come on samsung or sony, or anybody for that matter break the 1080p mark and that will be good news. thinner smaller does not mean alot bring on the highest resolution that you can. i mean who here honestly would not like to own a 2k,4k, or an ultra resolution display. just my two cents.
I think the problem is not with the display, but with the content available. With the cable and satellite TV providers and content producers fail to produce and deliver shows in 1080p, people would not see a need to upgrade to something even higher resolution when the content isn't here to deliver at that resolution. As much as I love 4K (I have been fortunate enough to see one of those sweet 4K Sony projectors in action in a private demo) being used to model mechanical designs and movie projections, the market from content producer (difficult to edit because it is computationally expensive), to the delivery infrastructure and equipment (again computationally intensive and high requirement for bandwidth with today's H264 and VC-1 compression), and user (the clarity brought at such close distance could cause dizziness) are simply not ready to adopt the resolution yet.
Bottom line is that while the 4K resolution may be good for large theatre projection or for companies doing mechanical design, the capital cost of investing into this resolution maybe too much for everybody in the process from content production to consumption. Perhaps it will take at least another 5 to 10 years before 2K and 4K becomes widely adopted as computation power increases and more efficient compression algorithm allows for efficient and cost effective production and delivery.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
come on samsung or sony, or anybody for that matter break the 1080p mark and that will be good news. thinner smaller does not mean alot bring on the highest resolution that you can. i mean who here honestly would not like to own a 2k,4k, or an ultra resolution display. just my two cents.
yes, i can't wait to play all my 4000p movies on a tv
I think the problem is not with the display, but with the content available. With the cable and satellite TV providers and content producers fail to produce and deliver shows in 1080p, people would not see a need to upgrade to something even higher resolution when the content isn't here to deliver at that resolution. As much as I love 4K (I have been fortunate enough to see one of those sweet 4K Sony projectors in action in a private demo) being used to model mechanical designs and movie projections, the market from content producer (difficult to edit because it is computationally expensive), to the delivery infrastructure and equipment (again computationally intensive and high requirement for bandwidth with today's H264 and VC-1 compression), and user (the clarity brought at such close distance could cause dizziness) are simply not ready to adopt the resolution yet.
Bottom line is that while the 4K resolution may be good for large theatre projection or for companies doing mechanical design, the capital cost of investing into this resolution maybe too much for everybody in the process from content production to consumption. Perhaps it will take at least another 5 to 10 years before 2K and 4K becomes widely adopted as computation power increases and more efficient compression algorithm allows for efficient and cost effective production and delivery.