[On sitting close enough to the screen for 8K to be within visual acuity] Sure, but as I said, I am not interested in theaters, we're talking about the consumer sphere.
What is preventing consumers from laying out their home theatres around IMAX "immersiveness" standards?
[On FRC] it just shows they're not willing to take the high road (which they will eventually anyway, they're just putting things off, and this has been by whole qualm in this topic).
Will take the high road eventually...?
Not really to me, as long as it's capable of 4:4:4, I'd be fine living with that.
The content ain't 4:4:4...
Finally, a 2012 spec in the year 2020 (not to pun it with BT.2020). Perfectly demonstrates my talking points.
Specs can be written at any time...
For example, un Europe, there was an effort to move from PAL to MAC (Multiplexed Analogue Components.) It worked by "squashing" the luma and chroma in time, which had to be "unsquashed" by the receiver. There was also a section for data (audio, etc.)
Image from Wikipedia--data, luma, chroma.
Version "D" dated from
1982 (at least checking on the unreliable source that is Wikipedia, but that sounds about right), was not introduced in the UK
until 1990. Then flopped because, in a nutshell, the competing satellite system that used PAL won. It made for very expensive receivers, because everything had to be A/D converted, buffered, and D/A converted in "unsquashed" form.
Why bother mentioning something that can only be considered extremely arcane, especially outside of Europe (and a few other places)? Well, the obvious feature was by using component video, bye-bye to composite artifacts such as moiré patterns.
MOREOVER, the UK receivers at least supported
WIDESCREEN (16:9) out of the box that could work with "pan-and-scan" data that would be transmitted, and a
high definition version (HD-MAC) would have been introduced--"1250 lines" (2x625 lines.) Some HD-MAC transmissions did occur in certain countries in the early 1990's.
Also, the data section, I think, supported up to
4 channels of digital audio (14-bit (well, 10-bit companded)/32kHz) so could have been used for discrete surround.
Over in Japan, high definition broadcasts existed in the form of Hi-Vision.
So much for 1980's standards that had some use in the early 1990's. How long did it take for high definition to properly "arrive"...?
OLED is an old tech, and it hasn't been improving for the past half decade either, it's main issues of luminescence, but mostly burn-in is a clear example of stagnation of even a revolutionary tech that hit about the time that decade threshold I was refering to - to when all this stagnation began. I'm not saying there's no new tech ever, but whole issue is the pace. The pace of the past decade is nothing compared to the decade, or decades before it simply put. This is strictly talking about display tech.
The problem is that once LCD became "good enough" plasma really suffered. I knew people who replaced their plasma displays because the screen was too reflective in a strongly illuminated environment. (e.g. Fed up with seeing their face reflected off the TV!) Once 4K was on the horizon, the decision was made to pull the plug on plasma.
BTW, plasma as a display technology dates from the 1970's. ;-)
OLED has indeed been around for a while, but there's a difference between it being developed to a certain quality point, and mass production of large screen TV-sized OLED displays. For TV's, OLED has only just reached the point of volume and pricing for mass consumer adoption.
Worse yet, even the slight generational improvements (whenever they occur) are accompanied by lunacy price hikes. Look at even more established industries like smartphones.
I find the whole smartphone situation and pricing (given they are basically disposable including planned obsolence) absolutely ridiculous, and (perhaps not entirely reasonably, but they're certainly part of the picture) I blame Apple for this "technology as jewellery" closed box nonsense.
Complete lack of modularity is extremely irritating--why do I need to buy a new smartphone when the only thing I want to upgrade (Samsung Galaxy S8+) is the camera? After all, certain PDA's used to have expansion ports. The rest works just fine--browser, messaging, phone calls, and some apps. Why can't I replace the battery without gross inconvenience (and "luck" in not destroying the phone) or having to take it to a repair shop? Ludicrous.
You and I are on the same page here. Glad we understand this mess and how it demonstrates companies just making up nonsense on paper that fools consumers in an attempt to make up for the stagnation that has led to all their products being very close with one anothers' offerings. And new consortiums always popping up in an attempt for companies to make their own standards hoping to add another sticker on the TV in hopes that will drive someone to pick their product over the other that looks similar on paper.
If the world (i.e. humans) worked in a rational way then things would be different. But it doesn't. And never did. So here we are, at least in a better era than the "Dark Ages."
How many CRT's could have been better if the HT line was properly implemented instead of penny-pinched?
