US Telco Support > Verizon > Verizon FIOS TV > Ultra HD at CES

reply to Mike

Re: Ultra HD at CES

What many of those here don't want to admit it that they are a minority of a minority, 4K and up is of no importance to the general public, regardless of how much content their might be.

1080p is more than good enough and will be the dominant content resolution for at least another 10 years.

And no Cablecard is not a cable box option. There is effectively no market for cablecard. The cable co's make it next to impossible to deploy them and hobble them so as to make them a very poor substitute for a true independent cable box solution.

I have to agree that the market probably isn't clamoring for 4k. The standards keep getting progressively higher resolution to allow for an immersive experience at larger and larger TV sizes. But that's the problem - at some point, you hit a point of saturation. How large do you have to get to to make 4k worthwhile? 84"? 100"? At that point you're getting larger than most people want in their homes. Even if the rooms they have can accommodate the larger screen.

I'm case in point with that - last year we got a new TV for our family room. I opted for a 50", even though the room could easily handle something larger. But I didn't want anything larger. I didn't want the TV to be THE focal point of the room. And our family room is large. Even if there are consumers out there just jonesing for a 100" TV, how many have rooms that can accommodate them? And if you don't have the space for anything larger than say a 50" TV, then why do you need/want 4k? You get the full immersive experience at 1080p.

That's not to say that 4k won't eventually catch on. It may. But only after the price drops enough (drops in price spur increased demand). I think eventually that'll happen. The price will drop enough to push creation of demand for the format. But I really don't see that happening for at least a few years. Couple this with the lack of bandwidth available for cable companies to move to 4k, and I think the drive for the format will be tepid for some time.

As for the cable box comment, earlier on, that if the FCC just pushed for the creation of a third-party market all these problems would go away. Um... what? While I'm a big proponent of such a move, I really don't see how that solves issues in terms of bandwidth. Besides, many on here who claim that we will never have third party box manufacturers... what makes you say that? Yes, I think the cable card was a fiasco. The cable industry was forced into creating of such a device, and as such were very loathe to support it. But recent moves by the FCC are designed to create just such a market, and it does amaze me that so many on this forum have missed it.

The over the top IP streaming requirement that the FCC put out there is designed to do just that. It has many advantages over things like the cable card. First, you don't have to lease anything, beyond maybe a router, from your cable company for it to work. Second, it's not tied to just viewing on your TV. Third, the FCC was smart in this move - the industry was moving in this direction ANYWAY. They just jumped on board that train and called that their solution for doing away with the STB monopoly. Yes, cable companies can define their own standards for their own over the top streaming, but the latest set of requirements require that they keep their architecture open, and fully spec'd. Which opens the door to all sorts of third parties coming in developing boxes of all sorts. Think it's a coincidence that Roku just announced an app for streaming TWC channels? No, this move doesn't get rid of the cable company - just the need for a cable box.

reply to danclan
1080 is horrible quality. Provider stream compression doesn't help either.

Is more detail better of course. Is it practical right now? Not really.
--
"If something about the human body disgusts you, complain to the manufacturer" - Lenny Bruce
What this country needs is a good five dollar plasma weapon.

reply to fishacura
Streaming quality throughout the web is frankly not up to snuff. YouTube's is often horrible. You could have the TV, the FIOS infrastructure, all ready. But if the source of the feed is crud, what good is it?

reply to danclan

reply to JPL

reply to MURICA
No offense, but your responses are somewhat elitist. Lowest common denominator? Can you possible be more insulting? In other words, what you're referring to is: the market. Without widespread acceptance of a product, it won't go anywhere. If there is no market, there is no product. Period. You think they're going to make uber-high-end TVs for a handful of people? Where's the money in that?

Next, if you sit 6" from your TV, yes you will see the pixels. So? Full immersion is about just that. If I sit in the front row of a movie theater, the picture looks blurry too. So what? The idea is that you become immersed at a normal viewing distance. In order to make 4k worthwhile, you need to have something that will benefit from that format. That means a super large TV. I don't know many homes that can handle a 100" TV. Given that, there is really no benefit of 4k over 1080p. If you sit 8' from your TV, then a 1080p TV in the 50 - 60" range will give you full immersion. Eventually 4k will probably catch on, but not until the prices come down. And until there's at least a modicum of acceptance, the prices won't come down. You need some base level of acceptance to drive down the price enough to create a market for a product. Otherwise, unless you're willing to plunk down $25k for a TV, you can forget about 4k.

reply to aaronwt
Right now that's true. No one believes that Roku will be the be-all, end-all here. It's a first step. Roku is more tailored to IP streaming anyway. My point is that this move by the FCC opens the door for real honest-to-goodness STBs made by other companies that don't require a cable card. Give it time. You'll see improvements.

reply to fishacura
4K does not excite me as there will be little to no content for many years...you will just have a very expensive upscaler...the OLED sets on display at CES were jawdropping...forget 4K, I'll take 1080p with an OLED

reply to TitusTroy
By that argument we'd all be still watching black and white tv with bunny ears or listening to transistor radio.

4k or 8k is the next technology jump. It's going to happen... not sure when. OLED is just trying to squeeze more out of a format without actually doing anything.

reply to fishacura
4K has been around for a while. Sony has been selling a projector for at least the last 2 years. Problem is, as has been stated, you need something to feed it. 4k for cable television is pointless because they can't even get 1080i to look like it should.

reply to aaronwt

reply to MURICA

reply to TitusTroy
Titus,

I totally agree that OLED is a Gamechanger, and will be the next generation of 1080p HDTVs. OLED tech can make TV sets thinner, more Energy Star efficient , cheaper to make, Infinite Contrasts, etc.

I am totally looking forward to OLED, and believe that even though they are debuting with 55"+ OLED sets, that they will filter down to regular sizes of 40-60 inches for the everyday home (like myself and others whom Family room can only support a Finite TV size.)

I also believe that OLED will be the manufactured norm for the non-to-distant future 1080p HDTV set, as well as Ultra HD sets before they are in the stores so we can see and purchase.

On that note: Samsung's curved OLED TV at CES, to me, was awesome, and IMHO would really take off if it was manufactured. Documentaries and sports would really benefit from the curved shape. This can Only be done with OLED displays, mind you.

Anywho...After all this trickles down, Before long, Computer Monitors will be OLED for only a few Hundred bucks. Like how for 300 dollars , one could get a 1080p LED 27' Monitor now.

I am eager to see what the future will bring in regards to this, and when affordable, I will get an OLED set, and then inevitably, an Ultra HD set when there is Media out there that are in Native form, (like Native 4k BluRays with Native BluRay Players, UHD STBs, and channels.)

reply to JPL

Not all the 4k sets are OLED. yes, Sony and Panasonic had 4k OLEDs but they were prototypes only. The 84" Sony 4K is an edge lite LED. IN fact, all of the current 4K sets that you can actually buy are. As for OLEDs, while it is the future, they will be expensive for the nest 3 years. personally, I wouldn't buy one now even if they were available. I would wait at least a year or even too so see how reliable they are in the field, how uniformily the phosphors age, etc.

reply to MURICA

--
My Gallery
Formerly Nezmo