Analyst Claims Apple Launching 55- and 65-Inch 4K Televisions Late Next Year

[JaySoul]

I don't think Apple could brainwash me into paying that much for a TV unless it makes me breakfast every morning.

 

[69650]

Same BS analyst prediction year after year. Will believe it when I see it.

Why 4K Ultra HD? There isn't any UHD content in the iTunes Store and I haven't seen any rumours of any such content coming soon. Plus imagine how big the file sizes will be, regular HD files are bad enough and take ages to download.

 

[gnasher729]

This all happened in the analyst's imagination, and nowhere else.

A TV today is screen + speakers + inputs + processor + software.

On a 55" or 65" 4K TV, 90% of the cost is in the screen, which is the one component that Apple has to buy from elsewhere and can't make better than anyone else, and that has huge competition so no money is made.

 

[Rizzm]

OLED is a different technology than 4K. OLED is the display tech, while 4K is the display resolution. Very soon, we will see OLED televisions displaying 4K resolutions.

It's like people comment without doing any of the necessary minimal homework.

When did I ever say 4K was display tech?

I would just much rather see the quality of OLED screens before a resolution that so few people need.

----------

720p
DVDs

Dude get on board with the future. This kind of comments have been going on since the transition VHS -> laserdiscs / DVDs.

Plenty of 1080p sources out there on the web, plenty of Blu-rays, not to mention the fact the generalization of 4K TV will bring more 4K sources.

Now, a good quality1080p (like the Blu-ray "remasters") will look better on a 4K TV anyway.
Don't take my word for it, go to a shop where you can see a demo and compare the two.

Eh, whatever. I just wanna see OLED pushed as fast as possible. Bring on the 4k sets I suppose! Just won't be buying one any time soon.

 

[dol4n]

Analysts.... sigh.

They are just like Tim Cook, they like to talk alot of nonsense.

 

[gnasher729]

720p
DVDs

Dude get on board with the future. This kind of comments have been going on since the transition VHS -> laserdiscs / DVDs.

Plenty of 1080p sources out there on the web, plenty of Blu-rays, not to mention the fact the generalization of 4K TV will bring more 4K sources.

4k TV is the same **** as 3D. Some geeks buying them, some people being pestered by their kids, and nobody is actually using them. Most people don't notice the difference between 720p and 1080p. 3D was supposed to be the savior of the TV market, but got stuck at 4%.

 

[orthorim]

Prohibitively expensive?

I saw some 4k displays for around $1k here in SE Asia. Looked good, only problem is a lack of content. If this goes the way it's been going with LCD TV sets, the prices will come down rapidly and will be half next year...

----------

4k TV is the same **** as 3D. Some geeks buying them, some people being pestered by their kids, and nobody is actually using them. Most people don't notice the difference between 720p and 1080p. 3D was supposed to be the savior of the TV market, but got stuck at 4%.

Disagree.

3D was completely useless marketing BS - no one needs it, and certainly nobody wants to wear glasses

Better image quality is something that you can see, and you don't need to wear glasses either. You can't really see pixels on a 1080p display either, at least not from normal viewing distance so I guess 4k will just look a bit better and sharper.

 

[gnasher729]

Actually plasma can cut it at that. Infact last yearat IFA, Panasonic had a 8K plasma. Wasnt for general sale but was technically possible just stupidly expensive.

Panasonic is stopping to sell any plasma screens very soon.

----------

If you have to ask "how much does it cost", then you cannot afford one.

In my experience: If I have to ask "how much does it cost", they are hiding the price tag because everyone would run away from their overpriced ****.

 

[MyMac1976]

Not happening..

Too cheap and too big.

 

[Seoras]

A number of companies released 4K ultra-high definition displays earlier this year,

It's never been about screen resolution, pixel density, 3D, processing power or large numbers of any sort.

Apple has always been about the user experience.
The only thing we'll ever know until the day it's announced is that it's a screen on which you will be able to watch TV & Movies.
Just as the only thing we knew about the iPhone until launch day was that it made phone calls and was an iPod as well.

 

[macs4nw]

…..the displays will have a frameless design with suppliers including LG for display panels, Samsung for graphical processing, and Corning's Gorilla Glass 3 for glass covers with units priced from $1,500 to $2,500. Foxconn would be used for final assembly for initial delivery in the fourth quarter of 2014, according to the analyst.

Article Link: Analyst Claims Apple Launching 55- and 65-Inch 4K Televisions Late Next Year

If these large sets are actually going to materialize, I'm really hoping for Apple to collaborate with Sony, and use their X-Reality PRO processors, as well as their Motionflow™ XR 960 Technology, the finest consumer grade video processing technology out there, imho.

