If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MacRumors)   Rumor mill says that the Apple Lisa is to be revived at the incredible price of $20k   (macrumors.com) divider line 82
    More: Interesting, Apple Lisa, Ultra HD, Rumor mill, Westinghouse, Google Fiber, walled garden, digitimes, rumors  
•       •       •

5194 clicks; posted to Business » on 27 Mar 2013 at 9:58 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



82 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-27 10:11:50 AM  
I'd settle for a $5000 Newton.
 
2013-03-27 10:13:04 AM  

TheShavingofOccam123: I'd settle for a $5000 Newton.


I'm holding out for a $99 Sinclair.
 
2013-03-27 10:14:49 AM  
Think of how much money people could save if "watching something on a screen" wasn't so goddamned important to them.
 
2013-03-27 10:21:31 AM  
GoldSpider:
Think of how much money people could save if "watching something on a screen" wasn't so goddamned important to them.

...he said, after reading something on a screen.
 
2013-03-27 10:23:35 AM  

cirby: ...he said, after reading something on a screen.


I'm at work; what else am I supposed to do?
 
2013-03-27 10:29:39 AM  
I have a 1080p at home that cost $1000 years ago and could be replaced for $500 today.

Good luck with that, Apple.
 
2013-03-27 10:40:24 AM  
I just changed by old wide-screen trinitron for a 300euros LCD, because I'm cheap. I think I'll wait a bit before changing to either 4k or 8k
 
2013-03-27 10:41:47 AM  

GoldSpider: cirby: ...he said, after reading something on a screen.

I'm at work; what else am I supposed to do?


Clearly saving your company money by being productive.

/like most of us here
 
2013-03-27 10:41:49 AM  

H31N0US: Good luck with that, Apple.


Exactly, thats why all these rumors are BS. It makes more sense for them to release an iterated Apple TV ($99) every year than to release a $5000 4k Apple Television. $99 is in the reach of more consumers, and every year they'll buy another (as the iPhone has proved.)
 
2013-03-27 10:46:10 AM  

MmmCrime: H31N0US: Good luck with that, Apple.

Exactly, thats why all these rumors are BS. It makes more sense for them to release an iterated Apple TV ($99) every year than to release a $5000 4k Apple Television. $99 is in the reach of more consumers, and every year they'll buy another (as the iPhone has proved.)


Maybe, but think of how many people buy premium products who really shouldn't based on their means of income.  Apple has continued to be 'the' brand.  Morans will find a way to afford it or put it on their credit card (read as rent-a-center).
 
2013-03-27 10:53:13 AM  

buckets_of_fun: MmmCrime: H31N0US: Good luck with that, Apple.

Exactly, thats why all these rumors are BS. It makes more sense for them to release an iterated Apple TV ($99) every year than to release a $5000 4k Apple Television. $99 is in the reach of more consumers, and every year they'll buy another (as the iPhone has proved.)

Maybe, but think of how many people buy premium products who really shouldn't based on their means of income.  Apple has continued to be 'the' brand.  Morans will find a way to afford it or put it on their credit card (read as rent-a-center).


I was able to afford the Apple premium until recently. Glad I purchased my toys before i bought a home, because now all of the money is funneling to that. I can't even afford good scotch to mix with my mountain dew :(
 
2013-03-27 10:56:13 AM  
I hate to be "one of those" people, but honestly, I've got a 58" plasma, and even @ 720p, movies and TV looks great on it, let alone at 1080p. Maybe it's because I grew up with an old 19" B&W TV in my bedroom, but since I started making my own money, I've always pushed the boundaries of my audio/video equipment... stereo VCRs... ATI All-in-Wonder video and Tuner cards... and all that. 1080p HDTVs, I think, hit the sweet spot for me. I've got a nice Onkyo 7.1 A/V receiver, and the TV handles any media I throw at it through my media server downstairs. Honestly... it's the pinnacle of home theater nerdvana I have been reaching for since I was a teenager. I've seen 80" TVs that look just great at 1080p. I suspect the format could easily handle 10~15 foot screens without any detectable loss of visual fidelity.

I don't see a reasonable market for 4K TVs. I can't imagine a  perceptibly better picture than my 1080p can deliver, and at what cost in resources? I regularly trade off 720p content for 1080p content to save bandwidth and disk space. 1080p strains the limits of speed on my local wired network connections to the TVs in our house, at any rate. 4K would involve me having to invest in all new infrastructure to support even higher network speeds and larger storage requirements.

