Slashdot Mirror


Alfred Poor Says HDTV Manufacturers are Hurting (Video)

The last time we talked with Dr. Poor (who is now a Senior Editor at aNewDomain.net), we ran out of time and didn't get around to discussing 3-D and ultra-high-def TV and whether they're worth buying. So here he is again on the Slashdot TV screen (which is *not* high-definition), talking about the TV marketplace. This is a perfect time for that discussion, since Dark Friday is only a few weeks away, and after that we move into the month during which TVs and a lot of other items sell at a lot higher rate than they do during the rest of the year. If you're thinking about buying a new TV for yourself or as a gift this holiday season, you might want to listen to what Dr. Poor has to say on the subject before you do.

37 of 307 comments (clear)

  1. pointless by Xicor · · Score: 4, Interesting

    theres no point in buying a 3dtv or a 4k ultra resolution tv when you cant watch anything on it with either... televesion is at best 1080p, and you can only get fake 3d tv. if you want to watch a 3d movie, you have to pay extra. if you want to stream movies, dont even think you will get 4k resolution any time soon. even if you could find something online with 4k resolution, you wouldnt be able to stream it without a gigabit internet connection.

    1. Re:pointless by neurojab · · Score: 4, Insightful

      4k is indeed pointless, unless you literally have a full size movie theater in your house. How in the world can anyone make out individual pixels at 1080p on a reasonable screen size without getting right up to the screen? It's physically impossible.

      And as for streaming being able to provide 4k before disc-based formats - HD streaming is good, but not close to blu-ray quality today at 1080p/24. This is due to bandwidth constraints. How is increasing the resolution going to help improve the bandwidth?

      I would rather like to have a 4k desktop monitor (because I do sit right next to it), but I would not pay more for a living room TV that has 4k (because I don't).

    2. Re:pointless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      who do people like you fail to realize that when you look at a TV picture you're not seeing pixels, you're seeing light emitted from those pixels, and that light interacts with all the light from the surrounding pixels to project an image on your retina. just because you can't see an individual pixel does not mean that more, smaller pixels don't produce a more pleasing/realistic image. there are a lot of other important physical phenomena and interactions happening at tiny scales between all the photons that you're not aware of. it's the same with people who argue that a 44.1kHz is the best sample rate for audio because you can't hear frequencies above 22kHz. there are interactions and harmonics beyond just the audible range that shape the overall sound of music. do you really think that 100 years from now we're still going to be watching 1080p video with 16-bit 44.1kHz audio?

    3. Re:pointless by wooferhound · · Score: 4, Insightful

      theres no point in buying a 3dtv or a 4k ultra resolution tv when you cant watch anything on it with either... television is at best 1080p, and you can only get fake 3d tv. if you want to watch a 3d movie, you have to pay extra. if you want to stream movies, dont even think you will get 4k resolution any time soon. even if you could find something online with 4k resolution, you wouldnt be able to stream it without a gigabit internet connection.

      You already own content that can be viewed on a 4k TV. I'm sure that your Photo Camera pictures are much higher resolution than 4k and would come alive on a 4k television.

      --
      We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
    4. Re:pointless by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 4, Funny

      this is true, but there is no 4K media yet

      Nonsense.

      My TRS-80 was displaying images exceeding 6K back in 1978.

    5. Re:pointless by TWiTfan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem is that too many manufacturers got addicted to the phat cash they made during the transition from SDTV to HDTV, and thought the gravy train was going to last forever. So the last few years have been one attempt after another (120Hz, "Smart" TV's, 3D, 4K, etc.) to recapture that magic (and those profits). They're not satisfied making the modest money they made during the later SD era, with people occasionally replacing worn-out or broken TV's. They want the BIG MONEY they made in the early-mid oughts when everybody was running out to buy a new big-screen HDTV.

      --
      The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    6. Re:pointless by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 2

      All we need is someone to start releasing porn in 4K format, and the 4K TVs will start flying off the shelves. :)

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    7. Re:pointless by stdarg · · Score: 4, Informative

      4k resolution is about 8.3MP so you're closer than you think.

