Your 2015 4k predictions....

[ADWyatt]

Now that plasma is dead and I've decided that my next TV will be a 4k LED, the question is when to buy. I believe that this year the technology is still a little too new and there is too little programming, and so my budget has been planned out for May 1, 2015. As of this writing, that is exactly one year from now.

What will the next year bring? For those who enjoy speculation, please feel free to give your opinions. It's all just for fun, and when this post is dragged up a year from now, it might be amusing to see how close, or how far off the mark, some of our predictions were. And so, without further ado, let me be the first to plunge into the water...

1. 4k LED sets will of course be less expensive, and the panels will be more refined. I believe some of the more expensive sets will come down in price by as much as $500.

2. OLED development will be coming along, coming along.

3. There will be no 4k Blu-ray units yet available by May 2015. But as 4k will show solid signs of consumer acceptance, the first 4k model will be released by Samsung by the Holiday season, albeit at a rather expensive price.

4. In the meantime, 4k programming will be provided by Netflix and other streaming subscription services, and by DirecTV and DISH. Some of the content will be quite good, some perhaps less than one might hope for.

5. 3D won't change. Some sets will offer active 3D, others passive, and some companies will abandon 3D altogether.

6. All 2015 4k TVs will have up-to-date connections included with the set for peripherals. Future proofing will be a thing of the past.

7. 'John Carter' will be as wretched in 4k as it was in 1080p, and you'll wonder why you didn't just donate your money to the poor.

8. 'Immortals 3D' will be as boring in 4k as it was in 1080p, and you'll wonder why you didn't just donate your money to the poor.

9. Nature documentaries will be as boring....well, you get the picture.

[Blu-Dog]

4K prices will be the same as 2K prices are now, in one year.

[steve1971]

My 2015 4k predictions? Nothing will change except maybe lower prices on TV's and that's about it. But nothing big or major is going to happen.

[Kirsty_Mc]

Not healthy if this article is true:-
http://www.techradar.com/news/video/...-water-1246497

[Auditor55]

Originally Posted by Kirsty_Mc

Not healthy if this article is true:-
http://www.techradar.com/news/video/...-water-1246497

Well anyone doing any kind of practical analysis could see that 4K Blu Ray is dead in the water.

[kpkelley]

My predictions:

1. 4K TVs will sell in droves
2. Most people will not see any difference
3. People will continue to be blinded to the fact that resolution is perhaps the least important feature of modern televisions.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

4K prices will be the same as 2K prices are now, in one year.

Only for the low end of the 4K sets and probably not in one year. Sony's cheapest 4K 55" is $3000. The price isn't dropping 33% in one year, which is pretty much what it would take to get it to the high end of 2K sets.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

Only for the low end of the 4K sets and probably not in one year. Sony's cheapest 4K 55" is $3000. The price isn't dropping 33% in one year, which is pretty much what it would take to get it to the high end of 2K sets.

One year. The blush is off the rose, and the old method of pricing any new technology in the stratosphere is dead. Witness the rollback of expectations (and profits) from Sony, but that's just an example.

The biggest reason is that no manufacturer is going to want to set up two production lines, in both formats. It's going to be either 2K for the aggregators, or 4K for the big guys, and that's it. When the big guys find out their sets won't sell at 30% to 100% more than "old style" units, they'll fold.

When the basic 4K spec has simple screen manufacturing processes (which is already does) everyone will do it, just as they did with 1080i vs. 1080p. While the usual price difference between aggregators like HiSense and TCL and the Sony-LG-Samsung groups, pricing will be at the same level, or units won't sell.

While I'm usually an early adopter, I don't need to push. I have an XBR, a Kuro, and a 70" Sony 1080i set. All are very nice, and all play all of my current technology. I even have a Sony 60" 1080i set in a bedroom...what do I need 4K for, when even the BDA is dragging its feet on 4K disc playback?

To entice people like me, they'll need to make very big televisions. The latest jokes from Sony, Samsung, and LG - none of which is making a real push for their overpriced items - have stopped me cold. 4K is practical for the big sets, but that's about it.

Once the manufacturing lines are set up for everyone, screens aren't a problem, and the circuitry is very much the same. Some premium things with the new H.265, and higher brightness and contrast, may bring higher prices, but it won't be a must-have for most buyers at the big box stores.

2K is obsolescent (not obsolete), and 4K will be the new standard. In three years, it will be 8K. To stay in the game, the prices must stay the same, and sets must be backwards compatible with everything that came before. As will pricing.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

Only for the low end of the 4K sets and probably not in one year. Sony's cheapest 4K 55" is $3000. The price isn't dropping 33% in one year, which is pretty much what it would take to get it to the high end of 2K sets.

And by the way, Sony is circling the drain...expect them to do some radical pricing soon.

