Westinghouse to Show 110-inch 4K TV at CES

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
The Consumer Electronics Show is just around the corner and we will be getting a preview of what to expect to see in coming days. Westinghouse has already announced what can be expected in the TV area: bigger will be better.

Pricing was not disclosed, but since current pipsqueak 84-inch 4K TVs from LG and Sony start around 20 grand, I gotta believe this wild Westy will cost at least as much.
Click to expand...
 
Gah at all the companies pushing crappy 4k when they know that it wont be standard. Still really isn't a point to these TVs until UHD connectors/other stuff is decided upon. These TVs will probably be rendered like a 720p TV without HDMI.
 
DeathPrincess said:
Gah at all the companies pushing crappy 4k when they know that it wont be standard. Still really isn't a point to these TVs until UHD connectors/other stuff is decided upon. These TVs will probably be rendered like a 720p TV without HDMI.
Click to expand...

Speaking of the connector, I found it funny when 720p was first coming to TV's that had the component connectors to support the resolution when no devices had those. My mom bought one of those TV's and had RCA hooked up to it for the longest time!

Shouldn't HDMI handle what ever resolution is coming out next? I thought that was the reason to have the connector to begin with, so we aren't changing our connector everytime a new resolution comes out.
 
we want cheaper 4k tvs, not more expensive ones. hopefully this one will be cheaper than a Prius
 
Trimlock said:
Shouldn't HDMI handle what ever resolution is coming out next? I thought that was the reason to have the connector to begin with, so we aren't changing our connector everytime a new resolution comes out.
Click to expand...

HDMI as of v1.4 can do 4096x2160....but ONLY at 24Hz.
 
Trimlock said:
Right, well maybe the next iteration of HDMI will give us a better frame rate.
Click to expand...

They need to at least double the bandwidth between overhead and audio to get even 60Hz...which with how Hollywood is shoving 3D at people still ain't enough.
 
Westinghouse? Really? Why would they do this when they can't make a single good 1080 TV. Seriously, their products are garbage.
 
So, basically...this 4K thing won't really catch on with the normal citizenry. I don't have $20,000 for a TV...even if I did...I don't have a movie theater in my house.
 
Skripka said:
They need to at least double the bandwidth between overhead and audio to get even 60Hz...which with how Hollywood is shoving 3D at people still ain't enough.
Click to expand...

Well where is the bottleneck happening at? You can't really blame a cable, is it more at the RAMDAC?
 
bbordwell said:
Version 2.0 is expected to be able to do 4k at 60hz, check wiki.
Click to expand...

I had read that...catch being it'll be at least a calendar year before we see gear ship with HDMI2.0, best case and unless the HDMI folks engineer a backwards compatibility miracle, all the v1.4(x) HDMI AVRs and GPUs and BD/DVD players will not work with the new 2.0 bitrate (for 4k screens).
 
Skripka said:
I had read that...catch being it'll be at least a calendar year before we see gear ship with HDMI2.0, best case and unless the HDMI folks engineer a backwards compatibility miracle, all the v1.4(x) HDMI AVRs and GPUs and BD/DVD players will not work with the new 2.0 bitrate (for 4k screens).
Click to expand...

Honestly by then I'm expecting most of the content to be stream, devices will probably be cheap enough that all we have to do is update the cord.
 
What's the plan for 4K delivery? We're already at violet lasers with Bluray, so we're going with x-ray?

Trimlock said:
Well where is the bottleneck happening at? You can't really blame a cable, is it more at the RAMDAC?
Click to expand...

There's no analog with HDMI. Digital interface standards are usually set based upon what's needed at the time and increase bandwidth as necessary, though eventually you run out what can reasonably be transmitted on a pair of conductors, as happened with USB.
 
Consumer reports rates pretty much all the flatpanels TVs similar in reliability. Westinghouse is one of the few exceptions. They are four times as likely to have problems as a Panasonic or Sanyo which are the two best.
 
Fooshnik said:
What's the plan for 4K delivery? We're already at violet lasers with Bluray, so we're going with x-ray?/QUOTE]

The Blu-ray spec is for up to 10 layers at 25GB per layer, so there is plenty of room in the Blu-ray format for 4k content. Not use what the status of 10 layer blu-ray media is though. Not good, I'd imagine.

SheHateMe said:
I don't have a movie theater in my house.
Click to expand...

Your loss. :D
Click to expand...
 
I wouldn't have any use for 110 inches unless I decide to remodel the house for "electronic wallpaper". I really don't see any reason to go any bigger than 46 or (maybe) 56 inches. It's hard to justify the cost with the content that is given. I might could understand a football fan going higher though. Otherwise, it's just not worth it. 3D is a joke, apps on tv makes for too many vulnerabilities, and the only way to get 1080p is with Blueray anyway. Since I have no desire for Blueray....there just isn't any point. It's hard enough to finger out the right specs for one's needs for most people....this just makes for another step in spending more money that most people likely don't have anyway.
 
Sweet, I hope my Ikea Galant can hold this baby. It's gonna be a helluva monitor. :D
 
SheHateMe said:
So, basically...this 4K thing won't really catch on with the normal citizenry. I don't have $20,000 for a TV...even if I did...I don't have a movie theater in my house.
Click to expand...

They've also announced 50", 55", and 65" models.

Prices will come down on the regular consumer-sized panels over time. My dad paid $3500 for a 42" 720p plasma less than a decade ago.

DeathPrincess said:
Gah at all the companies pushing crappy 4k when they know that it wont be standard.
Click to expand...

What do you mean, exactly? The 4k standard is already being used by high end cameras. 8k isn't going to be feasible for some time, and 4k (3840 × 2160) makes sense as the next standard resolution because it's exactly 4x 1080p. The issue for consumers is that the HDMI interface needs to be updated, but Blu-Ray market share isn't all that great anyway.
 
For those eager to plug 4K into a computer but disappointed about the TVs being so physically gigantic, Eizo have a ($35k RRP) 4K display of 37" and Intel made it sound like they wanted to get 4K displays out for computers also.

(Blu-Ray will be deliver 4K films on a single disc, but new drives will be required for the larger format. Would expect Sony to get the PS4 future proofed for this before releasing it, and it will definitely carry indie games and tech demos for 4K)

(And does anybody else remember when 640x480 was high resolution in the computer world?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top