    8. Re:pointless by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Have you actually seen a 4k TV in real life? I have seen a few and can see the difference with 1080p on a 55" screen from 3m away. It's not dramatic but definitely visible. Then again some people claim they can't see the difference between SD and 1080p either.

      I'm in no hurry to upgrade, I just refute the notion that 4k can't be seen.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    9. Re:pointless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      However once we reach around 2000 pixels per millimetre the pixels will can create an interference pattern which may be used to create holographic images.

      However I have seen 8K demos that will blow you socks off, it isn't even in the realm of HDTV. You can watch a football match from a static camera angle for example; you can read the face of the players while you see the complete pitch.

      But more interesting than 4K or 8K, is high frame rate video. I've seen a demo from the BBC showing a 300 fps system. That speed allows us to track moving images smoothly with our eyes (instead of the big steps moving images now have). This tracking allows our eyes to fully resolve a moving image and it becomes much sharper. It would be great for watching fight scenes etc.

    10. Re:pointless by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I prefer a good story. There are no amount of pixels that will improve the story.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    11. Re:pointless by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 4, Informative

      >What I don't understand is why music is mastered in 96KHz or 192KHz and we're not even getting 48KHz digital distribution yet

      So that a low phase distortion rc filter can be used to remove the super-nyquist components before sub sampling.
      You don't need more that 48KHz for playback. There is no benefit.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    12. Re:pointless by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 2

      >I have seen a few and can see the difference with 1080p on a 55" screen from 3m away.

      So I'm better off not seeing that, because right now I'm perfectly happy with my 720p TV. I don't want to have to want a better one.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    13. Re:pointless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      No, you can't hear those. If you can't hear a sine-wave tone above 20 kHz you can't hear any waveform steeper than that either. That's just how it works - the math and physics are very clear here.

      The engineering is pretty clear, too: amplifier and speaker roll-offs are generally 50 kHz and 20 kHz, respectively. If your speaker isn't kicking out harmonics higher than 20 kHz, a 44.1 kHz sample rate should be enough to reproduce almost all audible music to the point where your ear cannot tell the difference.

    14. Re:pointless by lgw · · Score: 2

      You need higher sample rates for mixing and mastering, because that can be lossy and you want CD quality left over when you're done, but not for the end product the consumer listens to.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    15. Re:pointless by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      I have no interest in a "3D" TV, and until I saw this I didn't have any interest in a new TV, since the old one works fine.

      That said, maybe I will, since I can get a 60 inch set $200 cheaper than the 42 inch 720p I bought in 2002... even though it still works fine.

      But then again, maybe they'll go down more? Electronics have been getting cheaper all my life. In 1976 I paid $600 for a 25 inch set.

      Nah, I'll wait until this one breaks.

    16. Re:pointless by geekoid · · Score: 2

      With 4k, you can see the abuse and destroyed lives. We don't want that!

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    17. Re:pointless by CityZen · · Score: 2

      I'm sure you could tell the difference between high-bitrate content made to make 4K look good vs. ordinary compressed HD content.
      However, if you were to watch the same content with appropriately-high bitrates for 4K and HD, you probably wouldn't see the difference.
      Why would they try to make both sets look as good as possible if the point is to sell the more expensive one?

    18. Re:pointless by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      $3500 for a monitor with a resolution higher than content? No, 1080p will do, especially since most TV is still 720p. I've seen 80 inch 1080p TVs for $800.

  2. "Dark Friday"? by grub · · Score: 2


    The article mentions "Dark Friday" but links to a wiki page called "Black Friday". What is that about? (I know about Black Friday in the US, just not sure why the Dark Friday bit)

    --
    Trolling is a art,
    1. Re:"Dark Friday"? by VortexCortex · · Score: 5, Funny

      The article mentions "Dark Friday" but links to a wiki page called "Black Friday". What is that about?

