If you can't find any ___ jobs in Seattle then you are basically unhireable, and it has nothing to do with H1Bs. Seattle is the hottest market in the US, if you can't get a job there you are eminently unqualified.
I agree with you completely. If you don't want it, don't buy it.
Though "4K" is not really the real advantage of the new TVs coming out, the main benefit will be HDR. I guarantee you could be blind as a bat and if the TV can push 1000 nits you will notice it.
Sorry, but that's idiotic. Seriously, you are using a "Sceptre" TV to disprove my point? Obviously completely shitty TVs technically exist but the people buying them are suckers. Read my fucking comment, "high end 4K monitor ". What you listed is so much worse than a medium range 1080p TV that it's a joke.
And while I agree with the general principal of "buy the best monitor" and plug in good sources, you obviously didn't, since I bought the best Panasonic from 2 years ago and it had (really crappy) smart features.
In general good luck keeping *any* TV for 10 years. I really hope yours lasts that long, but there is a reason the warranties are 1 year.
On the other hand, it would be a giant messy puke-fest for Jason Bourne (or any Paul Greengrass film, it seems), where apparently people were fleeing the 3D screenings asking for their money back even without a full-on VR experience...
"Get used to it" is the WORST advertising tagline one could imagine for VR (or any product).
It will always be a niche until the casual masses can use it without "getting used to it". If you actually want the field to advance more than the 90's VR crap and Nintendo Power Glove, moving beyond hard core gaming is the only path.
Funny that you say "teleporting" - since that's one of the current trends in VR game design intended to reduce nausea.
It turns our teleporting *is* what actually grounds you - in reality. Your brain either needs to be completely fooled into the VR world (racing or flight sim games can do this reasonably well since the cockpit is the "grounding") or have a mechanism to remind you that you are not in fact in the VR world (teleporting, etc).
If you watch a non-interactive VR experience (or one that requires you to move laterally or axially without physically turning your body) that is too "realistic", your brain tends to get VERY confused, resulting in headaches or extreme nausea.
That's why true 3D is going to be *really* difficult for non-interactive media. The only way to do is perfectly (well, in my understanding, at least) is to record 360 degrees from a relatively static camera and let you look at whatever you feel like - which would be a nightmare from a storyteller's perspective (not to mention director, cinematographer, set designer, the entire "off camera" crew, etc).
I don't think so. While color indeed does make the image more realistic, 3D video doesn't.
Correction: 3D video projected from a small source with an extremely limited FoV doesn't make the image more realistic. The problem is all about the tiny field of view and imperfect crosstalk, etc.
3D video using a high end VR system makes the image MUCH more realistic. Yes, they glasses (headset, really) is even more intrusive, but the effect can be (for some people almost literally) shit your pants realistic...
I have no smart TV's in my house as I didn't see the need
That by definition means you don't have a 4K TV, or any non projection TV larger than probably about 40-50" less than 3 years old. It's pretty much impossible not to buy a "Smart TV" these days unless it's basically a computer monitor.
Not saying you can't get a better experience with a big monitor + STB/etc, just that you can't actually buy a high end 4K monitor that isn't also Smart TV (whether you use the software or not).
You clearly are one of those silly people who think that PC browser support matters in the overall digital video industry. Those same people thought Theora and VP8 would be killer codecs, not to mention RealMedia and Divx...
In the end all that matters is what the CONTENT PROVIDERS use. The SoC and hardware manufacturers will build in whatever it takes to play back what Netflix, Apple, Amazon, VUDU, etc stream. And eventually what Comcast, Verizon, Dish, DirectTV/AT&T, Time Warner, etc broadcast (all of those listed are already offering or experimenting with HEVC-based 4K streaming). Google has a near monopoly on funny cat videos, but they are a tiny TINY player when it comes to premium content delivery. The rest of the members of AOMedia are just hedging their bets.
$124M? Really? $124M is a small aqui-hire in the valley these days. Google has spend more than that on dozens of bad ideas that never saw the light of day.
Though as I said, I'm not anti-AV1, I would love to see a superior royaltyf-ree codec. But the reality is AV1 will "exist" when it's in all shipping SoCs. I'm not sure why I am even arguing with a stupid AC, I doubt you even know what SoC means. On the other hand I have already shipped software that streams 4K w/ HEVC in about 20 million devices, and growing.
