PS3 News: Samsung Rolling Out 3D-Enabled LED HDTVs This Month - PS3 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

Samsung Rolling Out 3D-Enabled LED HDTVs This Month

We're very close to the official 3D gaming revolution, which will turn our high-definition experience with the PlayStation 3 into something even more mind-blowing.

It won't be long before Sony releases a firmware update that enables true 3D technology for all PS3s, which is great news. But who really has a 3D-enabled HDTV sitting at home? We're willing to bet that few of you do, so you're gonna need one, huh? Well, we know Sony's Bravia series will certainly support 3D; those compatible units will be on store shelves this summer. But another leader in high-def TVs, Samsung, has released a listing of their impending 3D-enabled LED HDTVs, so you can do some shopping ahead of time. With a grand total of 8 series ranging in size from 19 through 65 inches, there's a TV out there for everyone and the first models will start rolling out this month. Now, to embrace 3D right off the bat will certainly be a pricey endeavor if you're not already equipped for it, and these prices will cause your bank account to drop precipitously. Also remember that LED is significantly more expensive than LCD right now, so...

Me, I've got my eye on a 40" model but with the maximum stuff (240Hz, 1080p, etc.), it's pretty damn costly. Who wishes they would do TV trade-ins along with games? I bet I could get enough with my current model to make a new purchase a lot less painful...

3/10/2010 9:10:42 PM Ben Dutka

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous

Comments (89 posts)

Highlander
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 9:48:03 PM
Reply

Check out the rather hefty price of this new tech....These TVs come with active shutter glasses, and I believe that they are doing a range of 3D enabled BluRay players with movies and active shutter glasses bundled as well.

BTW the LED only refers to the back-light (or in the case of Samsung the edge-light, the screen is still an LCD. The most interesting aspect of these new LED lit TVs from Samsung - other than the 3D - is that some of the new models also offer a form of local dimming with the LED edge-lights. Local dimming will boost picture quality pretty decently on these new screens even compared to the regular LED edge-lit sets.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Shams
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 9:53:41 PM

If I'm not mistaken, the LED TV's use less power, too.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

fluffer nutter
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 9:54:55 PM

Samsung aren't the only ones with edge-lit LED, btw. Sony and the other majors offer the same. Samsung had a line that was full backlit LED but they have since been pulled off of the shelves. They weren't around for very long.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 9:58:14 PM

@Shams - yes, the LEDs are more efficient than the CFFLs.

@FlufferNutter

Sony's TVs are LED backlit, and they also have a tri-color LED back-light instead of white LEDs. In theory, the multi-color LED backlights should offer more vibrant color than back or edge lights using white LEDs.

But all the LED lit screens are better than the CFFL ones. To be honest I think we are getting to the point where a mid range 46-inch 1080p LED lit HDTV is pretty much as good as it needs to be for almost everyone, and the high-end sets are overkill for most.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

fluffer nutter
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:37:05 PM

As stated earlier, not all of their LED TV's are backlit. Some are edgelit. I didn't say that they didn't have any backlit ones.

Okay, I see what's going on here. Yes, they use LED's on the edge and a special panel that allow the light to go through the back but they aren't true LED backlit panels. Samsung did have a line like this but they have since been pulled.

Last edited by fluffer nutter on 3/10/2010 10:44:09 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 12:52:48 AM

just a FYI in most countries sonys tvs are not led backlight.
when i was looking for mine a month ago sony style told me only UK had the new lED series everyone else had to wait a few months.

the only sony TVs that are available worldwide that use LEDs are the 46 and 52 inch XBRs and they have been discontinued since early 08 for the new model releasing some time this year.
im regretting buying the Z5500 because since its using the old tubes instead it gives everything a extreme washed out look.
i knew i should of gone with a plasma instead but couldent because it only has 1 component out and my amp and processor do not have a HDMI slot.

