Active versus Passive

[rehaan99]

Active versus Passive 3D is a never ending debate. How does it affect a consumers preference towards the different 3D brands available?

 

[corElement]

It doesn't, you affect your own preference towards either technologies.

 

[grubyhalo]

Active versus Passive 3D is a never ending debate. How does it affect a consumers preference towards the different 3D brands available?

Project time, Rehaan? :lol:

 

[madhur45]

Hey, for many a customer it does not matter if its an active or passive 3D as long as its their favorite brand. This according to me is a rather nave approach which brings people to regret. Passive 3D is the next generation of 3D and the prospective customers should make their purchasing decision based on technology and not brand preference.

 

[Indian11]

Hey, for many a customer it does not matter if its an active or passive 3D as long as its their favorite brand. This according to me is a rather nave approach which brings people to regret. Passive 3D is the next generation of 3D and the prospective customers should make their purchasing decision based on technology and not brand preference.

I agree on your point with passive being the latest technology in smart TVs but we can't simply overrule the active tech as well. Active tech are used by brands like Samsung and sony who have good market share so we can certainly say that there are people who admire active tech as well or they be blindly following the brand without thinking about the pros and cons of the tech that particular brand is using.

 

[curious]

Hey, for many a customer it does not matter if its an active or passive 3D as long as its their favorite brand. This according to me is a rather nave approach which brings people to regret. Passive 3D is the next generation of 3D and the prospective customers should make their purchasing decision based on technology and not brand preference.

It's a never-ending debate. Both have their own pros and cons. I've experienced both active and passive 3D technology. Not much of a difference, atleast for me.

3D technology is not mainsteam yet. If we talk about the future of the 3D technology, glassless 3D seems to be the future. May be, it'll be the time to upgrade our TVs (with latest tech) by the time 3D becomes mainstream. So I think, we should not worry much about it as of now. We should just focus on getting a TV with good 2D picture quality and value for money. If the TV is 3D capable as well (active/passive), that should be considered as an added bonus or a stop gap arrangement till 3D becomes main stream.

 

[naman]

It's a never-ending debate. Both have their own pros and cons. I've experienced both active and passive 3D technology. Not much of a difference, atleast for me.

3D technology is not mainsteam yet. If we talk about the future of the 3D technology, glassless 3D seems to be the future. May be, it'll be time to upgrade our TVs (with latest tech) by the time 3D becomes mainstream. So we should not worry much about it as of now. We should just focus on getting a TV with good 2D picture quality and value for money.

Yeah, I agree with your point of 3D not being in main stream as per now but we can really hope that they will be come in mainstream in some years from now. As per getting a TV with good picture quality and value for money is concerned, I think any good brand LED would do the task.