Hisense Announces 55-inch Ultra High Definition 4K TV for $1,999

22

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

LilHammer

4K hardware and "content" will be driven by the PC industry. I'm an IT professional and a number of my co-workers and managers are constant looking for more pixels in the same screen space to have more information in their view at the same time.

Think about how many remote desktop sessions you cuold have open on the screen at the same time, and all at 1080 resolution... Network Operation Centers... Collaborative uses... Much of IT is supply-side driven, where new technology becomes available first, and then we figure out all the great uses for it, followed by consumer demand and those uses reach everyday needs.

Once there is significant traction in the PC industry, saturation will spread to the consumer market. We're buying a 55" 4K TV this for our workroom for collaboration.

avatar

stradric

A few things about this:
1) Wow, nice price and quite a bit of features too. Something's gotta give though. I'm willing to bet that the interface is horrendous and the apps sluggish. That tends to be the case with cheaper TVs from no-name brands.

2) Why do we even care about 4K? There's an equation for optimal view distance for HD TVs. It turns out that a 60" 1080p resolution is about as good as it gets in the average living room. You would need a massive 100+" screen to see any benefit from 4K in the living room.

4K computing devices make way more sense because it equates to more usable screen real estate. For TVs, we just need better contrast and color reproduction.

avatar

Zstreek

We care for a lot of reasons.
1) I think most of the people who are criticizing 4k have never seen one side by side with a 1080p tv. These are beautiful devices. The BS about having to sit so close to be able to see the difference is crap. Unless you are just blind.
2) I want to sit close. It is just a matter of time before the price drop meets the amount I have saved up for one of these and it replaces my current computer monitor. 55" 4k computer monitor is the dream! It is better for work and play. No more of this multiple monitor crap! Do it all on one screen.
3) Native content is coming. The Galaxy Note III has 4k video capture capabilities. They suck, but you can get it in a stinking phone. It is going to be everywhere in no time.

I just don't understand the resistance to this technology. Unlike 3D which totally blows, 4k is useful, beautiful, and exciting. If you don't want it, you don't have to buy it.

avatar

stradric

@Zstreek: Well for one I said it makes sense on computing devices where it equates to more screen real estate. Secondly, I *have* seen a 4K TV compared to a 1080p TV. Up close, the difference is noticeable. But from 7' away, it's not at all. Better contrast and color reproduction is noticeable from 20' away. I'll take a TV that gives me that over 4K any day.

4K has its uses. A 4K monitor for my comptuer would be amazing, but anyone who thinks they need one in the living room probably wants it more for the novelty than any practical purpose.

Also, 4K computer monitors mean compromising the horsepower of all the video cards out there on the market. Suddenly a game that ran great at 1080p is now struggling at 4K.

avatar

devin3627

thats because you need glasses bro. not everyone here is Mr. Four Eyes. must be siding with your old folks since they don't see well either.

avatar

USraging

I agree the average resolution for a 24" monitor is 1920x1080, the resolution on my 55" led tv is 1920x1080. Ok, which do you think will look better for gaming? Now, would a 4k monitor at 24" look better than a stretched out 55" at 4k? I don't think so. There is a point of diminishing returns for high resolutions on smaller screen sizes. Right now if I connect my gaming rig to my 55" 120hz 1920x1080 tv and try to play a game, it looks like poop, than I go back to my 24" led 1920x1080 and it looks a lot better.

I guess the point I am trying to make is that 4k will be better suited for larger screen formats.

avatar

vrmlbasic

I can still see the pixels, and the dreaded "jaggies" (aliasing), at the designed-for 3' eye-to-screen distance on my 27" 1440 monitor. 4K can't come soon enough.

The higher the resolution, the less need there is for anti-aliasing. If that "eye can only see so much detail" schlock is true for 4K (the related expression for 60 fps is bunk) then it would completely eliminate the need for antialiasing.

avatar

vrmlbasic

So it can only do 4k @ 30 Hz? How is that even watchable?

We live in an age where 720 and 1080i are the best that we can get from our TV providers (was the digital OTA system designed for 4K?), an age where many shows are only filmed in 2K (WHY!), an age where a fair number of shows are only given a DVD release.

Having a 4K tv in this age is like having a modern express train in the 1800s: it is vastly more capable than the infrastructure on which it depends.

avatar

stradric

Spec sheet says 120Hz.
http://hisense-usa.com/tvs/XT880/55/0

avatar

vrmlbasic

I was under the impression that HDMI was capable of anything above 30 Hz @ 4k...

avatar

Hey.That_Dude

Current HDMI is limited to 4K @ 24Hz for a single link.

avatar

Obsidian

We have 4k 13.3-inch screens; a Kindle Fire HD with wonderful DPI; the retina displays have been out for more than a year; now we're getting some 'affordable' 4k Television displays above 50-inches ...

When are PC users going to get any of that love in monitors (that aren't $3000+). It's time for some 27 to 32-inch monitors with 4k resolution that are under $900. Maybe even one with a curved screen that's in the 40-inch range (futuristic pipe dream).

avatar

Nimrod

HAAAA. The expensive ass 4k PC monitors will beat the crap out of these TVs and the stupid "retina" display in terms of color accuracy. Most the 4k panels out for your computer right now are geared to the people producing and creating the 4k content. Not the average end consumer.

But they will come.

avatar

kixofmyg0t

Just waiting for a affordable ~50" Sony 4k to to replace my current tv.

avatar

legionera

get the XBR-84X900! If you will spend on sony, spend big

avatar

yammerpickle2

Great to see 4K gaining a foothold in the market. The more sets sold, the greater the demand for content, and the sooner the content will become more common.

avatar

jbitzer

Great, I'm sure they'll cause the exact same market boom and frmat shift that 3d didn't.

avatar

Arthur Dent

Or the same market boom and format shift that 1080p TVs did.
The difference is that 3D was always a niche feature, but a higher resolution is something everyone would benefit from.

avatar

TommM

Except for there's little to no media for 4k. It's like buying a hot tub, but you can only fill it with a bathtub amount of water.

There's really no point in buying one unless you're one of those "first guy on the block" type of people.

avatar

Hey.That_Dude

Except that you can get equipment with a nice 1080p to 2160p upscaling.

So more like getting a hot tube and filling it with 1/4 water, them making all that water into bubbles that look a lot like water, to take up the rest of the space.

The real issue is that HDMI doesn't do 60hz at 4K. Until they get that debacle cleared out, I'm not gonna touch it.

avatar

AFDozerman

4K content won't come until there are 4K TVs to run it on. In the end, it's more about if you want to buy the chicken or the egg.

avatar

jbitzer

Exactly, Most content is still in 720p on broadcast, what, like 10 years later?

Maybe by 2046 you'll be able to watch a rehash of friends in 4k on your 25k TV.