samsung really fu**ed up there, they release their TVs not just one range every single of there TVs only have 1 component slot.
1 compare to the 5 my Z5500 has, compare to the 5 almost every other manufactures TV has.
wtf samsung?
way to alienate your market!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

fluffer nutter
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 9:42:46 AM

Maybe you have a knock off Sammy because mine has connections for two component devices.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Friday, March 12, 2010 @ 7:21:49 AM

is it a latest model?
i dident get the samy for that exact reason, i looked at god knows how many shops and their LCDs, plasmas, LEDs every TV they produce has only one component input.
i could use switches but thats just complicating things and well there not exactly cheap.
i really do not understand why you would do that, sure its saves them money but imagine how many customers they have lost because of it.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

redman479
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 9:49:12 PM
Reply

Just read that you have to buy glasses that cost $130 plus some kind of device that's an extra $40. Wow!!!

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 9:53:15 PM

There are also bundles.

I believe that the glasses use a transmitter that allows shutter synchronization, so that's more than likely the small extra piece you refer to.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

laxpro2001
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 9:49:25 PM
Reply

ooo I hope the 19 inch ones aren't too expensive. I just bought a 42" lcd about 6 months ago so I kinda have to wait to shell out more money. I should probably just wait 2-3 years until I'm out of school and hopefully have a job :/

*edit* screw that $380 is way too much for me.

Last edited by laxpro2001 on 3/10/2010 9:51:02 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

chedison
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 9:51:43 PM

Sounds like a good idea. Exactly what I'm doing. I just bought my new TV in the fall last year so there's not really any reason to buy this now anyways.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 9:55:06 PM

Nah, for 1080p you really need 24-26 inch for a 'personal' set. I'd imaging this would help with 3D as well.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Shams
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 9:51:47 PM
Reply

I finally saw Avatar 3D this weekend, and while I did enjoy the movie, and the 3D effects were pronounced at times, I did find them slightly jarring. So, I probably won't make the plunge, until my current plasma goes kaput, and I get a new TV that may happen to have the feature.

Last edited by Shams on 3/10/2010 9:54:22 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Alienange
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 9:52:15 PM
Reply

They can try their best to force this on the consumers, but it's not going to catch on. Despite Cameron's mouth flapping, his movie will not sell TVs.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 9:54:17 PM

GT5 in 3D will sell these TVs, as would a 3D enabled version of Uncharted 2.

Oh God, I just drooled a little.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

LimitedVertigo
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:15:59 PM

I'll be buying a 3D tv and one of the reasons is Avatar.


Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Alienange
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:27:30 PM

@ TheHighlander - People were having a heart attack when they saw the PS3 at $600. They couldn't even sell those with GT5. You think they'll buy a $3000 3D TV so they can wear glasses while they play their favorite game? Not in this lifetime.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:48:45 PM

Early adopters will. I've said the same thing as you before, and agree with you. However in a year's time these will be much less expensive, and the year after that they'll be less expensive still. With the rate at which LCD TV technology is maturing, 3D capability will be a standard feature within 4-5 years for most mid-range TVs.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 1:12:18 AM

am i the only one who fell asleep in avatar?
honestly it has to be one of the boringst movies i have ever seen!
sure the special effects were something special, well no they were fu**ing mind blowing!
but eye candy does not make a good movie.
ill take alien any day of the week!

Agree with this comment 2 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 1:18:23 AM

@Anon,

I haven't even bothered to see Avatar in 2D, never mind 3D! LOL!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

LimitedVertigo
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 1:40:35 AM

I enjoyed Avatar, enough to see it multiple times. I wasn't expecting the deepest movie ever told but I most certainly loved the visuals and the world was easy to get lost in.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 6:11:41 AM

oh, you MUST! see it in 3D just for the experience.
ive seen many movies in 3D and nothing matches it, instead of things popping out at you they slowly increase in depth it gives it a different feel which to me makes it feel more realistic.
tech wise avatar was a milestone.
enjoyment wise,meh.
im more of a grab you by your seat destroy everything kind of movie goer.
a movie has to have a sh*t load of intense action to keep me interested.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

fluffer nutter
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 9:53:09 PM
Reply