You really have no idea how insignificant "web video" is to the overall video streaming market, do you? Not the least of which is that most current PCs won't get 4K regardless of the codec used, since they need to support the hardware DRM required by the studios. You won't start seeing significant 4K streaming to PCs for anything other than crappy Youtube videos until the end of this year (and probably later on Macs).
I haven't had a Big Mac in over in a decade (really, I always disliked it, even when I was a kid and actually went to McDonalds I'd get the Quarter Pounder), and that's not going to change because I now live less then 3 miles from not one, but *two* In-N-Outs.
And as far as the market - good luck, Big Mac - the Double Double is already a dollar less!
Yeah, someone is really unclear on the whole concept of semi-joking-metrics (to quote The Economist, "Burgernomics was never intended as a precise gauge of currency misalignment, merely a tool to make exchange-rate theory more digestible." - I'm sure pun intended).
If you look at the "Big Mac index" almost every country is now considered "vastly undervalued". So while it may be fun, it's basically a teaching tool and not reality.
Though I *do* think the index shows McDonalds may not necessarily be adjusting pricing... it depends on how they source their raw materials, cost of labor, and just plain what the market will bear.
(If you want to see a *really* good example of how there is no reason to think US companies have to match their pricing to currency valuation - go look at drug prices by country...)
Being an "island" has nothing to do with prices in UK.
According to the index, a Big Mac in Alaska averages $4.87. In CA it's $5.11, in NY it's $5.23, and in HI it's $5.31.
Hawaii is a pricing exception to almost every rule, though, since it's an island thousands of miles away from *everything* and is too small and too tropical to grow many crops like corn or wheat or raise significant cattle. UK is BIG, has plenty of farming, a significant cattle industry, and a tunnel to Europe that will get you to France in a bit over a half hour. Big Mac prices in UK have to do with many factors (same with why they are expensive in CA and NY) but being an "island nation" is not one of them.
Can't believe this is my takeaway from a Brexit discussion, but - wait, a Big Mac is now almost $5 in the US!?!
I guess the fact that I haven't been to McDonalds for lunch in a decade means that shouldn't surprise me, but it does. Especially since an In-N-Out Double Double is only $4, and it doesn't make me regret the next 4 hours after I eat it...
You are probably the same AC I just answered... but what you are saying just isn't true or relevant, sorry. As I said in my other post, I really hope AV1 succeeds, but it's not even done yet, and so it's going to be a while before it gets into the chips that power most TVs, BD players, game consoles, etc.
People who actually work in the industry (as opposed to open source fanboys and academics) have already adopted HEVC as the 4K standard 2-3 years ago. Yes, they may have to pay some fees, but that's the same as always happens. They will continue to sell devices, stream movies, etc and someone will get a small cut of their profits. Nothing new.
And given the ridiculous licensing situation for HEVC patents, that feature alone is enough to make VP9 the better option.
No, it's really not. All patents mean is you have to pay to use the technology.
If a streaming company can provide the same quality at 30% lower bitrate, that translates directly to storage and network costs, which can add up to millions (or in an extreme cast like Netflix, hundreds of millions). Google/Youtube is sacrificing quality in using VP9. If I'm a customer paying a premium to stream a 4K movie, I don't give a crap if the codec is open, I want the best quality I can get.
And I really hope that AV1 does well. But I work in this industry, and for the embedded video (ie living room devices vs PC browsers) market, it's often the first to market that wins. AV1 isn't even finished yet, and once it is it's still going to take a while to get it into SoCs that will go into your TVs and STBs. Will be 2018 before it's starting to get adopted, at which point HEVC is already going to be in like a billion consumer devices...
No worries, I'm not confused... and don't need to walk through any stores, I have (almost) one of every 2016 (and upcoming 2017) 4K TV models in my office. And in fact I am going to LG's offices tomorrow to do some HDR quality analysis on their upcoming OLEDs;)
I suppose it was a bit of an exaggeration to say "majority" of 4K TVs over $500, though AFAIK all of LG's 2016 support HDR, down to the $499 42UH6100. But other manufacturers haven't been quite as aggressive...
