Apple to Debut Apple TV With 4K HDR Support at September Event

[Shlooky]

Where I live, if you want internet. You get Comcast. Period.

I call that a monopoly!
Where I live we have a ton of choices, whether it's the cable company, Phone company or your smaller ISP's in the area.

 

[Pbrutto]

Quoting you haha. I have FiOS and there isn't a cap on any of their plans at least that I know of. I around 5-7TB a month and haven't ever had a single naughty note from Verizon.

I thought i clicked somewhere once and ended up on the wrong page in my account and I saw 1TB, apperently not!
[doublepost=1503685387][/doublepost]

FiOS claims that it does not have a cap, but they do. It is so high, most people would never come close to it. I think it is like 10TBs, and after repeated violations of the cap, a warning letter is sent.

I read an article a while back about someone that reached their in-advertised cap. I forget what they were doing, probably running many servers or a business, but the FiOS customer was using the equivalent of streaming Netflix on 40 TVs nonstop 24 hours a day.

They were told to upgrade to a business tier of plan, or they would be disconnected.







For the people with Comcast, they have an unlimited data option for $50 more a month. You need to call to get it.

If you really want to stream 4K, or if you repeatedly go over the cap, then this option might be for you.

Good to know, I would imagine that 4K content would really eat its way towards 1TB, but frankly at some point you will run out of 4K content to download....for now.....

 

[Applefanhater]

Uh... 4K is 4x the resolution of 1080p, not 2x.

No, it really isn't It's 4 million pixels vs 2 million.

 

[thisismyusername]

No, it really isn't It's 4 million pixels vs 2 million.

It's 8 vs 2.
1920 * 1080 = 2073600
3840 * 2160 = 8294400

 

[aaronhead14]

No, it really isn't It's 4 million pixels vs 2 million.

Try again. Redo your math.

It's 8 vs 2.
1920 * 1080 = 2073600
3840 * 2160 = 8294400

^^This guy gets it.

 

[cube]

You claimed this earlier in another thread, but it's still false.

"...the EX750 is the only model in the entire range to support 3D. It uses the active shutter system. Demand for 3D has dwindled to the point where most manufacturers just don’t bother any more..."

http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/panasonic-tvs-2017-4k-hdr-2952995

"The EX780 series also, it seems, offer 3D support. This makes them not only the only 3D-capable TVs in Panasonic’s 2017 range, but also one of the only 3D-capable TV series available from any brand in 2017."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnarcher/2017/02/15/panasonics-2017-tv-line-up/

You keep on quoting American sites who are misinformed about the European market.

 

[thisismyusername]

I'm interested in hearing about the specs and price. Also, Amazon Prime still isn't available yet, is it? I've been using Rokus for nearly 2 years now (switched mainly because of Amazon Prime and 4k). While I have no technical problems with my Rokus, the one thing that I really miss from using Apple TVs is the consistent, polished UI between all the apps. It's annoying that each Roku app basically has a different UI. I'd consider coming back to Apple but price would also be a factor. Sorry AppleTV fans, but the AppleTV 4 was always overpriced and was outdated the day it was released. No streaming box is worth much more than $100, even one that supports 4k/UHD. I'd maybe consider paying the Apple tax if the price wasn't more then $150 but that's still hard to swallow.

 

[Juicy Box]

I'm interested in hearing about the specs and price. Also, Amazon Prime still isn't available yet, is it? I've been using Rokus for nearly 2 years now (switched mainly because of Amazon Prime and 4k). While I have no technical problems with my Rokus, the one thing that I really miss from using Apple TVs is the consistent, polished UI between all the apps. It's annoying that each Roku app basically has a different UI. I'd consider coming back to Apple but price would also be a factor. Sorry AppleTV fans, but the AppleTV 4 was always overpriced and was outdated the day it was released. No streaming box is worth much more than $100, even one that supports 4k/UHD. I'd maybe consider paying the Apple tax if the price wasn't more then $150 but that's still hard to swallow.

I would agree that ATV3 version of apps were polished and consistent, but not the ATV4's. Netflix, and Hulu's apps on the ATV4 are horrible imo.

I wish I could install the ATV3's version of apps on my ATV4.

 

[Nugget]

You keep on quoting American sites who are misinformed about the European market.

