This is a speculation oriented thread. Please remember this when posting.

When can we expect to see 4K made available to consumers . . . . rich consumers . . . the consumers who paid $20,000 for a 50" Pioneer PDP so many years ago?

Here is the new Panasonic 150" 4K PDP:

Panasonic's gigantic 150-inch plasma is official!

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x66/LeeAStewart/panny-keynote-img_0717.jpg

Although we got to see some pics of this beast under wraps, there's nothing like seeing it in person. The gigantic HDTV was unveiled at Panasonic's keynote today, with at least one surprise, this sucker is 4k! That's right, it is 4x 1080p, which we're sure looks awesome, but oh my, where the content will come from? Regardless, we have no doubt this thing will look sensational upconverting your 1080p HD movies.

Here is a whole bunch of photos on this display:

http://gizmodo.com/341633/holy-crap-...-plasma-photos

Sony just hired Mr. Cookson from WB. He was WB's CTO. Now he is the CTO for Sony. Here once again is the transfer equipment and such from the Blade Runner 4K article.

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/features/2624/blade-runner-how-great-hd-is-made.html

And here is Sony's 4K Projector series:

http://bssc.sel.sony.com/BroadcastandBusiness/docs/brochures/sxrd_large-venue_high-resolution_brochure.pdf

D-Cinema is going to be 4K (they call it SHD - Super HD - 4000x2000x24fps @ 12bit color depth.)

All that is really missing is a way to deal with the large files (10-12 TB's). JPEG2000 works with these files as far as compression.

Questions I have . . .

1. How long to develope a delivery system that is cheap and has the necessary storage?

2. Is 4K really for the Consumer?

3. Or will 4K be regulated to D-Cinema and maybe in 20 to 30 years it will come to the consumer?

i bet ces will have some uber rich consumer 4k projectors.wonder if the red showed.

5 years.

4k content may be a long time but 4k displays will be with us sooner than you think.

Toshiba was bragging about how wonderful "their" Cell processor is at such upscaling tasks. [The Cell is also used in the PS3.]

I guess that 200GB Blu Ray will have to be made after all......

I think the following:

1) Will be dependent upon what is deemed appropriate from a compression standpoint. While digital cinema is 4:4:4 even current day BD/HD-DVD is 4:2:0. If the studios still desire a 4:2:0 color depth then it is feasible to have an optical delivery system within the next several years assuming compression algorithms and storage technologies continue to advance.

2) Personally, no I don't think 4K is really for the consumer. Given that many would be hard pressed to notice a negligible difference between 720p and 1080p and most viewing distances and standard TV sizes, the jump to 4K carries an even further diminished margin. There have been recent tests and demonstrations pitting native 2K vs. 4K material in commercial cinemas (>35ft screens) and more often then not the attendees aren't able to notice increased detail beyond the third row of seats. Given that ANY form of HDTV adoption is still <20% (I believe this is right) I believe it will be a good while before 4K HDTV becomes a mainstay. Either consumers or going to have to DRASTICALLY increase their screen sizes or sit a LOT closer to their screens to notice the increased resolution and pixel fill and unfortunately the former bears increased cost. Unfortunately this doesn't mean that manufacturers won't build it and overhype it.

3) I don't even think 4K will take off in the digital cinema industry. There is only one backer, Sony, that within its own ranks has given up on the RP SXRD solution in the consumer market already. There are too many limitations with the 4K technology, cost being the most critical right now (not to mention no capability of digital 3D playback, poor brightness, contrast, and color uniformity when compared to TI DLP based 2K machines, etc...).

There will always be someone willing to pay for the top-end, but I don't think it has a chance in the consumer market UNLESS panel manufacturers figure a way to cut costs on production of 4K, large size units. If in 10-20 years 100+" panels are affordable (<$5000) then 4K may start to creep in. But like I said, manufacturers will continue to pursue the high resolution technologies and sell the gimmick. I just don't think it makes any sense.

Just my 2 cents.

