Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner

21 - 40 of 182 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,845 Posts
Phones appear cheap because they are subsidized by the phone companies... if TVs became subsidized there would be way more turnover.
We both know that given the current North American model of TV OWNERSHIP that a TV rental/lease model will never be widely accepted here. Now if this were Britain where a rental TV company called Granada built an empire .....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,096 Posts
Streaming 4K content over Internet could get really expensive. Netflix recommends 50 mbps Internet speed and with unlimited bandwidth it could get costly even in the big city.

I just do not think that many people will run out and start buying new TV sets and then pay well over $100 for the Internet just to be able to watch some 4k content on netflix.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,338 Posts
Discussion Starter #23
I think the big issue here will be data caps, not speed, at least in Canada. I don't know why you would need 50 Mbps as the 4K Netflix stream has a bitrate of 15Mbps. With Rogers cable only their Lite service ($45) can't handle that, their Express service ($55) is 25Mbps. But it only gives you 80GB per month which is 11 hours of content.

But the early adopters, like myself, are likely to have fast internet - my internet download speed is 250Mbps and my monthly cap is 1TB.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,096 Posts
People do not get Internet just to watch netflix , usually there are other members of a household that want to use Internet doing their stuff so netflix recommends to have 50 Mbps .
So the cost-of Internet itself would stop people from trying 4K content.
I am one of the early adopters also but I would not pay over $100 just for the Internet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,338 Posts
Discussion Starter #25
People who have Netflix realize that they need a decent internet connection. Perhaps Netflix is judging this on people running at least two simultaneous streams. But even then that leaves 20Mbps of overhead for everything else.

By the way, where do you get the 50Mbps suggested speed from? I see articles from Sep 2013 mentioning Netflix 4K requiring 50Mbps, but everything from CES 2014 talked about 15.6 Mbps. Maybe they have changed their mind on what bandwidth they will be using since last fall. The stories from CES say:
The picture was crisp on a large Sony Bravia screen when running off hotel Internet that was boosted to 50 Mbps, and didn't seem to take any longer than standard Netflix video to load.
So maybe that is where the 50 came from.

You don't have to pay $100 for internet - given the right bundles I believe both Bell and Rogers give you unlimited internet for $10/month. So Rogers Express + Unlimited is $65/month and should be good for one Netflix 4K stream plus 9.4 Mbps left over for a whole lot of other stuff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,096 Posts
25 Mbps is not enough if I want to watch netflix in 4 K and one of my kids wants to watch something else at the same time so 50 Mbps would be a better option.

I do not have any services wit bell so if I wanted their internet it would cost me over $100 for unlimited or over $200 with phone and tv bundle and that is not even 50 Mbps.
This is the link where netflix recommends to get 50mbps Internet
bgr.com/2013/09/26/netflix-4k-streaming

It is easy for Netflix to provide this service since they don't have to worry about getting new hardware or proper internet speeds for customers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,338 Posts
Discussion Starter #27
That link is from Sep 26 of last year - last Sep/Oct they were talking 50, they are now talking 15.

If you are watching a 4K stream and your kids are watching an HD or SD stream then you will be using up about 19 Mbps.

Teksavvy offers unlimited internet for less than $100/month depending on speed. Their Cable 45 service is $100 - if you can live with 300GB month then that is $57.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,368 Posts
reidw said:
I could argue every one of your points back like doesn't the plethora of announcements about upcoming 4K programming sound remarkably like similar announcements about 3D plans just a few years ago? But I won't.
Oh, I have no doubt you could argue the points, but I'm pretty sure you couldn't effectively argue the points. My points about human visual acuity limits and the ability for streaming media companies to adapt to new resolutions/codecs/etc are pretty air-tight arguments.

You likening 3D adoption to 4K adoption just shows that you're uninformed about why 3D failed: nobody wanted to buy or wear expensive glasses, and/or watch in a lower resolution.

Nobody will need to put stupid-looking $250 glasses on in order to watch 4K content.

reidw said:
Also is Joe Six Pack is ready to invest in yet another TV format?
I see no reason not to. Again, my prediction is that Christmas 2015 will sell a lot of 4K TVs, and practically all TVs over a certain price point (~$2,000) will be 4K. Most TVs will have 4K "built in" to them, along with built in apps for streaming video providers that provide 4K content.

bev fan said:
I am one of the early adopters also but I would not pay over $100 just for the Internet.
I think the point is that "early adopters" like Wayne are more interesting when it comes to looking at their habits and trying to determine what people will be doing in the future. "Laggards" like yourself, people who change last, are less likely to be able to predict future trends by looking at your behaviour. When people buy 4K TVs (and lots will, soon), they'll want to get 4K content - and that's where streaming video comes in.

Available bandwidth and data caps will continue to rise at a pretty good rate. The Rogers "ultimate" plan went from 200GB to 1TB in a couple years. I'm sure these trends will only continue. Incidentally, in my case I got fiber-to-the-home a couple weeks ago and it's great. While my ISP caps my bandwidth at 72mbps down and ~17mbps up, I get those speeds all the time, even at peak hours. And the line/modem is capable of providing 1Gbps up/down.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
416 Posts
I believe that people will buy 4k but no one will pay a premium for it as a feature, nor get rid of / upgrade a perfectly good OLED HDTV for one. For example, I don't consider myself a laggard but I'm not even using my current TV to its full 1080p potential most of the time due to the programming not being available besides BluRay and odd download ... so I don't see myself upgrading to 4k anytime soon. I just can't justify it. Dude, where's my content?

