Let's see $1400 for a 12" TV or $2800 for a 20" TV. This is not a product but a proof of concept priced not to sell, similar to Sony's 20" OLED a few years ago. I believe this will be a viable product in 2-3 years at best. At this point maybe a reasonably sized monitor (greater than 40") at a reasonable price (less than $2000) with a reasonable resolution (1080P) will exist.
It's hard to see many consumer 20" 3D TV sales. To watch what? would be another question, but another topic. On the other hand, a 12" or so 3D display might find some uses in a cockpit. Perspective-enabled imaging of terrain is available all the way down to general aviation aircraft; real 3D may or may not be an enhancement, as long as the pilot doesn't need special glasses to do it with.
I dunno. Pay significantly more for a TV that requires new chips to deliver slightly less 3-D resolution for small-medium-sized displays with limited viewing angles--and a benefit of no glasses. Seems too small a gain for me.
The fact that Toshiba is not doing this for big screens is significant.
With the market growth of portable/mobile devices, perhaps the technology can be simplified for smaller screen sizes where the viewing angle is definitely limited compared to big screen TV. If so, this would be a way to enhance viewing experience on these smaller displays. Right now I am sure the IC chipset cost would make this prohibitive, but that has been the case for many other previously costly technologies that are now mainstream.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.