For reference, a previous BD specific speculation thread where "4K" is discussed: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=953743 I'm sure there will be much duplicated here.

Why bother?

I mean sure it's cool, but we just are not ready for it.

We don't have any TV station even at 1080p, Most people like standard DVD, Hardly anyone has a HDTV if you look at the mass market.

If anyone expects these new tv's to catch on would be out of their mind. It may be cool , and it would only catch on is if the TV can upscale it to the super high res and make it look good!

I guess that 200GB Blu Ray will have to be made after all......

Capacity isn't the challenge, it's bandwidth...

At around 8x for a BD drive, you're approaching 300 MBits/sec raw bandwidth...

Could be enough.

4k content may be a long time but 4k displays will be with us sooner than you think.Probably true. With sources defining points in space and fixed pixel devices, it makes a lot of sense to have 4 pixels in the display for every one in the source. Just like upscaling 480p to 960p. In this case, 2k wide to 4k wide gives 2x the pixels in each direction, or 4 pixels for each one in the source.

--Darin

Long way. As long as we have people claiming they are satisfied with sd and can't really tell the difference with high def.

IMO - we are talking about 82" and up.

Sony is showing an 82" 4K display this year at CES. If I come across the link again I will post it. Just a proof of concept display.

JPEG2000 operates at I believe 250 mbps.

Here is Samsung's offerring:

http://gizmodo.com/341312/samsung-says-phooey-to-1080p-goes-4x-better-with-quad-hd

Apart from projectors, has there been a trend in the popularity of rising tv sizes? Was 50" today considered monstrous in the 90's?

My opinion.. 150" is too small for the millionaires who have mini theatres in their houses.

D-Cinema (the standard used for movie theaters) and it's use of JPEG2000 and PCM audio is not exactly a consumer format. With it's highly-encrypted hard drive based delivery system, space and bandwidth is not really a factor... the compression is almost intentionally inefficient.

Nobody will ever need more than 4K :)

My estimation 2 to 6 years for players & TVs (it doesn't need to be 82" TVs - 37" and up would be okay)
With something like HVD. or a special version of a Blu-ray / HD-DVD player with added bandwidth.

My question about the 4k Plasma above - does it get screen burn / image retention or do plasmas never get that any more? Will quite a few of the 2000 lines be black bars? :)

D-Cinema (the standard used for movie theaters) and it's use of JPEG2000 and PCM audio is not exactly a consumer format. With it's highly-encrypted hard drive based delivery system, space and bandwidth is not really a factor... the compression is almost intentionally inefficient.

This is somewhat true. The JPEG2000 codec is a "light" compression codec when comparable to VC1 or MPEG-4 AVC, but retains a pretty flawless picture.

Bandwidth is still certainly a concern however since the digital cinema servers have to be capable playing back this content in real-time. This is why 4K 3D isn't yet achievable.

Yup, that will be the day when we buy ourself a 4K TV and our Blu-Ray discs suddenly look like DVD on a 1080p screen = Crap ;)

Bring on the new 4K disc format Über-Ray :D

Yup, that will be the day when we buy ourself a 4K TV and our Blu-Ray discs suddenly look like DVD on a 1080p screen = Crap ;)

Bring on the new 4K disc format Über-Ray :D

Well if we took a giant leap backwards we could do it with no problem . . .

Laserdisc!

Real Estate galore:D

Fortunately I don't think my eyes are good enough to need 4k movies at home. :)

4k consumer format is probably ~10 years away. Though in a few years we might see niche high-def players that upconvert from 1080p to 2160p (a.k.a. 4K).

Seeing what Digital 2K projectors can do at a local theater on 40 foot screens, I have no doubt 1080p will be enough for consumers.

But it seems that people are obsessed with technical specs lately. And as long people are willing to pay premiums for top specs, I'm sure the companies will happily fulfill the demand. I'm sure we will see 1440p in a few years, and maybe 1920p sets, that will all upconvert your old low res 1080p content to SuperDef!

