Support NeoGAF

[Sky Chief]

Unless 4k TVs cost the same as a normal HD TV, I doubt it will sell. I really believe this is the end for Sony.

Talk about hyperbole. How would this be the end for Sony?

Every manufacturer is going to be making 4k TVs this year (many already are). Sony has been very successful selling 4k cameras and projectors for years now.

Furthermore, the first 1080p TV on the market in the US, a Sony Qualia, cost $13,000 at launch (it couldn't even accept a 1080p source because the HDMI standarddidn't support that yet and Blu Ray didn't even exist at the time) and I bought a similar model two years later for less than $1500.

 

[leroidys]

The quality of the panel matter a lot.

It's a pretty decent TV, 32" Samsung LCD, about 4 years old.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

Unless 4k TVs cost the same as a normal HD TV, I doubt it will sell. I really believe this is the end for Sony.

Sony have presold their first production shipment, and it is likely they will burn through the second one quite soon. It's not like they make these in any kind of huge quantities. I would be surprised if they ended up making 10-20k units in total before ending production. They will sell all of them, most of them will end up in the homes of footballers, various celebrities, rich Arabs and Russian oligarchs. That's who they have made this TV for, not us mere mortals. We can wait for a couple of years while the tech matures, and Sony can sell 10-20k units to rich people and make a massive profit from them which they can then invest into making production of these sets cheaper.

It's products like these that will help turn the company around, not doing what Sharp are doing by selling 80" TVs at a huge loss to beat Samsung in a race to the bottom.

 

[Omlagus]

What is CLED?

Crystal LED. Sony showed it off at CES last January. Basically each pixel has red, green and blue sub-pixels that are tiny led's. So the panel has millions of led's making up the picture. Their alternative to OLED since they didn't have a large panel to show off while Samsung and LG did.

 

[Monas]

This XBR-84X900 is the Triluminos range.
It's the top of the range and not for the massive mainstream production.
The 1080p equivalent back in the day, did cost the same.

 

[Totobeni]

Crystal LED. Sony showed it off at CES last January. Basically each pixel has red, green and blue sub-pixels that are tiny led's. So the panel has millions of led's making up the picture. Their alternative to OLED since they didn't have a large panel to show off while Samsung and LG did.

Here is my brief experience with it(a prototype that Sony Store/Sony official seller was showing early this year).

It was demonstrated next a Bravia and a Samsung LED(with a sticker on the Samsung logo saying other LCD brands )and it completely blew both out of the water, the image is super sharp and the black is way way darker like a Kuro, the Bravia and Samsung one were very dim next to it,it was like the New iPad screen next to a 3DS screen.

It was amazing really,not sure how it preform for games but it was easily way above anything oled or lcd/led. but sadly it look like Sony is having problems with them.

 

[Kung Fu Grip]

Unless 4k TVs cost the same as a normal HD TV, I doubt it will sell. I really believe this is the end for Sony.

You are exaggerating. Sony is just preparing for the future. They always think ahead, just like with bluray. You're going to see alot of 4K TV's at ces. I read on another forum by someone in the know that panasonic will have 4K TV's at the show.

And i don't know why everyone keeps complaining about the price. It's a new technology. It will get cheaper.

 

[luffeN]

Crystal LED. Sony showed it off at CES last January. Basically each pixel has red, green and blue sub-pixels that are tiny led's. So the panel has millions of led's making up the picture. Their alternative to OLED since they didn't have a large panel to show off while Samsung and LG did.

If you have about 6 million LEDs in the TV, doesn't that mean that it gets a hell of a lot more expensive because you use more LEDs than usual?

Edit: And thx!

 

[MDX]

I got a feeling Sony is pushing 4K because they have become irrelevant.

But imagine scenario where its not about the biggest set in the house, its
about each individual family member having a portable screen to watch TV with.
Small personal sets. This is what tablets are bringing, and now the WiiU.
This can extend the life of the large 1080p set long after the PS4.

 

[Jburton]

I got a feeling Sony is pushing 4K because they have become irrelevant.

But imagine scenario where its not about the biggest set in the house, its
about each individual family member having a portable screen to watch TV with.
Small personal sets. This is what tablets are bringing, and now the WiiU.
This can extend the life of the large 1080p set long after the PS4.

And you are way off the mark in regards to the irrelevant remark ...... in that case all manufacturers are irrelevant.


Personal sets will not overtake large TV.

 

[Raistlin]

You know I had no Idea whites on an oled uses the blue diode, on full blast, which has terrible life.

Any conventional additive color technology (in this case, RGB) is going to use all it's primaries in order to generate white. That's simply how it works - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Additive_color

Regardless, you are making a lot of assumptions regarding blue here. OLED is a constantly evolving technology, and different processes and materials are used depending on the use-case.

Previously IIRC, Samsung had been using PHOLED for red, and FOLED for green and blue (longer lived, but more power hungry) in order to reduce burn-in and color drift. UDC has been constantly improving their materials, and I believe Samsung's newest non-pentile panels are now using green PHOLED due to improved life. It's a moving target.

What we don't know is what is actually going into their television panels however. Certainly it is a major concern, but we shouldn't make assumptions until more is known. One thing to consider however is the simply reality of a television display versus a phone/tablet display. It is significantly lower dpi and significantly higher margin. The dramatically changes the equation for what can be used.



LG on the other hand is attacking things from an entirely different direction. Instead of a conventional RGB matrix, they are actually layering their OLEDs in order to generate a completely white sub-pixel matrix, and then overlaying it with an RGBW transmissive layer in order to generate picture elements. This has two immediate implications:

1) By using an RGBW layout versus conventional RGB, they can use lower voltage to create the same apparent brightness. This means lower OLED wear.

2) Since they are using the OLED layers to essentially create an sup-pixel-addressable backlight, they are not inherently forced to use R, G, B, layers to produce said 'white OLED'. IIRC LG is using RGB layers, but technically there are other potential ways to do it. Regardless, there may be easier ways to control color drift using a layering technique versus a conventional matrix (granted doing such processing can easily go awry - look at Panasonic's black level fuck up from a few years back when they incorrectly stepped the voltage).


Again though, we don't really know what type of OLED's are being used in their display. Is it definitely RGB? PHOLED, FOLED, a mix? Until these things are answered, it's hard to draw conclusions about stuff like aging, drift, etc.

Japan(4K) vs S.Korea(OLED)


I'd rather see these 2 new technolgies combined.

Who said they're mutually exclusive? Current OLED has more than sufficient DPI for 4k panels at these sizes (do the math). LG already plans to offer 4k OLED in 2013.

What you actually want is CLED. OLED has too many headaches over hte long term.

I'm not sure we should automatically make assumptions on CLED regarding this. Colored LED's do not have entirely linear aging either. Hard to tell until we know more.

If you have about 6 million LEDs in the TV, doesn't that mean that it gets a hell of a lot more expensive because you use more LEDs than usual?

Edit: And thx!

How is that different than OLED? It requires the same or more OLED sub-pixels.

Regardless, CLED is using a fairly mature fabrication technique based on semiconductor fabbing. While long-term, processes like vacuum deposition for OLED may prove more cost-effective than Sony's CLED manufacturing, that may not be the case in the short-medium-term.

so is HD TV broadcasting gonna move to 4K?

isnt most HD TV only broadcast in 720p @ the moment?

i see no point in a 4k Television!!

Yes, broadcasting is moving to 4k. Hell, 8k is being tested in some regions.

Also, current HD is not necessarily 720p. It's either 720p, 1080i, or 1080p depending on the channel/provider.

So do I have to buy all new players? Will current hdmi transmit 4k? If I have to swap out my whole HT that will slow me down on buying this stuff.

New players, yes.

Full speed HDMI 1.3/1.4 can support 4k (Sony's projector and TV accept 4k over single-link HDMI), however that's assuming current video characteristics remain unchanged. A definite broadcasting standard and media spec (BD 4k) have not been defined or at least publicly released.

Most are hoping Rec 2020 will supplant Rec 709. The reduced chroma sub-sampling, increased color bit-depth, increased framerates, etc would require a new HDMI specification and hardware even with the usage of improved codecs like h.265.

Unless 4k TVs cost the same as a normal HD TV, I doubt it will sell. I really believe this is the end for Sony.

Technology advancement ... how does it work?

 

[The Spoony Hou]

We can wait for a couple of years while the tech matures, and Sony can sell 10-20k units to rich people and make a massive profit from them which they can then invest into making production of these sets cheaper.

IF they make massive profit on these, I guess they can go on for longer, but I really don't see these catching on until they get the same price as "full HD". It's useless technology, unless you need a ginormous TV.

 

[RaijinFY]

IF they make massive profit on these, I guess they can go on for longer, but I really don't see these catching on until they get the same price as "full HD". It's useless technology, unless you need a ginormous TV.

