Apple Reportedly Talking to LG About 55-65 Inch Ultra HD TV Panels

Nope, not happening.

The very vast majority of people can't stream 4K at a worthwhile bandwidth. Heck, most people can't even stream 1080p without heavy compression. Apple has only just started offering 1080p streaming and it's nowhere near Blu-ray quality, but that was to be expected if they wanted people to be able to stream it. Now people should be able to stream 4x the pixels while the average Internet bandwidth has stayed the same?

The effect of 4K on a movie is more subtle than the jump from SD from HD was, and also more subtle than the jump from a regular display to a Retina display (considering you're displaying a lot of high-contrast vector graphics like text and other sharp UI elements on a computer/phone). In a movie, contrast is never as high and sharpness is often ultimately limited by the lens used to capture footage. You'll often notice several elements in a scene are slightly out of focus because of the depth of field.

Having seen 4K TVs in person, they look awesome but the resolution part isn't mind-blowing. You really have to get into big TVs (60"+) to notice it at average distance. The sharpness gain you get from the resolution would totally be negated by heavy compression artifacts if you were to compress 4K movies to the point they can be streamed by most (10-15Mbps). For reference, a 1080p Blu-ray movie is around 35Mbps, so obviously quadrupling the number of pixels while reducing the bandwidth significantly isn't going to look to good.

So yeah, who's willing to drop $5k+ on a 4K TV which's image quality wouldn't be better than a much cheaper 1080p set because there's no proper way no distribute 4K yet? If Apple had a plan to instantly become a high-speed ISP like Google Fiber it could work, but I highly doubt they're willing to make such an investment.

After all, we're talking about the same company who sells songs in 256kbps in 2013, and dare call them "CD quality". Even if people were ready for 4K (they're not), Apple would probably be too cheap on bandwidth anyway.

Elephant in the Room: No 4k Content

So you go out and buy that whizbang new 4k tv. Then what? Cable companies don't broadcast in 4k, there are no 4k discs to rent, no satellite 4k to pick up and nothing off air in 4k. So where does it come from? Oh yeah, the internet. Brought to you by the same US Cable companies that think you should lick their b@lls for "upgrading" you to 5Mbs. Call me cynical, but this is one cool technology that has nowhere to go.

*sets up appointment for kidney removal

D.

Having "just" this year upgraded from 1080i TV i bought when HDTVs where just out and expensive, to a 1080p Passive 3D screen , i will now NOT be upgrading my TV again until at the earliest 2020.. And that will only be if there is content out for it that i want..

The driving force behind me upgrading from my Rear Projection set to HD originally was the PS3s release, so maybe the PS5 will change my mind on 4K, but i doubt it.

I'm not interested at 65"

I bought a 70" TV in late 2011, and upgraded to an 80" in early 2013. My whole family LOVES our huge screen, and while I'd be chomping at the bit for the better resolution, I'm not going to take a step backwards 3 years to do so.

----------



Apple's TV plans make me nervous, in the sense that sometimes it seems they're reaching for something I just won't be interested in and/or able to use. I'd love to see an Apple TV + TiVO type marriage, but with Apple's brilliance and improvements all over it. Whatever it is, allow me to connect it to whatever TV I want, because (as stated before) I'm not giving up my 80" tV for some 65" Apple thing... won't happen.

Most people don't have over 50". A home theater enthusiast a iTV will go in the bedroom or game room

Simple. Don't live stream. Store-forward stream with 8gb cache. Per content stream with 2-4 screens accessible.

Rocketman