Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Toronto, Canada
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Agreed. Since I got Netflix and Apple TV iTunes movie access on my TV I never physically rent a movie anymore. I just can't be bothered going to the video store, renting them and then having to return them and possibly having to pay late fees. The only reason to do that would be if there was a movie I could not get there or one that I really wanted to watch in Blu-Ray quality. Also, the cost-benefit with services like Netflix ($8/mos for all the TV shows and movies, albeit not entirely competitive in terms of offerings with video stores) is very compelling.
It's kind of like when there were not TV remotes and people were too lazy to even get up and change the channel. So, variety shows thrived a during that time and totally died when the remote came out as people could create their own variety show by just flipping channels when they got bored. So, we flock to that which is most convenient and that makes the market.
Cable TV and Internet are struggling to even deliver pictures to our HDTV's in 1920x1080i quality. 1920x1080p broadcast is totally out of the question because of the excess bandwidth it would consume. Netflix has even had to dumb down their video quality in order to fit within the download capacity and GB limits that many households have. The signals are compressed severely in order to deliver them now via cable (an antenna on your roof delivers a better HDTV picture!). So, given that is the case, the days when we will be able to view a 4K picture in the quality that was intended is a long long way off. No one is going to pay for a 4K video over the pipe that is delivered in less than 2K quality. That will result in an extremely low rate of adoption of this technology. Likely the only market will be videophiles who want to and can afford to buy 4K Blu-Ray players (the only medium that will effectively be able to deliver 4K video) and 4K HDTV's.
Remember, it took over 50 years for HDTV to arrive after SDTV and even though technological advancements are accelerating 4K TV is not going to happen anytime soon. The limiting factor will likely not be the technology of the recording device (4K camera), the source material device (4K player) or the display device (4K HDTV) but rather the capacity and speed of the delivery mode, ie the pipe. But, the high cost of the devices will result in there being a lack of demand for a higher capacity and speed pipe. The classic chicken and egg situation. And, all this is in addition to the fact that 4K quality will really only be able to be perceived by the human eye in display devicees above 65" which is the short tail of the marketplace, hence low demand.
So, it's probably a bit of a moot point about whether plasma will support 4K. Likely OLED, which has so many advantages over plasma with the only two (big) disadvantages being cost and panel life, will eventually take over. The cost of OLED will eventually come down to be competitive with plasma for sure as yields and volumes increase. Panel life will eventually too. Both of these will happen by the time 4K starts to achieve some momentum, which I suspect will be more than 10 years away, if that soon.