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.
HD... whats next?
- Thread starter James Cole
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
hopefully a bigger hard drive and a basic OS to check emails, browse the web, view calendar, contacts etcetc. 
I don't think HD is really that impressive, in my opinion the quality looks worse most of the time. This is like the switch from CRT to LCD years ago, where the LCD's looked worse at the time due to low resolutions, where CRT made it look "blurry" so you couldn't tell.
I think HD+ is probably going to happen. It is bad that every change needs to be standardised, but to get video to match the resolution, this is currently the only way. Perhaps a HD+ standard where video is at an extremely high resolution and is scaled down to display at many different resolutions.
3D is a gimmick, and not a new invention. I think there is a reason it has not taken off before. Perhaps smell-o-vision!!! (Joke). Perhaps, eventually fully immersive television where you enter the scene and can freely explore it.
I think the continual merging of television and the internet will take place, with better on-demand and more user created content.
I think HD+ is probably going to happen. It is bad that every change needs to be standardised, but to get video to match the resolution, this is currently the only way. Perhaps a HD+ standard where video is at an extremely high resolution and is scaled down to display at many different resolutions.
3D is a gimmick, and not a new invention. I think there is a reason it has not taken off before. Perhaps smell-o-vision!!! (Joke). Perhaps, eventually fully immersive television where you enter the scene and can freely explore it.
I think the continual merging of television and the internet will take place, with better on-demand and more user created content.
I think you either need a better TV or a better delivery service.
In the States, at least, SD and HD are like night and day on a larger TV.
After getting used to the HD, I find it hard to tell if it's really better. Then I switched back to watching SD, and I then I knew.
Super Hi Vision comes next, on larger screens.
But the biggest, most noticeable advances in TV technology will be refresh rates, energy efficiency, and thin-ness (all to be found in OLED tech).
After that, it's all about formats and inputs and all that stuff-more about the STB than the TV itself.
But the biggest, most noticeable advances in TV technology will be refresh rates, energy efficiency, and thin-ness (all to be found in OLED tech).
After that, it's all about formats and inputs and all that stuff-more about the STB than the TV itself.
when is OLED destined to be released? i have been (somewhat) waiting for a good 2 years to know a final release date...
one thing that im really confused about is refresh rates and their benefits.. if you have a BD and compare it on a 100Hz vs 200Hz TV, are there actually an benefits?? if the BD is only 24p then how could there possibly be an increase in quality?? our eyes cant even see it haha!
edit: oh and also, does SUper Hi watsis name use the WHUXGA resolution (4 times greater then that of 1080p?) or are they different resolutions?
Sony already has an OLED set, something like 15 inches in size and costs about $2000.
wowzers!
What sets IMAX apart is not the resolution, but the frame size. It's freakin huge!
Yeah, for folks in the UK and Europe, the bump up to broadcast 720p probably isn't all that noticeable. For us in the states, going from 480 to 720 is a more dramatic change.
The two most touted coming advancements are the "quadHD" and 3D sets. The problem with both that will massively slow adoption rates are two fold-
-People have just purchased digital TVs and are not going to run out and spend another $2000 on another TV when they're still not truly seeing the benefits yet with regards to really great HDTV (1080p on most signals, be they satellite or cable; signals that aren't compressed to terrible levels to reduce bandwith)
-Broadcasters just laid out large dollar amounts on transmitting HD signals and are already complaining about not recouping the costs within 5 years. Now go to that broadcaster and try to have him lay out more capital expenditures to either go quadHD or 3D? Not gonna happen. Maybe on the top tier, premium channels like HBO, Showtime, etc., but not your local broadcast stations or even TBS, TNT, etc. And tell them that this won't do any good until people purchase yet another set? Um, in short, no.
And don't forget that 800 pound gorilla in the corner of the room who's name is 'the current economy'. No matter what happens, it's going to be 3-5 years before the public at large is clear of this financial mess and has the equity in their house back and feels comfortable enough to make a purchase of that level. There was just an article over at arstechnica.com about the current state of OLED's. The short answer - don't go saving your money. There manufacturing facilities aren't even in place yet to produce these things on a large enough scale to put the price point at something consumable to the mass market. And no manufacturers right now are even hinting at retooling any of their plants to do this until the economy picks back up. Hell, right now they're closing plants, not upgrading them.
What would be nice in an ideal world would be to see everyone involved in the creation, production, and transmitting of media to focus on quality and ease of delivery. Let's get the current product looking at it's best, then move on to whatever the media conglomerates claim is the next big thing.
-People have just purchased digital TVs and are not going to run out and spend another $2000 on another TV when they're still not truly seeing the benefits yet with regards to really great HDTV (1080p on most signals, be they satellite or cable; signals that aren't compressed to terrible levels to reduce bandwith)
-Broadcasters just laid out large dollar amounts on transmitting HD signals and are already complaining about not recouping the costs within 5 years. Now go to that broadcaster and try to have him lay out more capital expenditures to either go quadHD or 3D? Not gonna happen. Maybe on the top tier, premium channels like HBO, Showtime, etc., but not your local broadcast stations or even TBS, TNT, etc. And tell them that this won't do any good until people purchase yet another set? Um, in short, no.
And don't forget that 800 pound gorilla in the corner of the room who's name is 'the current economy'. No matter what happens, it's going to be 3-5 years before the public at large is clear of this financial mess and has the equity in their house back and feels comfortable enough to make a purchase of that level. There was just an article over at arstechnica.com about the current state of OLED's. The short answer - don't go saving your money. There manufacturing facilities aren't even in place yet to produce these things on a large enough scale to put the price point at something consumable to the mass market. And no manufacturers right now are even hinting at retooling any of their plants to do this until the economy picks back up. Hell, right now they're closing plants, not upgrading them.
What would be nice in an ideal world would be to see everyone involved in the creation, production, and transmitting of media to focus on quality and ease of delivery. Let's get the current product looking at it's best, then move on to whatever the media conglomerates claim is the next big thing.
It'll take a considerable amount of time before it gets to the rest of the world. It's a lot behind Japan.
I'd vote for a wider color space, like xvYCC/x.v.Color, which can already be Transported with HDMI 1.3 and is supported by some hardware including TVs, Blu-Ray Players, AV Receivers and Camcorders (mainly Sony stuff). I think the Playstation 3 does too and afaik Windows 7 will. What's missing are xvYCC sources besides those Camcorders