Jump to content

New Idea for Data...(just my thoughts)


derrph
 Share

Recommended Posts

Devices may move up to that resolution but it doesn't mean its a good thing. You can have a beautiful display with 1080p resolution on a screen the size used in phones. TV's may keep following that path, but content needs to catch up. I deliver and install tv's and appliances and any time I set up one of the newer UHD tv's I have to sit there and explain why it looks like shit compared to what they saw in store.

In my prefernce, I'm not a big fan of large screen televisions as they currently are and may be for some time. I just don't like real world distractions while watching, and since I don't have much of a choice at the moment and likely for quite a while, I choose to multitask with the television on while online the device.

 

I know there are people who may disagree with this, and I completely understand the downsides many people have with this, or simply just not thinking of it in such a serious way. I definitely don't argue the potential societal and other issues which could be majorly resolved by giving people a choice of online interactive, or fully personal private space.

 

What I'm getting at, is wanting to be able to have a fully virtual reality based custom reality software that is much more than a gaming headset, which is why I'm supportive of a 6inch 4k screen. My reasons have nothing to do with movie streaming and wasting data. I want this, along with medical sensory drugs and devices to help form this new life experience, which has absolutely nothing to do with shootem up games, porn stuff, typical aged social building software, etc.

 

So, I'm pretty much on the side of 4k really not being needed for conventional stuff, especially as it wastes streaming data. However, if anyone would like to know a bit about it, please pm to me. As a notice though, I'm having some increased health problems with my nerves and muscles, so I may be a bit longer from here somewhat. Whatever happens, I do support S4GRU!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my prefernce, I'm not a big fan of large screen televisions as they currently are and may be for some time. I just don't like real world distractions while watching, and since I don't have much of a choice at the moment and likely for quite a while, I choose to multitask with the television on while online the device.

 

I know there are people who may disagree with this, and I completely understand the downsides many people have with this, or simply just not thinking of it in such a serious way. I definitely don't argue the potential societal and other issues which could be majorly resolved by giving people a choice of online interactive, or fully personal private space.

 

What I'm getting at, is wanting to be able to have a fully virtual reality based custom reality software that is much more than a gaming headset, which is why I'm supportive of a 6inch 4k screen. My reasons have nothing to do with movie streaming and wasting data. I want this, along with medical sensory drugs and devices to help form this new life experience, which has absolutely nothing to do with shootem up games, porn stuff, typical aged social building software, etc.

 

So, I'm pretty much on the side of 4k really not being needed for conventional stuff, especially as it wastes streaming data. However, if anyone would like to know a bit about it, please pm to me. As a notice though, I'm having some increased health problems with my nerves and muscles, so I may be a bit longer from here somewhat. Whatever happens, I do support S4GRU!

If you want a VR headset then buy one. The oculus should be available early next year and there are several others. You can even get the Samsung set up. I still don't see how that translates to needing 4k or uhd resolution on your phone.

 

In case you didn't know, 4k is 4096x2160 and uhd is 3820x2160. Samsung managed to make it work with only 2560x1440.

 

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4k for phones is patently absurd.  The only reason for that kind of resolution on such a small screen is for VR purposes or if you're playing off that device to a larger screen.

 

As others have mentioned above, compression is a much greater factor in perceived quality at that screen size.

 

I work with 5k and 6k footage on a daily basis and that's for post/VFX reasons.  I'm definitely not against higher resolutions, it's just a waste of bandwidth where not needed.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4k for phones is patently absurd.  The only reason for that kind of resolution on such a small screen is for VR purposes or if you're playing off that device to a larger screen.

 

As others have mentioned above, compression is a much greater factor in perceived quality at that screen size.

 

I work with 5k and 6k footage on a daily basis and that's for post/VFX reasons.  I'm definitely not against higher resolutions, it's just a waste of bandwidth where not needed.

Exactly! When creating content, you ideally start with a higher quality/resolution source than you will use for final distribution. Just because you have a 4k (or 6k, 8k) source material, doesn't mean it needs to be distributed in that form for consumption. Frankly most people can't tell the difference between 720 and 1080p on their biggish screen TVs because they sit too far away from them. Now that's not true on larger screens when people sit closer, but on a 37 or 42 in TV, when people are sitting 6-8 feet away...

