected]]>Mar 17th 2010 1:02AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/May 5th 2010 5:15AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/Mar 17th 2010 1:12AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/Mar 17th 2010 1:15AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/
Why do you comment on 3D stuff if you don't care about it?

To me this is just a transition for when the glasses-free 3D TVs come out. They'll sell these to make money in order to make those TVs. They'll probably come out by the end of this decade.]]>Mar 17th 2010 2:02AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/
when did i say i didn't care about it.

I do care, but that doesn't mean i like it, it could also mean i don't want it shoved into the price of every damn TV i buy in the future. I don't feel like paying a premium for headache inducing "entertainment"]]>Mar 17th 2010 2:15AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/
It was directed @kojo87.

Anyone can comment whether they like something or not, it can lead to a good discussion on what works and what doesn't or what they like or what they don't like.

I just see so many people who repeat their comments on how much they don't care about 3D at all and yet they keep clicking on the 3D articles to comment on how they don't care about 3D.]]>Mar 17th 2010 2:25AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/Mar 17th 2010 3:39AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/
It's an attempt to lobby the rising up against a gimmick hoisted on the consumer in a lame attempt to speed up the TV buying cycle.

Give us glasses free, independent viewer adjustable focal depth 3D, not this piddly effort.

The next bit will be a re-release of old movies and games NOW with 3D (faked) for even more than you paid 2 years ago for the same thing. Yah!]]>Mar 17th 2010 3:39AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/
speaking of remaking old movies, do you know that titanic is slated for a 3d release next year?

and something more ridiculous? apparantly Avatar is supposed to be re-edited and re-released this year!]]>Mar 17th 2010 4:39AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/
It wouldn't be a 3D TV but who the f*ck cares about a damn fad.]]>Mar 17th 2010 1:13AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/Mar 17th 2010 1:17AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/Mar 17th 2010 6:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/
Yeah you're right lets just keep reality distorted. Lets also stop game immersion advancements too and go back to the Atari. People are gonna sit or not sit on the couch all day regardless of technology. That depends on the person. I personally don't want tech stunted because of fat lazy americans. Bring on more immersion.]]>Mar 17th 2010 9:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/Bring Your Own Glasses. All my friends better bring their own 3D glasses cause I'm buying one pair.]]>Mar 17th 2010 1:19AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/Mar 17th 2010 1:19AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/
Didnt stop millions of people from making fools of themselves by purchasing Wii's. People don't care what they look like in the comfort of their own homes....especially if everyone else in the room is wearing them too. ]]>Mar 17th 2010 1:21AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/Mar 17th 2010 1:24AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/This stuff has been around since I was a kid and cost under 50 bucks then. The high costs are all from marketing and price fixing.]]>Mar 17th 2010 4:10AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/Mar 17th 2010 1:28AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/
that's the reason i hate 3d now, your going to have to pay for it when it becomes standard.]]>Mar 17th 2010 2:15AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/
All these anti-3D arguments are absolutely ridiculous. People care about how they look in these glasses at home? How many people pay extra money to go to an IMAX theater and wear those stylish things in PUBLIC? Also, when you're watching a movie do you watch the movie or watch yourself in a mirror?]]>May 5th 2010 1:11PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/
Do you really believe the theater is going to give you a ticket discount because you brought your own glasses? HA!]]>Mar 17th 2010 1:59AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/Mar 17th 2010 2:04AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/did i read that right?
u mean that glasses from one TV can't be used with another?]]>Mar 17th 2010 3:39AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/
I'd hazard a guess that there are different types of 3-D visual effects if they don't know if their glasses will be compatible with another TV.]]>Mar 17th 2010 4:05AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/Mar 17th 2010 4:10AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/well, either way it sounds like a good reason to not dive into this 3D stuff.
i'm quite amazed at the amount of attention 3D is actually getting!]]>Mar 17th 2010 4:32AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/Mar 17th 2010 9:39AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/
Also, $125-150 is a fair for active shutter glasses, especially since manufacturers are going to throw in a pair or two in free with the purchase of a compatible TV or TV and Blu-Ray player.

Finally, for those that think 3D is a gimmick and will fade...wake UP! People have been asking for this for YEARS! Avatar, and more recently, Alice in Wonderland, as well as a dozen others over the past couple of years has shown that people are not only willing to wear silly glasses (in PUBLIC!!!), but they are willing to pay a premium ticket price over the 2D presentation, and in RECORD NUMBERS!

The biggest problem now is not the technology, or the glasses, but the lack of quality 3D movies. For every "Avatar", there will be a dozen "Clash of the Titans", where instead of being shot and composed for viewing in 3D, you get a rushed "conversion" from 2D to 3D.

Personally, I see 3D gaming as being the driving force behind 3D in the home. Gamers are all over this, and once the PS3 brings 3D to its games, you are going to see a lot of geeky glasses being worn!]]>Mar 17th 2010 11:31AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/Mar 17th 2010 11:35AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/May 5th 2010 1:28PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/Mar 19th 2010 4:17PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/17/xpand-x103-3d-glasses-universally-compatible-with-3dtvs-but-no/Mar 23rd 2010 9:24AM