That said, there is a big difference between HDR10 and Dolby Vision. There really aren't many quality standards for HDR10 as long as it can handle 2160p HEVC Main10 with rec.2020 color and SMPTE 2084/2086 EOTF, etc, whereas Dolby Vision TVs have to be certified by Dolby to make sure the TV handles the same content in (pretty much) the same way. HDR10 is much more of a crap shoot, it's amazing how different the same video can look on different HDR10 TVs.
All that said, I'm looking to buy a new 4K TV this year, and having most of what the big players have to offer, the mid-range LG OLED is a top contender (the high end Samsung and Sony are also solid). It's only downside (besides price) is it can't push quite the same nits as the quantum dot LEDs, but the color, uniformity, and of course contrast & black level are unreal...
Dead in the water!? Umm, Ultra HD Blu Rays have been out for almost a year, and streaming services like Netflix, Amazon, VUDU, Fandango, etc (even DirectTV and Dish have a few) have been using H.265 for UHD streaming for longer than that. All 4K TVs, STBs, and the recent 4K game console updates support H.265 decoding.
It may be a licensing mess, but it's one that *will* get resolved, just as it did with H.264...
Wait, VP9 new and bandwidth efficient? VP9 is a horrible codec in terms of quality for 4K. It may be better than H264, but no one seriously uses H264 for 4K video. The only thing it has going for it over HEVC is that it isn't patent-encumbered.
And 2732x1536 would be for 16:9 content (mostly TV shows, with a few movies).
There are very few TV shows in 4K (mostly Netflix) right now - so for 2.35:1 ratio movies, it would be more like 2732x1162 - really not worth the extra bandwidth required to stream 4K...
Well, you missed those key words from my previous post, so I had to try something more drastic if I was going to repeat them, and unfortunately the blink tag is no longer supported...
Plus, it seemed like you expected me to be impressed with the specific caps you used in your comment, so I figured you'd find them impressive!;)
Slashdot Mirror
If you can't find any ___ jobs in Seattle then you are basically unhireable, and it has nothing to do with H1Bs. Seattle is the hottest market in the US, if you can't get a job there you are eminently unqualified.
And I have heard this strategy totally failed in terms of sales... let's see what they do in 2017...
I agree with you completely. If you don't want it, don't buy it.
Though "4K" is not really the real advantage of the new TVs coming out, the main benefit will be HDR. I guarantee you could be blind as a bat and if the TV can push 1000 nits you will notice it.
Sorry, but that's idiotic. Seriously, you are using a "Sceptre" TV to disprove my point? Obviously completely shitty TVs technically exist but the people buying them are suckers. Read my fucking comment, "high end 4K monitor ". What you listed is so much worse than a medium range 1080p TV that it's a joke.
Is it 4K? If not, irrelevant to my post.
And while I agree with the general principal of "buy the best monitor" and plug in good sources, you obviously didn't, since I bought the best Panasonic from 2 years ago and it had (really crappy) smart features.
In general good luck keeping *any* TV for 10 years. I really hope yours lasts that long, but there is a reason the warranties are 1 year.
On the other hand, it would be a giant messy puke-fest for Jason Bourne (or any Paul Greengrass film, it seems), where apparently people were fleeing the 3D screenings asking for their money back even without a full-on VR experience...
"Get used to it" is the WORST advertising tagline one could imagine for VR (or any product).
It will always be a niche until the casual masses can use it without "getting used to it". If you actually want the field to advance more than the 90's VR crap and Nintendo Power Glove, moving beyond hard core gaming is the only path.
Funny that you say "teleporting" - since that's one of the current trends in VR game design intended to reduce nausea.
It turns our teleporting *is* what actually grounds you - in reality. Your brain either needs to be completely fooled into the VR world (racing or flight sim games can do this reasonably well since the cockpit is the "grounding") or have a mechanism to remind you that you are not in fact in the VR world (teleporting, etc).
If you watch a non-interactive VR experience (or one that requires you to move laterally or axially without physically turning your body) that is too "realistic", your brain tends to get VERY confused, resulting in headaches or extreme nausea.
That's why true 3D is going to be *really* difficult for non-interactive media. The only way to do is perfectly (well, in my understanding, at least) is to record 360 degrees from a relatively static camera and let you look at whatever you feel like - which would be a nightmare from a storyteller's perspective (not to mention director, cinematographer, set designer, the entire "off camera" crew, etc).
