Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!
  • Did you order new AirTags? We've opened a dedicated AirTags forum.

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
52,437
14,142



LG today detailed upcoming availability of its 2019 NanoCell LED 4K Ultra HD smart TVs with AirPlay 2 and HomeKit support.

lg-nanocell-800x500.jpeg

The new NanoCell lineup is divided into the Nano 8 and Nano 9 series, with 11 models in total ranging in size from 49 inches to 86 inches. Seven models will be available starting in April, followed by one model in May and three in June. Prices range from $799 to $4,299 in the United States.

LG detailed availability of other AirPlay 2 TVs coming to its lineup last week and says more will be announced later this year.

AirPlay 2 support will allow users to stream videos, music, photos, and more directly from an iPhone, iPad, and Mac to compatible LG smart TVs, complete with lock screen controls. HomeKit support will enable users to easily control the TVs using Siri voice commands or the Home app on iPhone, iPad, and Mac.

Samsung, Sony, and Vizio also plan to release AirPlay 2-enabled smart TVs this year. Last month, Samsung's new 2019 lineup of QLED 4K and 8K TVs with AirPlay 2 support became available to pre-order in the United States. MacRumors also reported that Roku is in talks with Apple about AirPlay 2 integration.

LG's 2019 TVs will also feature Amazon Alexa alongside Google Assistant.

Article Link: LG Announces Additional TVs With AirPlay 2 and HomeKit Launching Between April and June
 

StrangeNoises

macrumors regular
Jul 21, 2011
109
343
so, this is all software, but no word on software updates to existing capable models, amirite?

Sod it, I have an AppleTV 4K anyway (Bought before the OLED TV). This is partly why. People moan about apple but they do at least support their products with software updates for a proper period.
 
Comment

markfc

macrumors 6502a
Sep 18, 2006
933
1,512
Prestatyn, Wales, UK
I've got the 2018 LG that won't be updated, but I'm not bothered as I have the AppleTV 4K.

But this only gives you streaming over airplay though right? No dedicated Apple Movies app like the Samsung is getting?
 
Comment

Velin

macrumors 68000
Jul 23, 2008
1,601
1,065
Hearst Castle
LG's OLED televisions are excellent, truly best-in-class and look amazing day or night. So where is the OLED iPad Pro?
 
  • Like
Reactions: HJM.NL
Comment

JetTester

macrumors 6502
Feb 12, 2014
461
885
A nice addition if you just happen to be looking for a new TV with exactly those features at this time. But if you have a fairly new one, or an Apple TV, there's nothing really compelling about it. Pass...
 
Comment

McG2k1

macrumors regular
Jun 22, 2011
237
366
I wish they’d make a 32” oled for my office client monitor.
 
Comment

rpe33

macrumors regular
Jul 19, 2012
189
315
I find it hilarious all the BS marketing terms used to describe LCD displays. "nanocell" "qled" "liquid retina". IT'S ALL JUST A REGULAR LCD DISPLAY! Don't buy into the marketing mumbo jumbo, folks.

The worst offender has to be Samsung with their "Quantum" terminology. They literally just stick the word "Quantum" in front of everything and tell you it's new technology and people just eat it up. Pathetic.
 
Comment

nutmac

macrumors 603
Mar 30, 2004
5,055
4,201
What you don't have and endless supply of money to drop $799 to $4299 on a non-future-proof tv every couple years?
LG's concern may be to protect the sales of new TV models, not necessarily to punish customers who bought their TV 1-2 years ago.

Their thinking may be that if LG were to offer HomeKit and AirPlay 2 to last year's model, some folks would be steered to more heavily discounted last year's TV models instead of brand new models.

For instance, LG's C8 OLED TV currently sells for about $1700-1800 for 55" and $2700-2800 for 65". Their newest C9 series will sell close to retail price for next several months, $2500 for 55" and $3500 for 65". At $700-800 savings, many folks would no doubt overlook improved performance and new features, especially if they can get HomeKit and AirPlay 2 via firmware update.