In short, 4K will only appeal to the "brilliant pebbles" $300 HDMI Monster cable crowd. Fanatics who hear and see better through more dollar signs, spending money like it's toilet paper.
 
2013-03-27 11:06:08 AM  

LesserEvil: I hate to be "one of those" people, but honestly, I've got a 58" plasma, and even @ 720p, movies and TV looks great on it, let alone at 1080p. Maybe it's because I grew up with an old 19" B&W TV in my bedroom, but since I started making my own money, I've always pushed the boundaries of my audio/video equipment... stereo VCRs... ATI All-in-Wonder video and Tuner cards... and all that. 1080p HDTVs, I think, hit the sweet spot for me. I've got a nice Onkyo 7.1 A/V receiver, and the TV handles any media I throw at it through my media server downstairs. Honestly... it's the pinnacle of home theater nerdvana I have been reaching for since I was a teenager. I've seen 80" TVs that look just great at 1080p. I suspect the format could easily handle 10~15 foot screens without any detectable loss of visual fidelity.

I don't see a reasonable market for 4K TVs. I can't imagine a  perceptibly better picture than my 1080p can deliver, and at what cost in resources? I regularly trade off 720p content for 1080p content to save bandwidth and disk space. 1080p strains the limits of speed on my local wired network connections to the TVs in our house, at any rate. 4K would involve me having to invest in all new infrastructure to support even higher network speeds and larger storage requirements.

In short, 4K will only appeal to the "brilliant pebbles" $300 HDMI Monster cable crowd. Fanatics who hear and see better through more dollar signs, spending money like it's toilet paper.


19 inch Black and White TV you rich person I had a 13 inch B&W. I get what you are saying, I have 2 42" LG Plasmas I bought on sale for $329 each 720p I don't see a need  to replace them until they stop working.
 
zez
2013-03-27 11:08:43 AM  

GoldSpider: Think of how much money people could save if "watching something on a screen" wasn't so goddamned important to them.


I'd just spend more money than I already do on cycling and backpacking equipment

/doesn't really watch much tv
 
2013-03-27 11:15:56 AM  
I'll wait til samsung comes out with one for 3500 and buy that. I love apple, have an iphone 5 and macbook pro, but 20 grand? You just went too far apple. Theres no real point of buying that until media can support it anyway.
 
2013-03-27 11:17:09 AM  

LesserEvil: In short, 4K will only appeal to the "brilliant pebbles" $300 HDMI Monster cable crowd. Fanatics who hear and see better through more dollar signs, spending money like it's toilet paper.


I don't know.  You could have said the same thing about the transition from 720p to 1080p.  The 1080p TVs just started out expensive and then, as the technology got cheaper, they did as well.  Now the standard television is 1080p and you can get one for under $500.  I imagine 4k will be the same.  They'll be really expensive for the early adopters and then gradually come down in price until they phase out 1080p sets.
 
2013-03-27 11:17:44 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: TheShavingofOccam123: I'd settle for a $5000 Newton.

I'm holding out for a $99 Sinclair.


Timex...or Cambridge?  Because EBay a guy I know (don't ask questions) might be able to hook you up.  He'll only deal with me though.
 
2013-03-27 11:19:11 AM  
BEER_ME_in_CT: ...You just went too far apple. Theres no real point of buying that until media can support it anyway.

Or until it's actually more than just a rumour
 
2013-03-27 11:35:55 AM  

buckets_of_fun: MmmCrime: H31N0US: Good luck with that, Apple.

Exactly, thats why all these rumors are BS. It makes more sense for them to release an iterated Apple TV ($99) every year than to release a $5000 4k Apple Television. $99 is in the reach of more consumers, and every year they'll buy another (as the iPhone has proved.)

Maybe, but think of how many people buy premium products who really shouldn't based on their means of income.  Apple has continued to be 'the' brand.  Morans will find a way to afford it or put it on their credit card (read as rent-a-center).


Small problem with your lame ass attempt at putting down people who buy Apple products.  They cost the same as competing products and they work better.  Which is why Apple continues to sell so many of them. And if Apple pushed out a product that is shiat and doesn't work - it doesn't sell.  See the Mac G5 Cube.

