Active Topics
-
Is there a section to talk about Java ME? Apps, etc. (6)
to General by Kalatti - 2 days, 9 hrs ago -
Full linux distros on Sailfish OS (253)
to SailfishOS by qoh - 5 days, 3 hrs ago - more...
 |
|
2013-02-22
, 13:43
|
|
Posts: 1,789 |
Thanked: 1,699 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
|
#22
|
Well, firstly there is NOTHING special about 4K.
At 42in size the density of a 4K TV is 105ppi.
At a more respectable 60in size, the ppi drops down to 73.
HTC the ONE has a 1080p screen on 4.7inches which is 469ppi... that's something (high tech) "special". And that sells for $800 with additional parts (expensive radios, processor, motherboard etc etc).
While I'm not saying we can expect a 60in 4K TV for $800... I'm saying the difficult part is creating a large display. And we've got that down, we've mastered it. For quite some time too. And while we're adding an extra ~2.1 Million pixels... we're actually only increasing the resolution by four. And the overall pixel density by 36 (73-37ppi) or simply "by two".
So yeah, nothing special at all.
The specs of a $1,000 TV:
- 55inch
- LCD-LED with IPS
- Full-HD (1080p)
- 120Hz
- Passive 3D (Active is cheaper, more popular, but ultimately inferior)
- Great quality screen (colour accuracy, viewing angles, etc etc)
- "Name brand" (LG, Toshiba, etc etc)
After you cut out the tax, the middleman's profit, and the oem's profit... the price to manufacture that TV should be $500 or less.
As said before 4K is "Nothing Special" and isn't out of scope for the OEMs to churn out in the current tv quality. It might cost them an additional $100 to do so... and by ballooning that figure, we can say that a comparable TV should cost $1,500 to the customer.
But no!
They gotta milk it. They will sell it to you for $40,000. Then the same **** at $20,000. It won't be long until it is $8,000. After a year, 4K will have become the "norm" for the high-end and would have a starting cost of $3,000. The year later will be the year of "the markdown" and this is where the biggest price cut will be... and ironically it will be the most profitable one. So after about 2.5 years, a 4K TV should send you back around $2,000. Keep an eye on this post, and come back to it in two years... I told you so.
PS I forgot to mention 100Hz is "fast" for a 55in 1080p TV but it isn't "flawless". A 200Hz is needed to really destroy the ghosting effect from F1 and Tennis videos. With 4K this "speed" will have to increase a bit too. I believe a "200Hz" will be needed to be "fast" and a 300Hz+ will be needed to be "fluid".
At 42in size the density of a 4K TV is 105ppi.
At a more respectable 60in size, the ppi drops down to 73.
HTC the ONE has a 1080p screen on 4.7inches which is 469ppi... that's something (high tech) "special". And that sells for $800 with additional parts (expensive radios, processor, motherboard etc etc).
While I'm not saying we can expect a 60in 4K TV for $800... I'm saying the difficult part is creating a large display. And we've got that down, we've mastered it. For quite some time too. And while we're adding an extra ~2.1 Million pixels... we're actually only increasing the resolution by four. And the overall pixel density by 36 (73-37ppi) or simply "by two".
So yeah, nothing special at all.
The specs of a $1,000 TV:
- 55inch
- LCD-LED with IPS
- Full-HD (1080p)
- 120Hz
- Passive 3D (Active is cheaper, more popular, but ultimately inferior)
- Great quality screen (colour accuracy, viewing angles, etc etc)
- "Name brand" (LG, Toshiba, etc etc)
After you cut out the tax, the middleman's profit, and the oem's profit... the price to manufacture that TV should be $500 or less.
As said before 4K is "Nothing Special" and isn't out of scope for the OEMs to churn out in the current tv quality. It might cost them an additional $100 to do so... and by ballooning that figure, we can say that a comparable TV should cost $1,500 to the customer.
But no!
They gotta milk it. They will sell it to you for $40,000. Then the same **** at $20,000. It won't be long until it is $8,000. After a year, 4K will have become the "norm" for the high-end and would have a starting cost of $3,000. The year later will be the year of "the markdown" and this is where the biggest price cut will be... and ironically it will be the most profitable one. So after about 2.5 years, a 4K TV should send you back around $2,000. Keep an eye on this post, and come back to it in two years... I told you so.
PS I forgot to mention 100Hz is "fast" for a 55in 1080p TV but it isn't "flawless". A 200Hz is needed to really destroy the ghosting effect from F1 and Tennis videos. With 4K this "speed" will have to increase a bit too. I believe a "200Hz" will be needed to be "fast" and a 300Hz+ will be needed to be "fluid".
__________________
I'm flattered
Originally Posted by mscion
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to mscion For This Useful Post
I vote that Kangal replace Elop!
I'm flattered
|
|
2013-02-22
, 14:37
|
|
Posts: 395 |
Thanked: 255 times |
Joined on Nov 2010
|
#23
|
What i mean is simple, 4K TV has upgrade/better image than HD TV.
That would be a upgrade/better graphics on games, that would be next gen games for a "next gen console" (PS4).
PS4 is a good machine but not 4K is a "flop".
And yes i concuor with you in the drop prices of 4K TV in 2.5/3/4 years range.
Greetings.
That would be a upgrade/better graphics on games, that would be next gen games for a "next gen console" (PS4).
PS4 is a good machine but not 4K is a "flop".
And yes i concuor with you in the drop prices of 4K TV in 2.5/3/4 years range.
Greetings.
Why you want the 4K games if the price of 4K TV are so high and in theory would be standart/low prices in 7-10 years?
In that time there would be PS5.
Greetings.