[The Godfather]

If iTunes started offering 3D content (and you know they can), and Apple sold at-cost shutter glasses, would you try it?
It is technically entirely possible!

[The Final Dakar]

No.

[Doofy]

No.

(Plus, I hereby decree that anyone mentioning "3D" from this point forth shall be classified as a "teenage girl".)

[-Q-]

Nope. I just can't get excited about any of this 3D stuff. Sporting events look cool, but not enough to wear those stupid glasses.

[imitchellg5]

No. I hate 3D. Gives me massive headaches.

[::maroma::]

3D technology is merely a pacifier until we have holograms in our living rooms.

Help me Obi wan!

[Andy8]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

No. I hate 3D. Gives me massive headaches.

Exactly.

[sek929]

I don't get massive headaches, but I don't feel right either. After a 3D movie I feel as if I've been reading a book with tiny print for hours.

[SpaceMonkey]

Anyway, Apple selling something at cost? Does not compute. The glasses would retail for $50, be hand-forged by Jonathan Ive, sport a huge bezel and collect fingerprints like crazy.

[The Final Dakar]

Can't wait until we find out 3D gives eye cancer.

[design219]

No.

[angelmb]

No. Rubik's Cube was hard enough for me by itself.

[Aeolius]

If Apple produced a pair of augmented-reality goggles( ala Vuzix Wrap 920AR ), then made them suitably Steampunk by making the screens flip up like extra lenses, then incorporated mind-control (ala Emotiv EPOC ) , then we're talking...

[adonian]

The glasses would already be included with your 3d tv (well except for the new samsung, but that's a different story). So Apple wouldn't need to have glasses. All they need is 3d content and the Apple TV to stream 240hz onto a 3D tv.

And yes I would buy 3D content from Apple, I already have a 3D tv, and 4 movies, and I have a 3D camcorder. 3D isn't anywhere as bad as it was in the 80's with the red/blue glasses. I have been using active shutter glasses on my old sdtv for a few years now, and I like the fact that the color is not screwed like the red/blue, violet/green glasses.

3D content is coming and it will be here to stay, live with that fact. You don't have to use it, but it will be on all hdtv's soon, even the cheap wallmart tv's.

[Brien]

Epic zombie?

As for the original question: No.

[Paco500]

No.

[Person Man]

Originally Posted by Brien 

Epic zombie?

Hardly. The most epic™ zombie thread I've seen was a three year old thread dredged up by a spammer.

As for the original question: No.

Seconded.

[Salty]

I hate 3D

[besson3c]

What I want to know is if we have maxed out what is technically possible with 3D, or have we only seen the tip of the iceberg?

If the latter, we may hate today's 3D, but we should keep an open mind for tomorrow's and encourage its growth. If there is more coming, why wouldn't Apple want to jump aboard this bandwagon if there is money to be had?

[-Q-]

^ That's my current hope: that we're just scratching the surface of 3D innovation. However, until the technology does not require the use of glasses or other peripherals, it will never take off. And if this is the best we can do? Good riddance.

[The Godfather]

Originally Posted by -Q- 

^ That's my current hope: that we're just scratching the surface of 3D innovation. However, until the technology does not require the use of glasses or other peripherals, it will never take off. And if this is the best we can do? Good riddance.

If history serves me right, Apple stands on the sidelines until it can provide a final blow to make the technology an Apple worthy experience. Wait until manufacturers have a viable glasses free 3d panel, and Steve will unleash the checkbook.

[The Godfather]

Not bought or licensed, but invented by Apple!
Apple wins patent on 3D projector that needs no glasses - TVs, projectors, peripherals, monitors, Home Media Center, consumer electronics, Apple - PC World

[Shaddim]

Gives me headaches. So, no.