/haters got to hate
 
2013-03-27 11:46:14 AM  

LesserEvil: I don't see a reasonable market for 4K TVs. I can't imagine a  perceptibly better picture than my 1080p can deliver, and at what cost in resources? I regularly trade off 720p content for 1080p content to save bandwidth and disk space. 1080p strains the limits of speed on my local wired network connections to the TVs in our house, at any rate. 4K would involve me having to invest in all new infrastructure to support even higher network speeds and larger storage requirements.


You probably don't view a large image - either sitting too far away or have too small a screen. A 1080p image can be viewed at up to around 30 degrees field of view before you don't see any more detail and start seeing the pixels or the grid. Moving to 4K will double that to about 60 degrees - which is a pretty big image. If your display size / distance creates an image that is about 20 degrees wide you won't be able to tell the difference between 720p, 1080p, and 4K. What I really mean to say is that 4K is for a big image that will fill a lot of your field of vision. If that isn't a desire of the consumer you would be wasting your money paying for it.
 
2013-03-27 11:50:46 AM  
I've paid zero attention to their business practices over the last decade, so I'm definitely stupid enough to believe they'd come out with a $20k product no one wants.
 
2013-03-27 12:18:23 PM  

Champion of the Sun: I've paid zero attention to their business practices over the last decade, so I'm definitely stupid enough to believe they'd come out with a $20k product no one wants.


You own an iPhone and an iPad... don't you?
 
2013-03-27 12:30:29 PM  

LesserEvil: I can't imagine a  perceptibly better picture than my 1080p can deliver, and at what cost in resources?


Well, what is the Retina number for a 50" screen at 6ft? An 80" screen? Considering that the Retina resolution for a 4" phone at 6" is pretty close to 1080p, I'm thinking there is quite a bit of room to grow before we reach the limit of perceptibility.
 
2013-03-27 12:36:52 PM  
blog.timesunion.com
 
2013-03-27 12:39:09 PM  

gingerjet: buckets_of_fun: MmmCrime: H31N0US: Good luck with that, Apple.

Exactly, thats why all these rumors are BS. It makes more sense for them to release an iterated Apple TV ($99) every year than to release a $5000 4k Apple Television. $99 is in the reach of more consumers, and every year they'll buy another (as the iPhone has proved.)

Maybe, but think of how many people buy premium products who really shouldn't based on their means of income.  Apple has continued to be 'the' brand.  Morans will find a way to afford it or put it on their credit card (read as rent-a-center).

Small problem with your lame ass attempt at putting down people who buy Apple products.  They cost the same as competing products and they work better.  Which is why Apple continues to sell so many of them. And if Apple pushed out a product that is shiat and doesn't work - it doesn't sell.  See the Mac G5 Cube.

/haters got to hate


Not sure how you read that as Apple hate.  You should have read that as "People are bad with money."
 
2013-03-27 12:40:21 PM  

BEER_ME_in_CT: 20 grand? You just went too far apple.


H31N0US: Good luck with that, Apple.


xaveth: I'm definitely stupid enough to believe they'd come out with a $20k product no one wants.

You own an iPhone and an iPad... don't you?


I don't suppose any of you noticed the part of the article where the $20k figure was never once attributed to Apple? TFA just said that $20k was the going price for 4K TVs right now.
 
2013-03-27 12:45:06 PM  
Back to my old complaint about audiophiles...

Your eyes aren't that good.

From across the room, more than 10-15 feet from a 50" screen, you can't tell the difference between 720 and 1080.

Now, up close and personal and the resolution means something. At arms length 1080 means a lot on my 22" monitor. If I had a 50" computer monitor at arms length it would have to be in the 4k range. And preferably something with a touch interface.

/Your ears aren't that good either
 
2013-03-27 12:46:18 PM  

ryarger: I don't suppose any of you noticed the part of the article where the $20k figure was never once attributed to Apple? TFA just said that $20k was the going price for 4K TVs right now.


Subby was just keeping with the fine tradition of maintaining a high degree of accuracy between article and headline.
 
2013-03-27 12:50:35 PM  

wildcardjack: Back to my old complaint about audiophiles...

Your eyes aren't that good.

From across the room, more than 10-15 feet from a 50" screen, you can't tell the difference between 720 and 1080.

Now, up close and personal and the resolution means something. At arms length 1080 means a lot on my 22" monitor. If I had a 50" computer monitor at arms length it would have to be in the 4k range. And preferably something with a touch interface.

/Your ears aren't that good either


Videophiles don't sit 10-15' from a 50" screen.