I don't see why people are saying that these sets will be expensive. If you compare the equivalent to what you could get from the 2008 model year, with less specs, you'll notice that these are priced lower than those were back during the first few months after release. Also, you may not find all of the models in stores, today, but they have already been in stores for 11 days.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

fluffer nutter
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:45:39 PM

I take that back. These 2010 models, with much better specs have a lower MSRP than the "equivalent" models did for 2008 so you're not breaking the bank when you get one of these.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Darwin1967
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 12:10:37 PM

Except, they don't include the glasses...so, take the base price and add an additional 550.00+tax for a family of 4. Those glasses are going to be a real hinderence to the average buyer. Even the starter package that includes 2 pair is about 380.00. Also, most of the movies that are 3d have been geared towards kids...I don't know too many parents who will be willing to fork out 140.00 on glasses for kids. Seems to me like their biggest potential consumer base (parents of kids) will be a fairly tough sell.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

fluffer nutter
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 2:26:10 PM

The price of the TV's was taken into comparison. I didn't include the glasses because they are not a necessity (unless you want 3-D.) My point was that if you take the 46" C7000 model (MSRP of $2599) and compare it to the LN46A860 (MSRP of $3199), and look at the specs for regular viewing, you are getting a monster of a deal for this 2010 model set and no one is even going to be paying MSRP.

Oh, and look at that... add the glasses and you're still getting it cheaper than what the A860 was priced at back in '08. If you really want to get blown away, look at the A950 and that was even more expensive, when it was released and the C7000 blows it out of the water.

Any questions?

Last edited by fluffer nutter on 3/11/2010 2:27:50 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:05:50 PM
Reply

Nice, my next TV was going to be a Sony because of their 3D push, but now i may just get a Samsung. I like the one i have a lot.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:08:17 PM

Samsung and Sony (and a few others like Pioneer) have been working pretty closely on the whole BluRay thing, I would bet that the same group worked on the 3D implementation for BluRay and HDTV. As much as Samsung and Sony compete, they also work well together.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 12:50:38 AM

They both make great stuff. The Samsung TV i have has some great colors. I was thinking of getting a Sony next just to have the best of both worlds but i don't know, the colors are so damn rich on this Samsung.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 1:09:03 AM

id suggest getting a samsung because their cheaper and have 10 times the features, not to mention the picture quality is better.
a friend of mine just bought a series 8 and jesus tap dancing christ it looks 10 million times better than mine.
there is no wash out what so ever, which is a big thing with me because that always bugs me playing ps3 games where his TV did not suffer from that.
mine cost me 3K his a mere 2600.
and he got a free 22 inch LED from their promotion, not bad for 2600 bucks.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

kraygen
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:18:40 PM
Reply

Personally I'll have to see the technology in use for myself before I even make a decision. I have not been impressed with 3d movies, having something fly at my face doesn't do anything for me, but I'm willing to give it a shot.

At Universal's Islands of adventure they have some 3d enabled rides that are spectacular, so it will depend on how 3d gaming is handled.

If the tech is done how movies have been recently than I think the 3d thing might just be another fad we have to live with, or re-fad for that matter, tried 3d in what the late 80's.

If however the tech is as impressive as the theme park model, then after the tech has been out for a while and prices have dropped to a reasonable price, I'll hop on board.

I just have to see it done well for myself before I decide either way.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

inkme101
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:23:35 PM
Reply

i was looking at the i think it was a fifty inch. i could really care less about 3d ill never ever spend 6k on a tv but i want that touch screen wifi bluetooth remote with built in tv capabilities. screw the tv gimme the remote and im good! lol

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

BikerSaint
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:28:16 PM
Reply

I am so ready for this, but unfortunately some wallet moths have settled in & they don't want to migrate to a much warmer financial climate!

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Alienange
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:29:32 PM
Reply

There's a few nerds out there that will buy this, but the masses won't. Niche's are cute, but the money that is so heavily sought after by the big boys will not be found there.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:32:12 PM
Reply

*Jumps in the DeLorean and goes back to the future*

Okay everybody looks stupid in their glasses with dildos in their hands, but they ARE smacking what appears to be 3D things in and out of their television screen with the Move.

Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 3/10/2010 10:33:02 PM

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:51:26 PM

5 years from now the screens will us polarization and the glasses will be really unobtrusive, the 3D controller will have been refined and people will look much less foolish playing 3D games because game makers will have figured out ways to use it that don't make people look like poor mimes or gamers with Alzheimer's disorder.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

fluffer nutter
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:57:11 PM

In the future, we won't need specialized glasses. The 3D enabled TV's coming out in China, later this year, will not require any glasses at all. They say it'll be at least two years before we get this technology here in the U.S. I will replace my other television when those come here, if I can hold out long enough.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

rogers71
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:57:31 PM

Hey World,
Get out of my car.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 11:12:32 PM

Sorry Rogers, have your keys back.

So Highlander will this polorized whatchamajig need glasses at all?

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Sol
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:49:17 PM
Reply

I remember checking out Sony when they first announced what I think they called the "First" LED TV. I looked at the tech specifications and didn't understand S*** (partially because I didn't care so long as the picture's good), but from what I can remember those Light Emitting Diodes are something special. Unfortunately these things are super expensive.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:57:47 PM

Sony's first LED TV was an OLED - Organic Light Emiting Diode, TV. It's a completely different technology from the current wave of so-called LED TVs, and that first OLED TV was limited to an 11-inch screen.

The current LED TVs are actually the same LCD panels that we're already buying only instead of a CFFL (flourescent) backlight, they use LEDs as a light source. So they are more properly called LED backlit LCD HDTVs.

The OLED technology that Sony used for that first truly LED TV actually creates separate colored LEDs for each pixel, the technology or OLEDs is really promising. OLEDs are very bright, and potentially very fast and have a high contrast ratio. Some forms of OLED technology would allow screens to be made using far simpler manufacturing techniques than the LCDs of today. But they are still working on it.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 1:04:01 AM

OLEDs will never take off for 3 reasons.
1 there extremely expensive. sonys 11 inch costs a cool 10K!

2 there are many alternatives that are cheaper and easier to manufacture one being laser TVs.
i know theve been in the pipeline for so freaking long, but when they come out minds will be blown along with wallets because there suppose to be cheaper than LCDs.

3 picture quality.
OLEDs are good, but laser TVs are better.

i remember reading a article late last year saying 3D TVs and laser TVs will be out roughly the same time towards the end of this year.
one part has come true so lets hope the other is, hopefully laser TVs end their ridiculous long production time and release this year.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 1:24:50 AM

Laser TVs, FED TVs, SED TVs, OLED TVs, etc....

Right now the only safe bet on a TV is LCDs and newer plasmas. The best around right now and for the next 2-4 years is going to be either a decent late model plasma or one of the newer LED lit LCD models with local dimming, wouldn't you say? OLED is promising, but seems to have stuck on the final steps before commercialization. Laser TV sounds too much like DLP, so until I see one in action, I'll reserve personal judgment.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jackyl
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 1:35:42 AM

Mitsubishi already has an laser TV out called the LaserVue. It's a 65" and retails for just under $4000 on Amazon. Also is said to be 3D ready.

Need the other manufactures to step up and help bring down the prices.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 6:08:14 AM

yeah thats why i said i wished i bought a plasma.
i was going to but i have read so many forums saying plasmas are no for playing games on.
that and samsung plasmas only had 1 component slot which was a real pain for me.
panasonic are among the best but there expensive.
if i could id get the KURO which is still to today the worlds best TV.
but a mere 50 inch will set you back 7K there not cheap!

im really interested in laser TVs though because there suppose to be able to create allot more colors than plasmas, and the contrast is much higher.
also one thing allot of people complained about LCDs and plasmas and LEDs for that fact is that the color they produce looks fake, overdone, over saturated in comparison to cath tubes.
only time will tell if it really happens, if it does than were going to have a TV thats better than plasmas and cheaper too.
count me in!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

fluffer nutter
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 9:46:08 AM

This year's plasmas aren't a good option, in the U.S., because they're going to release new power consumption standards that will make the current ones obsolete. They're looking to change the standards once more, after that, too.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Shams
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 1:14:19 PM