There will always be someone willing to pay for the top-end, but I don't think it has a chance in the consumer market UNLESS panel manufacturers figure a way to cut costs on production of 4K, large size units. If in 10-20 years 100+" panels are affordable (<$5000) then 4K may start to creep in. But like I said, manufacturers will continue to pursue the high resolution technologies and sell the gimmick. I just don't think it makes any sense.

I agree with everything in your post except the timeframe. 1080p initially cost about 50%-70% more than a comparable 720p set. Now it is sold at a slight premium and it getting hard to find a 52"+ 720p set. Since 40" is about the minimum where 1080p does any good I expect within a year or two 40"+ will be only 1080p. LCD production costs fall at an exponential rate as yields rise and master glass gets larger like any other silicon based product.

If we see the first consumer 100" 4K set for $30K in 2009 then a better model will likely be availble for $12K by early 2010. By late 2010 we will see substantial competition and prices droppng to $8K. Smaller panels (86"+ will likely be upgraded to 4K and will be a fraction of the 100" panels ($3-$4K). Within time everything above 60" will likely be 4K because it simply is cheaper to mass produce one pixel density than have seperate lines producing 1080p & 4K.

Basically all the same arguments about costs, viewing distance vs screen size and over extended timescales we heard about 1080p are being repeated for 4K.

I can think of 4 major markets for 4K:
HTPC. I would love to hook a HTPC to a 4K display. Casual Computing.

Games. What is going to be the "next big thing" past 1080P HD for consoles. Computer games are already moving well past 1080p. Consoles will likely within 2 generations (5-7 years) follow them.

Photos. I have a 10.2MP digital camera. I current downsample the images to 16:9 1080p and put them on as a slideshow on my HDTV. I would love to be able to display images at 4K instead.

Movies. While 4K isn't needed 4:4:4 colorspace and 12 bit color would be nice. Consumers will never go for a new format based on color improvement only, even though that will provide a bigger jump in PQ than resolution. Another format in 10+ years (same lifespan as DVD) running 4K 4:4:4 deep color with 100% lossless audio might be enough to get enthusiast to bite. The same problem studios have with DVD right now will repeat itself with HDM in a decade (or less).

Crap like this makes my wallet get dry heaves.

I hope never.

Display resolution is going to be driven more by broadcast technology than any optical format, and ATSC isn't going anywhere within the next 15 years minimum. Has anyone considered how many people watch broadcast television as opposed to purchase SD DVD's? Color NTSC will have lived 56 years when it goes dead in 2009. Think about that for a second before estimating that we'll have 4k consumer displays any time soon. Anyone have the numbers for HDTV penetration in US households?

I also find it funny that some of the the same guys in this thread who have been saying that HDVOD is going to kill HDM are the same guys talking about consumer 4k displays. I think there's a logic disconnect there that I cannot find a bridge for. The only way HDM dies at the hands of HDVOD is if 1080p stays the format of choice.

4k will be available for high end within 2-3 years. Basically Bluray and HD-DVD were extinct before they started.

Why they didn't "think forward" and design a 4k solution, i'll never know.

So will Blu-ray and HD DVD look like SD in this mammoth Panny Plasma ?

Yes. 480p has 345,600 pixels per frame. 1080p has 2,073,600 pixels per frame. 4k has 11,303,424 per frame. I'd love to see the hardware that would upscale to that resolution from 1080p. :D

4k will be available for high end within 2-3 years. Basically Bluray and HD-DVD were extinct before they started.

Why they didn't "think forward" and design a 4k solution, i'll never know.

You point out the exact problem with the whole "4k will be the high end in 2-3 years" when you talk about the lack of a format for it. Without content, the display is nothing.

Display resolution is going to be driven more by broadcast technology than any optical format, and ATSC isn't going anywhere within the next 15 years minimum. Has anyone considered how many people watch broadcast television as opposed to purchase SD DVD's? Color NTSC will have lived 56 years when it goes dead in 2009. Think about that for a second before estimating that we'll have 4k consumer displays any time soon.