      Many people refused to support the shopping event "Black Friday" on the grounds that it is racist towards people of other skin tones. The pollitically correct term is "Dark Friday", which is on the eve of "Darkie Weekend" during which most people don't have to work and can just laze about on their porches like monkies.

    2. Re:"Dark Friday"? by LurkerXXX · · Score: 2, Informative

      Dumbest thing I ever heard. The name is in reference to black vs red ink in accounting books showing positive or negative numbers. Black is a positive thing in accounting. Some people go out of their way to be offended by things that aren't relevant.

    3. Re:"Dark Friday"? by stdarg · · Score: 3, Informative

      From the Wiki:

      The day's name originated in Philadelphia, where it originally was used to describe the heavy and disruptive pedestrian and vehicle traffic which would occur on the day after Thanksgiving. Use of the term started before 1961 and began to see broader use outside Philadelphia around 1975. Later an alternative explanation was made: that retailers traditionally operated at a financial loss from January through November, and "Black Friday" indicates the point at which retailers begin to turn a profit, or "in the black". For large retail chains like Walmart, their net income is positive starting from January 1, and Black Friday can boost their year to date net profit from $14 billion to $19 billion.

    4. Re:"Dark Friday"? by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 2
      Amen, a thousand mod points to you my good man...

      Anyone who takes offense to "Black Friday" is just looking for something to take offense at.

  3. Ultimate buyer of HDTV? by gadget+junkie · · Score: 2

    Here in Italy, the only form of broadcast HDTV content is via pay channels. I see them stealing a page out of the mobile phone companies, and include the TV in their contract, so that the early exit penalty would be paying off the TV. they get more consistent revenues, and the HDTV producers "Eat" the retailing margin, or they split.
    Only problem, as a consumer, would be if they get the producers to include the ability "brick" the TV remotely (for non payment, for instance) and/or include some proprietary encryption.

    --
    "If a boss demands loyalty, give him integrity. But if he demands integrity, give him loyalty." (John Boyd, 1927-1997)
  4. Transcripts? Summary? by Darinbob · · Score: 2

    Why is there no summary or transcript? Watching a video to hear a few words is a completely wasteful use of bandwidth and time.

  5. Re:Transcripts? Summary? by SydShamino · · Score: 4, Informative

    See the "Hide/Show Transcript" link just under the video?

    --
    It doesn't hurt to be nice.
  6. Re:Transcripts? Summary? by Darinbob · · Score: 3, Informative

    Oh, didn't see it. Oops.

  7. Re:Blame cable by lgw · · Score: 2

    There are geeks who still have cable?

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  8. Obnoxious 2 minute commerical for IBM crapware by JoeyRox · · Score: 2

    If I'm going to suffer through a 2 minute commercial lead-in for a "doctor" video it better be a doctor that can cure heart disease or cancer instead of one telling me I should buy a 3-D television.

  9. 3d by Antipater · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One of the things about 3D is that the consumers have shown that they are not particularly interested in spending a whole lot more money in order to get 3D. And the installed base is growing but it is not growing fast enough to support the development projects by the broadcasters and the content producers. ESPN was singular for being way out in front on developing 3D content especially for live sports coverage. And they have actually pulled the plug on a lot of that activity now because I think, in part, they are just not getting the viewership for it.

    Smart observation. But then...

    And it is just a matter of time in my opinion for the installed base to get to the point where people are going to be able to take advantage of it and will want to take advantage of it,

    WRONG CONCLUSION.

    People do not want 3dtv. The market research shows this clearly, as he himself states. Then he does a 180 and starts pushing 3d. The fact that it's baked into every TV on Best Buy's shelves (for a significant markup, of course) is NOT A GOOD THING. Maybe TV sales wouldn't be so damn bad if TV manufacturers didn't keep trying to shove every damn bell and whistle in our faces for an extra $100. Just give us a big, pretty screen. That's all we want. No cameras in our TVs, no 3d, no internet bullshit. If I want internet on my TV I'll plug my computer into the HDMI port. If I want a camera I'll plug in a camera. If I want 3d I'll...wait, I'll never want 3d, because it's retarded.