Well maybe the point is that it isnt done for us (average Joe)....?

 

[TONX]

Saw one in the Sony Store last weekend. It was me and a bunch of people just standing there watching it play some Soccer demo. Noone said anything.

The only thing that came out of peoples mouths were random curse words, either at how good it looks, or the pricetag.

 

[metalslimer]

Well there isn't going to be a big TV switch for a long time considering everyone just upgraded, but looking at HDTV prices companies have to come out with something new with how dirt cheap HDTVs have become.

 

[dbztrk]

Currently HDMI can only do 4K at 30hz. Without support for 60hz it will take much longer for public adoption.

 

[Router]

Currently HDMI can only do 4K at 30hz. Without support for 60hz it will take much longer for public adoption.

I think the next HDMI standard is set to be announced early next year.

 

[Corky]

Anyone know what the PPI is on that screen?

 

[RukusProvider]

4k for even mass enthusiast market is largely irrelevant due to the size and viewing distance ratio.

If/when 4k becomes standard it won't be due to great demand. It'll simply be due to a natural evolution of technology.

 

[pixelbox]

Any conventional additive color technology (in this case, RGB) is going to use all it's primaries in order to generate white. That's simply how it works - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Additive_color

What I meant was they burned a diode with a significantly shorter life span along with the other diodes with similar, much longer life spans, equally. That doesn't sound like a problem? That coupled with the fact that as soon as you turn it on each sub pixel starts to degrade to their respected half-lifes, unevenly. And even if they all had the same life spans, you still have to worry about which pixels are used the most i.e. burn-in.

For the people that doesn't know much about OLEDs, think about each sub-pixel as a candle. If one is lit longer than the others that one will be closer to death. If you're looking at these candles from a top down view the one lit longer will be shorter or a greater distantance away from the viewer, appearing dimmer than the rest.

Regardless, you are making a lot of assumptions regarding blue here. OLED is a constantly evolving technology, and different processes and materials are used depending on the use-case.

Previously IIRC, Samsung had been using PHOLED for red, and FOLED for green and blue (longer lived, but more power hungry) in order to reduce burn-in and color drift. UDC has been constantly improving their materials, and I believe Samsung's newest non-pentile panels are now using green PHOLED due to improved life. It's a moving target.

I am not making assumptions on the blue diode. I have suffered through Samsung's cheap ass products to know that even if they had better techology R&Ded they would just opt for the old just to ride better cost. Whatever they are using they were afraid to put it in their larger devices because of the issues they were having. Fact is, I had the burn-in 8 months after purchasing a device with their tech and so have many others. Some with-in the first couple weeks. It's a flawed techology as long as they continue to use organic compounds.

 

[The Spoony Hou]

Well maybe the point is that it isnt done for us (average Joe)....?

Then I don't see much content being created in 4k, which makes it even more pointless.

 

[whitehawk]

Currently HDMI can only do 4K at 30hz. Without support for 60hz it will take much longer for public adoption.

Wait. The 4K demo TV at the Sony Store was displaying 60fps video. How did they transfer the video then?

 

[Corky]

Wait. The 4K demo TV at the Sony Store was displaying 60fps video. How did they transfer the video then?

I don't know about that one in particular but I remember another 4k ( was it 8k?) setup using several gpus and hdmi-inputs.

 

[metalslimer]

Then I don't see much content being created in 4k, which makes it even more pointless.

Eh.. you have to start somewhere. The tech probably isn't going to be in many people's home until a decade from now, but if they don't actually start producing them how are costs going to go down?

 

[Chittagong]

I wonder if it's safe to assume 4K won't gain much prominence in the next 6 years? I'm just at the end of my previous 6 year cycle which saw me jump to 1080P at the perfect time, and wonder now if a new 1080P will carry me through the next cycle.

 

[The Spoony Hou]

Eh.. you have to start somewhere. The tech probably isn't going to be in many people's home until a decade from now, but if they don't actually start producing them how are costs going to go down?

Fair point. I just don't see how Sony can sustain it until it gets cheap. But maybe they can.

 

[Mario007]

Fair point. I just don't see how Sony can sustain it until it gets cheap. But maybe they can.

A few post above you you have a poster telling you Sony has already sold out its first shipment and it seems like they will sell out on the second. So obviosly they are making money on these, don't doubt the fact that there is a nice profit margin here to cover the R&D costs.

Next year Sony will come with pretty much this same TV but in 15-20k range, the year after that in 10-15, then 3-8 and in 4 years 1-3k (this is all wild speculation) and each time the TV will be produced in different quantities and aimed at a different market sector.

