Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPad Pro 4K HDR is all the rage when Will Apple catch up ?
- Thread starter TheRealAlex
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Let me guess....youre american??? The rest of the world buys 4K HDR blu rays for 3 years already! Netflix is 4K vor 2 years already. You tube is 4K for 3 years already. I need to go on?
But im shure that in your part of the world, like at apple, someone will wake up there too.
Maybe in 10 years, like they did with 1080P, but it WILL come there too!
Both 4K and HDR are big battery drains. HDR requires a very high brightness from the backlight and that would cut on battery life significantly when watching videos. While 4K would improve image quality, I don't think it would make that big a difference in real use because the current displays are already high PPI.
HDR content is still in its infancy with some on YouTube, Netflix and game consoles. I assume it will eventually trickle down to iMacs when panels capable of that become available. HDR desktop monitors are only coming to market this year.
HDR content is still in its infancy with some on YouTube, Netflix and game consoles. I assume it will eventually trickle down to iMacs when panels capable of that become available. HDR desktop monitors are only coming to market this year.
I think Apple was right to wait on this. Once they implement 4K movie and tv show rentals, they will release an updated Apple TV for 4K. Right now there just isn't a lot out there in terms on content and the majority of what people watch is not in 4K. Later this year, potentially. Not needed on an iPad though.
4k is not required on a screen of 10 inches or even 15 inches in size. it is a total and complete waste of time. the gpu can scale content from 4k to retina resolution without any noticeable quality loss as the screen just isn't big enough to require that resolution.
if you think it is, you're clearly a victim of "bigger numbers are better" marketing.
4k is even excessive on monitors smaller than say 22 inches. once the pixels are small enough to not matter, increasing resolution becomes irrelevant and a waste of power.
i'd say based on my 30 years of watching displays improve that frame rate at this point is more important. 4k60 still isn't common and some people can pick 120fps from 60 reliably in blind testing.
if you think it is, you're clearly a victim of "bigger numbers are better" marketing.
4k is even excessive on monitors smaller than say 22 inches. once the pixels are small enough to not matter, increasing resolution becomes irrelevant and a waste of power.
i'd say based on my 30 years of watching displays improve that frame rate at this point is more important. 4k60 still isn't common and some people can pick 120fps from 60 reliably in blind testing.
I'm probably what you would call an early adopter of most things and even I don't really care about 4K yet. TVs are not items that I upgrade just because there's new tech out there. I will get a new TV when our current 1080p Samsung breaks. I acknowledge that 4K content looks fantastic when I see it on TVs at the store. But 1080p content also looks fantastic at my house.
The one thing that has come close to swaying me is the PS4 Pro. But it hasn't yet, and from what I've read, the PS4 to PS4 Pro sales mix tells you just what a niche 4K still is at this point. When the 4K TVs come down in price enough where they're the same as what 1080p TVs are now, people will just buy them by default.
The one thing that has come close to swaying me is the PS4 Pro. But it hasn't yet, and from what I've read, the PS4 to PS4 Pro sales mix tells you just what a niche 4K still is at this point. When the 4K TVs come down in price enough where they're the same as what 1080p TVs are now, people will just buy them by default.
I think Apple is messed up on this one. We've had the ability to record 4K video on our iPhones since the iPhone 6s was released. Yet for some reason, we cannot play those videos on an Apple TV. It would be nice to be able to airplay those 4K videos recorded to a big screen tv in 4K.
Majority of what I watch is 4K on netflix. Almost all of the netflix original stuff is recorded 4K. There is enough quality netflix originals that all I use cable for is live sports.
Fair enough, I am sure it will come eventually when Apple supports 4K movies and tv shows.
I guess I just don't buy the notion that the world is clamoring for 4K just yet. I still don't know one person who even owns a 4K TV, and I know a lot of tech junkies.
That's a little surprising to me as I don't know why you would buy anything less than a 4K TV in the last year, maybe even two. They have been so cheap. Now it's just waiting for content.
Me too! I think it's just not something people will upgrade for, and TVs can last quite a while. Again, I admit that 4K content on a nice 4K TV looks freaking amazing, but I just don't think it's something people feel like they must have.
Yep, same. We'll replace the TV when it breaks down. The switch to flat panel displays was likely driven in part by the analog shutdown. I know plenty of people who still haven't made the switch from DVD to Blu-ray.
The PS4 Pro, unfortunately, does not support 4K Blu-ray. Only 4K Netflix and other streaming services.
I know exactly one with a 4K OLED bought for I think $4K.
Only if one was in the market for a TV. I think TVs much like refrigerators and other appliances don't tend to get replaced all that frequently.
I'm more interested in the PS4 Pro for the improvement in game graphics, but even then, I can still play all the same games on my regular PS4. In fact, even if I JUST bought a PS4 Pro and didn't bother upgrading the TV, I would still reap the benefits on PSVR. So it's probably safe to say I would upgrade to a PS4 Pro long before I'd replace my perfectly good TV.
Yes, I'm an American. But the library of 4k movies is still nowhere where it needs to be compared to standard HD. Also 4K is really only useful for streaming if the bit rate is much higher. Otherwise whats the point? I've seen 1080p streaming with a crummy bitrate and even a standard DVD would look better in some cases.
There are many factors at play to consider.
i'm sorry
. long story short: 4k doesn't make sense on a small display, hdr drains the battery of a mobile device, the ipad has already wide color gamut, and last, but not least: there's a bunch of 4k hdr standards already, so which one to chose ? (hint: not bt.2020, because that's a dead end - not backwards compatible like bt.1886 )
I keep thinking about all the people I STILL know who claim to not really be able to tell the difference between a retina and non-retina display. This is why 4K is still a hard sell. The average TV watcher just doesn't care and can't see the difference or doesn't think the difference is big enough to warrant a purchase.
i'm sorry
long story short: 4k doesn't make sense on a small display, hdr drains the battery of a mobile device, the ipad has already wide color gamut, and last, but not least: there's a bunch of 4k hdr standards already, so which one to chose ? (hint: not bt.2020, because that's a dead end - not backwards compatible like bt.1886 )
I agree but there are some with "special eyes" that can notice the difference in 4K on their iPad. LOL!
Only thing I would notice is too many pixels slowing my 10.5 down!
There's no content.
The frame rate is more important
The initial 4k panels were 30hz and non-HDR
The market for HDR 4k content just isn't there.
Most people didn't even bother with blu-ray yet. 4k takes more bandwidth than most can stream, and their disc player is still DVD.
And as above.... 60 fps is a massive difference irrespective of screen size and viewing distance. 120hz is a big difference too, but nowhere near the jump from 30 to 60.
4k is definitely still early adopter only right now and most people just really don't care. Most of the content they're playing is either 480p DVD or 720/1080p stream. Even the 1080p content most people stream is heavily compressed - having more bandwidth for less lossy compression would help for a start.
Game consoles can't do it, most even struggle with 1080p.
I personally would MUCH Rather see 60 fps 1080p content becoming far more common than 30 fps 4k.
netflix 4k , plenty of content. Cable TV doesn't even support 1080p. PS4 Pro game console outputs in 4K. Who wants to watch a blu ray movie at 60FPS when they are filmed at 24 FPS?
[doublepost=1501260279][/doublepost]according to this chart in the article below, 4K looks close to being ideal on 10.5 inch iPad when using device in lap. Granted the ipad isnt 16x9 but it would be close.
http://referencehometheater.com/2013/commentary/4k-calculator/
Last edited: