TV going away.. so why 4k delivery?

[Zakaree Sandberg]

http://digitaljournal.com/article/317700

Less people are watching TV (good for them... bad for the propaganda machine)
they are moving towards internet based entertainment....


computers can handle the 720 or 1080 data throughput.. but real 4k?

plus the economy blows and people aren't going to go out and buy expensive new 4k TVs and Monitors..

look at what happened with 3D tvs

where does 4k fit in?

[David W. Jones]

http://digitaljournal.com/article/317700

Less people are watching TV

Maybe because even with 250 channels there is still nothing worth watching on.

[Tom Lowe]

Where does 4K fit in?? If anything, this means that 4K will be adopted even MORE QUICKLY, as TVs are kind of a slow-moving legacy device.

How about 4K monitors for the PC? How about a 20-inch 4K tablet? How about 4K projectors?

I have a 65" plasma here with 200 HD channels, and I never turn it on. I watch everything on computer screens.

[Sam Winzar]

The friction' iPad has now surpassed 1080P! If that doesn't signal a 4K future I don't know what else does...

[Steve Sherrick]

Maybe because even with 250 channels there is still nothing worth watching on.

I don't completely agree with this. I use to feel that way, and now I'm catching up on shows I missed over the years and there is some good stuff. Now, admittedly a lot of it falls within a select group of channels but if you seek it out, there's quality TV available. And keep in mind, what we may not like because it's not "art" the average Joe who just wants to sit down and unwind after a long day at the office might find to be great TV for them.

As for 4K, if we start to think in terms of displays rather than legacy TV terms, everything becomes scalable. So, if you buy a 4K display, you have the ability to view your content in many different ways, whether it's direct connect internet programming, video game console, Blu-Ray players (maybe even 4K versions), Red-Ray, etc. Just because there's limited content now, doesn't mean you can't plan for scalability in the future.

[Zakaree Sandberg]

yah i actually can see the 4k monitor thing.. and people just hooking up to computers vs the traditional tv cable..

but it has to be priced right... people aren't spending

[Jay Birch]

Next iMac will almost certainly have 4K+ and should be capable of playing 4K without a struggle.

The only limitation is net speed and bandwidth (especially on the side of the provider).

Time for RED to launch a 4K streaming service with their latest codec?

[Brad Webb]

Google is working on super high speed interent. They are testing it now is some town in the midwest. They are gearing youtube up for 4K streaming and want the net speed to be able to handle it.

[sergio arguello]

well heres a halfway point right?

[Phil Holland]

4k in the home is on the horizon. I'm really curious to see what cable and dish providers are going to do from here on out. Too pricey to make a box solution. Will there be some sort of net based "cable" subscription? Hulu and Netflix are on the right track, but lack the availability to content that network and cable have. Netflix has expressed interest in 4k. Youtube supports 4k today.

We are at a weird point here in terms of home delivery. For cinema delivery things are a bit more predictable as 4k DCP is happening. Compressed disk delivery of a decent quality encoding of 4k content lands at about 30GB for two hours of content currently. Red's got a few things up their sleeve that will effect projection and perhaps even disc delivery.

I feel that in home 4k and web tech are the future. Just a bit curious about what I would call "legacy" tech that's implanted in millions of homes. Exciting times for sure.