|
|
Post by Bonzo on Feb 19, 2019 14:06:18 GMT -5
So are Sony OLEDs. So why is Panasonic singled out? Contracts. So Panasonic willingly signed a contract with LG where LG said okay here's the deal and you can't sell them in the U.S.? |
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Feb 19, 2019 15:26:11 GMT -5
Well makes sense. The round gold and silver spinners are having a rough go. Netflix, Hulu, YouTube, Amazon, and all the rest make point and click so easy. I like CDs and BluRays sure. And don't start about that I own it. Now the true test is if they can hold the license. Even more, 10 plus years later will you really go for that movie again? I know sometimes I do. But with so much content out there, going back and watching old is not always so compelling. Smart TVs and USB and more are your clients of content enjoyment now. Had to happen. I hope no one was surprised.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by KeithL on Feb 19, 2019 15:27:38 GMT -5
I agree entirely. As you might expect, there is a current trend to offer higher and higher "numbers", whether they really matter or not. (8k must be better than 4k, right?)
However, when it comes to video, another thing worth considering is the type of compression being used. The amount of space required to store uncompressed video, and the amount of bandwidth needed to stream it, is really huge. Therefore, uncompressed video is really impractical, even for discs, and virtually ALL video is compressed - but Blu-Ray and 4k UHD discs are compressed FAR less than equivalent video streams. One of the technological advances that made 4k streaming more practical is the development of better compression technology. In fact, the new HEVC compression used for 4k video works so well that a 4k video stream can deliver 4x as many pixels as an HD video stream, but use only about twice as much bandwidth.
The other interesting detail is that, when it does reach its limits, the new compression standard degrades more gracefully. (When you applied excessive compression with the old h.264 standard you got those annoying block artifacts; with the new HEVC compression, at a similar point, the picture just gets a little bit softer.)
The upshot of this new technology is that, if you were to try to send an 8k video stream, using the same bandwidth as you're currently using for 4k....
The picture won't look especially bad.... but, even though it may have more pixels, it probably won't look any sharper than a current 4k picture. (You've basically reached a point of zero return - where the overall sharpness is limited by the bandwidth - and the "pixel count" doesn't mean much in terms of making the picture actually look better.)
Unfortunately (or not), now that we've essentially reached the highest worthwhile pixel count, and HDR provides plenty of color gamut, and big screens have gotten so economical... It's difficult to imagine what they'll be able to offer us to convince us to purchase a new TV next year... or the year after... (Egads.... they may have to actually start producing more shows and movies that are worth watching  .)
The problem seems to be that the market just plain doesn't care enough. (Of course, there is a fair argument that, if you have to walk up to within two feet of the screen to see the difference, then maybe it really isn't all that important after all.)
The reality is that upscaled HD content does NOT look quite as good as true 4k content... but, at the best of times, it can be pretty close. Likewise, 4k streaming can look very good, but not as good as a 4k disc, which has much higher bandwidth and uses less compression. And, of course, it doesn't help that not all "4k content" is really filmed and processed fully in 4k.
And it helps even less that, with many shows and movies, beyond a certain point the absolute quality just plain doesn't matter all that much. This all begs the question of whether "8k" will actually be a visible improvement - or just a marketing slogan.
I think the whole concept of streaming, and on-demand, rather than OWNERSHIP, also erodes the concern many of us have for quality... When I purchase a disc, which I plan to watch over and over again, I tend to be very concerned about minor details of exactly how good it looks and sounds... But I just can't work up as much concern for a movie I'm watching on my streaming subscription... To me it feels sort of like the difference between getting my own car detailed... and a rental...
And, to me, it seems that we're heading in the direction of a world where everything you watch is a "just a rental"...
I also think that as Streaming replaces Physical Media - The speed and bandwidth required to go to higher and higher resolutions simply becomes "Impractical". Remember that your Display is a 2-Dimensional array. (Resolution is expanded along TWO axis.) Assuming that each Pixel has several pieces of data associated with it (Greyscale / color code or nnn bits) Doubling the resolution from 1K to 2K or 2K to 4K DOES NOT simply DOUBLE the amount of data - It QUADRUPLES IT (I KNOW that this is over-simplified - but You'll get the point): --1000 X 1000 = 1,000,000 --2000 X 2000 = 4,000,000 --4000 X 4000 = 16,000,000 [NOT 8,000,000] This means that you now have either 16 TIMES The Data when going from 1K to 4K or FOUR Times as much when going from 2K to 4K Even with REALLY fast Internet connections and modern compression technologies - this is A WHOLE LOT of Data, and once everybody in a neighborhood starts doing it, the current Data Services that are available may be unable to keep-up. [Maybe we'll have to go BACK to physical media the size of a Lazer-Disk or LP, but with data densities of a Blue Ray in order to store a movie...] (never quite understood why 2K never really took-hold except maybe for Computers, where 4K is still too "taxing" for all but the most expensive Graphics Cards to keep-up with decent frame-rates) At some point - going to a higher resolution makes no sense unless you have a REALLY HUGE screen (if your eyes cannot see an appreciable difference, then there's NO POINT to it, regardless of what marketing says) I hope that at some point, the "resolution wars" STOP at some reasonable dot-pitch that makes sense (When done RIGHT, 4K is REALLY NICE on screens over a certain size - but at some point, people are going to get sick of having to invest in new equipment for no appreciable difference, and the Data Infrastructure will need to be upgraded by a quantup-leap in order to cope with it. |
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 18,487
|
Post by DYohn on Feb 19, 2019 15:32:18 GMT -5
So Panasonic willingly signed a contract with LG where LG said okay here's the deal and you can't sell them in the U.S.? It is not uncommon for a company to sign region-specific agreements with another company when licencing or incorporating their produycts. I cannot speak for LG or Matsushita, but it would be normal in this business. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by KeithL on Feb 19, 2019 15:33:29 GMT -5
Exactly....
