8k broadcast's on its way, not soon but coming!

Feels to me like the companies are rushing to push the technology changes too quickly.

I certainly wont be investing 4k never mind 8k for a good while because I just don't have any content for it.

Hawker

everyone is different. i don't want a 4K or 8K tv, but I do want 4K or 8K broadcasts, because currently HD broadcasts are crap, 4K and 8K broadcasts would fix that even if they were low bit rate they would be a lot better than the current HD broadcasts.

ideally we need the broadcasters to step up to the plate and start investing into their infrastructure (something they are reluctant to do because they are profit orientated not quality orientated).

4K is a stop gap for 8K which should really be the next panel people are aiming for in the long term. but who knows what is around the corner in a decades time 12K, 16K or 20K, etc.

obviously screens will also get bigger, thinner and cheaper.
 
il be looking at a new panel in the next year or so and its going to be a 1080p one, sure would be nice to have a 4k one i could through pc games at but the spec/price will be dire compared to 12 months down the line.

id rather save up for a 4k projector really.
 
It's a bit silly and pointless peddling 1080p when we already have 1080i. The resolution difference is nothing, the only difference is the way frames are displayed. 4K next plz, for the love of god i hope they don't waste time switching the ninety 1080i channels we have to 1080p.
 
obviously screens will also get bigger, thinner and cheaper.

It became so cheap thats why people prefer LCD over Plasma and thats why Plasma's are nearly dead. Saturated with garbage edge lit dirty screen effect displays because the masses prefer cheap products.

4k TV's right now are 15,000 to 40,000 dependant on what model and people love 70" and bigger. THIN, THIN, THIN!

You just need to read the enthusiast forums to see that.
 
Last edited:
It's a bit silly and pointless peddling 1080p when we already have 1080i. The resolution difference is nothing, the only difference is the way frames are displayed. 4K next plz, for the love of god i hope they don't waste time switching the ninety 1080i channels we have to 1080p.

big difference between 1080i and 1080p, you could say 100% more information in 1080P
 
It became so cheap thats why people prefer LCD over Plasma and thats why Plasma's are nearly dead. Saturated with garbage edge lit dirty screen effect displays because the masses prefer cheap products.

4k TV's right now are 15,000 to 40,000 dependant on what model and people love 70" and bigger. THIN, THIN, THIN!

You just need to read the enthusiast forums to see that.

LCD sets are more expensive than plasma so I don't get what your saying here.

LCD's have sold better because they have been thinner, more efficient and marketed a hell of a lot better, not because of them being cheap because they are far more expensive than plasma for comparable panels.

i mean put a fat tv and a thin tv in front of a moron and ask him to pick one and every time he will pick the thin one regardless of the picture quality.

people think plasma is old outdated tech that's why it's cheaper, therefore the "newer LED" which is more expensive must be far better quality, that's how the masses think.
 
big difference between 1080i and 1080p, you could say 100% more information in 1080P

You "could say" whatever the heck you want. :p I said the resolution is the same, which it is. The fact that you manage to become more "informed" watching 1080p rather than 1080i is completely psychological.

The fact is you have completely disregarded temporal resolution. 1080i has 50 and 1080p has 25 as standard.

Not to mention all digital flat panel TVs apply de-interlacing to interlaced sources so the final image you're seeing is a progressive image anyway, therefore the interlacing is merely a transmission mechanism. This isn't like the CRT where interlaced fields are displayed as is.
 
Last edited:
Where on earth do you get your information from, Psycho?

LCD sets are more expensive than plasma so I don't get what your saying here.

LCD's have sold better because they have been thinner, more efficient and marketed a hell of a lot better, not because of them being cheap because they are far more expensive than plasma for comparable panels.

Not when the Kuro's were on the go... $6,000 - $9,000. http://www.techradar.com/news/telev...ioneer-kuro-uk-plasma-prices-confirmed-171944

Let alone Pioneer Kuro PDP-LX6090. "I still think that the starting point of £4,300 isn't too unreasonable for a prestige 60in"

Plasma has always been more expensive than LCD. It's why nearly everyone can get LCD TV's for £200 - £700 and think it's got great black levels on the shop floor. That as well as torch mode. It's what sells as first impression.

Yes, I agree LCD's have been marketed very well. Energy bill saving, tick! If Plasma's are so cheap why isn't the market saturated with Plasma's? Just about every TV ad I saw for years were LCD's. Occasionally on Sky ads years ago before a film started it was Viera. It's been such a long time since I can remember and I'm not sure what models they are.


Pioneer and Panasonic pulled out of Plasma because they weren't selling like LCD's. It's the same reason why Samsung has dropped one of their 2014 Plasma's. http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/samsung-h7000-201403153671.htm

RobbyTV AVSForum said:
it's all about profit and the uninformed consumer.
Even all the Samsung Reps at my Local Best Buy claim that Samsung has never used such a panel on any of the Samsung TV's

Weboh AVSForum said:
Last years cheap Samsung 1080p used something that looked what seems to be pentile. It was not a very sharp TV, because of it.





Psycho Sonny said:
i mean put a fat tv and a thin tv in front of a moron and ask him to pick one and every time he will pick the thin one regardless of the picture quality.

You'd be a stellar teacher, Sonny. Not everyone is a moron and most don't know or has been educated. Doesn't make them morons. Were you born with any technology/TV knowledge? Your description certainly shows how you have no clue about marketing. Looks sell but it's whether they know what the technology is like inside. Most don't.
Going by your description that makes you a "moron" as well.