I am writing this on my upstairs HTPC where I am sitting 10' from a 65" screen and my basement theater has seating 8-20' from a 120" screen. My upstairs setting is perfect for 1080p, but my theater would clearly benefit from 4K. So I am waiting for an LED 4K projector to go under $4k... probably late next summer.
 
2013-03-27 12:51:53 PM  
We just got our first 40" LED for Christmas 2011.  The tube TV went to the bedroom.

I don't see upgrading, unless the tube blows, the 40" goes to the bedroom, and a 55" LED for about $1,000 goes in the front.

/The room is 15' long, so 40" feels a little small, but is way better than the old 29" tube.
 
2013-03-27 12:53:26 PM  
i152.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-27 12:54:32 PM  
20K.. Today.

Please remember the prices of plasmas when they first came out.  Hell, I've installed a handful of 100K residental (analog) front projectors.   Things get better, things get cheaper.

A 42", 480p plasma in 1997 ran you $14999 (It was a toshiba).  16 years later, they are about $500, 1080p, and don't have the same horrible burn-in problems.

You can get a 108" plasma, 5 years ago, for $108,000... 3 years ago, $80,000.  You can get a 150" plasma, 4 years ago, for about $120,000.
 
2013-03-27 12:56:12 PM  
Data plan!
Lisa needs market share!
Data plan!
Lisa needs market share!
Data plan!
Lisa needs market share!
...
 
2013-03-27 12:59:06 PM  

buckets_of_fun: gingerjet: buckets_of_fun: MmmCrime: H31N0US: Good luck with that, Apple.

Exactly, thats why all these rumors are BS. It makes more sense for them to release an iterated Apple TV ($99) every year than to release a $5000 4k Apple Television. $99 is in the reach of more consumers, and every year they'll buy another (as the iPhone has proved.)

Maybe, but think of how many people buy premium products who really shouldn't based on their means of income.  Apple has continued to be 'the' brand.  Morans will find a way to afford it or put it on their credit card (read as rent-a-center).

Small problem with your lame ass attempt at putting down people who buy Apple products.  They cost the same as competing products and they work better.  Which is why Apple continues to sell so many of them. And if Apple pushed out a product that is shiat and doesn't work - it doesn't sell.  See the Mac G5 Cube.

/haters got to hate

Not sure how you read that as Apple hate.  You should have read that as "People are bad with money."


He/She is very emotionally invested in apple products, it's bizarre.
 
2013-03-27 01:14:48 PM  

gingerjet: buckets_of_fun: MmmCrime: H31N0US: Good luck with that, Apple.

Exactly, thats why all these rumors are BS. It makes more sense for them to release an iterated Apple TV ($99) every year than to release a $5000 4k Apple Television. $99 is in the reach of more consumers, and every year they'll buy another (as the iPhone has proved.)

Maybe, but think of how many people buy premium products who really shouldn't based on their means of income.  Apple has continued to be 'the' brand.  Morans will find a way to afford it or put it on their credit card (read as rent-a-center).

Small problem with your lame ass attempt at putting down people who buy Apple products.  They cost the same as competing products and they work better.  Which is why Apple continues to sell so many of them. And if Apple pushed out a product that is shiat and doesn't work - it doesn't sell.  See the Mac G5 Cube.

/haters got to hate


Oh look, it's you again. We missed you in the thread yesterday where you claimed it cost $3000 and $1000 per year to play games on a computer... and then promptly left. That was a pretty good troll. We could have used you towards the end when it trailed off.
 
2013-03-27 01:19:18 PM  

rugman11: LesserEvil: In short, 4K will only appeal to the "brilliant pebbles" $300 HDMI Monster cable crowd. Fanatics who hear and see better through more dollar signs, spending money like it's toilet paper.

I don't know.  You could have said the same thing about the transition from 720p to 1080p.  The 1080p TVs just started out expensive and then, as the technology got cheaper, they did as well.  Now the standard television is 1080p and you can get one for under $500.  I imagine 4k will be the same.  They'll be really expensive for the early adopters and then gradually come down in price until they phase out 1080p sets.


The issue is how many people actually have rooms big enough to make a difference.  Though I guess they could be fooled into thinking they do.

/happy with a 32"
//42" is about as big as I would want for the size room I have
///cue the sex jokes
 
2013-03-27 01:22:19 PM  
Apple will do anything to control the distribution channel for hi rez displays, so they make investments and set market propositions for the manufacturers, imagine that.
 
kab
2013-03-27 01:23:03 PM  

wildcardjack: Back to my old complaint about audiophiles...