    --
    Everything is better with chainsaws.
  10. Re:Blame cable by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2

    Just wait a year. 1000 Gpbs internet is rolling to all locations within 10 miles of a top tier research university nationwide. For only $10 a month.

    It's part of the Internet 2 initiative.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  11. Re:Blame cable by TWiTfan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm a geek who has tried cutting the cord several times now. And it's still just not there. It's better than it once was, but there is still a lot more that you CAN'T get than you can. And even the stuff you can get still comes with a lot of caveats, costs, and weird compromises.

    Cutting the cord right now is fine if you're okay with accepting whatever content happens to be there. But it sucks if you're the kind of person who hears about a specific show and wants to watch *that* show (and not wait a year or more to do it). There are just too many shows that I like that either aren't available at all or would cost me $3 an episode to watch.

    --
    The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
  12. There's no reason to upgrade again by Tridus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sales spiked up during the HD transition because everyone was upgrading from SD to HD. The benefits were obvious and easily viewable.

    Those days are over. I don't want fake 3d with stupid glasses. I don't need a TV with a camera that can Skype, my phone already does it (better). There's simply no reason why I'd need to buy another new TV, unless my current one dies.

    Sorry TV makers, but this is the new normal. If you set up expecting things to stay in transition sales mode forever, than it sucks to be you.

    --
    -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
  13. Re:Dark Friday? by slew · · Score: 4, Informative

    Why so gloomy sounding? Why can't it be called A Mix Of All Colors Friday?

    If you work in retail (as opposed to actually owning a retail establishment), maybe you might wish for a dark friday...

    Dark Friday: a Friday when the staff is taking the day off and the establishment is not open (normally only applied to a Play or Show)
    Pink Friday: a crappy album made by Nicki Minaj
    Red Friday: (US/CA) support the troops (UK) July 31, 1925, british coal miner labor union celebrate winning a temporary government backed minimum wage
    Orange Friday: (US baseball) support the SF Giants day
    Big Yellow Friday: Children's liver disease foundation awareness/fundraising day
    Green Friday: a social reform movement
    Blue Friday: support law enforcement officers KIA
    Purple Friday: (US football) support the Minnesota Viking or Baltimore Ravens
    Black Friday: (US) the day after thanksgiving (which is always on thursday) many business goes from "red" to "black". This follows the tradition of accountants to use black for non-negative numbers and red for negative numbers. (UK) April 15th 1921, the day the Triple Alliance chickened out and called off a strike that would have supported british miners in their fight or minimum wages (see Red Friday)

    Thank God it's Friday: oops that was a day early, it's only thursday.

  14. plasmas are less bright than LCD by Chirs · · Score: 2

    The brightest plasma screens are far darker than the brightest LCD screens (which are so bright you have to turn them down in a dim room otherwise they're uncomfortable to watch).

    Plasma has better colours, better viewing angle, better blacks, etc. But it's not brighter.

  15. Re:All your 4D is belong to Cyber Monday by geekoid · · Score: 2

    "Seriously, if you want to buy electronics you either do it on Cyber Monday or you do it in February."
    what a stupid generalization, and it shows complete ignorance on how companies change and evolve.

    "Everyone knows that."
    Everybody knows a lot of thing, they are seldom correct.

    "We don't care about 3D."
    I do, albeit it not strongly.

    "We also don't care about 4D.
    I do, very much so. Have you seen a 4k film on a 4k TV? IT's fucking amazing.

    "Nobody cares what the "industry" wants us to buy.
    if that was true we wouldn't have iPhones and Tablets.

    "The only reason we even bought 1080p HDTV sets in the first place was we were forced to."
    Stop acting like you speak for even a tine percentage of the population.

    The internet is middle aged, maybe it's time you grew up and stopped being an ignorant hater?

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect