There's plenty of Android devices with MHL ports (to be used with Micro-USB to HDMI adapter cables). For $40, you can do the same for iPhone. You can hook that up to a 52" TV. How's that for eyestrain?
I agree you're not likely to be pulling down 1080p on an iPhone, but that's only a short-term CPU limitation.
We're not causing them to dump pollution all over themselves. You can't run an industry and keep manufacturing here if your competitors aren't. The hands have been forced - we're not exactly willingly sending all manufacturing over there.
I want good working conditions at the Foxconn plants, and less pollution in China. But I can't vote with my wallet if there's literally nothing left on our shores to vote with. I don't mind living in a global economy, but I don't want the Chinese to be exploited by their leadership at the same time.
If that pressure is unconstitutional, then we need to revise the constitution. I want "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" and EPA helps preserve two of the three. I think liberty should always be subject to restrictions when it effects the life of others.
Since "K" (theater) resolutions are measurements of horizontal resolution, I expect you probably have a 2K screen (1920).
I was just saying that affordable 52" 4K screens do not mean that we have the ability to manufacture affordable 24" 4K screens. If you remember HDTV's, you didn't start seeing small 1080p TV's until years later than the large ones.
The density of screen that drives a 1080p 24" screen is already out there. So just cutting a larger screen out of this and calling it 4K is relatively easy. It doesn't work in reverse, and 4K 24" screens are further off.
Only everything to do with it. It means that affordable 4K computer screens are probably another generation away. Whereas 4K TV's are made with the actual same panels we already use for 1080p computer screens.
Only if it's being used to run a cheap free wi-fi hotspot for a small business and managed not to catch fire running the default firmware. A WRT54GL would do just fine as a wi-fi hotspot on DD-WRT, but doubt it could handle the load on stock.
Right. Just like at my local mall. They have all these video ad signage displays. What do they use for the screen? "Movie" screen shaped TV's with an aspect ratio of around 2.4:1 instead of the taller 16:9 turned on their side. I don't know any consumer that's buying them. Completely unintended consequences, I'm sure. Instead of using them to watch movies filmed in a "Cinemascope" ratio, they are being used to sell designer shoes.
Not only that, but I don't see the point of 4K at all. The human eye just can't see the difference at reasonable viewing distances.
Maybe at a 55" screen size. As it is now, with my living room set up to allow 4-6 people to watch a TV at the same time, a 42" TV almost 8 feet away is taking up a very narrow portion of my field of view. I want an 84" TV. Or for my whole wall to be a 4K screen.
At a movie theater, I can certainly tell the difference between 2K and 4K. The screen is huge.
Except that a 52" 4K TV is less pixel-dense than a 1080p 17" laptop screen - or even less. It's just that the panels that the 17" laptop screens are cut out of are finally of a manufacturing quality that they can cut out a 52" screen with no major flaws. This is why bigger screens are so much more expensive.
This is the trickle-down of the last generation of computer monitors.
In the tech world, it's usually introversion to the point of social exclusion that prevents relationships. I almost went that far. If you don't interact with people on a fairly regular basis, you're not going to find anyone. It's usually only on TV where people find meaningful relationships at a bar among strangers.
Last time I went to a 2K theater 5 or 6 rows back, I could see the lines between the pixels. And I'm slightly nearsighted. Remember, a huge theater screen several rows back is something like sitting 2 feet away from a 42" HDTV at 1080p (almost 2K itself).
But if you don't answer your phone, you're not home sick. You have to prove you're not taking a trip somewhere. At least that's how it is if you live in an at-will employment state and you have a bad employer.
So 300dpi at 14" on paper is your visual limit, but you don't want a 300ppi monitor for your computer? Why not? Retina displays are far more useful than 4K TV's at 5 feet away.
If by grayscale discontinuities you mean color banding, then the fault might be with the TV itself and not the blu-ray. This mostly comes from cheap TV's using 6-bit panels and not even doing proper dithering. A TV capable of "Deep color" (xvYCC color space) should present no problems with smooth color transitions (like skies).
All the details you'd already see at a 4K digital movie theater anyway - especially sitting in the front row. You do know that people are already watching movies at 4K, right?
Video compression does far better than 2:1. At least 10:1 for most Blu-Rays. HEVC could improve that to 20:1 for the same quality. At HEVC, you could probably get a 4K movie down to around 100GB. Half my monthly cable Internet cap, but I could download it in under 8 hours.
My 1080p TV does not scale up. And it reveals how dumb our local fox affiliate is. For SD shows, they use SD source video to encode their HD broadcast and leave in the closed captioning, upscaled to 720p. So the top of my screen has a row of flickering pixels (line 21) where the closed captioning would be hidden on an SD TV.
Re: cable and sat don't have the bandwidth for it
on
The Trouble With 4K TV
·
· Score: 1
I'm pretty sure NONE of the TV's above 60Hz actually do that. It's a nice idea, but I don't think it's really being done. They use the extra frames for motion interpolation when a Trademarked named feature like "Smooth Motion" is turned on. And they usually do a fairly lousy job of it on fast-moving action scenes.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft discontinued support for Silverlight last year. Why are they using it?
Proper DRM support that Flash lacks. Whether you agree with their choice or not, that's the reason.
There's plenty of Android devices with MHL ports (to be used with Micro-USB to HDMI adapter cables). For $40, you can do the same for iPhone. You can hook that up to a 52" TV. How's that for eyestrain?