Well, LCD's are the one's attributed with overly bright, and unnatural coloring. Plasmas display many more colors, but look subdued comparatively in ambient lighting (i.e only an issue when comparing the tv's in showroom, but it is nonissue otherwise) . Plasmas also have higher contrast ratio's, better black values, and are cheaper, too, if we don't count the pricey high-end Pioneer Kuro Elite models. The only negatives about the plasma is their power-efficiency (though they've improved it with last year's models), and the reputation they were given from their launch models. But image-retention and screen burn-in is no longer a problem with today's models. I haven't even calibrated mine (pioneer TC-P42S1 for 699.99), and despite the occasional ghosting that may show on a black screen, I've had zero issues. And I use mine just for gaming and the occasional movie.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

fluffer nutter
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 2:30:22 PM

Today's Plasma sets are still energy hogs. Yes, they are much better than prior but they still suck up an amazing amount of juice. Also, burn-in is still a problem but not to the degree, as the past, so to say that it is a non-issue is just wrong. I'm not trying to deter anyone from getting a plasma set because they are wonderful to look at but facts are facts.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Shams
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 4:20:22 PM

Ask Arnold. He's got one: A Pioneer Elite, still ranked the as the best TV money can buy. I got a Panasonic TC-P42S1. Zero burn in, and only slight image retention of static images such as health bars, and hud, but no more than a standard CRT. And I'm still breaking it in. Any image-retention is noticable only over black screens, and is gone as soon as I play another game.

Do you have a plasma? Or have you even noticed burn-in on showroom models?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

fluffer nutter
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 4:41:25 PM

I do not own a plasma screen and I haven't seen any 2010 models with burn-in, yet, but I have talked with company representatives that state that over time, there still is the possibility of burn-in but it is staved, off to a certain degree, and the company's expectations are that the model will be replaced by a consumer before it is quite noticeable. This is why they still have the features included to help deter any immediate effects from happening.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Friday, March 12, 2010 @ 7:16:21 AM

only reason i did not get one is because i was told ghosting, burn in, light reflection can be real issues on them.
also ive been told you need to break them in for the first few months before the TV reaches its full quality.
as i said lasers are suppose to have all the benefits of plasmas and make them better with none of the draw backs.
thats what i dont get, plasmas are better and cheaper.
i hate LCDs for that exact fact that they over exaggerated colors and make everything looked washed out, but i was not really given a choice.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Hezzron
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:51:03 PM
Reply

I will hold out for the 3D TVs that will no doubt be coming in a few more years, that won't require the glasses. Buying a pair for the all the members of the family adds to the overall cost.

Besides, it just would seem awkward inviting a girl over for a movie, and then trying to make a move with those ridiculous things on your face.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

FatherSun
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 10:59:13 PM
Reply

3D is another inevitability. Eventually reaching HoloDeck levels.

Has anyone imagined HOME in 3D? Besides me of course.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 11:07:33 PM

Yep. Home in 3D with PlayStation Move will be a huge step forwards into virtual reality.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

inkme101
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 11:19:42 PM
Reply

imagine porn in 3d. ahhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!! theres some things i for sure do not want to see coming out of my tv! lol

Agree with this comment 1 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

LegendaryWolfeh
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 11:38:20 PM

pfft, old news for some people =P lol..

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 11:40:17 PM

Those extendo-vaginas in Dante's Inferno would truly be terrifying!

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

inkme101
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 12:04:31 AM

lmfao @ extendo vaginas!

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Faith
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 3:03:55 AM

Hahahahahaha! I can imagine some very funny scenes in 3D!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Superman915
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 11:44:19 PM
Reply

unless i can get some sort of 3d update on the TV i have now, since most HDTVs have a way to update via internet or USB, Im not interested.

what if i have ppl over to watch a movie? am i gonna need glasses for all of them? nooo thank you.