And, for a consumer....
The down-side of streaming is that you don't get to own the movies... The up-side is that, if you ended up replacing a lot of movies you owned on DVD with new copies on Blu-Ray, that won't happen again this time... (And some of us even remember replacing our VHS tape copies with those DVDs before that.)
We are going from an "ownership model" to a "rental model" or a "service for pay" model..... and a lot of people seem to be OK with that.
(I personally prefer to own things that I really like.)
Never forget that this is an INDUSTRY and the idea of all industry is to make money. New audio or video formats and "improved" screen resolutions and surround sound schemes and new technologies are less about improving the look, sound or enjoyment for the user and more about getting more of that user's money and finding ways to improve profit margins. Same for the death of discs and disc players (when something is not selling, you lose money making it) and of the "rental" streaming model. MUCH more money can potentially be made from streaming than from physical media sales. Make no mistake, the rise of streaming is just as much about the industry figuring out how to capitalize on it as it is about the desire for user convenience. |
|
|
|
Post by Loop 7 on Feb 19, 2019 15:51:52 GMT -5
via Digital Trends (2013 December):
"After a year and a half of an alliance that was forged in an effort to make OLED TV production for the masses a viable proposition, Panasonic and Sony are calling it quits.
The two consumer electronic powerhouses have been working together to produce ultra-thin OLED displays that could be price-friendly enough to match paces with the falling cost of 4K Ultra High Definition (UHD) TVs. But even with the promise of new inkjet printers that could potentially revolutionize the way OLED displays are created, the Japanese juggernauts decided to take a step back.
A report from the Wall Street Journal broke the announcement, which cites 'technical challenges in improving panel durability and lowering production costs' as the reason for the split. While both companies will continue to develop OLED technology on their own, the lead focus will be on the burgeoning field of 4K displays."
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Feb 19, 2019 17:17:33 GMT -5
So Panasonic willingly signed a contract with LG where LG said okay here's the deal and you can't sell them in the U.S.? It is not uncommon for a company to sign region-specific agreements with another company when licencing or incorporating their produycts. I cannot speak for LG or Matsushita, but it would be normal in this business. It just seems odd that their agreement with Sony is so different. I can see different price negotiations etc, but to let one brand in and kick the other out is odd in my book. Unfortunate for us since Panasonic makes the best most natural looking displays. |
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Feb 19, 2019 17:20:53 GMT -5
via Digital Trends (2013 December): "After a year and a half of an alliance that was forged in an effort to make OLED TV production for the masses a viable proposition, Panasonic and Sony are calling it quits.
The two consumer electronic powerhouses have been working together to produce ultra-thin OLED displays that could be price-friendly enough to match paces with the falling cost of 4K Ultra High Definition (UHD) TVs. But even with the promise of new inkjet printers that could potentially revolutionize the way OLED displays are created, the Japanese juggernauts decided to take a step back.
A report from the Wall Street Journal broke the announcement, which cites 'technical challenges in improving panel durability and lowering production costs' as the reason for the split. While both companies will continue to develop OLED technology on their own, the lead focus will be on the burgeoning field of 4K displays."Yes, I remember that because of the idea of being able to "print" an OLED display. But since then, both Sony and Panny have moved on and now buy OLED displays from LG, then do their own thing. LG has allowed Sony to sell OLEDs here in the U.S., but they did not give that ability to Panny. Reasons unknown to me. |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Feb 19, 2019 17:27:12 GMT -5
I used to have a Samsung oven/range - they're HUGE and do a lot more than must electronics (by the way, that oven died after 3 years - really bad quality) I used to have a Samsung dishwasher, it died after 2 years, really bad quality. Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Feb 19, 2019 17:37:00 GMT -5
Regular DVD's account for 57% of all disk purchases; that says a lot. I don't know what it's like in the US but here (in Australia) a current movie release DVD retail costs $19.95, a Blu Ray $29.95 and a 4K $39.95. People just aren't willing to pay twice as much for the same movie just because it's in 4K. As a result the retailers devote around 60% of their shelf space to DVD's, 30% to Blu Rays and 10% to 4K's. In one of the larger retailers I actually have to look really hard for the 4K version, they're never front and centre. Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by 405x5 on Feb 19, 2019 17:41:47 GMT -5
I used to have a Samsung oven/range - they're HUGE and do a lot more than must electronics (by the way, that oven died after 3 years - really bad quality) I used to have a Samsung dishwasher, it died after 2 years, really bad quality. Cheers Gary I’ll have to see what happens but so far, my Samsung oven running on propane from Best Buy is the best unit I’ve ever had. The dishwasher is a Kitchen Aid, but notably Kitchen Aid is no longer Hobart, so we’ll see how that one goes. You can barely hear the thing running. Bill |
|
|
|
Post by Loop 7 on Feb 19, 2019 18:04:06 GMT -5
My LG washing machine and Samsung dishwasher both bit the dust in a few years as did my pal's Whirlpool washing machine.
Taught me a lesson - stop buying top-of-the-line and just get the cheap models and plan on them failing.
Ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Feb 19, 2019 19:59:59 GMT -5
My LG washing machine and Samsung dishwasher both bit the dust in a few years as did my pal's Whirlpool washing machine. Taught me a lesson - stop buying top-of-the-line and just get the cheap models and plan on them failing. Ridiculous. Washer and dryer, buy old technologies! Dishwasher? Wash them by hand and buy one that looks good! LOL |
|
.)