I guess that is why I bought a 480p EDTV because right now of the 200+ channels I get only 13 are HDTV. Oh wait I bought a 1080p set. Werid how they were selling 1080p sets before HDM even came along. Even weirder how there is nothing broadcast in 1080p.

Broadcast standards have absolutely nothing to do with displays. The display market is driven by an absolute fear of becoming a commodity. The Samsungs, Sharps, and Sonys of the worlds are chased by the Vizios, Specter, and Westinghouses. Everything the 1st tier does gets coppied by the low cost companies and sold cheaper. Unless Sony wants to start selling $499 xBR set they need to stay ahead.

let's look at what has happened to displays in the last couple years:
1080p - not in broadcast standard
120Hz panels - not in broadcast standard
motion enhanced interpolation - not in broadcast standard
10 bit/12 bit panels - not in broadcast standard
24p inputs - not in broadcast standard
5:5 pulldown - not in broadcast standard
LED backlighting (exceeds ASTC colorspace) - not in broadcast standard

All this innovation or junk (depends on who you ask) is a desperate race to keep margins up as long as possible. Sony/Sharp/Toshiba/Samsung's shareholders demand constatly increasing profit margins. Careers, bonuses, stock options are all based on this.

Right now there is a variety of new "junk"/inovations keeping margins up:
10bit/12bit panels, advanced processing engines, 24p inputs, 5:5 pulldown, LED baclighting, improved contrast, improved pixel response, motion interpolation. But anything the top tier makes the bottom tier copies and sells it for 20% less.

Imagine it is 2012-2014 and Visio has a 62" 8th generation 1080P 120Hz LCD panel with 12bit color, LED backlighting exceeding 140% of ASTC standard, 1,000,000:1 contrast (dynamic of course :D) and 12bit processing engine. It comes with 5 HDMI 1.8a inputs supportiong 24p/30p/60p/120p inputs (120 for higher frame rates for next gen consoles), deep color, CEC2.0, and a bunch of other buzz words. For 99.9% of consumers it looks as good as a Sony yet Vizio wants $799 and Sony wants $1499 (which is already less than they want to sell it at) who do you think gets the marketshare. Do you honestly think Sony is going to cut their gross selling price 40% and explain that to the board. "Sorry guys it has been a good run but expect our 12%-15% margins to be more like 2%-4% from now till the end of time".

What is Sony going to do for the "next big thing" to get those margins back up? 4K. It may be totally useless but a good demo material, marketing, buzz words and boom 1080p is todays 720p set. Just like 1080P is called "Full HD" implying consumers should not waste their money on that inferior 720p garbage the same thing will be done to highlight the QuadHD over 1080p with it's mere 2 million pixels. All you need to do is look at the last 10 years from the emergence of EDTV through today to see that 4K is all but inevitable. Due to Moore's law a 65" 4K set will cost substantially less than a 46" 1080p set does today. Much like that 46" 1080p set costs substantially less than a 36" EDTV cost 5 years ago.

I guess that is why I bought a 480p EDTV because right now of the 200+ channels I get only 13 are HDTV. Oh wait I bought a 1080p set. Werid how they were selling 1080p sets before HDM even came along. Even weirder how there is nothing broadcast in 1080p.

Broadcast standards have absolutely nothing to do with displays. The display market is driven by an absolute fear of becoming a commodity. The Samsungs, Sharps, and Sonys of the worlds are chased by the Vizios, Specter, and Westinghouses. Everything the 1st tier does gets coppied by the low cost companies and sold cheaper. Unless Sony wants to start selling $499 xBR set they need to stay ahead.

let's look at what has happened to displays in the last couple years:
1080p - not in broadcast standard
120Hz panels - not in broadcast standard
motion enhanced interpolation - not in broadcast standard
10 bit/12 bit panels - not in broadcast standard
24p inputs - not in broadcast standard
5:5 pulldown - not in broadcast standard
LED backlighting (exceeds ASTC colorspace) - not in broadcast standard

All this innovation or junk (depends on who you ask) is a desperate race to keep margins up as long as possible. Sony/Sharp/Toshiba/Samsung's shareholders demand constatly increasing profit margins. Careers, bonuses, stock options are all based on this.

Right now there is a variety of new "junk"/inovations keeping margins up:
10bit/12bit panels, advanced processing engines, 24p inputs, 5:5 pulldown, LED baclighting, improved contrast, improved pixel response, motion interpolation. But anything the top tier makes the bottom tier copies and sells it for 20% less.

Imagine it is 2012-2014 and Visio has a 62" 8th generation 1080P 120Hz LCD panel with 12bit color, LED backlighting exceeding 140% of ASTC standard, 1,000,000:1 contrast (dynamic of course :D) and 12bit processing engine. It comes with 5 HDMI 1.8a inputs supportiong 24p/30p/60p/120p inputs (120 for higher frame rates for next gen consoles), deep color, CEC2.0, and a bunch of other buzz words. For 99.9% of consumers it looks as good as a Sony yet Vizio wants $799 and Sony wants $1499 (which is already less than they want to sell it at) who do you think gets the marketshare. Do you honestly think Sony is going to cut their gross selling price 40% and explain that to the board. "Sorry guys it has been a good run but expect our 12%-15% margins to be more like 2%-4% from now till the end of time".

What is Sony going to do for the "next big thing" to get those margins back up? 4K. It may be totally useless but a good demo material, marketing, buzz words and boom 1080p is todays 720p set. Just like 1080P is called "Full HD" implying consumers should not waste their money on that inferior 720p garbage the same thing will be done to highlight the QuadHD over 1080p with it's mere 2 million pixels. All you need to do is look at the last 10 years from the emergence of EDTV through today to see that 4K is all but inevitable. Due to Moore's law a 65" 4K set will cost substantially less than a 46" 1080p set does today. Much like that 46" 1080p set costs substantially less than a 36" EDTV cost 5 years ago.


+1

Will it play on an iPhone?

4k will be the standard for movie theaters. Real ones.

1080p will be the resolution on HDM for a long time. After that will come deep color, and then maybe anamorphically enhanced 2.35:1 discs for the few setups that could take advantage of it.

I guess that is why I bought a 480p EDTV because right now of the 200+ channels I get only 13 are HDTV. Oh wait I bought a 1080p set. Werid how they were selling 1080p sets before HDM even came along. Even weirder how there is nothing broadcast in 1080p.

The ATSC standard has a specification for 1080p30 and 1080p24 in addition to 1080i60. However, it has a monitor interface specification for 1080i because it was required for legacy HD CRT displays, which are effectively dead in the marketplace. Still, you have a point, though I believe it to be very minor. Certainly, LG has gone ahead with producing 1080p broadcasting equipment (displayed at last year's CES) now that CRT is dead, and it is only a matter of time before the ATSC standard is amended.

Broadcast standards have absolutely nothing to do with displays. The display market is driven by an absolute fear of becoming a commodity. The Samsungs, Sharps, and Sonys of the worlds are chased by the Vizios, Specter, and Westinghouses. Everything the 1st tier does gets coppied by the low cost companies and sold cheaper. Unless Sony wants to start selling $499 xBR set they need to stay ahead.

So you're saying that the most widely viewed video content has nothing to do with how displays are designed and built? Pick any HD display in your house and tell me what tuners it has?

As far as becoming a commodity, how many companies today make their own LCD panels? How many of them are low end companies like Vizio or Olevia?

Furthermore, I did not say that display technology was driven exclusively by broadcast technology, simply that it was driven more so by it than by film driven content. Certainly, many improvements have been made recently for HD digital displays when displaying 24p film sources, however, it should be pointed out that these advancements have been afterthoughts. That would seem to reinforce the following point: HD displays were originally built to comply with broadcast standards. HDM formats have also followed broadcast standards, at least in total resolution. Most, if not all, of the updates you list are almost entirely designed to fix problems with digital displays, and only some of them are specifically for film.