I don't think so. While color indeed does make the image more realistic, 3D video doesn't.
Correction: 3D video projected from a small source with an extremely limited FoV doesn't make the image more realistic. The problem is all about the tiny field of view and imperfect crosstalk, etc.
3D video using a high end VR system makes the image MUCH more realistic. Yes, they glasses (headset, really) is even more intrusive, but the effect can be (for some people almost literally) shit your pants realistic...
I still have a T-shirt from the 2001 CGDC from this company: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
It was a horrible idea, and equally horrible implementation. And I will cherish the T-shirt forever...
I have no smart TV's in my house as I didn't see the need
That by definition means you don't have a 4K TV, or any non projection TV larger than probably about 40-50" less than 3 years old. It's pretty much impossible not to buy a "Smart TV" these days unless it's basically a computer monitor.
Not saying you can't get a better experience with a big monitor + STB/etc, just that you can't actually buy a high end 4K monitor that isn't also Smart TV (whether you use the software or not).
You clearly are one of those silly people who think that PC browser support matters in the overall digital video industry. Those same people thought Theora and VP8 would be killer codecs, not to mention RealMedia and Divx...
In the end all that matters is what the CONTENT PROVIDERS use. The SoC and hardware manufacturers will build in whatever it takes to play back what Netflix, Apple, Amazon, VUDU, etc stream. And eventually what Comcast, Verizon, Dish, DirectTV/AT&T, Time Warner, etc broadcast (all of those listed are already offering or experimenting with HEVC-based 4K streaming). Google has a near monopoly on funny cat videos, but they are a tiny TINY player when it comes to premium content delivery. The rest of the members of AOMedia are just hedging their bets.
$124M? Really? $124M is a small aqui-hire in the valley these days. Google has spend more than that on dozens of bad ideas that never saw the light of day.
Though as I said, I'm not anti-AV1, I would love to see a superior royaltyf-ree codec. But the reality is AV1 will "exist" when it's in all shipping SoCs. I'm not sure why I am even arguing with a stupid AC, I doubt you even know what SoC means. On the other hand I have already shipped software that streams 4K w/ HEVC in about 20 million devices, and growing.
You really have no idea how insignificant "web video" is to the overall video streaming market, do you? Not the least of which is that most current PCs won't get 4K regardless of the codec used, since they need to support the hardware DRM required by the studios. You won't start seeing significant 4K streaming to PCs for anything other than crappy Youtube videos until the end of this year (and probably later on Macs).
I haven't had a Big Mac in over in a decade (really, I always disliked it, even when I was a kid and actually went to McDonalds I'd get the Quarter Pounder), and that's not going to change because I now live less then 3 miles from not one, but *two* In-N-Outs.
And as far as the market - good luck, Big Mac - the Double Double is already a dollar less!
Yeah, someone is really unclear on the whole concept of semi-joking-metrics (to quote The Economist, "Burgernomics was never intended as a precise gauge of currency misalignment, merely a tool to make exchange-rate theory more digestible." - I'm sure pun intended).
If you look at the "Big Mac index" almost every country is now considered "vastly undervalued". So while it may be fun, it's basically a teaching tool and not reality.
Though I *do* think the index shows McDonalds may not necessarily be adjusting pricing... it depends on how they source their raw materials, cost of labor, and just plain what the market will bear.
(If you want to see a *really* good example of how there is no reason to think US companies have to match their pricing to currency valuation - go look at drug prices by country...)
Being an "island" has nothing to do with prices in UK.
According to the index, a Big Mac in Alaska averages $4.87. In CA it's $5.11, in NY it's $5.23, and in HI it's $5.31.
Hawaii is a pricing exception to almost every rule, though, since it's an island thousands of miles away from *everything* and is too small and too tropical to grow many crops like corn or wheat or raise significant cattle. UK is BIG, has plenty of farming, a significant cattle industry, and a tunnel to Europe that will get you to France in a bit over a half hour. Big Mac prices in UK have to do with many factors (same with why they are expensive in CA and NY) but being an "island nation" is not one of them.
Can't believe this is my takeaway from a Brexit discussion, but - wait, a Big Mac is now almost $5 in the US!?!
