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

[IJ Reilly]

4K will be generally "stupid", etc right up until Apple rolls out 4K. Then it will be gushing greatness, "how did we ever live without this?", "shut up and take my money", etc. Same story, over and over. Once it's here, we can repeat it all again with 8K resolution right on it's heels.

Please allow that many of us are not making this argument at all. We are arguing that tech doesn't automatically become important or necessary just because it exists. Whether Apple supports or promotes any given standard isn't the issue. In fact I'd argue that if Apple actually is pinning its TV hopes on 4K, that the potential number of customers for these products will be very limited. Most people will scratch their heads and wonder why they should even be interested in spending so much more for a TV that isn't going to give them a better viewing experience.

 

[pearvsapple]

Retarded speculation. 4k @ 65" for $2500? Apple doesn't run charity.

 

[palmerc2]

This very same argument was beat to death on this very site in support of "720p is good enough" while Apple was still clinging to that. Then, Apple adopted 1080p and all those people who made this argument seemed to vanish and some of them gushed about the greatness of 1080p.

I can appreciate the argument you're making and those who will agree with you now- while Apple tech is still pushing 1080p- but the key is will you still feel this way after Apple rolls out 4K? Those of us who found fault with devices like TV 2 & 1 for being capped at 720p were thoroughly ripped into by the "720p is good enough" crowd. We were "stupid", "trolls", "if you don't like it, don't buy it", "the chart", "until broadband increases everywhere", "the internet will crash", and on and on by the "whatever Apple endorses is right" crowd. Then, Apple rolls out 1080p and they don't find any fault with Apple for going 1080p. What happened to "720p is good enough", "the chart" and all of that? Why isn't Apple "stupid", etc for embracing 1080p per all those "it's overkill", "gimmick", "no one can see the difference" arguments?

4K will be generally "stupid", etc right up until Apple rolls out 4K. Then it will be gushing greatness, "how did we ever live without this?", "shut up and take my money", etc. Same story, over and over. Once it's here, we can repeat it all again with 8K resolution right on it's heels.

In another post on this thread, I pointed out I work in the CE business and I see 4K TV's practically everyday. I, as well as the professionals who have to sell them, are not impressed with 4K. I've seen both a 1080p, and a 4K in the same room and I can't see the difference at normal viewing distance. I've watched movies that were shot in 4K, and I couldn't see the difference.

As far as what Apple is planning with their resolutions, and folks gushing about how 720p was good enough, I didn't pay attention to that at all. I don't let Apple make my decisions of what I like. My eyes like what they like, and I quite frankly see no value in 4K at all. I see myself getting another plasma before getting a 4K.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I wasn't aiming that reply at you. I was aiming that at the masses, simply pointing out that the sentiment you posted and now some of the stuff you just shared again was the very same stuff being posted ad nauseam about 1080p while Apple clung to 720p as a MAX standard. Then, when Apple rolled out 1080p, all that sentiment appeared to completely dry up. Some of us was "dumb", "can't see the difference" etc when we pined for 1080p while 720p was "king" (per Apple) but then when Apple went 1080p, Apple wasn't dumb, etc for forcing a "can't see the difference" resolution on all.

While I can feel like you do about 4K myself, I expect the exact same sequence of events. The crowd (here) will bash 4K right up until Apple rolls it out. And then it will be "shut up and take my money", etc.

Apple's already begun the transition in that some of their software is supporting 4K (FCP X for example). They spin the new Mac Pro as being able to run 3 "4K" monitors at the same time. "Retina" is likely to spread to more of Apple's hardware soon. So they'll go there- whether you & I think we can see it or not. When they do, this crowd will swear that 4K is the second coming. Until then, there will be more of your sentiment. Then, the switch will be thrown and all that sentiment will evaporate never to be cited again.

 

[MaxHedrm]

Not only is that a silly prediction from a price perspective (4k TVs could drop 50% & still be more than that - and Apple's WON'T be cheapest), but the "analyst" has zero clue about the tech (and physics). There is almost NO reason to use Gorilla Glass on a television. Especially one of this size. If something hits a sheet of Gorilla Glass that large hard enough to break the top surface of a normal TV screen, while the glass may not break, it will flex enough that the LCD under it will get messed up.

 

[prowlmedia]

And the irony is that Youtube, Netflix and internet streaming are inferior than SD and becoming more popular. People wants the content and are very willing to sacrifice quality. What matter is the story of the video more than the quality. If people wanted quality, Youtube would be gone and is not.

for me 4K is just a way to sell more video equipment and discontinue what we have now. We didn't need HD any way still. Yes, looks good... so? To watch MTV? The Kardassians? bunch of reality shows? the news? 98% of what you see on tv is generated is SD or less originally. Most of the times in cellphones.

Um, Well no. You tube does do 4K now. And if that was true they'd still be on 320x240.