Both of those articles are discussing the European market specifically. Panasonic has no 2017 televisions in the American market at all, so any discussion of Panasonic televisions is necesarily referring to the European and Asian markets.

 

[Karma*Police]

Agreed. New remote is great, although I wouldn't mind it being slightly bigger. Also it's so symmetrical that when you pick it up it's hard to tell which way you're holding it without looking. Kind of annoying in a dark room.

I agree, Apple's obsession with symmetry is great for aesthetics but hurts usability in this case. But for everything else, it's light years ahead of anything else in this space

Use your phone or Ipad instead, Works much better

I have the remote on my Apple watch and iPhone. I find it a lot easier with the remote... no need to launch an app... I just pick it up and start swiping, tapping and giving voice commands to Siri on the remote. The only advantage I find with iPhone is the virtual keyboard but I rarely need that.

 

[cube]

Both of those articles are discussing the European market specifically. Panasonic has no 2017 televisions in the American market at all, so any discussion of Panasonic televisions is necesarily referring to the European and Asian markets.

I don't care. At least 25 3D models started being sold in Europe this year (all 4K). From the Panasonic, all but one are EX.

 

[Nugget]

I don't care. At least 25 3D models started being sold in Europe this year (all 4K). From the Panasonic, all but one are EX.

You are very confused.

 

[cube]

You are very confused.

No, you trust crap publications.

 

[Juicy Box]

The only advantage I find with iPhone is the virtual keyboard but I rarely need that.

The virtual keyboard is the only thing that I like about the remote app, but it doesn't work for typing in passwords for some reason for me.

As for everything else about the remote app, I can't stand using it as a regular remote. It is nice when I need to pause or stop a video playing and I am not around the Siri Remote, but scrolling is horrible for me.

I use IR remotes, like my TV remote for most things, but I wished it had a Siri button on it.

 

[mmm1345]

What?! LOL, please don't post false statements. Nowhere in ANY of my comments did I say anything remotely close to that. Like I said; sit far away enough and 4k is pointless.... although I have no idea how you interpret this as me hating 4k?

Please explain how you came to that conclusion.

just your general attitude, so I'm extrapolating.

 

[e1me5]

wow. three years behind the industry.. only apple can make 5 year old technology "retro"

VHS is retro. 4K hasn't even made its way to the mass market.

 

[JamesPDX]

You didn't get my point. The blu rays are perfect and that's the problem. Perfect 1080p and perfect 4K look virtually identical. Imperfect 1080p and imperfect 4K look drastically different with the 4K being noticeably superior. This is why streamed content 1080p vs. 4K will produce a massive enhanced experience.

Okay.
[doublepost=1503693906][/doublepost]

The definition of a display resolution is the number of pixels in each dimension that can be displayed. You're throwing out one of the dimensions. Throwing out one dimension to come up with "1080P" or "4K" is okay for marketing terms, but once you start doing things like math (doubling or quadrupling), you need to take both dimensions into account.

Let's say the standard TV display was 1000x500 pixels and it was called "1K". By your definition of resolution doubling, 2000x1 pixels would be "2K" and hence double the resolution. "1K" is correct and "2K" is correct, but nobody in their right mind would call that second screen double the resolution. What happens to the horizontal lines cannot be ignored.

If that's too silly of an example, here is a real life example:

View attachment 714409

No reasonable person would consider these to be the exact same resolution just because they are both 1440p.

http://www.rtings.com/tv/learn/what-is-the-aspect-ratio-4-3-16-9-21-9
http://blog.chameleondg.com/post/111891072017/resolution-aspect-ratio-cheat-sheet
http://blog.chameleondg.com/post/111891072017/resolution-aspect-ratio-cheat-sheet

 

[DaveN]

Seems like 14 of the 16 pages of comments here are debating wether 4K is two or four times the resolution of full HD. Really people? That is what is important to you?

 

[betabeta]

If it’s just a 4K upgrade I’ll be a little disappointed, I hope we get a few surprises. I hate reading the menu on my TV and would love to mirror the on screen menus to my iPad and not just use it as a controller for the on screen menu but see the menu on the iPad.

Also better Siri integration, but it sounds like Apple will want you to get the Home Pod. No chance, but also would love to have local storage options.

 

[KeithBN]

Maybe in the USA. In most other countries that get's you a small junk tv at best.