[steve1971]

If it is true that Sony has no faith in Blu ray anymore then 4K Blu ray is going to suffer and it spells trouble for the 4K format in general. Sorry to say it but I saw this coming.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by steve1971

If it is true that Sony has no faith in Blu ray anymore then 4K Blu ray is going to suffer and it spells trouble for the 4K format in general. Sorry to say it but I saw this coming.

You're probably right. The media isn't the issue, though. All the gee-whiz "excitement" about 3-D turned into a smoke-and-mirrors advertising attempt which fell flat in less than six months, and I don't think 4K advertising will even get off the ground.

Pricing killed a landscape change by 3-D; no one wanted to pay the premium, or deal with the limited technology (glasses, and of course a new TV to replace the ones they had). 4K will wind up being in the same boat, and it's causing real turmoil in the manufacturer's sphere. Any attempt to get the consumer base to toss their current sets will crash before it gets airborne. The BDA is more than hesitant to issue a new disc standard after getting burned by the empty promise that 3-D discs were backwards compatible, and assuring that a 4K disc will work fine in a 2K player may wind up being just as false.

Streaming 4K after the death of net neutrality, and the ludicrous pricing of most streaming content? One-day rentals for $8 or $9? That won't help anyone make it, and the broadcasters aren't interested in making their sitcoms and reality shows in 4K, either.

For 4K to make it, it must be backwards compatible, making it an afterthought right out of the gate. Sony and others know this - they've already mined the videophile audience until it's scraped clean - thus their negativity. This will be a very slow change, unnoticeable to most.

[ADWyatt]

If I seem to be changing my mind constantly on 4k, it's because this new display medium seems to have been built on a technological swamp, where the ground is anything but firm.

I first rejected 4k because it appeared to be little better than 1080p plasma, especially as delivered by top-of-the-line Panasonic units. I then tried to embrace it, as calibrated 4k TV's in Best Buy and Sears showed a very impressive picture indeed. As noted, I planned on a May 2015 purchase.

But it seems as if 4k news is changing almost daily. If indeed it is true that Sony will be committing very little money to 4k Blu-ray disc development, that might very well spell the end for a player that I had hoped would make up the vast majority of 4k content.

Broadcasters aren't going to be presenting their programs in 4k for a very long time into the future, and I believe streaming services are going to offer only limited content for a very high price. In short, as of the date of this post, it appears that developers didn't just put the cart before the horse, they decided to leave the horse out of the equation altogether.

All of which now has me shifting my attention in another direction. When I recently visited my local Sears store, they had a 65" Samsung 4k TV set up, and the demo clips were of course quite impressive. But only about five feet away was a 75" Samsung 240Hz 1080p TV which was playing the latest Hobbit movie with the soap opera effect turned on. (Many people just hate this look, but I rather like it.) The 4k provided a better picture, naturally, but the 1080p set wasn't bad. As a matter of fact, it wasn't bad at all.

If I bought the 65" version of that 1080p Samsung model for my living room, and shifted my 58" Panasonic 3D plasma into a game room to be used just for the X-Box One, I think I could live with that. I would need a separate room for using the Kinnect, which means I'd have to have another TV, so why not just use the Panny, especially since I wouldn't get peanuts on the dollar for it anyway?

Of course, there's a fly in the ointment. The new Samsung would give me the soap opera picture I like, but I wonder how its overall display quality would compare to that of a four-year-old high-end Panasonic plasma. I'm a little uneasy with that thought.

By the time you read this, I don't doubt that something else will have changed in the 4k world to upset the apple cart, but I certainly would like to have opinions on my thinking here. I very much value the intelligent and perceptive responses of the members of this forum, and your suggestions and opinions carry a great deal of weight with me.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by ADWyatt

By the time you read this, I don't doubt that something else will have changed in the 4k world to upset the apple cart, but I certainly would like to have opinions on my thinking here. I very much value the intelligent and perceptive responses of the members of this forum, and your suggestions and opinions carry a great deal of weight with me.

I'm in the same boat you are, and I think that unless you're going 84" or larger, there is no reason to replace a television, partly for the reasons you mention above.

Manufacturers want too much money for a market moving this rapidly. This isn't something as easily re-bought as a small computer - it usually requires incredible capital outlay, and it's changing faster than PC's, even.

I'm putting the brakes on this thing until they come up with some unified technology, and drop the Wizard of Oz ad campaign.

[Dragun]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

Manufacturers want too much money for a market moving this rapidly. This isn't something as easily re-bought as a small computer - it usually requires incredible capital outlay, and it's changing faster than PC's, even.

People tend to keep their TVs for a long time, and by the time their current set craps out, they'll buy what's available. They won't buy a new set because of some new feature, if their current set is working fine. If they buy a 4KTV, it won't be because they want 4K so much that they upgrade. It'll be because they need a new TV and 4K's the only thing available, or because 4KTVs aren't much more expensive than 1080 TVs.

My prediction for 2015 is that 4K content will be a niche product for some movies and episodic shows, but that 1080 will still be dominant. Whoever is unable to see much difference between DVD and HD (or sees it and doesn't care) will see even less of a difference between HD and 4K.

[Canada]

Originally Posted by kpkelley

My predictions:

1. 4K TVs will sell in droves
2. Most people will not see any difference
3. People will continue to be blinded to the fact that resolution is perhaps the least important feature of modern televisions.

The most important thing in 4K is colour resolution, going from rec 709 to rec 2020 we would be able to see a lot more difference, and 12 bits 4:4:4 would be amazing for the next leap to 4K. You need a 10 foot screen to be able see most of the resolution on a 1080p signal.

"Streaming 4K after the death of net neutrality, and the ludicrous pricing of most streaming content? One-day rentals for $8 or $9? That won't help anyone make it, and the broadcasters aren't interested in making their sitcoms and reality shows in 4K, either." Blu -Dog. 4K streaming won't work I don't think because internet companies will have to massively upgrade internet speeds and they would also have to up peoples internet cap.

[Kirsty_Mc]

My prediction is that 4K will grow slowly, but will grow. The amount of stuff these days being shot in 4K and above resolution will continue to grow. For example Sky in the UK shot some of their nature documentaries on Red Epics. I can easily see more and more TV being shot at 4K resolution.

Given that more and more content is being generated in 4K, the media companies will certainly have a strong desire to monetise this asset and the premium end of the market will be the one they target. 4K Blu-Ray will happen and this will be the premium delivery medium alongside streaming services such as Netflix. Streaming will continue to grow as fast broadband and the newer codecs kick in... That is until the ISPs start to push up the prices of fast broadband subscription or introduce caps and over usage fees. They too after all will want a slice of the action. If streaming really takes off, then expect data usage to be taxed. Governments in the western world are hungry for cash, and a data tax could be on the cards.

Streamed content of course will be available on Blu-Ray as the streaming companies will realise with the plethora of services, not many people will have a subscription to all. Streaming will not be allowed to gain anything like a monopoly share of the market, governments will see to that, ensuring the survival of their national broadcasters in the same way they protected their flag carrier airlines.

Internet congestion may become a real issue. If the internet is becoming clogged with too much streamed content, then I believe governments may step in to protect the available bandwidth for internet use which is more economically vital, such as e-commerce etc.

Eventually, beyond 2015 both streaming services and physical media will settle down and coexist, one will not replace the other, each having its advantages and disadvantages. The current obsession for streaming will settle down and be recognised for what it is, a bubble talked up by the same types that caused the dot com bubble in the nineties.

Some of the larger Japanese firms will continue to move out if hardware and will follow the Apple model or even licence their IP to other companies, perhaps selling under their own name only in the premium end if the market.

There will be arguments on blu-ray.com about 8K and what screen size you need to watch it and some trolls will argue for the re-adoption of VHS.

[Auditor55]

Streaming will continue to grow as fast broadband and the newer codecs kick in...

The roll back of Net Neutrality has put monkey wrench to any high band width streaming. With Sony's announced regard 4K Blu Ray and this, 4K is all but dead.

[Chaplin2345]

My prediction is the general public will care about this as much as they did with expensive 3D sets. But maybe even less so. Hell their still a lot of 720 tv for sell. I see 4k a lot like CD players and Mp3 players. CD offers superior audio quality. But Mp3 players are far more convenient and is more popular. 1080p and 720p cost very little compare to 4k. I don't even think the general public hate 3D. It dose well at the theater. Its just people don't care for those bulky active 3d glasses vs the lightweight passive 3d glasses you get a theaters. Also the price tag is way to high. But i think 8k would be more useless than 3d. Hell i think 4k is even more useless.

[Auditor55]

Originally Posted by Chaplin2345

My prediction is the general public will care about this as much as they did with expensive 3D sets. But maybe even less so. Hell their still a lot of 720 tv for sell. I see 4k a lot like CD players and Mp3 players. CD offers superior audio quality. But Mp3 players are far more convenient and is more popular. 1080p and 720p cost very little compare to 4k. I don't even think the general public hate 3D. It dose well at the theater. Its just people don't care for those bulky active 3d glasses vs the lightweight passive 3d glasses you get a theaters. Also the price tag is way to high. But i think 8k would be more useless than 3d. Hell i think 4k is even more useless.

I think I'm going to wait for 8K OLED.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Auditor55

The roll back of Net Neutrality has put monkey wrench to any high band width streaming. With Sony's announced regard 4K Blu Ray and this, 4K is all but dead.

4K is inevitable, but no reason to run into a video store with your credit card on fire.

It's not dead. It's only sleeping.