 

[DCharlie]

Sony are dead? um - this is a banner product that sits in a number of Japanese stores as "come taste what daddy got!" view of future tech.

Yodobashi Shinjuku has a nice seated set up area showing a looping 4K demo of a football match. It looks pretty good but, yeah, the problem now is content.

I have a few pictures of a few of the demo set ups - i should throw them up here somewhere.

Anyways, no, this isn't the death of Sony - especially as these are all sold out and i doubt they are taking any hit on these. Plus it's another LOOK AT US AND OUR STUFF product that consumer electrics companies like this put out to get people excited - this isn't likely to be their mid-range unit for the masses (at least for a while - i have noted that the average size of HDTVs in Japan seems to be going up and up and up - though prices of large panels are tumbling so quick that makes perfect sense)

 

[The Spoony Hou]

A few post above you you have a poster telling you Sony has already sold out its first shipment and it seems like they will sell out on the second. So obviosly they are making money on these, don't doubt the fact that there is a nice profit margin here to cover the R&D costs.

I don't know how big that shipment is. If it's like 10,000, I guess that's a nice sum of money. If it's 100, not so much.

Plus it's another LOOK AT US AND OUR STUFF product that consumer electrics companies like this put out to get people excited

I know it's that, but I don't think it excites anyone, so it seems like a waste of cash.

 

[Raistlin]

What I meant was they burned a diode with a significantly shorter life span along with the other diodes with similar, much longer life spans, equally. That doesn't sound like a problem?

Where did I imply it wasn't a problem? I was simply illustrating that all displays do this - ie. it isn't something specific to Samsung's implementation (or even OLED for that matter).

I am not making assumptions on the blue diode. I have suffered through Samsung's cheap ass products to know that even if they had better techology R&Ded they would just opt for the old just to ride better cost.

It's not quite that simple though. Samsung doesn't actually make the materials for their OLED's. They are sourced from UDC, etc. So while at times they may opt for inferior materials or simply have them stocked from earlier purchases (they don't buy them as-needed), what is available is based on what their sources are producing.

Think of it like HDD's. At a certain point, it's actually more expensive to opt for the earlier tech (in this case, smaller HDD's). OEM's only have so many fabrication lines, and end up moving basically all of them to the newer tech. Same thing for processor/SoC companies. They'd need to set up special lines in order to handle the older products, and that costs extra.

With this in mind, the component quality keeps evolving.

Whatever they are using they were afraid to put it in their larger devices because of the issues they were having. Fact is, I had the burn-in 8 months after purchasing a device with their tech and so have many others. Some with-in the first couple weeks.

As I alluded to earlier, phone/tablet products are very different from TV's. For their phones, they have a very limited BoM. Similarly for the panels they OEM for other phone/tablet manufacturers, there's only so much margin and BoM that can be included ... otherwise the manufacturers will simply go elsewhere.

With TV's, the panel is a significantly higher percentage of the BoM, can have a higher margin, and can use different tech since it's much lower DPI.

It's a flawed techology as long as they continue to use organic compounds.

Non-organic LED's have non-linear decays. So do Plasma phosphors. The difference is they have been around for a long time and have continued to improve over the years.

The same thing will happen with OLED (it already has). It isn't inherently 'flawed technology' any more than those others are. It's simply less mature at this point.




Note ... I'm not saying people shouldn't be cautious. I actually wouldn't be surprised if there are issues with initial OLED TV panels. However, you are making assumptions on every step of the way here. What has happened with OLED phones (particularly early models) is not automatically an indication of what will happen with TV's. And it certainly shouldn't be an indictment on OLED tech as a whole ... particularly in the long-run as it matures.

 

[Raistlin]

Then I don't see much content being created in 4k, which makes it even more pointless.

Digital movies are normally shot in 4k or higher now, and studios have been remastering their film libraries to 4k or higher for long-term vaulting for years.

Moreover, TV broadcasting is moving to 4k (and in some locations, 8k). It's in testing in many countries. Similarly some satellite providers have already begun testing (for example DirectTV).


In terms of non-broadcast delivery, the BD spec will be updated to support it. Who knows, we may even get some insight at CES in a few weeks.

Wait. The 4K demo TV at the Sony Store was displaying 60fps video. How did they transfer the video then?

Oh really? That's interesting. I would have thought it would be similar to their VW1000ES projector which supports 3840 x 2160/24p, 3840 x 2160/25p, 3840 x 2160/30p, and 4096 x 2160/24p over HDMI.

If it really does support 4k/60p, I'd imagine it uses dual-link DisplayPort like their pro projectors. Earlier units employed dual-link DVI, but I think that's pretty much dead moving forward.

Fair point. I just don't see how Sony can sustain it until it gets cheap. But maybe they can.

Higher margins.

 

[DCharlie]

I don't know how big that shipment is. If it's like 10,000, I guess that's a nice sum of money. If it's 100, not so much.



I know it's that, but I don't think it excites anyone, so it seems like a waste of cash.

I don't think they are aiming for the general joe on the street with this ! But hey - there's always someone there having it demo'ed to them. I've sat through it - without being a dick - i could afford one easily, but hey - i'm beyond spending 25k on a tv when that's not even a year of schooling for one of my kids.

But there's a market for sure - just not a mass market one. If this was 5-6 years ago? i'd be sitting infront of one right now playing Wipeout HD with my FACE full of FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK

If it really does support 4k/60p, I'd imagine it uses dual-link DisplayPort like their pro projectors.

from someone i know at Sony, it's dual/multi link - i could have sworn they said HDMI but i think DisplayPort seems way more likely. Anyways, i'll double check again. Hell, if i get time in this week i'll just go ask. Perhaps i'll be a dick and ask them to turn the tv round so i can see the back! lol - enjoy your hernias , Yodobashimen!

 

[oatmeal]

Not sure if it's been brought up, but RED has released the REDRAY.

http://www.red.com/store/products/redray-player

It plays 4K content, and they struck a deal for streaming 4K content. Their 4K projector will be out next year some time which will be 'only' $10K.

 

[Mr.Squirrel]

If there were 4K content I'd get it, but by the time it's readily available, 4K sets will be going for 1/10 of that price.

 

[1st Course]

Does CLED technology have any advantage over OLED? Any reason why they didn't go with OLED like the other big players?

 

[DCharlie]

Also - 4K projectors with 3D support ... oh my pants :O

 

[Sky Chief]

Then I don't see much content being created in 4k, which makes it even more pointless.

Almost every film made over the last several years has been created in 4K as this is a standard for digital movie theaters. Many older films have been converted into 4K already. The amount of content ALREADY in 4K is astounding and there will only be more in the future.

 

[Raistlin]

Does CLED technology have any advantage over OLED? Any reason why they didn't go with OLED like the other big players?

Sony is actually one of the pioneers of OLED, and is continuing to work on it. As a matter of fact they recently partnered with Panasonic to work on consumer displays.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/06/25/sony-panasonic-oled-partnership-is-official-aims-for-mass-prod/



As for CLED advantages vs OLED:

• Cheaper to manufacture in the short-mid-term. CLED uses fabrication that's derived from semi-conductor fabbing. There are some interesting OLED processes in the pipeline that may make it cheaper in the future (cheaper than LCD even), but it's unclear when (and maybe even if) we'll get there.
  
  As with Sony's tradition in display R&D and production, they are betting on more than one technology here. Certain technologies are better for certain uses. Also, differing technologies have different cost and maturity timelines. It doesn't make sense to put all their eggs in one basket given Sony's size and R&D capabilities.
  
  So for a while at least, it's likely CLED will have price or at least margin advantages over OLED (though LG's technique should at least be more cost-effective than Samsung's OLED).

• Scalability. CLED is essentially a grid of fixed-size CLED units that are basically lego'd together to make a display. In order to make a larger size display, they simply add more rows/columns of CLED units (can't recall the exact size, but I think each unit is around 1-2" square or so?) and scale the image with a video processor.
  
  The disadvantage of this method is that you lose 1:1 pixel mapping, however most people won't notice the difference. This is particularly true if they eventually move to higher DPI base CLED units that are intended for 4k.
  
  Granted there's nothing really stopping LCD and OLED from employing a similar model, but no one's done it yet and there hasn't been any indication they plan to. The difference here is CLED was designed for this model from the get-go. And by using matrixed CLED units, yields are fantastic. With traditional TV manufacturing, if part of the screen has a defect you have to through out that entire panel (or section of the 'glass' if it hasn't been cut yet). With this design, Sony can simply throw out the defective CLED units and replace them with functioning ones.
  
  I should point out there's nothing fundamentally stopping Sony from using different DPI base units (so they can get 1:1 pixel mapping at different display sizes) ... but the logic in keeping it down to one or only a few base DPI's, and using video scaling to hit different display sizes, is to reduce costs. It's always cheaper when you have fabrication lines producing the singular design.