Again, my point is not that film doesn't drive display advancements. But how exactly will we be getting 4k content in the next 2-3 years as some here say? It won't be HDVOD. It won't be BluRay. Are we going to be buying encrypted hard drives like the ones currently used in digital theater 4k setups? Holographic discs? Some new and improved broadcast formats while broadcasters were just forced to update to ATSC compliant hardware?

So will Blu-ray and HD DVD look like SD in this mammoth Panny Plasma ?

Not when the 200GB 8 layer 4K Blu-ray discs show up. :D

4k resolution has to come before the idea of downloads @ 1080p wipes out blu-ray.

4k will be the standard for movie theaters. Real ones.

1080p will be the resolution on HDM for a long time. After that will come deep color, and then maybe anamorphically enhanced 2.35:1 discs for the few setups that could take advantage of it.

According to whom? Last time I checked 2K was the predominant front-runner and most of this equipment is expected to last 10+ years.

I think the following:

2) Personally, no I don't think 4K is really for the consumer. Given that many would be hard pressed to notice a negligible difference between 720p and 1080p and most viewing distances and standard TV sizes, the jump to 4K carries an even further diminished margin.

I agree. I rather see higher frame rate than higher resolution.

We may not get 4k media for a while, but I can see 4k home projectors and displays in the not too distant future

Again, my point is not that film doesn't drive display advancements. But how exactly will we be getting 4k content in the next 2-3 years as some here say? It won't be HDVOD. It won't be BluRay. Are we going to be buying encrypted hard drives like the ones currently used in digital theater 4k setups? Holographic discs? Some new and improved broadcast formats while broadcasters were just forced to update to ATSC compliant hardware?

I think people saying 4K will be mainstream in 2-3 years are 100% wrong. I think people saying 4K will NEVER happen are equally wrong.

I think we will see the first consumer displays within 2 years (Christmas 2009 at latest). It will take 3-5 years before 4K display will be common coexisting with 1080p on the high end large screen segment (52"+). I think within 2 years of that 4K will eclipse 1080p just as 1080p has all but replaced 720p at 46"+.

Movie content will come later but 1080p displays were being sold before HDM ever launched. 720p/1080i sets were being sold before there was any HD period. Many people bought them because their DVD looked better. Displays will always lead content.
One source of content is games which will look much better at higher resolutions. 6-7 years should be enough time for another two generations of consoles. Considering CPU power doubles every 18 months and GPU power ever 12 the ability to push 60fps photo realstic games @ 4K will not beyond the ability of consoles in 2015.

It will happen. Maybe my timeline is short although I think I am being conservative, and it will take twice as long (10 years for displays to hit mainstream and 12+ years for content. Some people seem to think that we will be still using 4:2:0 1080p for 10, 20, 50 years and that is just plain foolish.

I think 4K will not exist in any big way in the mainstream in the next 10 years.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if 4K never makes it into the mainstream, as a dominant video format (not counting theatres). The focus of the future is new delivery methods, and they will centre upon lower bandwidth video. OK, maybe 15 years from now 4K will be doable over direct-transfers to the home in some form, I just don't see it being a dominant force.

Broadcasters don't seem to care, and I don't think mass market consumers care either. It's going to be an uphill battle to get 1080p optical to topple DVD. Getting a 4K format to topple 1080p optical is going to be an even harder battle, by several orders of magnitude.

Some CE companies are going to try to force the issue though, since 1080p display and players will become increasingly commoditized, so they will need some way to generate new revenues to compensate. I just don't think it will work at least in the next 10 years. They tried it after CD (1080p) with DVD-Audio/SACD (4K) and failed miserably. After a certain point, people simply don't care anymore. After a certain level, what they want is increased convenience, not increased resolution.

How big of a screen would you need to even tell the difference?

If 2k works just fine for most movie theaters, I see it having no use at home.

I much rather see work done on higher bit depth for color. The extar Rez will do nothing.

How big of a screen would you need to even tell the difference?