Besides, most just see TV's as TV's until they have been informed. Some learn some don't want to learn. Doesn't make them morons. I really wish you'd stop calling people morons.
Some learn about them, most don't or most don't care. To them, it's just a TV. It's just entertainment after work.

Also, super thin LCD's come with a price. Edge-lit. So many are wanting 4k - 8k 60"+ but watch fast panning shots on edge-lit screens and you'll see the streaks. Then people start complaining about it months to years later after they have found out what it is. People want super thin screens so they get edge-lit and because of that the panel can't evenly light the screen.


Psycho Sonny said:
people think plasma is old outdated tech that's why it's cheaper, therefore the "newer LED" which is more expensive must be far better quality, that's how the masses think.

While thats partially true, Plasma has never been cheaper unless you go to the budget range but both have budget ranges and LCD still beats out lower priced Plasma. Some LCD TV's you can get for £120. However, no top end LCD currently can beat a high end Plasma and it comes with a price for that reason. Plus the fact so many people have been drilled with the energy efficient LCD marketing. As well as scared off with screen burn but thats a whole other topic.

Let alone OLED.

AVSForum said:
Plasma tech has plenty of problems too. And everybody who though OLED was going to be problem-free... HA! They are in for a big surprise... like pixels illuminated at 100% can't maintain that level of light output very long before the pixel dims to protect itself from head damage. And there's the face that anything organic begins decaying right after it comes into existence... nobody is saying how long we can expect OLED displays to look good before the organic (i.e. carbon) based LEDs begin to drift as they decay.

There is no perfect or ideal video display tech and there may never be one. DLP has, perhaps the fewest compromises but today the only way to get DLP is in a projector. And that's not practical in a room that gets a lot of light during the day.

Doug Blackburn
"Movies is magic..." Van Dyke Parks
THX Certified Professional Video Calibration
ISF -- HAA --
Widescreen Review -- Home Theater & Sound
 
Last edited:
would be interesting if ofcom (i think thats the right hopeless mob) would force anyone who produces a hd stream to show what sort of bandwidth it was actually transmitted in.

as some of these supposed hd channels are rather iffy. hell netflix looks better on some shows than sky hd did and i only get around 3.5 meg on netflix so what sky is playing at god only knows.
 
i think when sky offer 4K it will be premium then they can offer HD for free (like the US has since 2008)

I live in Belgium and have 16 HD channels included in my package which is free due to it being bundled with 120MB fibre cable and 2000 minutes to any landline in 35 european countries. of course this costs 64€ per month !
 
i think when sky offer 4K it will be premium then they can offer HD for free (like the US has since 2008)

I live in Belgium and have 16 HD channels included in my package which is free due to it being bundled with 120MB fibre cable and 2000 minutes to any landline in 35 european countries. of course this costs 64€ per month !

hahaha sky offer something for free lol

they show how much money they make when they phone up offering half price and better deals to get people back on. sky reall need to lose a lot of channels and go fully hd as tbh i bet the vast majority of their active subcribers have hd tv's now.
 
FAO VF:

Plasma is the cheaper tech unless you buy the stupidly expensive flagship panels like the Kuro or ZT65B.

Lemme give you two clear examples of this.

I bought a 50" GT50 (the second best panasonic plasma at the time, top of the range reference quality panel) last year for less than £800 brand new with 2 sets of 3D glasses and 5 year warranty, etc. At the same point in time if I wanted a 50" LCD with comparable picture quality (as close as you can get to the GT50 on an LCD) I would have needed to spend at least £1600 (so at least 2 times that amount roughly). So LCD's were 2 times more expensive at that time last year for similar panels with worse PQ.

The year before that I got a 51" D8000 with 2 sets of 3D glasses and a 5 year warranty for £769. Now if I wanted a comparable LCD (same size and as close as you can get to the D8000 in terms of picture quality) then I would have needed to spend around £2400, well over 3 times the price of my top of the range 8 series samsung plasma (samsung's top of the rang flagship panel when launched) and I still would have ended up with a panel with worse PQ than my D8000.

Even if you moved into budget panels you could get a 42" 720p panny plasma for £300 which would spank any 42" 1080p LCD in it's price range.

Plasma even right now is still cheaper. You can get a 60" LG Plasma for less than £1000 brand new, show me an LCD with comparable PQ to an LG plasma that is 60" for anywhere near £1000 or cheaper.

It's only when you start looking at the stupidly expensive panels like the Kuro or ZT65B that plasma is more expensive and nobody that is an average consumer would buy those that is why they don't sell well.

So looking at all the above info. Could you tell me why plasma's don't sell well even though they are far cheaper and have been so for the past 3 years at least (from my personal purchases)?

Nothing to do with price because plasma are cheaper for comparable panels in size and PQ. The masses have been duped into thinking plasma is crap. When I tell my mates I bought a plasma they are like wtf, why did you buy a plasma they are crap, I got an "LED" and look how thin it is.

Marketing killed plasma, so why did the manufacturers market LCD's and not plasma's? well the profit margins are a lot bigger on LCD's no glass panel needed for a start. They use cheaper components inside them, etc due to needing less power.

LCD's have been getting cheaper though. But I dare you to try and find even today right now a 50" LCD brand new which has a better PQ than my GT50 for less than £800, a year on and you still cannot beat it for the money.


The only way you will find LCD's cheaper than plasmas is if you don't care about PQ, then you can pick up LCD's on the cheap because they are so cheap to manufacture. Plasma has always been expensive to manufacture.

High production costs and low sales killed plasma as well as the TV companies marketing LCD's as the future. The TV companies set up their plasma divisions to fail.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom