Many e-mail client programs contain calendar features. Since I rarely ever use any calendaring features I fail to see how e-mail and calendar are related.

To me it feels like calendaring is a functionality on its own and th…

So it’s official – Samsung has dumped 3D televisions (see cnet). Clearly, if the world’s largest TV manufacturer has dumped 3D, it’s because there wasn’t much of a market for them.

Now, I’m no ‘prophet of doom’, but I predicted this would happen years ago on the basis that the user experience of using 3D TVs is, well, awful! And, to me this fact seemed so obvious that I’m surprised they really ever came to market in the first place.

In a nutshell, viewing 3D seems more hassle than it’s worth. Glasses are generally bulky and each viewer requires a pair to watch the content. So, when I was asked by someone seeking a government grant, What changes to the user experience would be required for 3D TVs to take off? my initial answer was that the technology has to change so there is no need for wearing glasses while watching 3D content.

However, I started wondering, am I right in this or is it just that the experience needs to be engaging enough to distract users from the frustrations of using the technology?

From all accounts James Cameron’s Avatar was a hit in 3D, and so are many 3D games, so does this prove that the answer may not need to be ‘get rid of the glasses’ but to make better content?

Unfortunately, I myself can’t view 3D content due to blindness in one eye, so I have no way to view 3D content to compare and try to answer this. And, asking this community the question is really going to be potentially too broad and opinion-based.

So, can anyone here refer me to some research into the user experience of 3D televisions? Or indeed, has anyone here conducted any firsthand research (via surveys, focus groups, etc) into this topic?