 

[daviddth]

4K? Hell we barely have HD content on free to air TV here, and pay TV is too expensive and the satellite HD channels are so compressed they may as well be SD. 4K will start to show up aboout the year 2100 or later

 

[hmmmkay]

4k TV is the same **** as 3D. Some geeks buying them, some people being pestered by their kids, and nobody is actually using them. Most people don't notice the difference between 720p and 1080p. 3D was supposed to be the savior of the TV market, but got stuck at 4%.

Nonsense. 3D has *nothing* to do with display quality.
Anyway, can't wait for 4K to be generalized so people will shut up with those inane comments, the same way they don't regret VHS, DVDs, 512k bandwith, the non-phone era, the non-smartphone era.

Eh, whatever. I just wanna see OLED pushed as fast as possible. Bring on the 4k sets I suppose! Just won't be buying one any time soon.

It will probably happen at the same time actually. OLED is becoming cheaper and easier to manufacture, as well as high density screen, so to me there is no doubt TV manufacturer will see this as a gold mine (OLED 4K will blow anyone's mind next to a LCD / plasma 1080p TV).

 

[Nightarchaon]

I'm interested in how apple are going to screw this up,

Either it's going to have an Apple TV like device built in, which they will make obsolete every 3 years expecting you to buy a new TV , because they expect people to that with all their other products,

And / Or they lock it down so it only works well with other apple products , or apple approved products by using thunderbolt or a proprietary connector instead of HDMI , so you ether need to buy apple approved set top boxes or an expensive adapter that will probably fail the HDMI copy protection protocol so things like blurry players and consoles like the PS4 and xbone won't work on it to play movies thus forcing you to the iTunes Store for that content.

 

[Lesser Evets]

... with units priced from $1,500 to $2,500.

....Good luck with this prediction.

 

[juanmanas]

I don't think Apple could brainwash me into paying that much for a TV unless it makes me breakfast every morning.

1500 dollars for a 55 inches 4k would make it one of the cheapest models in the market...

----------

Analysts.... sigh.

They are just like Tim Cook, they like to talk alot of nonsense.

And the winner of pointless comment of the day, by mr nobody about the CEO of the biggest company, goes to...

 

[ValSalva]

This is wishful thinking from an analyst who has not been analyzing too well.

Why would Apple want to make a device that people upgrade maybe once a decade? And there is nothing special about these proposed televisions.

The AppleTV is already here. Apple will keep iterating it until gradually it's the center of the living room. The AppleTV is more about deals with providers than it is about hardware. It's more like the iTunes Store than the iPad or iPhone.

 

[Zeldain]

Believe me... it's not going to be Apple that leads the charge into low cost 4k.

This report is false.

 

[cjmillsnun]

This all happened in the analyst's imagination, and nowhere else.

A TV today is screen + speakers + inputs + processor + software.

On a 55" or 65" 4K TV, 90% of the cost is in the screen, which is the one component that Apple has to buy from elsewhere and can't make better than anyone else, and that has huge competition so no money is made.

Agreed.

I don't see Apple doing this. They make more money from selling the hockey puck Apple TV. TV sets are high volume low profit. Entirely the opposite of Apple's usual philosophy.

 

[rmwebs]

Meh no thanks. A TV is not worth that much to me, regardless of screen size or quality. Paying double the price for the 'oo I can see the dirt under that guys fingers clearer than in HD' isn't justifiable IMHO.

Sure, its 'nice' but not worth it.

Besides, Apple's track record with the current AppleTV isn't exactly great. It's pitiful compared to some other options out there.

 

[Zaid]

I'm probably missing something here, but I just can't see why Apple enters that actual TV market itself. The upgrade cycle for TVs is too long and given the nature of the market would Apple be able to make the kind of margins they normally require?

I know it's been rumoured that theSteve cracked it, but I think that's the vision for the current Apple TV rather than building actual TVs.

 

[osx11]

I think the way you interact with the TV will drastically change once Apple releases this product.

I also think the Apple TV will be the HUB for all your iOS, OS X devices, integrating everything seamlessly into one piece of hardware:

- iPhoto HUB
- iTunes HUB
- Video HUB
- App Store
- Game HUB
- TV Apps (a la carte)
- FaceTime

It will be the GO TO device for Media, Games, Apps, Video Calls ...etc...

 

[Morrile]

I would be interested if it was a 4K iMac or a 32" to 42" for the iMac Pro

 

[rei101]

I work at a TV station

And 4K is a joke.

There is no way to produce 4K content while the world still catching up with HD. In TV stations storage and networks to manage HD content still demanding.

Then, the satellite signal give better bandwidth to more commercial channels like HBO or ESPN. So, you may be uploading content in HD but you may be be treated with a lot of compression and your signal will look SD.

So... 4K is a total joke, totally unrealistic for regular production, it may catch up in 10 to 15 years just as HD did.

 

[richman555]

I am very doubtful this would happen.

Reasons include -

1. Its still too early for 4K and just imagine the massive file sizes for digital content.
2. Gorilla Glass.... why for a TV?
3. Samsung for graphics processing? Really?