I am interested in some of the ancillary benefits of a 4K TV: the true black and sharper contrasts. That translates right down to 720p programming, so that gets me pondering an early upgrade but that's about it. There' also the wife factor too (justifying the cost when the current TV is still brand new and looks great) :)


I'm still surprised by how many SD cable/sat boxes are still around ... and that was for HD which is a huge leap step and bound in terms of image quality. If that's any indication then I believe a slow 4k migration will occur but I doubt a 4K "craze" will be here anytime soon. With that being said, OTA broadcasting going to 4K (ATSC 3.0) may be more in line with this evolution than we think
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
560 Posts
I don't think 4K will take off too quickly either. Broadcasters and consumers don't want to have to upgrade everything. I can see it being used more in sports production, like FOX does, so they can zoom in on images and maintain a high resolution. But 4K (and 8K) only benefits people with large TV's that sit a certain distance away from their TV.

And delivering content down the pipe will strain BDU's capacities even more - look how much compression is already being done. Even via OTA, I think there will be limits.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,368 Posts
Simonizer said:
And delivering content down the pipe will strain BDU's capacities even more - look how much compression is already being done.
This is just a argument that BDUs will adapt slowly, not a argument against high quality content being delivered. Netflix already looks better than what my local cableco delivers.

With higher resolutions and better codecs, Netflix will be increasing its quality lead.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
hi there! sorry -- I'm wholly tech-illiterate, and don't understand much of what I have been here :( But I'm hoping my question makes sense, and that someone can respond in REALLY simple terms: I am watching OTA (in London On) and only get 3 channels even WITH an indoor antenna. I'm thinking of buying a fancy big-screen 4k TV so I can watch Netflix and movies in real style. Will I still be able to get my OTA channels? 3 is not much, but I would hate to lose them. Thanks so much to anyone able and willing to help me with some info.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
I remember how good 1080p looked on a Plasma TV's with 600mhz refresh rate and you don't see Plasma TV's much any more because they were said to have a possible short life span.

I personally won't buy one, I'll let everyone else buy them and take the chances. This reminds me when 3D was the thing they tried to convince you was something you couldn't live without but they didn't realize, long term eye damage could be a side effect of watching too much 3D content. :cool:

This is just like the TV industry, VHS was replaced DVD's and Blue Ray when analog to digital was forced upon us, now they'll going to make you buy more crap you don't need so you can watch and record 4K content, nope not me.
 

·
OTA Forum Moderator
Joined
·
24,867 Posts
ATSC3.0: 4K OTA capability, spectrum efficiencies

Licensed as WI9X3Y in the Cleveland suburb of Parma, Ohio, and owned by WJW’s parent company Tribune Broadcasting, the full-power UHF station operates on Channel 31 with an ERP of 430 kW.
That's great to see Futurecast (Zenith, LG and GatesAir) working on a proposed next generation Digital OTA technology! 4K OTA (3840×2160 at 60 fps) would be a tremendous jump in broadcasting quality.

Here's a link about their August and October, 2014 testing of ATSC3.0 in Madison, WI: Zenith and Futurecast Test ATSC 3.0 Broadcasts in Wisconsin - Article from CE Pro
 

·
OTA Forum Moderator
Joined
·
24,867 Posts
ATSC2.0 vs ATSC3.0

Here's an introduction to ATSC2.0:
Broadcast industry takes charge with new ATSC standard for OTT services, non-real-time (NRT) content delivery, second-screen viewing, rich interactivity
New ATSC 2.0 Will Change the Way We Watch TV - Article from CE Pro

ATSC3.0 takes all those 2.0 features and packs them more efficiently into the standard 6MHz channel slot on the TV spectrum, permitting 4K and ATSC M/H (mobile/handheld) streams. Bandwidth provided by ATSC3.0, utilizing H.265 and OFDM, is ~26Mbps, as opposed to the original ATSC1.0's ~19Mbps using MPEG-2 and 8VSB.

ATSC2.0 is meant to be backwards compatible (ATSC1.0 gear would receive it as ATSC1.0 broadcasts as we see them today) but ATSC3.0 would not, requiring a compatible new tuner/receiver.

Here's a link to Wikipedia's info on ATSC2.0 and ATSC3.0:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Television_Systems_Committee_standards#Future
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
880 Posts
Once ATSC 3.0 gets the green light, I don't think 4K will be the main selling point for stations. I can see stations using ATSC 3.0 to offer more 1080 streams.

Some US stations are currently offering two 720p streams. Such as WWTI in Watertown, NY.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WWTI

In this particular case they offer ABC on their 50.1, and CW on 50.2 at 720p each. That market also has no NBC station.

I can see stations using ATSC 3.0 to offer three 1080i (or 1080p) streams, and increasing their possible revenue streams than using up a large piece of their spectrum for 4K. It would also depend on the networks as well. Will they want to offer their main network feed at 4K to their affiliates. Would a 2K stream be a better option. Would all those new 480i sub-channel networks prefer to upgrade their feeds to 480p or 720p to their affiliates thus increasing the space they take up the stations spectrum.

I think we'll see less licensed stations with ATSC 3.0. But, each station will be affiliated with more networks. Thus, for the viewer, there may be more channels available in HD in their market.
 
21 - 40 of 182 Posts
Top