Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

The 4K "Apple Problem"

Reading the tea leaves

Reading the tea leaves

I question the premise that current resolution limits on Apple devices/services can be used to predict the timeline for future offerings.

IAC, when I look at Apple's past behavior I see a company that likes to wait for the ideal time to bundle various tech advancements into a user friendly package that can be marketed as a quantum leap for the consumer.

1) I believe that Apple wants to "own" the living room and will release large displays as soon as they can meet their design/marketing envelope. I believe these displays will offer UHD resolution even if there is little facility for viewing true UHD material right out of the gate. I think they can "sell" the idea of a bigger desktop with multiple open windows for multitasking millennials, high resolution slide shows of stills shot on high megapixel digital cameras & phones, gaming, etc with the promise of being ready for 4K/UHD motion content as it becomes available.

2) Apple has gained marketing traction with the Retina displays (regardless of who invented or OEMs them) and I believe likes the idea of using that as a differentiator in selling larger displays. Its pure speculation, but I think the delay in launching a TV-ish display has been Apple's lack of interest in a "me too" 1080 product so I actually see that as evidence of their focus on going UHD and simply waiting for the costs to drop (H.265 to launch...). I would further guess that Apple has a price target in mind that they feel is low enough to hit sales targets that make sense for them - something like under $2,000 for the 40-42" entry level model.

3) As others have noted the traditional broadcast infrastructure doesn't even support 1080 properly so why would they want UHD? The other side of that argument is that traditional broadcasting as we know it is on its last legs - does anyone think that the content access/consumption model of 2020 will look anything like it did in 2010? This is the transition period and I'd be shocked if at least a couple of the big players didn't decide that promoting 4K/UHD would enhance their marketing spiel.

Cheers - #19
 
Rob Anderson said:
Everything I know (first and third party) is Apple was sold and branded those panels.
Click to expand...

The fact that Apple received the panels from an outside manufacturer and then branded them is not evidence that they did not spec the panel. If they do source their panels from multiple sources then it is only logical that Apple dictates the spec.

You have not specified how you come by your "facts" and your language suggests that your points are actually conclusions rather than actual first hand knowledge. If you want me to put any faith in your truths at all you are going to have to back them up.
 
Rob Anderson said:
I 100% agree with this. The disagreement has become if Apple is doing this or if it was already done and shopped to them. The fact is, it was already done (then shopped and sold to Apple).
Click to expand...

No, again, you're misinformed. Apple pushed the manufacturers to produce the Retina screens, as you can read from the blog entry I linked to with some behind the scenes information on the subject. Obviously the link was not big enough...

Apple even invested billions in manufacturing tools and aid for it's suppliers for making the Retina iOS devices possible.
 
Blair S. Paulsen said:
I question the premise that current resolution limits on Apple devices/services can be used to predict the timeline for future offerings.
Click to expand...

I agree with your speculations. I would also guess OLED (if not in the first, maybe the 2nd version?) and perhaps a rather powerful inbuilt computer used for decoding, video-processing and game console competition?
 
Jon MIchael Puntervold said:
I agree with your speculations. I would also guess OLED (if not in the first, maybe the 2nd version?) and perhaps a rather powerful inbuilt computer used for decoding, video-processing and game console competition?
Click to expand...

My assumption is that the Apple display will be essentially an oversized iMac. While I would anticipate some traditional IO options like HDMI 1.4a and USB 2/3, I think Apple is all about built in wireless connectivity. Will be interesting to see if Thunderbolt is offered at all due to unit cost issues.

While the promise of OLED is huge, the glacially slow progress in improving yields despite enormous R&D efforts by the usual suspects over the last 3 years makes it questionable at best.

Cheers - #19
 
Blair S. Paulsen said:
While the promise of OLED is huge, the glacially slow progress in improving yields despite enormous R&D efforts by the usual suspects over the last 3 years makes it questionable at best.
Click to expand...

I just did some research and it seems like the OLED manufacturers have some belief that they'll be able to produce large OLED panels with sustainable yields by the end of the year... time will tell.
 
Rob Anderson said:
Apple did not design or invent the Retina panels. LG did. LG designed and fabricates them (sometimes subs manufacturing out) and then Apple buys the panels from LG. Credit where due... It's an LG product with an Apple name on it. This isn't a component that Apple designed and found a manufacturer to build. It's a component LG designed and sold, which Apple now sources.

http://www.dailytech.com/LG+Looks+to+Leave+Apple+Behind+With+5Inch+Retina+Display/article24788.htm

While it's true that companies like Apple and RED often do not get enough due for how much of a hand they have in 'inventing' their product, we're talking about the panels here. And that's an LG product.