I guess the fact that I haven't been to McDonalds for lunch in a decade means that shouldn't surprise me, but it does. Especially since an In-N-Out Double Double is only $4, and it doesn't make me regret the next 4 hours after I eat it...
You are probably the same AC I just answered... but what you are saying just isn't true or relevant, sorry. As I said in my other post, I really hope AV1 succeeds, but it's not even done yet, and so it's going to be a while before it gets into the chips that power most TVs, BD players, game consoles, etc.
People who actually work in the industry (as opposed to open source fanboys and academics) have already adopted HEVC as the 4K standard 2-3 years ago. Yes, they may have to pay some fees, but that's the same as always happens. They will continue to sell devices, stream movies, etc and someone will get a small cut of their profits. Nothing new.
And given the ridiculous licensing situation for HEVC patents, that feature alone is enough to make VP9 the better option.
No, it's really not. All patents mean is you have to pay to use the technology.
If a streaming company can provide the same quality at 30% lower bitrate, that translates directly to storage and network costs, which can add up to millions (or in an extreme cast like Netflix, hundreds of millions). Google/Youtube is sacrificing quality in using VP9. If I'm a customer paying a premium to stream a 4K movie, I don't give a crap if the codec is open, I want the best quality I can get.
And I really hope that AV1 does well. But I work in this industry, and for the embedded video (ie living room devices vs PC browsers) market, it's often the first to market that wins. AV1 isn't even finished yet, and once it is it's still going to take a while to get it into SoCs that will go into your TVs and STBs. Will be 2018 before it's starting to get adopted, at which point HEVC is already going to be in like a billion consumer devices...
No worries, I'm not confused... and don't need to walk through any stores, I have (almost) one of every 2016 (and upcoming 2017) 4K TV models in my office. And in fact I am going to LG's offices tomorrow to do some HDR quality analysis on their upcoming OLEDs ;)
I suppose it was a bit of an exaggeration to say "majority" of 4K TVs over $500, though AFAIK all of LG's 2016 support HDR, down to the $499 42UH6100. But other manufacturers haven't been quite as aggressive...
That said, there is a big difference between HDR10 and Dolby Vision. There really aren't many quality standards for HDR10 as long as it can handle 2160p HEVC Main10 with rec.2020 color and SMPTE 2084/2086 EOTF, etc, whereas Dolby Vision TVs have to be certified by Dolby to make sure the TV handles the same content in (pretty much) the same way. HDR10 is much more of a crap shoot, it's amazing how different the same video can look on different HDR10 TVs.
All that said, I'm looking to buy a new 4K TV this year, and having most of what the big players have to offer, the mid-range LG OLED is a top contender (the high end Samsung and Sony are also solid). It's only downside (besides price) is it can't push quite the same nits as the quantum dot LEDs, but the color, uniformity, and of course contrast & black level are unreal...
Dead in the water!? Umm, Ultra HD Blu Rays have been out for almost a year, and streaming services like Netflix, Amazon, VUDU, Fandango, etc (even DirectTV and Dish have a few) have been using H.265 for UHD streaming for longer than that. All 4K TVs, STBs, and the recent 4K game console updates support H.265 decoding.
It may be a licensing mess, but it's one that *will* get resolved, just as it did with H.264...
Wait, VP9 new and bandwidth efficient? VP9 is a horrible codec in terms of quality for 4K. It may be better than H264, but no one seriously uses H264 for 4K video. The only thing it has going for it over HEVC is that it isn't patent-encumbered.
And 2732x1536 would be for 16:9 content (mostly TV shows, with a few movies).
There are very few TV shows in 4K (mostly Netflix) right now - so for 2.35:1 ratio movies, it would be more like 2732x1162 - really not worth the extra bandwidth required to stream 4K...
Only select 4K sets support HDR
If by "select" you mean the majority of 4K 2016 TVs over $500 and the majority of 4K TVs period to be sold in 2017, sure...
And I guess it may depend on your definition of "reasonable", but 2017 will see some pretty affordable OLEDs from LG.
Well, you missed those key words from my previous post, so I had to try something more drastic if I was going to repeat them, and unfortunately the blink tag is no longer supported...
Plus, it seemed like you expected me to be impressed with the specific caps you used in your comment, so I figured you'd find them impressive! ;)