Many years ago, Apple sold software update that brought new features to the older OS or hardware, such as FaceTime macOS app ($0.99) and 802.11n ($1.99). Perhaps LG selling HomeKit and AirPlay 2 to older model may offset some of the loss sales to newest models? Say, $200?
[doublepost=1552929137][/doublepost]
I find it hilarious all the BS marketing terms used to describe LCD displays. "nanocell" "qled" "liquid retina". IT'S ALL JUST A REGULAR LCD DISPLAY! Don't buy into the marketing mumbo jumbo, folks.

The worst offender has to be Samsung with their "Quantum" terminology. They literally just stick the word "Quantum" in front of everything and tell you it's new technology and people just eat it up. Pathetic.
If you think about it, LED is also BS. It's just LCD with LED lighting (instead of CCFL).

Many folks think QLED is equivalent or superior to OLED!
 
Comment

jimthing

macrumors 68000
Apr 6, 2011
1,651
878
London, UK (Europe, Earth, Space)
If you don't need any new TV's, then given there are now the first early adopter expensive 8K's from the likes of Samsung coming into the marketplace, why not wait a couple of years and go straight from 2K to 8K, and skip 4K in the process?

Give it another 2 years, and the 8K's will be at this price, and you'll have saved yourself a lot of money buyng the needless "middle UHD" variant TV's. (wait until the usual end of year sales discounting, between Oct/Nov/Dec/Jan and save money again.)

It's in many ways similar to the previous HD vs. Full HD debacle from 15 years ago. People were told "buy into the new amazing HD TV!", only to then get told two years later "buy into the proper Full HD 1080p!". Many people who bought early paid through the noise for the 720p TV's, while the savvy ones one waited not only paid a lot less, but got FHD models as well.

Content to this day in FHD is lacking across terrestrial broadcasters. After you bought the FHD TV, you then typically still today have to sign-up for cable or over-the-top; the free-to-air stuff (e.g. "Freeview HD" here in the UK) has only a fractional few of the free-to-air channels in FHD. So your "regular" TV viewing, like news (especially local news channels), magazine programmes, drama – even via free catchup services (from BBC/ITV/C4) are limited to just 720p. Not great at the moment if you own 2K certainly non-existent on 4K/8K TV's, even with upscaling, it's hardly native resolution content.

Anyway, so far we've had: 4K, then 4K HDR, then 4K HDR with Dolby Atmos, now we have {QLED/nano/add-name-here} variants of the former, then we will have OLED/local-OLED/(whatever name doesn't leave burn-in!) versions of this.

And then we'll have 8K versions of that (likely with the usual couple of 'extra' to-have marketing things, in the middle!).

I'd suggest waiting until this 8K point happens, unless you just can't save that cash from leaving your wallet, lol! Regardless of whether you can "see" the difference on normal 55-65" sets, you'll still feel cheesed-off at not having "Full UHD" only a couple of years later.

And around we go.
 
Last edited:
Comment

nutmac

macrumors 603
Mar 30, 2004
5,055
4,201
If you don't need any new TV's, then given there are now the first mainstream 8K's from the likes of Samsung coming into the marketplace, why not wait a couple of years and go straight from 2K to 8K, and skip 4K in the process?
I am personally very skeptical of 8K for many reasons.
  1. In most households, people sit at a distance where the benefits of native 4K contents are barely appreciated. They will need a very large 8K screen to appreciate all the pixels, which explains why most 8K TVs announced this year are larger than 80". If you are not intending to buy 80" or larger TV, or sit very close to the TV, 8K will be wasted.
  2. 8K requires about 4 times the storage space and processing power as 4K.
  3. 8K is no doubt more future proof, but many movies and TV series with CGI are mastered in DCI 2K (slightly wider than 1080p but essentially the same). Almost all the rest are 4K. So 8K will rely heavily on upscaler. Even IMAX and Dolby Cinema laser digital projection systems, widely considered the best in the industry, are 4K.
  4. It will take awhile for gaming consoles to push 8K pixels adequately.
  5. Blu-Ray is on life support as it is, with Samsung exiting the market and more expected to follow.
  6. Many households have bandwidth cap that makes streaming even 4K digital contents less than desirable. 8K would require many to upgrade to even more expensive plan without the bandwidth cap.
Having said that, I do think 8K would be great for certain uses, such as sports and computer-based display. And it is very possible that about 5 years or so from now, 8K can fully replace 4K, just as 4K has nearly fully replaced 1080p.
 
