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 :)

TV going away.. so why 4k delivery?

Zakaree Sandberg

Zakaree Sandberg

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
4,260
Reaction score
1
Points
38
Age
43
Location
Los Angeles, CA
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?
 
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.
 
The friction' iPad has now surpassed 1080P! If that doesn't signal a 4K future I don't know what else does...
 
David W. Jones said:
Maybe because even with 250 channels there is still nothing worth watching on.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
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.
 
Whether people are spending freely, or not, at any given point in the economic cycle, is a short term issue. I do believe that the state of the economy influences people's decision making but perceived value is usually the key driver. More on point to this particular discussion might be the weak performance of the recent 3D push and the red ink the CE companies have been spilling of late.

I continue to maintain that 4K is the logical next entrant in the "new hotness" marketing plans of the major players. I also expect that the long awaited refresh of the Apple display line, likely including monitors that will eliminate the last vestiges of differentiation between TV and computer displays, will offer at least one 4K or QHD (3,840 x 2,160) option. Thunderbolt strikes me as an I/O targeted more for the demands of the next generation of displays than to speed up the file transfers of the 1% of users who weren't adequately served by USB or Firewire. I predict either a PCIe 3 based TB tap or perhaps TB right on the mobo in the next iteration of the MacPro.

I challenge Zak's implication that the predicted death of traditional TV distribution models means that people have lost their taste for high value content. In fact, one could argue that the fragmented landscape of entertainment options puts even more onus on producers of some types of content to differentiate based on qualities like resolution. Once legacy revenue streams based on existing distribution avenues erode enough, they will be supplanted by hybrid access methodologies like GoogleTV, AppleTV, etc which will offer myriad resolutions based on the source.

The mix of screens in the modern household from the Retina iPhone to the big HDTV in the living room is largely still a "horses for courses" proposition. I see the next step in the evolution as people using the most accessible device for interaction (user input) in concert with the best screen for viewing, which may be the same screen in some cases, but not always. Even in advance of wide availability of 4K motion content, decent sized high resolution screens would be great for multi-taskers, gamers, media creators, virtual environments, presentations and interactive functionality - not to mention higher res interleaved 3D.

The elephant in this discussion is bandwidth and how it is apportioned by the provider. Legacy switching technology, long term contracts and the challenges of monetizing OTT are likely to distort the marketplace for a few more years but time and technology will march on.

Rant off.

Cheers - #19
 
Blair S. Paulsen said:
I challenge Zak's implication that the predicted death of traditional TV distribution models means that people have lost their taste for high value content. In fact, one could argue that the fragmented landscape of entertainment options puts even more onus on producers of some types of content to differentiate based on qualities like resolution. Once legacy revenue streams based on existing distribution avenues erode enough, they will be supplanted by hybrid access methodologies like GoogleTV, AppleTV, etc which will offer myriad resolutions based on the source.

Cheers - #19
Click to expand...

No Challenge needed.. I think things are moving big into the internet world and away from mainstream network and tv.. so there will actually be more content.. Great for us!
and high quality.. is the way to go.. my initial question for this thread would be more related to the delivery of 4k content..

if things do move more internet based.. will there/ is there a way to dish out 4k or is their a kink in the pipeline which limits that kind of data..

i mean... no question.. one day it will get there.. most likely sooner than later
 
... the interesting bit about visionary technology is, the masses speculating about the tip of the ice berg, while the creators are dealing in massive reality shifting grounds with massive implications in the deep dark seas of mystery.... invisible to the ordinary mind ... simply because of the lack of information and insight to the mad scientists vault.

the simple thought is, the higher the resolution, the more depth cues, the more "three dimensional reality feeling" can be perceived ... without glasses that is or any other optical beam splitting tricks for that matter.

....to see an example, one may go to louvre in paris and watch a few of the giant canvases painted by masters ...

now, as soon as the masses eye has seen the world with a new set of super high res eyes ... everything else will be pale. ... and vanish in time.

... which in turn will inspire companies with vanishng profits to innovate and cater to the new status quo ....

guess my point is, 4k does not come with a dial-up connection and all the other latest tech from the 80ies ... ;-)
allthough the idea of 4k and 8 and 16 is reality shifting, other industries do have breakthroughs, too

there is a massive compound effect.

and that, in summary, is why it makes sense to be on the left side of the adoptive powercurve.
 
