TV manufacturers: '3D no reason to buy TV' - OLED and 4k are

vbimport

#1

TV manufacturers: ‘3D no reason to buy TV’ - OLED and 4k are.

[newsimage]http://static.rankone.nl/images_posts/2013/01/1XvbMK.jpg[/newsimage]TV manufacturers think that 3D technology is not a reason to buy a new TV. But they think new technologies will seduce us to buy a new one...


Read the full article here: [http://www.myce.com/news/tv-manufacturers-3d-no-reason-to-buy-tv-oled-and-4k-are-65888/](http://www.myce.com/news/tv-manufacturers-3d-no-reason-to-buy-tv-oled-and-4k-are-65888/)


Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

“OLED technology promises better brightness …” Finally! NOT. TVs are already so bright out of the box that most people (everyone I know, anyway) turn the brightness (and contrast) down when initially setting them up. And those who don’t are probably the people who complain about the “blacks not being black”.

“Ultra HD has a resolution of 3840×2160 and is four times as sharp as HD content.” Yep, and unless the TV is bigger than 70" diagnal, it’s unlikely that anyone will (honestly) be able to tell the difference.


#3

Don’t hold your breath for OLED any time soon. Everybody has announced product but no one has shipped. Only exception was about 3 years ago when Sony was selling their 11" OLED for the bargain price of $2500.
OLED holds much promise but the manufacturing hurdles and costs are still it’s chief drawback. Last time I spoke to one of the guys at LG, they were tossing 90% of production due to faulty panels. 10% useable product is not a viable production option.
As for 3D and 4K;
3D, who needs it.
4K works wonderfully for Advertising Agencies showing still images. Video not so good, until data transfer speeds creep closer to the gigabit per second range. The new H265 encoding is supposed to allieviate bandwidth problems but you still need 30 megabits per second to make it work. Don’t know about your ISPs but on a good day Shaw might get to 6.5 or 7 mbps.

Buy a good 1080p TV and enjoy both the TV and watching the iTwitts and Technofreaks drool over the latest and shiniest gadgets.


#4

As an experiment, I made a 1920x1080 screen recording from my PC and played the resulting MP4 recording on the living room TV, which is a 37" LCD Full HD display. While standing a metre (~3’) from the TV, it looked like a giant PC monitor and everything was as clear and sharp as on my PC monitor. However, when I sat on the sofa aprox. 4 metres (~13’) away, I could not make out the writing on the screen apart form headlines on webpages in the recording.

If I cannot see 1080p natively from the sofa, somehow I doubt I’m going to see a better picture with 4K. :disagree:

On the other hand, I’m sure 4K would be nice on a PC monitor where one sits close enough to see additional detail. I agree with what others say in that 4K would be better for giant 60"+ TV displays and projectors, but certainly not for <50" except for those who sit right in front of the TV.


#5

[QUOTE=olddancer;2674943]As for 3D and 4K;
3D, who needs it.
4K works wonderfully for Advertising Agencies showing still images. Video not so good, until data transfer speeds creep closer to the gigabit per second range. The new H265 encoding is supposed to allieviate bandwidth problems but you still need 30 megabits per second to make it work. Don’t know about your ISPs but on a good day Shaw might get to 6.5 or 7 mbps.

Buy a good 1080p TV and enjoy both the TV and watching the iTwitts and Technofreaks drool over the latest and shiniest gadgets.[/QUOTE]

I very much agree with all of the above. My family still hasn’t migrated from DVDs to Blu-Rays, and I know we’re not alone. That said, there are still many people who enjoy watching SD TV. I don’t think 4K will sell too well, at least not for some time.

It’s true, HD movies do look a little sharper, but unless you have a TV the size of you driveway, there’s really no point to 4K.


#6

I’m already starting to save my pennies for the 64K TVs with the 14Tb RAID5 arrays built-in. I understand those are now going to be 10-drives in a matchbox.

At least, I think that’s what Carl Perkins would write it, if it was a new song today.


#7

I’m not sure why everyone is downing on 4k2k …

If you can’t see the difference between 480p and 1080p on your tv, then you are either blind, your equipment is not good, the source is low quality, or a combination of the three.

I can easily identify 720p from 480p content on my Sony 46" tv from 4m away. 720p to 1080p not so much, but 4x they’re resolution of 1080p will be like night & day.

Most 1080p tvs are still terrible for use as a pc monitor due to low pixel density, and smoothing algorithms. The smoothing can be turned off, but the pixel density it’s still terrible.

4k2k will alleviate many of these problems.

C’mon people! If It wasn’t for technological progression, intel would still have us paying $500 for 30mhz 386 cpu … soldered to the motherboard …


#8

Aren’t these the same guys that were saying we should all go out and get 3D HDTV’s because they were going to be “the next big thing” a year-year and a half ago?


#9

4K is a “mere” 8.3 mega pixels.

Our eyes are capable of discerning far more detail than most people seem to think.


#10

I bought 1080. My next buy will likely be the cerebral implant…


#11

Yeah but when does anything need better than 4K/8.3MP resolution on TV? The only thing I could possibly think of would be sports where 1080 falls short some times.


#12

[QUOTE=yojimbo197;2674999]Yeah but when does anything need better than 4K/8.3MP resolution on TV? The only thing I could possibly think of would be sports where 1080 falls short some times.[/QUOTE]
My 5 year old digital video camera takes photos at 12MP. I have >150GB of photo’s going back 5 years, incidentally :slight_smile:
1080p look ok, but just doesn’t do them justice, especially if they are rotated …

My Galaxy S (v1.0) from 2years ago, takes photo’s at 5MP … my iphone 3GS from 4 years ago took photo’s >2MP, my nokia 6600 (or whatever) from 6-8 years ago took photo’s >2MP.

My wedding photos were taken on a >12 megapixel camera, and were provided on (multiple copies of) DVDR :slight_smile:

Give me a few more years, and I’ll be cursing those pictures, and it better be in glorious UHD+ :stuck_out_tongue:

I’m off to find a an old mobile phone with 160x120 screen resolution, so I can watch 1080p content at glorious 80 dpi … smart phones … bah … 600p/720p/1080p (250-400dpi) screens … absolutely ridiculous … why would anyone want that? :stuck_out_tongue:


#13

3D TV is dead anyone could see this coming, since I was a child they have tried to do 3D but it never last.


#14

You are comparing apples to orange.tv is not a still picture. and you still havent answered what practical.use would 4k display technology have for the average consumer.

secondly the areas are vastly different between the average picture sizes and a tv screen. its much more evident that a 12mp picture looks betted than a 1-2.

also silver halide/real film.still.trumps any digital photo ive seen to date.

[B][/B][QUOTE=debro;2675000]My 5 year old digital video camera takes photos at 12MP. I have >150GB of photo’s going back 5 years, incidentally :slight_smile:
1080p look ok, but just doesn’t do them justice, especially if they are rotated …

My Galaxy S (v1.0) from 2years ago, takes photo’s at 5MP … my iphone 3GS from 4 years ago took photo’s >2MP, my nokia 6600 (or whatever) from 6-8 years ago took photo’s >2MP.

My wedding photos were taken on a >12 megapixel camera, and were provided on (multiple copies of) DVDR :slight_smile:

Give me a few more years, and I’ll be cursing those pictures, and it better be in glorious UHD+ :stuck_out_tongue:

I’m off to find a an old mobile phone with 160x120 screen resolution, so I can watch 1080p content at glorious 80 dpi … smart phones … bah … 600p/720p/1080p (250-400dpi) screens … absolutely ridiculous … why would anyone want that? :p[/QUOTE]


#15

Given that the average consumer doesn’t appear to have the capability of differentiating 480p & 1080p, 4k2k has absolutely nothing at all to offer the average consumer :wink:

Obviously, those of us that have decently capable vision will be in awe of our 4k2k tv, much like we appreciate our 1080p blurays & tvs now :wink:


#16

[QUOTE=debro;2675009]Given that the average consumer doesn’t appear to have the capability of differentiating 480p & 1080p, 4k2k has absolutely nothing at all to offer the average consumer :wink:

Obviously, those of us that have decently capable vision will be in awe of our 4k2k tv, much like we appreciate our 1080p blurays & tvs now ;)[/QUOTE]

I can tell the difference between 480 and 1080p. Sure its nice. That STILL doesn’t answer the question as to what 4K will do that will differentiate it and make it a must have from current 1080p systems.


#17

[QUOTE=yojimbo197;2675011]…make it a Must Have…[/QUOTE]

C’mon! You have money. They don’t. THAT makes [I][B]it[/B][/I] a Must Have.

For THEM.

:p:p

Must Have 2.0.

Well, by this time, it’s - what? - Must Have 2013 rc8? It’s a good thing Must-Have marketing campaigns aren’t managed by the Chrome Numerics Department.


#18

I think the TV manufacturers would be well served by promoting ips screens for HDTVs. On tablets the ips screen have fantastic picture quality over conventional LCD screens, IMO.

Quadrupling resolution may not be all that useful in the real world. How many years did it take 1080p resolutions to be useful? Until the content providers can readily supply 4k content then I would have no use for a 4k screen.

Then again, I guess new technology has to start at some point so it can start the path to being mainstream.


#19

PROS of 4K television

  • Kiss-ass 2160 resolution that MANY people should be able to distinguish over 1080 quality
  • Bragging rights. The guy with the best TV gets the hottest women. I read that somewhere in the Bible.
  • Will kick 3D to the curb since it’s a joke. Good riddance.
  • Lastly… 4K porn. :slight_smile:

CONS of 4K television

  • I’m not gonna lie, kids. This isn’t your daddy’s TV. It’s going to cost a pretty penny at first.
  • You’ll have to re-buy your entire Blu-ray collection in the new format. :frowning:

#20