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4k for phones is patently absurd.  The only reason for that kind of resolution on such a small screen is for VR purposes or if you're playing off that device to a larger screen.

 

As others have mentioned above, compression is a much greater factor in perceived quality at that screen size.

 

I work with 5k and 6k footage on a daily basis and that's for post/VFX reasons.  I'm definitely not against higher resolutions, it's just a waste of bandwidth where not needed.

Exactly! When creating content, you ideally start with a higher quality/resolution source than you will use for final distribution. Just because you have a 4k (or 6k, 8k) source material, doesn't mean it needs to be distributed in that form for consumption. Frankly most people can't tell the difference between 720 and 1080p on their biggish screen TVs because they sit too far away from them. Now that's not true on larger screens when people sit closer, but on a 37 or 42 in TV, when people are sitting 6-8 feet away...

 

It sounds like at least one of you works in post production, so you will know what I am talking about.

 

The greatest benefit from the paradigm shift to 4K or UHD probably will be the more careful source origination.  To illustrate, look at the past nine years of BD.  Sure, nearly every BD release has been superior to an earlier or simultaneous DVD release.  However, many of these BD releases have been sourced from old DVD era scans that marginally possess 2K resolution.  Early in the BD format, we did not know any better, the image looked high def, and we ate it up.  Then, we got wiser.

 

Today, we are seeing a great many 4K scan sourced BDs, and they look tremendous.  Even though they have been down sampled to 1080p, they retain most/all of the resolution of the source.  In other words, 4K capture has greater benefits than 4K display.  On most 2160p displays, I am unconvinced that most UHD BD will visibly trump BD -- provided from the same 4K scan.  But the 4K movement hopefully will end the practice of passing off old master scans on UHD BD or BD.

 

AJ

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want a VR headset then buy one. The oculus should be available early next year and there are several others. You can even get the Samsung set up. I still don't see how that translates to needing 4k or uhd resolution on your phone.

 

In case you didn't know, 4k is 4096x2160 and uhd is 3820x2160. Samsung managed to make it work with only 2560x1440.

 

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

While personally I don't need 4k on a smartphone device for 4k vr, there still likely will be a big market for such an "all in one" device, especially as more companies compete for the more/most feature-rich products.

 

For instance, rumors are that the may be a 4k screen for the Sony Z5+. It makes sense for these smartphone/vr headeset combo devices to be made for the portability factor. Even though many of these same people who want 4k for vr, may not think its needed for the smartphone.

 

Yet, it'll still be there as manufacturers think of having their "ultimate" devices. I still figure on their being lesser end devices with 1080p though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While personally I don't need 4k on a smartphone device for 4k vr, there still likely will be a big market for such an "all in one" device, especially as more companies compete for the more/most feature-rich products.

 

For instance, rumors are that the may be a 4k screen for the Sony Z5+. It makes sense for these smartphone/vr headeset combo devices to be made for the portability factor. Even though many of these same people who want 4k for vr, may not think its needed for the smartphone.

 

Yet, it'll still be there as manufacturers think of having their "ultimate" devices. I still figure on their being lesser end devices with 1080p though.

I can barely see the pixels on my nexus 5 screen holding it as close to my face as my eyes will focus. I can't see pixels on the newer Samsung displays at all. There is a lot more to a quality display than pixel density and resolution. At some point you are adding pixels just for the sake of adding pixels.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can barely see the pixels on my nexus 5 screen holding it as close to my face as my eyes will focus. I can't see pixels on the newer Samsung displays at all. There is a lot more to a quality display than pixel density and resolution. At some point you are adding pixels just for the sake of adding pixels.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

I really, very seriously doubt that anything below 5.5 inches will be 4k, and in my opinion, I'd rather see all devices under 6 inches be 1080p, while have the 6 inch starting point be for 4k. I can't see any need for a higher resolution than that, which I mean for vr purposes.

 

As I said, I know the needs are different between smartphone use and vr, but the convenience/marketing factor is there, especially for social vr apps on the go.