Comment

jimthing

macrumors 68000
Apr 6, 2011
1,651
878
London, UK (Europe, Earth, Space)
I am personally very skeptical of 8K for many reasons.
  1. In most households, people sit at a distance where the benefits of native 4K contents are barely appreciated. They will need a very large 8K screen to appreciate all the pixels, which explains why most 8K TVs announced this year are larger than 80". If you are not intending to buy 80" or larger TV, or sit very close to the TV, 8K will be wasted.
  2. 8K requires about 4 times the storage space and processing power as 4K.
  3. 8K is no doubt more future proof, but many movies and TV series with CGI are mastered in DCI 2K (slightly wider than 1080p but essentially the same). So 8K will rely heavily on upscaler. Even IMAX and Dolby Cinema laser digital projection systems, widely considered the best in the industry, are 4K.
  4. It will take awhile for gaming consoles to push 8K pixels adequately.
  5. Blu-Ray is on life support as it is, with Samsung exiting the market and more expected to follow.
  6. Many households have bandwidth cap that makes streaming even 4K digital contents less than desirable. 8K would require many to upgrade to even more expensive plan without bandwidth cap.
Having said that, I do think 8K would be great for certain uses, such as sports and computer-based display. And it is very possible that about 5 years or so from now, 8K can fully replace 4K, just as 4K has nearly fully replaced 1080p.
Regardless of whether you can "see" the difference on normal 55-65" sets, you'll still feel cheesed-off at not having "Full UHD" only a couple of years later.
Sure you're likely correct, but my above comment overrides any technical issues, lol. It's all about the "feeling behind" thing being quite a nagging force of nature to our little human heads, haha!

EDIT: Should also add that of course it doesn't suddenly all stop at 8K, but given it's round the corner in TV set availability, and money is a thing for most TV buyers meaning upgrades are say around a once a decade thing, it may make a good point for many to jump into the upgrade marketplace.
I even saw some news programme 4-5 years ago that said Hollywood studios were scanning older film into 16K, even back then. Now that is obviously for archival reasons, and "cleaning up" old film stock, so who knows if that'll be something for cinemas to get...
 
Last edited:
Comment

nutmac

macrumors 603
Mar 30, 2004
5,055
4,201
Sure you're likely correct, but my above comment overrides any technical issues, lol. It's all about the "feeling behind" thing being quite a nagging force of nature to our little human heads, haha!
When it comes to technology, I don't think we will ever be at "this is absolutely perfect and cannot be improved anymore." It's a matter of buying when you need it (although waiting few months for newer model is often wise, if you can afford to wait), understanding your needs, and getting the best for your money.

When it comes to 8K, I think it will take more than a couple of years before they will be at the 4K price range.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jimthing
Comment

radiologyman

macrumors 6502a
Jul 23, 2011
707
253
There were ramblings that hacks are in the works to bring support to older models. I would be interested but I do have 4K Apple TV already
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: ikir
Comment

macfixx

macrumors newbie
Nov 8, 2010
14
0
What you don't have an endless supply of money to drop $799 to $4299 on a non-future-proof tv every couple years?

Exactly. Some LG display fans put $10,000 into three brand new 2018 LG OLED's for future-proofing the walls of their entire home and prefer not to have glitchy "high speed" HDMI cables and the boxes attached to deal with.

But LG sees those people as oldtech suckerfans who just like to complain about how their home theater setups look and perform and prefers they drop another $10k or just plug em all up and ****.
 
Comment

nutmac

macrumors 603
Mar 30, 2004
5,055
4,201
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.