Your My eyes aren't that good, so yours can't be either.

/Your My ears aren't that good , so yours can't be either.


Makes sense.
 
kab
2013-03-27 01:26:44 PM  

madgonad: I am writing this on my upstairs HTPC where I am sitting 10' from a 65" screen and my basement theater has seating 8-20' from a 120" screen. My upstairs setting is perfect for 1080p, but my theater would clearly benefit from 4K. So I am waiting for an LED 4K projector to go under $4k... probably late next summer.


This is FARK.  If you're not watching tv on your cellphone, or listening to music on earbuds, you're an elitist who buys Pear cables and wood volume knobs.
 
2013-03-27 01:31:51 PM  

MmmCrime: buckets_of_fun: MmmCrime: H31N0US: Good luck with that, Apple.

Exactly, thats why all these rumors are BS. It makes more sense for them to release an iterated Apple TV ($99) every year than to release a $5000 4k Apple Television. $99 is in the reach of more consumers, and every year they'll buy another (as the iPhone has proved.)

Maybe, but think of how many people buy premium products who really shouldn't based on their means of income.  Apple has continued to be 'the' brand.  Morans will find a way to afford it or put it on their credit card (read as rent-a-center).

I was able to afford the Apple premium until recently. Glad I purchased my toys before i bought a home, because now all of the money is funneling to that. I can't even afford good scotch to mix with my mountain dew :(


You'll find that even a cheap scotch can be improved by giving it a few runs through a brita filter pitcher.  Enjoy!
 
2013-03-27 01:39:27 PM  

wildcardjack: Back to my old complaint about audiophiles...

Your eyes aren't that good.

From across the room, more than 10-15 feet from a 50" screen, you can't tell the difference between 720 and 1080.

Now, up close and personal and the resolution means something. At arms length 1080 means a lot on my 22" monitor. If I had a 50" computer monitor at arms length it would have to be in the 4k range. And preferably something with a touch interface.

/Your ears aren't that good either


Pretty much this.  I have 20/15 (corrected) vision.  I own a 4 year old 50" 1080p Hitachi plasma monitor connected to a PS3 via HDMI.  The monitor is mounted on the wall, and my couch is directly across about 10 feet away.  Movies in 1080p and 720p are pretty much imperceptible.  Maybe if I'm staring at a particular part of the screen and analyzing the clarity of the background, but why would I be doing that when I'm trying to enjoy the farking movie?

4K at home is pretty much a pissing contest for people who have too much money to blow on electronics.  Same as purchasing all Krell audio equipment so you can play legacy CDs and dock your iPod.
 
2013-03-27 01:46:26 PM  

valkore: wildcardjack: Back to my old complaint about audiophiles...

Your eyes aren't that good.

From across the room, more than 10-15 feet from a 50" screen, you can't tell the difference between 720 and 1080.

Now, up close and personal and the resolution means something. At arms length 1080 means a lot on my 22" monitor. If I had a 50" computer monitor at arms length it would have to be in the 4k range. And preferably something with a touch interface.

/Your ears aren't that good either

Pretty much this.  I have 20/15 (corrected) vision.  I own a 4 year old 50" 1080p Hitachi plasma monitor connected to a PS3 via HDMI.  The monitor is mounted on the wall, and my couch is directly across about 10 feet away.  Movies in 1080p and 720p are pretty much imperceptible.  Maybe if I'm staring at a particular part of the screen and analyzing the clarity of the background, but why would I be doing that when I'm trying to enjoy the farking movie?

4K at home is pretty much a pissing contest for people who have too much money to blow on electronics.  Same as purchasing all Krell audio equipment so you can play legacy CDs and dock your iPod.


This and that.  Just don't get me started on 3D.
 
2013-03-27 01:49:09 PM  

kab: wildcardjack: Back to my old complaint about audiophiles...

Your My

99% of the population's eyes aren't that good, so yours can't be most likely aren't either.

/Your My 99% of the population's ears aren't that good , so yours can't be most likely aren't either.

Makes sense.


Yes, it does.  And even if you are able to decipher the differences between a 720p and 1080p image on 50" monitor at 12 feet, the real question is why do you care that much as to blow 10x the amount of money to address that "problem" with a 4K TV.

Perhaps audiophiles and videophiles just have undiagnosed Asperger's?  "I... I can see the... the lines...  Must be... perfectly smooth...  C-cannot enjoy... Batman Begins otherwise!  AAAAAAH!"
 
