Why You Shouldn't Buy a UHD 4K TV This Year 271
Lucas123 writes "While it's tempting to upgrade your flatscreen to the latest technology, industry analysts say UHD TVs are still no bargain, with top brand names selling 65-in models for $5,000 or more. And, even though 4K TVs offer four times the resolution of today's 1080p HDTVs, there are no standards today for how many frames per second should be used in broadcasting media. Additionally, while there's plenty of content being produced for UHDs, little has been made available."
Tempting? I Don't Have a TV... (Score:5, Interesting)
"While it's tempting to upgrade your flatscreen to the latest technology,
I don't have a TV, and don't watch TV/movies other than through my faux-HD monitor.
I understand not everyone is like me, and that's OK. But in my circle of friends, it's really common to not have a TV and not care. Is this the experience of others, too?
Also, this whole 4K thing reeks of "we tried to sell 3D, failed, now trying desperately with the next thing..." But please reply if you're really into 4K, too...
Same reason as before (Score:5, Interesting)
Please see last year's posts on why you shouldn't buy a 3D TV.
Re:Seiki 39" 4K can be had for less than 500 bucks (Score:4, Interesting)
I think he's referring to pixel density, which he probably assumed (as did I) would be so fine you wouldn't notice the increase. However, after actually calculating it, here's a comparison:
1280x1024, 19": 86.27 px/in
1920x1080, 24": 91.79 px/in
3840x2160, 39": 112.97 px/in
Which is only 23% finer than the 24" HD monitor, and 31% finer than the uber-common 5:4 19" LCD. So I think you'd notice an improvement, and with proper DPI adjustment would be quite nice.
Why you *should* buy a 4k Monitor this year (Score:2, Interesting)
After a number of years in the desolate wasteland that is 1080P, we are finally at a convergence of the television and monitor markets with 4K televisions. Based on the ability of Seiki to sell a 4K 39" panel for less the $500, it's likely that 2014 will usher in a series of relatively-inexpensive monitors delivering this resolution. Similar 1080p panels are selling for $300, and since the manufacturing isn't significantly more difficult, it's likely that in 12-18 months that pricepoint will be reached for 4K monitors as well.
Worth noting - the Seiki does all of this while including a remote, tuners, and multiple connectors unnecessary for strictly computer-use monitor. It's likely the costs (and prices) could drop even more in that sort of an implementation given enough volume. (Since the TV market is much bigger it may still make sense to make a one-size-fits-all model)
I purchased the 4K 39" Seiki TV about two weeks ago for use as a monitor. The 30Hz refresh rate is lower than I would like, but for software dev, still images, and watching the tiny amount of 4K video content it is completely fine. 39" is a little bit larger than I would have normally considered, but it offers a nice amount of screen real estate (less than 2 30" monitors though) and slightly higher dot pitch than a standard 2560x1600 30" display.
tl;dr It's completely worthwhile to get a 4K display now at this price.