Last edited by Superman915 on 3/10/2010 11:45:12 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

fooosie
Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 11:59:49 PM
Reply

I hope this isnt a mandatory update. Im a bit gun shy after 3.0 bricked my fat

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 1:35:50 AM

I have two original model phats with full PS2 compatibility and neither has ever had a problem with a firmware update. The hardware is not overly stressed or bricked by firmware updates.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

inkme101
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 12:04:07 AM
Reply

UPDATES DO NOT BRICK HARDWARE!!! misuse or neglect (occasionally just bad components) bricks hardware! it just happened in the right time frame for you to "believe" that a firmware update bricked your console!

Agree with this comment 1 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 12:54:13 AM

so its just a coincidence a massive amount of consoles YLOD straight after the 2.6FW update and the 3.0 one?
sorry but thats a little too coincidental for me.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 1:28:29 AM

The yellow LED is a general failure, it doesn't indicate a specific hardware fault. It can be anything from the HDD failing to start, to a memory error, to the BluRay failing to read.

IIRC a lot of bricked systems that were supposedly bricked by the firmware were bricked because some systems simply failed to complete the update properly and sometimes because users did not following instructions and turning off the PS3 during the update. A lot of the problems are HHD failures that coincidentally occur right after or soon after a firmware update.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 12:58:24 AM
Reply

now heres the million dollar question.
do i go out now and spend 1K on nvidia 3D tech and a compatible monitor.
or do i wait till 3D TVs come out and see if there cheap or not.
or do i go on a 5 day holiday?

im leaning towards the monitor that way its only 1K easily the cheapest of the 3, and that way i can play my ps3 games and my pc games in 3D.
only bad thing is well PC monitors are not exactly large, the one im looking at is a mere 22 inches.
not to mention no one in australia stocks it.
WTF is the point of that?
create a product than have no one who has it in stock.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

fooosie
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 1:07:11 AM
Reply

It could be coincidence but the firmware DOES tweak how the hardware works as one will not do anything without the other. Minutes after the install the bluray drive stopped reading discs. Im told this is caused by an overload. Faulty components could be at fault, I grant you. Misuse or neglect is not the cause here. Just ask the the ps3 of which Im writing, still happily working. Installed the new laser myself.
Gun shy I remain.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 1:34:37 AM

A firmware update cannot cause a hardware failure. No firmware update is going (for example) to cause a laser diode to overload. The firmware cannot cause the hardware to do something it's not designed to do. The firmware can't cause a voltage spike or surge in current that fries a component. the most you could do is write a firmware routine to ignore the thermal warnings from the hardware so that in the case of a heat problem the system would simply halt because the firmware didn't respond properly. But even then the hardware is designed to be fault tolerant on it's own and halt the CPU if it overheats.

The most 'damage' that can occur as the result of a firmware update is an incomplete installation for whatever reason (stuff sometimes happens - external power fluctuations, silly users, cat's stepping on switches, whatever...). An incomplete firmware update could cause a yellow light error because the firmware is corrupt or because of a corrupt HDD. Both of these are fixable and are not due to faulty hardware or software.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

kraygen
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 2:01:09 AM

Highlander is 100% correct, you might as well say that the update threw your ps3 off your shelf and smashed it to the floor.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

johnld
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 3:46:13 AM

if a firmware update can cause hardware failure, wouldnt the entire line of the ps3 version all brick? i've been hearing some complaints that "firmware update bricked their 60gb" but i installed updates to my launch 60gb ps3 and never once did the system get bricked. as highlander stated, its more about not installing it properly than a specific firmware problem. Its not like sony bricked ps3s on purpose just as a big name game is coming out forcing people to buy new systems.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

fooosie
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 1:46:07 AM
Reply

Not convinced. I risk it when I get rich and buy a 19inch 3D tv.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Faith
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 3:02:47 AM
Reply

3D Technology is truly amazing! 2009 was all about HDTV. 2010 is all about 3DTV.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

chedison
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 3:10:55 AM
Reply

I already wear glasses every breathing moment of my life. I don't need another oversized awkward pair sitting on top of them while i try to enjoy playing videogames or watching a movie.....

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

inkme101
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 12:36:59 PM

me too!

