Apple Press Conference Thoughts
- Thread starter Scott Greczkowski
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 92
- Views 6K
"if you build it, they will come"
but it is a good question, especially since the size of the file and the bandwith to share
Scott- here's what some of us who own and shoot 4K are doing to great advantage on 2k Monitors-
1. When you shoot 4K you have the option of downresing the 4K to 2K with superb sampling that results in an even better image than the same camera shooting at 2K for native display. But this does require longer processing.
2. Shoot in 4K and then in video editing or even still frame pictures, we can select a 2K frame inside the 4K image and now create a better framed shot. Along the same lines we can also crop a cinematic aspect ratio to appear film like in the output without losing resolution for the 2K display. By comparison, shooting 2K and trying the same thing, requires blowing up the shot to full screen which creates a softer image.
So, you see, there are other things besides just preserving the original 4K that can be done and what we are doing in the video world with 4K right now.
Last edited:
I get it. But 99% of people who own iPhones, do not own Apple TV's. You are assuming the market is one and the same. Should they include that in Apple TV? Probably. Is it essential for their market? Probably not. As Don says, you can use the video effectively on a PC/macbook. Indeed, wouldn't it be quite good on a retina-display mac?
h.265 ( High Efficiency Video Coding ) I doubt they developed something different or it will never be able to be displayed on industry standard 4K TV's
I was reading about NASA 4K TV being launched this fall. It would kick awesome keister if there was a NASA 4K TV App on the AppleTV G4. But, alas, I'm afraid not...
Just because I can understand the why of not supporting HDMI 2.0 and HDCP 2.2 doesn't mean I like the decision. It means me putting off a replacement for my AppleTV G3 for another two to three years.
Just because I can understand the why of not supporting HDMI 2.0 and HDCP 2.2 doesn't mean I like the decision. It means me putting off a replacement for my AppleTV G3 for another two to three years.
Technically HDMI 1.4 can deliver 3840×2160 (Ultra HD) at 24 Hz/25 Hz/30 Hz, so if the iPhone is doing 3840x2160 30fps vs 4096x2160, the Apple TV would be capable of outputting the video. But, of course there is the whole issue of HDCP 2.2 for 4k video from other sources, perhaps Apple did not want to confuse everyone with that and just said it is 2K only...
As far as the new products:
1. iPad Pro - nope not interested. I think "Pro" is a good designation. It is for companies and professionals that want to run specific apps on a larger screen - think insurance adjuster. It would be easier than a laptop in a lot of specialized applications.
2. Hermes iWatch... Mom wants one already! I am not interested
3. Apple TV - I will probably get one, but I really wish they had put in 4k
4. iPhone - I like the new camera and the 23 bands of LTE. I am doubting that I will get one, but I will not rule it out yet. I will wait on some review of the camera quality. My digital camera broke a year ago and I have been getting by with just the phone since.
As far as the new products:
1. iPad Pro - nope not interested. I think "Pro" is a good designation. It is for companies and professionals that want to run specific apps on a larger screen - think insurance adjuster. It would be easier than a laptop in a lot of specialized applications.
2. Hermes iWatch... Mom wants one already! I am not interested
3. Apple TV - I will probably get one, but I really wish they had put in 4k
4. iPhone - I like the new camera and the 23 bands of LTE. I am doubting that I will get one, but I will not rule it out yet. I will wait on some review of the camera quality. My digital camera broke a year ago and I have been getting by with just the phone since.
That's a question you should ask of ESPN; especially now as they seem to be in belt tightening mode.
Ah, but that would be the driving force behind upgrading to a true UHD Apple TV that could decode some proprietary Apple container.
There's always a madness to Apple's method.
4K support would have been nice for future proofing but they know that most of us still don't have 4K TVs. Remember that this is the same company that made the second gen Apple TV 720p even though Roku and many other devices at the time were 1080p capable. They have pretty much shown that they aren't going to worry about spec wars until something is widely adopted and they have to.
Perhaps you're confusing the capability of the box with the theoretical capacity of one of its lesser components? The HDMI class tells you more about what the box can't do than what it might.
Putting W-rated tires on a Chevy Spark isn't going to enable it go 168mph.
There's an interesting Forbes magazine article about the folly here. The one chance Apple had to assert itself in this new market was utterly wasted. Several Android UHD streamers are already available on Amazon.
UHD TVs are out there and some are buying their second sets at this point. To ignore those who throw money such gear is suicide for a company like Apple who depends on people who spend money easily on what they think is bleeding edge equipment.
They've been ready to go for months. I realize it is too early in the seasons for a lot of power match-ups, but you think they would want to test the waters some time.ESPN is ready to go. Was just there last week.
Quite honestly they have been doing 4K since the new Sportscenter Studio went online.
I know they are getting close as they are looking for a new 4K receiving plant from DIRECTV and DISH to be built for them.
Similar threads