Seriously?
Friend just bought a brand new 42" 4K tv here in the uk last month. £350.

 

[tich]

Believe me, it’s not TV makers. They want you to waste money on smaller 4K TVs all day because it’s just marketing hype. It’s just science and the fact that your retinas, even with perfect vision, cannot discern the pixels from that far at that size. What can they discern? Better color, contrast, and brightness. But not better sharpness. As a matter of fact, from 9ft away, a 55” TV isn’t even full 1080p. If those other features are important to you, then that’s fine. But most people would be better off getting a 1080p TV and saving they money and data usage (many home internet connections have caps now in the U.S.). In a few years large 4K TVs will be much more affordable. People like to argue with me a lot about this on the forums, often because they don’t want to admit that they wasted money on something irrelevant. We can only grow as humans when we learn from our mistakes and move on. You very likely do not have super human vision, and science has proven the limits of our vision, so it’s quite easy to calculate.

Try out the calculator at the bottom of this page to see for yourself: https://referencehometheater.com/2013/commentary/4k-calculator/

Better colour, range etc. But there is a physical limit as to what your eye can resolve from a given distance.

I get your points and agree that most people probably won't be able to tell the difference, but all I can say is that, beyond a shadow of a confirmation bias, it's sharper to me. I'm not talking about being able to discern pixels, but rather how sharp the image looks as a whole. I'm all about sound science, but to me the edges are still sharper and more detail is resolved, even from those distances. On both of my TVs. No, I can't discern individual pixels, nor would I want to!

 

[bn-7bc]

If you sit about 8 feet or further away from your TV you won't notice a difference (depending on TV size). See chart below:

Does that chart take things like HDR into sccount or just the incresed resolution? Imho more stops berwieen lift and gain is allways nice, infact if the industry had gone thst way would be happy wit 1080 9 hdr, snd please cane we hav 4:2:2 chroma subsampeling instead of 4:2:0. Unfortunatly HDR and chrioma dubsamprling (esp the latter) is not eell understood if at all by a lott of people, bur a higher number must be better right, so what us bushed first the resolution

 

[dilbert99]

I get your points and agree that most people probably won't be able to tell the difference, but all I can say is that, beyond a shadow of a confirmation bias, it's sharper to me. I'm not talking about being able to discern pixels, but rather how sharp the image looks as a whole. I'm all about sound science, but to me the edges are still sharper and more detail is resolved, even from those distances. On both of my TVs. No, I can't discern individual pixels, nor would I want to!

what distances are you talking about and what size of screen?
Yes I would take those charts as a guide, different people have different vision capabilities but there comes a limit that the eye can resolve detail from a given distance. I think you are within those distances so you can clearly see a difference.
[doublepost=1503702192][/doublepost]

I understand what you're saying. But resolution is the surface area, not just the number of pixels that measure the width and height. You're talking about linear resolution (vertical or horizontal resolution). 2K contains roughly 2,211,840 pixels (2048x1080), 4K contains roughly 8,847,360 pixels (4096x2160). Or if we're taking 1080p vs UHD then it's 2,073,600 and 8,294,400. 4x!

No, resolution is the ability to resolve detail and yes its about 'linear' resolution. That's what resolution is.
Thats why they call 1080p - 2K which is half the resolution of 4K. You can resolve twice the detail.
But because the resolution is in two dimensions and you can resolve twice the detail in 2 dimensions, you then have 4 times the amount of information or pixels.

The resolution of monitors is described either as 4K or x*y never as the total number of pixels.

 

[samlikesmac]

Ohh right, they don't have the original in 4k and 5k for the 4k version they knew they'd need a few years later. Think people..

I don't, but if that's the case then there will never be 4k due to visual effects

I believe some (very few) visual effects are being rendered in 4K at this point, but you’re right, there is a lot of catching up to do in that regard. As long as he entire movie isn’t CGI and it was captured and mastered at 4K or higher you’ll get great clarity even with upconverted CGI. IMDb is usually very accurate with capture and master quality if you’re ever iffy about whether or movie was actually mastered in 4K.

 

[lsutigerfan1976]

Um, have you actually shopped recently?!? 4K TVs are fairly cheap now.

They are. Got a good deal a month ago for an LG UHD TV. May not be the top of the line model, but it has a pretty decent picture on it.