• Wolf@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    I would love to have an 8K TV or monitor if I had an internet connection up to the task and enough content in 8K to make it worth it, or If I had a PC powerful enough to run games smoothly in that resolution.

    I think it’s silly to say ‘nobody wants this’ when the infrastructure for it isn’t even close to adequate.

    I will admit that there is diminishing returns now, going from 4K to 8K was less impressive than FHD to 4K and I imagine that 8K will probably be where it stops, at least for anything that can reasonably fit in a house.

  • pulsewidth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    The consumer has spoken and they don’t care, not even for 4K. Same as happened with 3D and curved TVs, 8K is a solution looking for a problem so that more TVs get sold.

    In terms of physical media - at stores in Australia the 4K section for Blurays takes up a single rack of shelves. Standard Blurays and DVDs take up about 20.

    Even DVDs still sell well because many consumers don’t see a big difference in quality, and certainly not enough to justify the added cost of Bluray, let alone 4K editions. A current example, Superman is $20 on DVD, $30 on Bluray (50% cost increase) or $40 on 4K (100%) cost increase. Streaming services have similar pricing curves for increased fidelity.

    It sucks for fans of high res, but it’s the reality of the market. 4K will be more popular in the future if and when it becomes cheaper, and until then nobody (figuratively) will give a hoot about 8K.

  • skisnow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    I hate the wording of the headline, because it makes it sound like the consumers’ fault that the industry isn’t delivering on something they promised. It’s like marketing a fusion-powered sex robot that’s missing the power core, and turning around and saying “nobody wants fusion-powered sex robots”.

    Side note, I’d like for people to stop insisting that 60fps looks “cheap”, so that we can start getting good 60fps content. Heck, at this stage I’d be willing to compromise at 48fps if it gets more directors on board. We’ve got the camera sensor technology in 2025 for this to work in the same lighting that we used to need for 24fps, so that excuse has flown.

  • n1ckn4m3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    2 days ago

    As someone who stupidly spent the last 20 or so years chasing the bleeding edge of TVs and A/V equipment, GOOD.

    High end A/V is an absolute shitshow. No matter how much you spend on a TV, receiver, or projector, it will always have some stupid gotcha, terrible software, ad-laden interface, HDMI handshaking issue, HDR color problem, HFR sync problem or CEC fight. Every new standard (HDR10 vs HDR10+, Dolby Vision vs Dolby Vision 2) inherently comes with its own set of problems and issues and its own set of “time to get a new HDMI cable that looks exactly like the old one but works differently, if it works as advertised at all”.

    I miss the 90s when the answer was “buy big chonky square CRT, plug in with component cables, be happy”.

    Now you can buy a $15,000 4k VRR/HFR HDR TV, an $8,000 4k VRR/HFR/HDR receiver, and still somehow have them fight with each other all the fucking time and never work.

    8K was a solution in search of a problem. Even when I was 20 and still had good eyesight, sitting 6 inches from a 90 inch TV I’m certain the difference between 4k and 8k would be barely noticeable.

  • BlackVenom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    2 days ago

    For what content? Video gaming (GPUs) has barely gotten to 4k. Movies? 4k streaming is a joke; better off with 1080 BD. If you care about quality go physical… UHD BD is hard to find and you have to wait and hunt to get them at reasonable prices… And these days there are only a couple UHD BD Player mfg left.

  • happydoors@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    I am a filmmaker and have shot in 6k+ resolution since 2018. The extra pixels are great for the filmmaking side. Pixel binning when stepping down resolutions allows for better noise, color reproduction, sharpened details, and great for re-framing/cropping. 99% of my clients want their stuff in 1080p still! I barely even feel the urge to jump up to 4k unless the quality of the project somehow justifies it. Images have gotten to a good place. Detail won’t provide much more for human enjoyment. I hope they continue to focus on dynamic range, HDR, color accuracy, motion clarity, efficiency, etc. I won’t say no when we step up to 8k as an industry but computing as a whole is not close yet.

  • DarkSideOfTheMoon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    17 hours ago

    Even 4K the content is not yet easily available . I mean except from AppleTV plus that all content is 4K and it’s part of basic subscription, every other streaming charges much more for 4K content, most people don’t want to pay more every month for 4K

    So 8K is just a distant reality that content makers are not really wanting to happen

  • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    2 days ago

    The difference between 1080 and 4K is pretty visible, but the difference between 4K and 8K, especially from across a room, is so negligible that it might as well be placebo.

    Also the fact that 8K content takes up a fuckload more storage space. So, there’s that, too.

  • Wispy2891@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I’d buy a 8k TV, provided that it has no smarts, no WiFi, no TV tuner and its price isn’t over 5% than a 4k TV

  • kylian0087@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    I do want a dumb 8K TV. I do not want all the so called smart features of a TV. Small Linux device with kodi works way better.

      • viking@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        3 days ago

        Some Xiaomi TVs have root exploits, so you can manually disinfect the OS, but it’s cumbersome to get done since you need to enter adb commands over the remote control to get there in the first place.

        Easier to just use an external device and the TV as a screen only. Personally I’m using the Nvidia Shield for 5+ years now and regret nothing.

      • elucubra@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 days ago

        Not ideal, but you can air gap the TV from the network, and use some small sbc, or even a firestick or android box. That’s what I do. Stremio?

    • Don_alForno@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      I do want a TV that can access Netflix etc without another box. I just don’t want the surveillance that comes with it.

    • GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      I just run mine without ever connecting it to the internet.
      I run an Apple TV (shock, walled garden!), as it is the only device I’ve seen that consistently matches frame rates properly on the output.

  • Photuris@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    129
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    I don’t care about 8k.

    I just want an affordable dumb TV. No on-board apps whatsoever. No smart anything. No Ethernet port, no WiFi. I have my own stuff to plug into HDMI already.

    I’m aware of commercial displays. It just sucks that I have to pay way more to have fewer features now.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      You can have a smart TV but never set up any of the smart features. I have two LG OLED TVs but rarely touch anything on the TV itself. I’ve got Nvidia Shields for streaming and turning it on or off also turns the TV on or off. Same with my Xbox.

      I just need to figure out if I can use CEC with my SFF gaming PC (so that turning it on also turns the TV on, and turning it off turns the TV off), then I won’t have to touch the TV’s remote again.

      Ethernet port or wifi are good for controlling the TV using something like Home Assistant. I have my TVs on a separate isolated VLAN with no internet access. I have a automation that runs when the TV turns on, to also turn on some LED lights behind the TV.

      • Photuris@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        Fine, but I don’t want the smart features to be installed at all in the first place.

        I don’t want a WiFi antenna or Ethernet port in there.

        I know that sounds ridiculous, since I can “simply not use them,” but I want to spend my money on an appliance, not a consumer data collection tool.

        I don’t want them to have any of my data, and I don’t want to spend money “voting” with my dollar for these data collection devices.

        Some of these devices have even been known to look for other similar devices within WiFi range, and phone home that way (i.e., send analytics data via a neighbor’s connected TV as a proxy).

        Fuuuck that. I don’t want my dollar supporting this, at all, plain and simple. And I don’t want to pay a premium for the privilege of buying a technically simpler device. I do, but it’s bullshit, and I’m unhappy about it.

        • Null User Object@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          Some of these devices have even been known to look for other similar devices within WiFi range, and phone home that way (i.e., send analytics data via a neighbor’s connected TV as a proxy).

          Ummm, wut? I’m going to need some quality sources to back this claim up.

          • BassTurd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            3 days ago

            Yea, this paragraph feels like fear mongering. I’m not saying OP didn’t see that somewhere, but from a tech standpoint, the TV still has to authenticate with any device it’s trying to piggy back off the wifi for. Perhaps if there were any open network in range it could theoretically happen, but I’m guessing that it’s not.

            I do remember reading that some smart TV was able to use the speakers as a mic to record in room audio and pass that out if connected. It may have been a theoretical thing but it might have been a zero day I read about. It’s been some years now.

            • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              Actually, it’s true. Amazon’s sidewalk works in a similar way, where if the sensor is not connected to the internet, it will talk to local Echo devices like your speakers that are connected to the internet and pass the data to Amazon through your device’s network.

              TVs will look for open Wi-Fi networks. And failing that, they could very well do this exact same thing.

              Edit: The way it works is that the echo devices contain a separate radio that works over the 868 to 915 megahertz industrial scientific and medical band, so the sensor communicates with your echo that way, and then your echo communicates it to the network as if it’s coming from the echo itself, not another device. So the sensor gets connected to the network without your network realizing that it’s actually a third-party device. To your network, the only thing it sees is the Echo, but to the Echo, it sees both your network, which it’s connected to, and the sensor, so it’s acting as a relay.

              • BassTurd@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 days ago

                I forgot the Sidewalk is a thing. While that tech does kind of do what OP was saying, Sidewalk is limited to only Amazon Sidewalk compatible devices, like the echo line and ring. Just at a quick glance, there are no smart TVs that can connect to that network.

                That said, it is an opt out service, which it awful. No smart TVs will connect, but I’d recommend disabling for anyone that uses Amazon devices.

        • vithigar@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 days ago

          I know that sounds ridiculous, since I can “simply not use them,” but I want to spend my money on an appliance, not a consumer data collection tool.

          For what it’s worth you’re actually spending the manufacturer’s money (or at least some of their profit margin) on a data collection device that they won’t get to use.

          Smart devices are cheaper because the data collection subsidizes them.

        • dan@upvote.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          3 days ago

          I totally get where you’re coming from. It’s hard to find devices like that. I think the issue is that regular customers are demanding the smart features, and using them without caring about privacy aspects.

        • ccunix@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          They are called “Digital Signage Panels” and they cost an arm and a leg.

          The data collection subsidises the cost of your TV, so that brings the cost down. Also, digital signage panels are rated for 24/7 use, which significantly increases their cost.

        • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          Some of these devices have even been known to look for other similar devices within WiFi range, and phone home that way (i.e., send analytics data via a neighbor’s connected TV as a proxy).

        • olympicyes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          Your tv price is subsidized by the presence of those network connections. I recommend using universal remote.

      • 4am@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Sometimes that doesn’t even matter anymore; they’ll refuse to work now without a network set up.

        • dan@upvote.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          If it wants a network then stick it on an isolated VLAN with no internet access.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            That’s not what that means and you know it. It refuses to work unless it can successfully phone home over the Internet.

            • dan@upvote.au
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              So people in rural areas without good internet, or places where the network is airgapped, can’t use them at all? Seems like there’s be a way around it.

    • olympicyes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      I blacklist the TVs Ethernet and WiFi MAC addresses. I strongly encourage using a computer, Apple TV, or anything that can’t fingerprint everything you use your tv for.

    • iopq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      No, I want only one DP port and to have a separate box that selects sources. That way I have the ports I want