2013-03-27 01:54:16 PM  

Kraftwerk Orange: MmmCrime: buckets_of_fun: MmmCrime: H31N0US: Good luck with that, Apple.

Exactly, thats why all these rumors are BS. It makes more sense for them to release an iterated Apple TV ($99) every year than to release a $5000 4k Apple Television. $99 is in the reach of more consumers, and every year they'll buy another (as the iPhone has proved.)

Maybe, but think of how many people buy premium products who really shouldn't based on their means of income.  Apple has continued to be 'the' brand.  Morans will find a way to afford it or put it on their credit card (read as rent-a-center).

I was able to afford the Apple premium until recently. Glad I purchased my toys before i bought a home, because now all of the money is funneling to that. I can't even afford good scotch to mix with my mountain dew :(

You'll find that even a cheap scotch can be improved by giving it a few runs through a brita filter pitcher.  Enjoy!


lol well played. I was making a classic Fark joke, I'm actually a bourbon man, neat. All I need is one more set of the glencairn glasses and my house will be done!
 
kab
2013-03-27 02:06:07 PM  

valkore: And even if you are able to decipher the differences between a 720p and 1080p image on 50" monitor at 12 feet, the real question is why do you care that much as to blow 10x the amount of money to address that "problem" with a 4K TV.


Why does anyone need anything better than what they have now? You realize that any other new tech in the home entertainment ring has been prohibitively expensive when it starts out, right?

Movies are being shot in 4k now, and as early adapters latch onto the new tech, the price will go down.  And the general consumer will either accept it, or ignore it (as they did with SACD, DVDA, etc).
 
2013-03-27 02:12:35 PM  

valkore: Pretty much this.  I have 20/15 (corrected) vision.  I own a 4 year old 50" 1080p Hitachi plasma monitor connected to a PS3 via HDMI.  The monitor is mounted on the wall, and my couch is directly across about 10 feet away.  Movies in 1080p and 720p are pretty much imperceptible.  Maybe if I'm staring at a particular part of the screen and analyzing the clarity of the background, but why would I be doing that when I'm trying to enjoy the farking movie?


From that viewing distance you probably can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p. You need to be about 7' away to see the full detail provided by 1080p with that size screen. The uses for 4K will be obvious at 24-32" for desktop computer displays and for 70"+ displays for TV usage. Everything in between is just not going to be used in a way that people will see the detail. And since large PC monitors and HDTVs over 70" and projectors are a niche market I just don't see too much growth for 4K. I'm sure a lot of people will buy it just to have it, but only certain uses will receive a benefit.
 
2013-03-27 02:14:03 PM  

kab: And the general consumer will either accept it, or ignore it (as they did with SACD, DVDA, etc).


DVDA...that's a four-port hub, right?
 
2013-03-27 02:25:27 PM  

kab: Movies are being shot in 4k now, and as early adapters latch onto the new tech, the price will go down.  And the general consumer will either accept it, or ignore it (as they did with SACD, DVDA, etc).


4K is actually the long term standard. 35mm film-stock can be scanned at resolutions up to about 4K before maxing out the available detail. 70mm film and iMAX go higher, but pretty much almost ALL film in the 20th century can be scanned at 4K and essentially provide the home consumer with a 'master quality' video image. It literally won't ever get any better. What this means to you and me is that you can buy your library @4K and never ever need to buy it again..

~320x240 VHS
~720x480 DVD
1280x720 720p
1920x1080 1080p
4096x2160 4K (sometimes 3840x2160 quadHD)

We have had a rapid progress of home content quality in the past 25 years. 4K is a plateau - essentially master quality video. Sure, there are 8K cameras in existence now, but those require a 100 degree viewing angle to fully resolve. 4K is going to be a standard for home video for a long long time.

I don't even want to start on 3D. I get headaches after crossing my eyes for 20 minutes or so.
 
2013-03-27 02:37:18 PM  

ryarger: I don't suppose any of you noticed the part of the article where the $20k figure was never once attributed to Apple? TFA just said that $20k was the going price for 4K TVs right now.


Knowing Apple, it'll do half the things of a regular 4k, with lots of icons, and nearly double the price.
 
2013-03-27 02:38:21 PM  
Instead of buying an expensive TV you should buy a lot of whiskey and not care about how good the picture is.
 
Displayed 50 of 82 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report