Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Which 4k tv?
- Thread starter surfer369
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Huh? Most TVs come with at least 4 inputs. If you need more than that it's time to look at getting a receiver.
I'm loving the look of the new LG C8 OLED. With iTunes offering so many films in 4K Dolby Vision, surely an LG OLED with its DV, Dolby Atmos sound and reliable WEB OS really makes sense for an Apple TV fan doesn't it? If the budget allows.
I'm put off my SONY because of their Android OS choice, their half hearted implementation of Dolby Vision and for me, their rather poor longevity - i've never managed more than 5 years of use from a SONY product (Panasonic 10-15+ years).
I love the look of the SONY A1, but LG really seem to have everything pretty much perfect in the upper TV market don't they?
Certainly, when I was a college boy working in a HiFi TV shop on a weekend, we were all aware of SONY's non-existent customer service. At the time Panasonic were the stars. LG was in the last year of its Goldstar name but was regarded super poor quality at the time - mind you, I remember Samsung as a child at the end of the 1980s being regarded as a super cheap & nasty brand. Very cool how their quality improved
I'm put off my SONY because of their Android OS choice, their half hearted implementation of Dolby Vision and for me, their rather poor longevity - i've never managed more than 5 years of use from a SONY product (Panasonic 10-15+ years).
I love the look of the SONY A1, but LG really seem to have everything pretty much perfect in the upper TV market don't they?
Certainly, when I was a college boy working in a HiFi TV shop on a weekend, we were all aware of SONY's non-existent customer service. At the time Panasonic were the stars. LG was in the last year of its Goldstar name but was regarded super poor quality at the time - mind you, I remember Samsung as a child at the end of the 1980s being regarded as a super cheap & nasty brand. Very cool how their quality improved
What content? 8K content because you keep banging on about it and keep advising readers to only buy televisions that support HDMI 2.1. At this point in time for most people whether a TV supports 2.1 should be way down a list of features in a buying decision. There are so many other important factors to consider first.
2.0 was released four and a half years ago. It’s taken that long to get to the point where services provide any sort of reasonable range of 4K HDR content, and it’s by no means universal (eg iTunes’ list of 4K HDR films is still very small).
You also seem to forget that it’s not about whether a service can stream 8K but whether there is any content being made for it. That always lags behind adoption of new standards.
And 8K might go the way of 3D. For almost all buyers with the size of the TV that they purchase and the distance sat from it they will not be able to resolve the resolution difference between 4K and 8K. So it’s up to the sales marketers to convince the public they need 8K, and it sounds like they have done a really good job on you. I would argue that a much bigger impact on the quality of images in the latest tech round has been HDR, not 4K.
So taking all that into account anybody that is interested in this stuff (ie not the general public but TV obsessives) will be ready to upgrade any television they buy now by the time there is anything worth watching at 8K.
Last edited: