The next "big thing" at CES: 4K

[RAMA]

Looks like 4K is the new 3D. Since 3D has not caught on in the home like everyone thought it was, it's now the content makers like Netflix that are supplying the go-to technology of the multimedia future. Streaming 4K is going to be widely available, and it looks like optical discs are going to be left out of the loop, at least for now. 4K TVs are becoming affordable (sub $1k), and Netflix is the medium that will be delivering it most of it. Already some shows are filmed and available in 4k.

More:

http://www.theverge.com/2014/1/10/5291068/how-netflix-won-ces-4k-streaming

http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/everything-need-know-streaming-ultra-hd-2014/

http://www.whatech.com/iptv/17983-cbt403-4k-steals-the-show-at-ces

 

[Venardhi]

Streaming 4k is years away in 90% of the country. Streaming 1080 is still pretty rare as it is, and I don't see any ISPs hurrying up to make it more available or affordable.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Streaming 4k is years away in 90% of the country. Streaming 1080 is still pretty rare as it is, and I don't see any ISPs hurrying up to make it more available or affordable.

This is the right answer. 4K is going to be hampered by connections that can't handle it.

 

[FPAlpha]

Yep.. just another marketing tool to sell devices that have features no one can use fully or on a consistent basis (much less need it).

The human eye can't see the difference with 4k unless you have a wall sized TV, there's not if any programming/BluRay (or its successor if there is to be one) that can use it so skip it for a few year when and if there will be programming that uses 4K.

Best to get a standard HD TV with good picture quality and features.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Well, it'd probably start with some TV stations broadcasting in 4K (alongside their 1080 broadcasts, I suppose.) But streaming it and having it on optical media is definitely a ways off, nor are 4K TVs anywhere near being affordable for most people.

 

[Snaploud]

4K is just another excuse cable companies will use to throttle internet connections and cap data plans. Very few people will actually benefit from it.

 

[Bisz]

To me 4K is like 3D, Dead On Arrival. I have no use for it since as already pointed out, you can't see the difference between it and 1080p unless your TV is monstrous.

This is just a gimmick the companies are trying out to boost TV sales, which were down last year, I think for the first time in years.

As for the streaming aspect, I don't think it will be the problem people in this thread perceive it to be. I read recently that a new codec is already in the works which will allow 4K streaming using less data than current 1080p streaming. But really, how much compression can you do, how much data can you cut out, before your 4K display is wasted on a compressed signal which no longer has a true 4K image.

 

[DarthTom]

Well, it'd probably start with some TV stations broadcasting in 4K (alongside their 1080 broadcasts, I suppose.) But streaming it and having it on optical media is definitely a ways off, nor are 4K TVs anywhere near being affordable for most people.

Seiki isn't a name brand most of us are familiar with but they are selling 4K TV's for $899 which is very affordable.

AmazonSeki TV - 4K

 

[Robert Maxwell]

The TV I'm making this post on is a Seiki... not a great TV, really, but it gets the job done. I'd be pretty skeptical of the quality of a 4K TV for $900.

 

[BillJ]

I watched 480i for 35 years, I had a 720p set for a couple of years and a 1080p set for almost five years. I'm perfectly happy with 1080p.

 

[DarthTom]

^^^ It would be cool to own a super thin samsung for ergonomic and asthetic reasons and some of the new smart TV functions would be fun to have as the geek in me loves that shit.

But, at this point - and like with my iPad 2 - until something revoluationary occurs either in tablet ownership and/or TV technology I'm standing by. Revolutionary on the scale of holographic images.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

Does that mean we'll get past the horrible monitor downgrade to "HD", and go back to monitors that had decent resolutions?

 

[Amaris]

I watched 480i for 35 years, I had a 720p set for a couple of years and a 1080p set for almost five years. I'm perfectly happy with 1080p.

Yep. Enjoyed 480i for most of my life, the past 5 years has been all about 720p. Eventually I'll get a 1080p, but until then, I am quite happy with the quality of my experience. I think moving up to 4K/8K would be based solely on that it's the new thing. Unless you have a giant-ass TV and you only sit 4 feet away from it, I see it as pretty pointless, especially considering the current price and availability.

VHS to DVD was a huge leap forward. DVD to Blu-ray was a solid step. Blu-ray to 4K? Eh, if you have the high end stuff it probably looks better. 8K? Who could tell the damned difference from more than a foot away? Eventually, diminishing returns will kick in.

 

[Snaploud]

I've had a 32 inch tube tv for about 15 years. It's easily the best electronics purchase I've ever made. It's extremely heavy, though, and I'll probably have to replace it soon enough. I expect to go for a 720p or 1080p tv next.

 

[Amaris]

I wish we sold LCD TVs back when I worked for a rent-to-own company. Jesus Christ, dragging 70" projection screen TVs up 3 flights of stairs in the middle of Summer. *shudder*

 

[RAMA]

Streaming 4k is years away in 90% of the country. Streaming 1080 is still pretty rare as it is, and I don't see any ISPs hurrying up to make it more available or affordable.

The whole point of the post is that no one, (including myself) thought 4K was would have a way to be seen much less be promoted in anything closer than 10 years from now. Now, not only are shows being shot in 4K, but the availibility of a $1000 TV(a major price-performance increase in infotech) and a major supplier of content (also in delivery) are interested in using it. It's a major change.

As for differentiating the quality from 1080p, i dont see it taking the place of the avg household tv soon, however, because of it's aspect ratio, it'll be useful for very large displays and may actually lead to convergence of hardware and habitat.

USA bandwith increased over 30% last year. The USA has the 9th fastest avg internet speed in the world. There will be plenty of ISPs that will change to catch up to the technology. My current speed is almost 20 times the national average and I live in the relative boonies of NJ.

 

[sojourner]

New Jersey is the origin state of Bell/AT&T. No part of that state can be considered "boonies" when it comes to internet access.

Considering the courts just killed net neutrality, I can see a lot of content providers balking at higher bandwidth usage in the near future.

 

[Venardhi]

Streaming 4k is years away in 90% of the country. Streaming 1080 is still pretty rare as it is, and I don't see any ISPs hurrying up to make it more available or affordable.

The whole point of the post is that no one, (including myself) thought 4K was would have a way to be seen much less be promoted in anything closer than 10 years from now. Now, not only are shows being shot in 4K, but the availibility of a $1000 TV(a major price-performance increase in infotech) and a major supplier of content (also in delivery) are interested in using it. It's a major change.
.

I don't know where you've been but "4k" has been well on its way in over the last couple years.. I would have been far more surprised if 4k hadn't made the kind of appearance it did this year.