January 5, 201016 yr ESPN to launch 3D TV network in June ESPN is joining the rush to go 3D with plans to launch a 3D television network in June. The Walt Disney Co's sports unit said on Tuesday it will launch ESPN 3D, which it claims is the industry's first 3D TV network, in June and will air a minimum of 85 live sporting events during its first year. "This will be a meaningful step to drive adoption of 3D television sets and afford opportunities for our affiliates to create value through new product offerings, and our advertisers, who want fresh sponsorship opportunities," Sean Bratches, ESPN's executive vice president of sales and marketing, said in a statement. Already a hit in movie theaters, many believe 3D is poised to take over the home market as the display technology to watch this year. Many 3D technologies will be on display at the annual Consumer Electronics Show this week in Las Vegas. A lack of 3D programming, in particular for sports, has been one of the key barriers to adoption of 3D TV, analysts have said. Having to wear special glasses is another. In addition, sports, perhaps even more than movies, is a prime driver of consumer sales for screen technology, including flat-screen TVs. ESPN said its first broadcast will be a June 11 World Cup soccer match between South Africa and Mexico. Other events to be produced in 3D include up to 25 World Cup matches, the Summer X Games extreme sports, college basketball and football, including the BCS National Championship game in Glendale, Arizona, on January 10, 2011. ESPN has been testing 3D for more than two years and last fall produced the college football game between University of Southern California and Ohio State University in select theaters and on the USC campus.
January 5, 201016 yr Author I didnt read anything about the technology behind it. I HOPE it wont be those silly red/blue glasses. If you are going to do it, do it right.
January 6, 201016 yr QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jan 5, 2010 -> 10:26 AM) I didnt read anything about the technology behind it. I HOPE it wont be those silly red/blue glasses. If you are going to do it, do it right. the glasses have clear, polarized lenses, no more red+blue
January 6, 201016 yr QUOTE (Real @ Jan 5, 2010 -> 07:50 PM) the glasses have clear, polarized lenses, no more red+blue That sucks.
January 6, 201016 yr Author QUOTE (zenryan @ Jan 5, 2010 -> 05:50 PM) Gotta have a 3D capable tv with the glasses. Oh thank God. I was really hoping that is what would be the case. Having to wear those clear polarized lenses kinda sucks, but it's better than red/blue.
January 8, 201016 yr So 3D TV is the new HDTV...and I hoping on buying HD this year and now this,WTF.
January 8, 201016 yr Author QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Jan 8, 2010 -> 07:07 AM) So 3D TV is the new HDTV...and I hoping on buying HD this year and now this,WTF. It was only a matter of time. It;s just another ploy to sell TVs to people that already have perfectly good ones.
January 8, 201016 yr Author QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 8, 2010 -> 09:50 AM) This is a fad item that will not sell well IMO. Additionally, the broadcast networks dont have enough over the air bandwidth to do 3D HD. So, in the end, this will be a cable only thing.
January 8, 201016 yr Author QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 8, 2010 -> 09:52 AM) And who the heck wants to wear special glasses every time they watch tv? agreed
January 13, 201016 yr I'm with you guys. It's a poorly constructed idea. Plus, especially to those of you guys who wear contacts or glasses, wouldn't it be a strain to put on a pair of 3D glasses after coming home exhausted so you can watch a movie while you sleep or some sports? Anything that I have to wear is too much effort. When I come home, I don't want that eye strain, nor go through the hassle of looking for the shades(or having to buy them for others) to watch some damn tv. Imagine having a Super Bowl party in 3D. You're going to have to pay thousands of dollars so you can have a party of 10 over. F that.
January 13, 201016 yr QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 08:28 PM) Anything that I have to wear is too much effort. When I come home, I don't want that eye strain, nor go through the hassle of looking for the shades(or having to buy them for others) to watch some damn tv. Imagine having a Super Bowl party in 3D. You're going to have to pay thousands of dollars so you can have a party of 10 over. F that. I'm not a fan of 3D TV as an idea either, but the glasses cost a couple bucks at the theater. Not sure where you get thousands of dollars from.
January 13, 201016 yr QUOTE (danman31 @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 08:35 PM) I'm not a fan of 3D TV as an idea either, but the glasses cost a couple bucks at the theater. Not sure where you get thousands of dollars from. For the glasses marketed with the tv at CES, they had Bono and someone else rocking them and they retailed for like $229.00
January 13, 201016 yr QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 08:40 PM) For the glasses marketed with the tv at CES, they had Bono and someone else rocking them and they retailed for like $229.00 Those are for glasses that you can wear all the time. You can go really cheap for standard 3D glasses.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.