Color Television was disappointing when first introduced?

[Steve D.]

I think all the above comments ring true. The mid fifties was a time of prosperity. All kinds of new gadgets were coming on the market. Much like today's electronic candy store. Color tv was not a priority purchase in most middle class homes. As stated, there was little color programming, the sets were expensive and the screens small compared to available b&w sets. This along with the complex chassis and multiple adjustments and nightmarish stories of bad purity and convergence problems, more new terms for consumers. And having to watch less then bright images in dimly lit rooms, scared many potential buyers away. There was a wait and see attitude. "I'll wait for lower prices" or "more color shows". RCA spent millions on developement of color and millions more trying to sell the sets. The public wasn't buying. Less lag time, but several years in, HD is just now starting to catch on. There is still much confusion over types of sets. HD ready, HD monitor, HD built in, set top box, HD coverter. Not to mention plasma, lcd, dlp ect. Then there's The network HD broadcast standard, at least 3 of those. Plus the scare tactic of an analog cutoff date. You weren't told in 1954 that you better buy a color set, because all b&w broadcasts would cease after a certain date. Compatible color. But that's another term people didn't understand that scared off early color buyers.

-Steve D.