http://news.cnet.com/8301-31021_3-20018534-260.html
One of the sites says “Somebody finally figured out how to do it”, which is absurd. There have been patents out for decades on how to build 3D TV systems. Many of them have been glasses-free lenticular models. This is just the first time it’s made economic sense, what with 3D TV networks springing up and other, glasses-using 3D TVs already on the market.
Quite an unfortunate typo there in the title. I was getting ready to place my order for the Millenium Falcon chessboard.
I dunno…
Lenticular displays tend to look pretty shitty. You necessarily lose half of the horizontal resolution, because you’re displaying both images simultaneously on the same surface. You’d need to keep your head in the “sweet spot” for viewing, and the display wouldn’t perform as well for 2D. Meh. This seems more even restrictive than shutter-glasses, severely limiting where the viewer’s head must be and precluding the possibility of a second viewer. I want a true 1080p image with a big screen, if I’m going to watch a 3D movie. A fuzzy image on a little screen that only one person can watch is kind of a step backwards.
I’ll be happy enough when they bring passive-glasses systems home. (Really only practical with projection, but it would be the best home theatre ever.) That combined with polarized glasses with reasonable quality frames instead of the “disposable” jobbies would be as good as “no glasses” for me. (And a much better image than lenticular could hope to give you.)
I will probably break down and buy a 3D set and a couple pairs of shutter glasses when it approaches my price-point - though god knows when that’ll be. 
This system was described as having 9 angles in the lenticular strips. This would be some improvement over the more common 2 or 3 angle implementations in still pictures. But there was also criticism that the viewing angle and distance was limited.
Maybe integral imaging, or some variant, will be available someday. It sounds like resolution is an issue there, but multiple DLPs might be able to handle it. Anything that uses more than the two image method used by systems with glasses will require a lot of extra data that current delivery systems can’t handle.
I know those glasses will drive me crazy, so I’m willing to give any glasses-free system a shot though.
Isn’t this the same (or very similar) technology the Nintendo 3DS is using? In that case, it makes much more sense for a portable since 1) Only one person uses it at a time and 2) You’re holding it in front of you, so it’s easy to stay in the “sweet spot.”
Seems impractical for home use.