If 2k works just fine for most movie theaters, I see it having no use at home.

I much rather see work done on higher bit depth for color. The extar Rez will do nothing.
Yup, and this is a point that many people forget about it. Telling apart 720p and 1080p is already fairly difficult on 40" screens at say 7' away. Having 4K won't offer any benefit, except for bragging rights.

I agree. I rather see higher frame rate than higher resolution.

+1

Double or Triple current framerate will be far more noticeable to everyone than higher resolution than 1080p.

How big of a screen would you need to even tell the difference?

If 2k works just fine for most movie theaters, I see it having no use at home.

I much rather see work done on higher bit depth for color. The extar Rez will do nothing.

Very true. If we remember the order of importance of image "builders" - resolution is on the bottom:

1. Contrast Ratio
2. Accurate Gray Scale/Color Temp
3. Color Saturation
4. Resolution

We can continue to make improvements. Deep Color will improve 2 & 3. They are always working on #1 (see the article on the brand new Pioneer Kuro - black is finally black)

All doable with the platforms we have today.

Very true. If we remember the order of importance of image "builders" - resolution is on the bottom:

1. Contrast Ratio
2. Accurate Gray Scale/Color Temp
3. Color Saturation
4. Resolution

We can continue to make improvements. Deep Color will improve 2 & 3. They are always working on #1 (see the article on the brand new Pioneer Kuro - black is finally black)

All doable with the platforms we have today.

I wonder if we will ever see deep color in Blu Ray movies.
Maybe after new disc authoring and come profile 5.0? :p

I think 4K will not exist in any big way in the mainstream in the next 10 years.

This my thinking as well. 4K is not going to be at the consumer level for at least 10 years.

Toshiba was bragging about how wonderful "their" Cell processor is at such upscaling tasks. [The Cell is also used in the PS3.]
Well, to be fair it is theirs - they bought it, they can claim "theirs".

Will it play on an iPhone?
ROTFLMAO - it better, one must compete with BD on a PSP.

4k content may be a long time but 4k displays will be with us sooner than you think.

Toshiba was bragging about how wonderful "their" Cell processor is at such upscaling tasks. [The Cell is also used in the PS3.]

The cell processor was a joint development of IBM, Sony and Toshiba in Austin Texas. They all own the rights to it. Toshiba claims to be using it in 2008 LCD flat panel TV's.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_microprocessor

I think people saying 4K will be mainstream in 2-3 years are 100% wrong. I think people saying 4K will NEVER happen are equally wrong.

If you're implying that I said it would never happen, I suggest that you re-read. What I said was that it won't be happening any time soon. For perspective, the Advanced Television Systems Committee (ATSC) started their little foray into the current standard back in 1987! Of course, you keep saying that somehow television doesn't matter and will become irrelevant, and I could not disagree more.

[quote]Movie content will come later but 1080p displays were being sold before HDM ever launched. 720p/1080i sets were being sold before there was any HD period.

Question: are 720p and 1080i specifications that came out of the ATSC standard? It's a very simple answer: Yes! Given that, where do you think CE manufacturers got the idea to make sets that displayed 720p and 1080i? Certainly, other HDTV specs had been bandied about since the early 1980's, but none of them had resolution specifications of 720p or 1080i. 720p and 1080i sets were displayed at CES in Januray 1998, but ATSC had been ratified on Christmas Eve 1996 and the first HDTV CRT sets from Mitsubishi and Panasonic hit the market in September of 1998, just in time for the first HDTV broadcasts due to begin on 11/1/1998. CBS actually broadcast the John Glenn space shuttle launch on October 29, 1998.

Also remember that Mitsubishi actually had to sponsor CBS Fall 1999 primetime linuep due to people not buying HDTV sets because there was no content, and there was no content because no television studio wanted to pump money into a format that didn't have built-in viewers. Panasonic followed suit by providing ABC with HDTV gear so they could broadcast Monday Night Footbal and Super Bowl XXXIV in HD. :D

Without content, there is no reason to buy the display.