Because the Retina displays are an LG product, this isn't Apple "pushing towards 4K". This is LG doing it, along with a number of other panel makers, and Apple is just one of many carts latched onto those horses. And I question how far back they're hitching their cart.
Click to expand...

Erm... that article you referenced is nearly a year old. Also pretty darn ill-informed and speculative, even for the time.

LG did not invent "retina" displays, not by a long shot. In fact, the first manufacturer to produce panels with higher than 100ppi was Hitachi. The first panel maker to make panels with higher than 200ppi and again 300ppi was also Hitachi. Sharp was the first panel maker to produce actual 1080p displays smaller than 9" and again smaller than 7", Samsung the first to do it in a package size, actually several sizes, smaller than 6". Neither LG, nor Apple were the first to use the term "retina" to define the high resolution displays. Apple attempted to trademark the "retina" moniker, that didn't work out so well for them. Opponents of that movement were able to show the term being used generally within the industry dating back several years, with no positive ID on who was the first to use it, so the trademark was denied.

You also might want to do some serious checking into who does the design work for many of these panel makers and who owns the actual patents and rights to the underlying technology. Many of the panel makers are nothing more than just that, makers or manufacturers. The new iMac and iPhone 5 screens are great examples of this. They are every bit an Apple-designed product. Apple has applied for patents on, and even had a few granted for, some of the new concepts used in these two panels. Primarily the new iMac screen. Apple has successfully patented the glass bonding and cell containment methods for the panel. LG was at one time the primary supplier for panels to Apple. They were the lead supplier for the iPhone 4, which is the device that introduced "retina" displays to the world. They are by no means the lead supplier to Apple anymore, nor are they a supplier of iPhone 5 screens... While LG does manufacturer a number of their own designs, they actually manufacture a great deal more panel types that are not of their design. While not "retina" displays, Samsung was the primary supplier of many components for the first three generations of iPhone and was the primary manufacturer, or assembly partner, for the iPhone and iPhone 3G. By the time the 3Gs rolled off the lines, Foxcon had assumed equal status for assembly of the phones, while Samsung still remained the primary supplier for the displays and the sole supplier for the CPUs and memory.
 
Jon MIchael Puntervold said:
I just did some research and it seems like the OLED manufacturers have some belief that they'll be able to produce large OLED panels with sustainable yields by the end of the year... time will tell.
Click to expand...

We'll see. OLED has some great features, but a few flaws of its own, even if they can get sizes and yields up. It no longer has an advantage with black levels over the latest LED panels that have independent black backlight masking (per pixel blackout layer), but those displays have yet to hit the market... probably within the next year. OLED still struggles with noise control in high luminance or "white" areas of the display -- much the same way plasma screens and most LCD's have a difficult time presenting accurate white detail. I do think OLED is probably the tech that will replace LED backlit LCD. Just not quit there yet. It's still emerging and one reason they haven't managed to get the yields up is because they haven't yet managed to make the tech consistently better than what's already out there. For every OLED display I've ever seen with amazing color fidelity, I've seen a prototype LCD display that can match it. Neither of which I can actually go out and buy at this moment.

If Apple does release a TV product, it will happen when all the stars align in their favor and their criteria can be bet by themselves and suppliers. If Jobs and his team spec'd the display as being 4K OLED, then it may just be that... And we may not see it for another year or two, waiting until some suppliers can produce the panel to their intended specs. Apple wanted the iPhone to be a "retina" display from the start, it just wasn't possible until the iPhone 4.

I really don't see Apple releasing a TV that isn't UHD/4K capable. If they do release a new flagship TV, intended to woo the industry, and it's not 4K... they will be the laughing stock of the AV market. Just sayin'. If they release a 42" 1080p as their primary model, as many have speculated for more than a year, their stock will go straight into the shitter. And they won't be able to convince people about how great any features may be... The size and resolution specs will be dwarfed by TV's costing half as much, selling at WalMart.

FWIW, more pricing of UHD TV's came out yesterday from companies like Vizio. Their 70" UHD will be available in the USA end of Q3 this year with an MSRP of $6500. I'm pretty darn sure holiday shoppers will be able to buy it at discount clubs like Sam's or Costco and buy it for under $6K. 4K is here, period. At this time next year, we won't be discussing when 4K panels are going to start selling. We'll be discussing new models and which ones people are actually buying. LG dropped the price on their 84" yesterday too. MSRP is now $14K. Puts both MSRP and estimated street price just a fuzz under double that of a top of the line 80" LED 1080p.
 
Jake Bastian said:
Until Apple shows they are ready to accept even 1080p by making it default on Apple TVs instead of 720. And make it so I can stream shows I've paid for to the device in a reasonable amount of time (i.e. no wait AT ALL), then what reason do I have to believe that video streaming in 4K is anywhere close to ready? Retina screens or not.
Click to expand...

Apple TV has been supporting 1080p since March 2012. Their entire iTunes catalog is also in 1080p.
 
Rob Anderson said:
Agree. Thank you.

Everyone ready to get back to the main discussion yet? Would an Apple Television at 1080 slow 4K in the home? Can pressure from SONY, RED, create a situation where an Apple Television would 'fail' because of it not being 4K?
Click to expand...

I don't think it's a YES or NO question. To some, it would slow 4K adoption because many larger companies like to sit back and see what Apple does with 4K so they can follow suit. Other smaller companies are more nimble and thrive on the competition so they would ramp up their 4K division to match Apple and offer a competing 4K TV.
 
Speculating further, if Apple does launch an "Apple TV" with 4K resolution, I would bet they would have their own way of feeding 4k content to it. I can see the Disney and Pixar catalogue being available at the time of launch in the itunes store at 4K...What codec? That is a good question, but I think something proprietary...
 
Laurence of Arabia 4K streaming

Laurence of Arabia 4K streaming

Liking my Samsung SUHD - Seems like 12-13Mbps allows streaming of Netflix and Amazon Prime 4K content now (HEVC encoder? VBR?)
Anyway Lawrence of Arabia looks very good. Film grain preserved nicely and only one scene where I think the compression is fubar - the scene where the flowers are thrown into the sea? Maybe that is only glitch specific to maximum bandwidth of connection, or maybe the codec actually hiccuped there and no one caught it? Very low light scene with lots of texture.

So how soon before you (we ;) are streaming your work in 4K? !!!
 
No need for 4K support right now. Consumers don't have the TVs or the beefy Internet connections to support 4K streaming. Because of Obama's legislation, every major ISP/TV provider has pledged to replace their copper networks with fibre optics in the next decade or so and as that happens, UHDTV sales and content availability will increase to a point where it is available to the masses.
 
We can wait for next year's Apple TV with 8K. (Or maybe not.)
 
Marc Wielage said:
No support for 4K in the new Apple TV launching this week (say "sources"):

http://variety.com/2015/digital/news/the-next-apple-tv-wont-support-4k-video-report-1201583887/
Click to expand...

Apple makes small and very calculated steps. It needs masses on the AppleTV hobby in order to leverage content deals, so to do that they lure the masses with a refreshed AppleTV with Siri GUI / gaming console / App based tv. After all, apps made the iPhone popular, so why not the TV too?

Robert X. Cringely predicts the new AppleTv device will be 4K ready, just not 4K enabled at launch. Apple will release a software update in 2016 that will enable h265 streaming that will give 4K content to the iTunes store at bandwidth I predict 15Mbps. This will allow most average households be able to watch 4K from Apple's streamed service.

My original 3rd gen AppleTV didn't have 1080p streaming with surround from Netflix when it was released, but as soon as Netflix offered it, a software update gave the functionality to the device. Apple will repeat the strategy, mark my words.

Once they have consumers hooked, they'll expand functionality with homekit and take over the whole house, hehe.

I really think Apple has been calculating how to take over the living room for quite a while now, and this may be just how it's done.

http://www.cringely.com/2015/05/27/apple-tvs-4k-future/
 
At the beginning of the presentation of the new apple tv i was very interested. But after the presentation i had suspicens apple were trying to fool me getting old tech...
No way i pay for new 1080p mediaplayer 2015 to replace ny old boxee box. Will settle with the nvidia Shield console instead.
 
Joel Arvidsson said:
At the beginning of the presentation of the new apple tv i was very interested. But after the presentation i had suspicens apple were trying to fool me getting old tech...
No way i pay for new 1080p mediaplayer 2015 to replace ny old boxee box. Will settle with the nvidia Shield console instead.
Click to expand...


From the content producer side, I think the concept of adding apps to the Apple TV environment is an important development.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top