8K TVs Are Coming, But Don't Buy the Hype (engadget.com)

If the 8,294,400 pixels of resolution on an Ultra High Definition television just don't seem to convey enough detail, fear not: The electronics industry has heard your cry. From a report: Even as UHD TVs, often called 4K TVs for their nearly 4,000 pixels of horizontal resolution, approach half of display shipments in the U.S., set manufacturers have been stepping up their demos of 8K sets that, with their 7680-by-4320 resolution, pack in a full 33,177,600 pixels. And Sharp is now expanding its distribution of one such set, the 70-inch LV-70X500E. Following its October debut in China and subsequent arrivals in Japan and Taiwan, this 8K display will go on sale across Europe at the end of April for about $13,800 at current exchange rates. That, apparently, is supposed to be a reasonable price for a set that supports a video format that offers next to nothing to watch, that can't be streamed on most broadband connections or fit onto Blu-ray discs and which can't even be properly appreciated unless you get a set too big to fit in many living rooms.

[...] The highlights reel playing on a demo unit of Sharp's 8K set required 300 megabits per second of bandwidth to stream, said Adrian Wysocki, group product manager at UMC, the Sharp-owned firm that builds TVs in Poland for the company. He suggested in a conversation Friday that more efficient formats could cut that to 100 Mbps. Only 23.2% of U.S. fixed-broadband connections hit that speed at the end of 2016, according to to the Federal Communications Commission's latest report on internet access services.

Comments

Higher resolution leads to holographic TVs

[GWBasic]

Increasing TV resolution like this is a good thing.

A hologram works by using photographic film capable of photographing the actual light waves. Once we have resolutions better than light's wavelength, we can have holographic TV.

Re:Brave take

[bluefoxlucid]

Rich people, really. What do you think I'm going to do when that $175k Congressional salary starts rolling in? Buy a $1,500 bespoke suit at my local tailor, of course. There's no way I need a $175k salary, so it may as well go into the local poverty-stricken district of my city where some entrepreneur has attracted wealthy clients to create local jobs.

Of course I'm going to eliminate my mortgage and car loan, too. That'll take uh. Two months. I'll also have a nicer yard, seeing as so many people in my neighborhood are desperate for jobs and are willing to clean up the trash and do the gardening for pretty cheap. Even at $15/hr, that's only $150/week for a ten-hour weekly maintenance schedule. I'd like to rebuild my rear deck with some composite but maybe I'll just pay somebody else to strip it down and redo that for me, too; along with doing some electrical work and finally installing that 40-amp ChargePoint I've been meaning to get.

I'm still not buying a $5,000 TV; screw that. 4K UHD OLED TVs will be under $1,000 by the time I'm ready to buy.

What? You didn't think I'd already planned for how to deal with this unnecessarily-large compensation package? I plan for everything.

Re:Brave take

[ChrisMaple]

From your wikipedia citation:
the human eye should have a resolving power of 20 arcsecs in theory, though normally only 60 arcsecs.
Stated better, the human eye is diffraction limited at 20 arc seconds, but other factors limit the typical resolving power of thew human eye to 1 arc minute.

Some people have exceptionally good vision and can do better than 1 arc minute. The GP claim of 31.5 arc seconds is silly in its exaggerated precision.