Tom Lowe said:
Where does 4K fit in?? ...

I have a 65" plasma here with 200 HD channels, and I never turn it on.
Click to expand...

... good example for my point above ...
it doesnt help to blow up full-hd res footage to super size screens .... it's ugly. no fun.

big screens ASK for big resolution to create the enhanced experience, which is what i am refering to with the louvre paintings.

there are giant, GIANT canvases and they contain almost infinite detail .....
which made me look in awe and study, for quite some time ...
 
Zakaree Sandberg said:
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?
Click to expand...

That article is very misleading. The actual study asked people if they watched broadcast TV "live" - i.e. not Tivo-ed. A Tivo (or whatever PVR) is the same as the original broadcast in terms of res. It is playing back the same digital data unfiltered. Other studies show that people stop fast-forward to see products they are interested in. For example, people looking to buy a small car will pause when they see small car ads. In effect the ads work as well as they did before because if you were a man and you saw a tampon commercial it has no useful purpose before, even if you had to sit through it and now you just fast-forward it. No huge loss for the advertiser.
 
Tom Lowe said:
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.
Click to expand...

You are not typical though. Also you do not have a family with kids, which shifts habits quite a lot. Even married couples do not watch shows together on their PCs, they use the TV. (Studied fact). It doesn't matter what we do in terms of the market for something because we on thsi forum are for the most part statistical outliers.
 
Detlev Eller said:
... good example for my point above ...
it doesnt help to blow up full-hd res footage to super size screens .... it's ugly. no fun.

big screens ASK for big resolution to create the enhanced experience, which is what i am refering to with the louvre paintings.

there are giant, GIANT canvases and they contain almost infinite detail .....
which made me look in awe and study, for quite some time ...
Click to expand...

We have a 1080p projector on a 92 screen. Let me tell you it looks GREAT with blu-rays. You cannot see pixels, and I have much better than 20/20 vision.
 
Blair S. Paulsen said:
Whether people are spending freely, or not, at any given point in the economic cycle, is a short term issue. I do believe that the state of the economy influences people's decision making but perceived value is usually the key driver. More on point to this particular discussion might be the weak performance of the recent 3D push and the red ink the CE companies have been spilling of late.

I continue to maintain that 4K is the logical next entrant in the "new hotness" marketing plans of the major players. I also expect that the long awaited refresh of the Apple display line, likely including monitors that will eliminate the last vestiges of differentiation between TV and computer displays, will offer at least one 4K or QHD (3,840 x 2,160) option. Thunderbolt strikes me as an I/O targeted more for the demands of the next generation of displays than to speed up the file transfers of the 1% of users who weren't adequately served by USB or Firewire. I predict either a PCIe 3 based TB tap or perhaps TB right on the mobo in the next iteration of the MacPro.

I challenge Zak's implication that the predicted death of traditional TV distribution models means that people have lost their taste for high value content. In fact, one could argue that the fragmented landscape of entertainment options puts even more onus on producers of some types of content to differentiate based on qualities like resolution. Once legacy revenue streams based on existing distribution avenues erode enough, they will be supplanted by hybrid access methodologies like GoogleTV, AppleTV, etc which will offer myriad resolutions based on the source.

The mix of screens in the modern household from the Retina iPhone to the big HDTV in the living room is largely still a "horses for courses" proposition. I see the next step in the evolution as people using the most accessible device for interaction (user input) in concert with the best screen for viewing, which may be the same screen in some cases, but not always. Even in advance of wide availability of 4K motion content, decent sized high resolution screens would be great for multi-taskers, gamers, media creators, virtual environments, presentations and interactive functionality - not to mention higher res interleaved 3D.

The elephant in this discussion is bandwidth and how it is apportioned by the provider. Legacy switching technology, long term contracts and the challenges of monetizing OTT are likely to distort the marketplace for a few more years but time and technology will march on.

Rant off.

Cheers - #19
Click to expand...

hey Blair I agree with you. I would also add that very few people actually watch home-made content (youtube cat videos et all) for more than a few minutes a day. I have also seen studies that show this form of content is declining compared to pro music videos and comedy shows, as after a while all those cat videos are very similar, and the fad to find them cute is diminishing - not going away, just declining. There are still major media events that almost everybody sees. The landscape is somewhat fragmented, but not completely so, and is not fragmenting further in terms of content. The good news is piracy has also plateaud.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top