I am fairly sure you as an intelligent human being can tell the difference between 95% of you tube content which is basically Americas Funniest Home videos and unboxing videos and say a BBC Drama or High production value US show.

In no way is 98% of TV generated in SD or less. Not for about3 Years. Every US, UK and European Broadcast company have HD ( 50 Mbit/s minimum recording codec - 50Mbs inter-frame or 100Mbs intra-frame, Even) and won't accept HD from small format cameras etc. It's more like 5% and that's the Americas funniest videos etc.

Most Broadcast cameras cost upwards of $50K and the lenses are $10K each hence why most companies hire.

As for Cellphones creating TV content... er... No. In no way at all.

 

[CodeJingle]

The near future of display is in higher bit depth of color, not necessarily quadrupling the pixel count. The reason 4K as a standard is a coming trend is because 4K displays come standard with 30-bit color, versus 24-bit as the current standard. But you don't need a 4K display for 30-bit color, you can get a 1080p or 2560x1440 display with native 30-bit color for much cheaper than a 4K display.

http://www.eizo.com/global/products/coloredge/

Higher resolutions may eventually have a place for new technologies such as a real-time holographic display (which would be better than current 3D display technologies), but the density of holograms requires 3k+ pixels per millimeter, so even with the 8K standard you would only get a holographic display that is the size of 0.15 inches, so maybe it would fit on a pinky ring. That is pretty lame. Besides requiring a new kind of display technology, a reasonable holograhic display of around 13 inches would require a resolution of about 40K, so 4K * 100 (since 40K would have 100 times more pixels than 4K).

 

[clickgr]

I dont really mind about 4K. I only hope the new Apple TVs will be 21:9 aspect ratio pannels. A 65" 21:9 TV from apple that costs below $2000 I swear I would buy it the next day.

 

[iisdan]

The OS isn't simple, they reversed text colour and background colour making it harder to determine whats a control bar and whats content. Also the safari icon could have ditched the blue circle and would be 100x better.

Because your weak photoshop is an indication of anything. iOS7 is incredibly nice. It's very simple. Change the Background.

----------

I still have hope for the company and I wait every day for them to turn it around.

you mad, bro?

if you werent interested in future apple products, you wouldnt be slumming it on a website devoted to...future apple products. doh!

----------

iOS 6 looked fun and good, they may have went overboard on the leather sometimes but at least the whole thing didn't look the same and boring.

Ha! I know you're not trying to say that ios6 was any better in that area....? C'mon now.

 

[KanosWRX]

Think again. 4k is already below 1k for 55". If the big tv makers push for 4k this holiday season as planned, we will see good quality 70" 4k for $2k next year. You'll also have to abandon plasma for 4k. Plasma can't cut it when it comes to that many pixels.

You can't even buy a good quality 70" 1080p TV for under $2000 right now how do you expect to get a 4k one for that much?? Maybe our idea's of quality are different but right now one of the best HDTV's the Panasonic VT60 is around $2500 dollars.. I don't see a 4k version being that price for another 2 years.

 

[Fravadona]

I guess that we have to see a 120" or taller TV to see a difference between 4K and 1K...

I think that 4K is addressed for computers for which you need a more compact resolution. 4K will make a 40.5" monitor to have the same pixel/inch resolution than a 2560x1440 27" display.

 

[derbladerunner]

For those of you saying "we've been hearing this for years, this will never happen, blah blah blah"...

iPhone (rumors started in 1999)- http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/26/the-apple-tablet-a-complete-history-supposedly/#rumortimeline

iPad (rumors started in 2004)- http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/timeline-apple-iphone-rumors-1999-present

I have to disagree here. Both products you mentioned had clear advantages on the hardware and UI side when they launched compared to existing smartphones and tablets (not even speaking of the software ecosystems, because the app store wasn't ready when the iPhone launched back in 2007).

I have a hard time seeing this "disruption" analogy for a TV screen from Apple.

Any TV manufacturer can produce a good 4K, 21:9, HMDI 2.0... (insert your own tech spec here) screen.

In fact, so many do produce similar and good TVs that the current HDTVs manufacturers are in the red - customers shop for price and TV prices keep falling. The only large TV manufacturer still making money is Samsung and even their margins are very thin.
Most high-end TV brands are gone or bleeding money and exiting the TV market soon (Pioneer Kuro, Panasonic Plasma, Loewe, BOSE Videowave...). Is is a business Apple wants to be in?

Unless Apple can create something entirely new in their labs - say, a holographic TV image or similar - why should I buy a screen from Apple? What would be unique?

The "brain" of the TV is in the services/UI and the cloud today. To achieve this, all Apple has to do in my opinion is update the current Apple TV box (maybe add an SDK/app store, add an interface for casual game controllers) and sell it at the current low price, $49-99. Works with any TV, all the customer has to do is plug in a single HDMI cable.

 

[Rossatron]

Magic 8 ball, will Apple be releasing a 4k TV late next year?

-"ask again later"