I agree you're not likely to be pulling down 1080p on an iPhone, but that's only a short-term CPU limitation.
8K in the near future? Or do you mean 4K x 2 eyes? Neither is in the near future.
We're not causing them to dump pollution all over themselves. You can't run an industry and keep manufacturing here if your competitors aren't. The hands have been forced - we're not exactly willingly sending all manufacturing over there.
I want good working conditions at the Foxconn plants, and less pollution in China. But I can't vote with my wallet if there's literally nothing left on our shores to vote with. I don't mind living in a global economy, but I don't want the Chinese to be exploited by their leadership at the same time.
And considering all the wild bush fires almost all over Australia lately, that just helps show how bad China is.
If that pressure is unconstitutional, then we need to revise the constitution. I want "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" and EPA helps preserve two of the three. I think liberty should always be subject to restrictions when it effects the life of others.
Chinese leadership may be forced to alter their strategy and move away from pollution-generating industries
OK, so Chinese leadership are buying new homes further away from the pollution. How does this help China as a whole? :-)
Since "K" (theater) resolutions are measurements of horizontal resolution, I expect you probably have a 2K screen (1920).
I was just saying that affordable 52" 4K screens do not mean that we have the ability to manufacture affordable 24" 4K screens. If you remember HDTV's, you didn't start seeing small 1080p TV's until years later than the large ones.
The density of screen that drives a 1080p 24" screen is already out there. So just cutting a larger screen out of this and calling it 4K is relatively easy. It doesn't work in reverse, and 4K 24" screens are further off.
duct tape? Are you nuts? How about maybe painter's tape? Or at least masking tape.
Only everything to do with it. It means that affordable 4K computer screens are probably another generation away. Whereas 4K TV's are made with the actual same panels we already use for 1080p computer screens.
Only if it's being used to run a cheap free wi-fi hotspot for a small business and managed not to catch fire running the default firmware. A WRT54GL would do just fine as a wi-fi hotspot on DD-WRT, but doubt it could handle the load on stock.
Right. Just like at my local mall. They have all these video ad signage displays. What do they use for the screen? "Movie" screen shaped TV's with an aspect ratio of around 2.4:1 instead of the taller 16:9 turned on their side. I don't know any consumer that's buying them. Completely unintended consequences, I'm sure. Instead of using them to watch movies filmed in a "Cinemascope" ratio, they are being used to sell designer shoes.
Not only that, but I don't see the point of 4K at all. The human eye just can't see the difference at reasonable viewing distances.
Maybe at a 55" screen size. As it is now, with my living room set up to allow 4-6 people to watch a TV at the same time, a 42" TV almost 8 feet away is taking up a very narrow portion of my field of view. I want an 84" TV. Or for my whole wall to be a 4K screen.
At a movie theater, I can certainly tell the difference between 2K and 4K. The screen is huge.
Except that a 52" 4K TV is less pixel-dense than a 1080p 17" laptop screen - or even less. It's just that the panels that the 17" laptop screens are cut out of are finally of a manufacturing quality that they can cut out a 52" screen with no major flaws. This is why bigger screens are so much more expensive.
This is the trickle-down of the last generation of computer monitors.
In the tech world, it's usually introversion to the point of social exclusion that prevents relationships. I almost went that far. If you don't interact with people on a fairly regular basis, you're not going to find anyone. It's usually only on TV where people find meaningful relationships at a bar among strangers.
Awesome, but not technically pointillism
Last time I went to a 2K theater 5 or 6 rows back, I could see the lines between the pixels. And I'm slightly nearsighted. Remember, a huge theater screen several rows back is something like sitting 2 feet away from a 42" HDTV at 1080p (almost 2K itself).
But if you don't answer your phone, you're not home sick. You have to prove you're not taking a trip somewhere. At least that's how it is if you live in an at-will employment state and you have a bad employer.
Thankfully I have a 10 year old car with a dimmable dashboard with filament bulbs.
So 300dpi at 14" on paper is your visual limit, but you don't want a 300ppi monitor for your computer? Why not? Retina displays are far more useful than 4K TV's at 5 feet away.
If by grayscale discontinuities you mean color banding, then the fault might be with the TV itself and not the blu-ray. This mostly comes from cheap TV's using 6-bit panels and not even doing proper dithering. A TV capable of "Deep color" (xvYCC color space) should present no problems with smooth color transitions (like skies).
All the details you'd already see at a 4K digital movie theater anyway - especially sitting in the front row. You do know that people are already watching movies at 4K, right?
Video compression does far better than 2:1. At least 10:1 for most Blu-Rays. HEVC could improve that to 20:1 for the same quality. At HEVC, you could probably get a 4K movie down to around 100GB. Half my monthly cable Internet cap, but I could download it in under 8 hours.
My 1080p TV does not scale up. And it reveals how dumb our local fox affiliate is. For SD shows, they use SD source video to encode their HD broadcast and leave in the closed captioning, upscaled to 720p. So the top of my screen has a row of flickering pixels (line 21) where the closed captioning would be hidden on an SD TV.
I'm pretty sure NONE of the TV's above 60Hz actually do that. It's a nice idea, but I don't think it's really being done. They use the extra frames for motion interpolation when a Trademarked named feature like "Smooth Motion" is turned on. And they usually do a fairly lousy job of it on fast-moving action scenes.