• Burn-in/color shifting. While the different colored inorganic LED's do not exhibit perfectly linear half-lives either, their time horizon is much better than current OLED (particularly for blue diodes). While it's expected OLED will continue to improve, LED is simply more mature at this point.

 

[Izick]

Makes sense. It'll be cheap enough for humans to buy in like 3-5 years, when the next consoles are part way through their cycles.

 

[1st Course]

stuff

Thanks, really appreciate your inputs.

 

[purnoman3000]

Does CLED technology have any advantage over OLED? Any reason why they didn't go with OLED like the other big players?

I believe it's production yields and lifespan that CLED has over OLED



.

 

[Akira]

Any word if Sony will be showing a new CLED prototype at CES? I have heard rumors of an OLED set by Sony (perhaps the result of its partnership with Panasonic)

 

[whitehawk]

Wait. The 4K demo TV at the Sony Store was displaying 60fps video. How did they transfer the video then?

I don't know about that one in particular but I remember another 4k ( was it 8k?) setup using several gpus and hdmi-inputs.

Oh really? That's interesting. I would have thought it would be similar to their VW1000ES projector which supports 3840 x 2160/24p, 3840 x 2160/25p, 3840 x 2160/30p, and 4096 x 2160/24p over HDMI.

If it really does support 4k/60p, I'd imagine it uses dual-link DisplayPort like their pro projectors. Earlier units employed dual-link DVI, but I think that's pretty much dead moving forward.

Wait, sorry guys. My bad. I saw the TV again today and it was actually 30fps. I guess since it was displaying some sports footage, my brain remembered it as 60fps.

 

[Raistlin]

Wait, sorry guys. My bad. I saw the TV again today and it was actually 30fps. I guess since it was displaying some sports footage, my brain remembered it as 60fps.

Hey no problem. Thanks for confirming it.

 

[pixelbox]

Note ... I'm not saying people shouldn't be cautious. I actually wouldn't be surprised if there are issues with initial OLED TV panels. However, you are making assumptions on every step of the way here. What has happened with OLED phones (particularly early models) is not automatically an indication of what will happen with TV's. And it certainly shouldn't be an indictment on OLED tech as a whole ... particularly in the long-run as it matures.

Oh OK. Because people should know that the tech isn't mature enough produce imho. Maybe I'm just sour because my screen suffered from burn-in.

 

[Bboy AJ]

Raistlin, where are we with 8k tech? Will it be awhile or can we ride out the 4k wave like I did with 720p?

 

[thuway]

Unless 4k TVs cost the same as a normal HD TV, I doubt it will sell. I really believe this is the end for Sony.

You really don't understand how technology works.

 

[Raistlin]

Raistlin, where are we with 8k tech? Will it be awhile or can we ride out the 4k wave like I did with 720p?

I don't see it as becoming relevant as a consumer display tech. At least not until we're living in a future with walls made out of displays. It has usefulness as a recording medium though.



Regardless I think you can safely go with 4k.

 

[The Spoony Hou]

Digital movies are normally shot in 4k or higher now, and studios have been remastering their film libraries to 4k or higher for long-term vaulting for years.

Moreover, TV broadcasting is moving to 4k (and in some locations, 8k). It's in testing in many countries. Similarly some satellite providers have already begun testing (for example DirectTV).

Higher margins.

This is interesting, although by producing content I meant it in the sense I don't see they releasing 4k discs if the market is too small, not to actually make the 4k content, sorry I wasn't clear. We have to see if they deem the investment worth it.

And yes, I get higher margins. I really don't care how expensive these first batches are.

You really don't understand how technology works.

Yes, I do. But useless techlogy that doesn't catch on won't make profits.

 

[Mario007]

This is interesting, although by producing content I meant it in the sense I don't see they releasing 4k discs if the market is too small, not to actually make the 4k content, sorry I wasn't clear. We have to see if they deem the investment worth it.

And yes, I get higher margins. I really don't care how expensive these first batches are.



Yes, I do. But useless techlogy that doesn't catch on won't make profits.

How many times do you have to be told that this particular piece of tech has sold out or Sony and it is a pride-product, used to show that Sony is willing to innovate into the future and to try out their technologies as well as a chance to get money back on the R&D as these things are also sold at a hefty margin.

This is a win-win for Sony.

The challenge is, bringing the costs down to average consumer level quick enough before LG or Samsung get there first.