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 3:44:45 PM

Ditto...

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

RadioHeader
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 5:27:48 PM

Me ditto.

To enjoy 3D we need to get laser surgery, then more glasses O.O Nah this third dimension is too pricey.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

JackC8
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 8:12:08 AM
Reply

Even if I had enough money for one of those TV's, I wouldn't even think of spending it on that. Good lord, thousands of dollars to play a video game in 3-D? You gotta be nuts.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

photo K
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 9:38:52 AM
Reply

awesome! I just bought a 40inch samsung led, now to upgrade my 52" Samsung LCD!!!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

FullmetalX10
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 10:22:20 AM
Reply

I have an oath saying I shall never shall buy a samsung TV or mobile phone, since I don't like samsung, so I'll just stick with anything Sony, to be sure it works properly.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 10:35:37 AM

LOL, I might buy a Samsung TV, but their phones suck harder than the cold vacuum of space.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Darwin1967
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 12:13:16 PM

I had the same belief...until it took a Class Action Lawsuit to get our Sony TV's covered under an extended warranty for a faulty part that typically goes defective after the year warranty expires....a part that with labor runs about 2,500.

Last edited by Darwin1967 on 3/11/2010 12:13:49 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

fluffer nutter
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 2:32:35 PM

What's wrong with their phones? I've been using their phones for years without any issues. Now, if you're talking about the multi-use PDA phones, that could be true but their regular cell phones are wonderful. Best battery life around when compared to LG, Motorola, Sanyo, and others. If you really want a stinker, go get a BlackBerry. One of the worst phone lines out there for super users.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 3:44:16 PM

No one makes a better flip phone than Motorola. To be honest the original slimline GSM StarTac from Motorola was probably the best cell phone (straight cell phone, no funny business) that I've ever used. The RAZR v3 GSM phones were phenomenal too. Now I own a Droid, and feature for feature, ounce for ounce I love it. Every Motorola phone I've had felt solid, every Samsung phone I've tried/used felt flimsy and plasticy.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

fluffer nutter
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 4:45:47 PM

I remember having various StarTac phones and they were great but the battery life was horrible on those. Motorola still has the issue with battery life. My wife has a RAZR v3, still, and her battery life is horrible. It's a well known issue with Motorolas. Other than that, they do make great phones. The features work and they are dependable. My experiences with Samsung are that the phones always work and they have up to four times the battery life, whether it be, standby or operational.

My work phone of choice was the MotoQ 9h as it never ever had any issues in the 18 months that I used it, across several time zones, in multiple areas. The only gripe I had was the provider (AT&T) but that wasn't the fault of the phone. Every BlackBerry I have had since has failed miserably, in every category, except for phone reception because of the excellent coverage that Verizon Wireless offers. I really do miss using the MotoQ 9h whenever I've had to replace the BlackBerry every two to three months.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, March 12, 2010 @ 12:08:37 AM

I still have my original StarTac, but it won't work on an American network because I can't get a full size SIM anymore.

I never had a problem with battery life, but then I purchased an extended life battery.

The battery life on my Droid is a tad short - mostly because I can't stop playing with it...LOL!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Friday, March 12, 2010 @ 7:11:18 AM

razor?
O DEAR GOD NO!
i had one and after 8 months calls kept dropping out and the mic went faulty.
had so many problems with that phone i ended up getting rid of it not even a year after purchase.
worst phone ive ever owned.
iphones are the shiz but extremely overpriced.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Wage SLAVES
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 7:28:08 PM
Reply

Awe...I just got an LED 8000Series. 55inches of pure HD glory...not 3D glory!!!!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Shadow_Ninja
Thursday, March 11, 2010 @ 9:25:44 PM
Reply

i would wait to get one of sony's 3d tvs. they're supposed to have different type of glasses that use batteries to improve visual quality that normal 3d tvs will actually reduce.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

What do you think about The Last Of Us: Remastered?
Fantastic! Can't wait to get it!
Good, not sure if I'll buy immediately.
Eh, not bad, but I don't care.
It's just a stupid money grab.

Previous Poll Results