 

Personally though, I hate all of these social apps, and I'm just interested in getting right into my own vr world to create and explore at my own time with no outside interference and pop-up adds, etc. I'm not interested in the Oculus for that reason, and am hoping for something great from Sony in either the Morpheus project or the Xperia+.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 inch devices don't need 4k either, IMO. Unless they are WiFi only. Wireless data networks can't support them anyway. I use an 8 inch Samsung Note tablet that is 1080p, and my screen is gorgeous. And at normal viewing distance, individual pixels are not perceptable. Additionally, my 6 inch Nexus 6 screen is stunning in 1080p.

 

A 4k screen would marginally add an improvement to these type of devices (and only while using 4k content). However, the hits to processor performance, RAM, battery life and the impact to streaming over a wireless carrier mobile network at 16x 1080p is just not worth it. I'm not willing to pay the additional cost for the screen either.

 

What would happen if 4k becomes the next big thing is that 4k streaming will be disabled by all providers. Like Verizon does now with HD streaming. Because mobile networks struggle with 1080p now. They would just crumble and die if they had to support 16x more for each frame than what 1080p consumes. Even Sprint doesn't have the spectrum to do that.

 

I get the desire to improve technology and experiences. But in the case of mobile devices and 4k screens, there is just not a payoff that exceeds the cost/benefit analysis. In my mind, it's not even close. 4k belongs on really big screens that don't stream over anything but possibly WiFi.

 

Using Nexus 6 on Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, I will sum it up with this hot take.  Manufacturers have to sell new TVs and phones.  They need an enticement to get people to upgrade.  That enticement presently is 2K and 4K, which will have some tangible benefits but be a gimmick for most devices and consumers.

 

AJ

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

    • By danlodish345
      Even though Sprint doesn't have the best coverage in my area. I do have lots of memories and nostalgia with the company. I wonder who else here will miss Sprint besides me?
    • By vanko987
      I'm new to this forum, and I've seen people mention cell sites with specific ID's (for example, SF33XC664). Is there any significance to these ID's, and is there a way to decode them? Also, how do I figure out what the cell site ID's are for towers near me?
      Thanks! I'm excited to start talking on this site more 😀
    • By lilotimz
      Samsung Network Vision equipment are highly distinct and fairly easy to spot compared to the equipment that other vendors are deploying. Sprint is Samsung's first extremely massive American contract (baring Clearwire) so there  should be no issues in confusing these equipment for another carrier which happens often with Ericsson NV equipment.

      Below are images of Samsung equipment which includes antennas, remote radio units, base stations, and their mounting configurations. 
       
      Samsung antenna with eSMR 800 RRU & PCS 1900 RRU

      A close look at a Samsung setup





      Next Generation Samsung Configuration
      RRH-P4 4T4R 1.9 GHz  | RRH-C4 4T4R 800 MHz| RRH-V3 2.5 GHz

      Next Generation 8 Port Dual Band Antenna Setup 
      4 port 800 MHz RRH-C4 800

      (source: dkyeager)

      (source: dkyeager)
      Narrow beam setup

      High Capacity Site with 2 Antennas & 3 RRUs (2x PCS & 1x SMR).
      Second antenna is PCS only for now.


      Canadian IBEZ (NO SMR)

      Special Case PCS Only Setup for Canadian IBEZ




      Close up of standard antenna connectors 

      Samsung Cabinets

       
       
      Powerpoint slides from Samsung / Sprint
      *disclaimer - all  powerpoint diagrams and images were found through public municipality online databases and is by no means misappropriated through malicious means*
      *Credit goes to those whom took pictures of these equipment. You know who you are*
    • By kckid
      Sprint announced at MWC trade show in Barcelona that 5G will go live with 4 cities starting in May  (Chicago, Atlanta, Dallas and Kansas City )
      https://phys.org/news/2019-02-sprint-5g-network-chicago-atlanta.html
       
  • Posts

    • At least a few sites in STL are now at 100 MHz.
    • 100 MHz n41 is live in Austin and...Bentonville, Arkansas. Guessing this went live on Tuesday or Wednesday in Austin; network was acting a bit wonky on Tuesday. Noticed it yesterday, as I'm still a little too far away at home to catch n41. Peak speed in Bentonville 1/3 mi from the site was 675-700 Mbps down, 80-90 Mbps up, with the upload speed only possible with a 20 MHz B66 anchor...which seems congested at times. They also have 5 MHz B2 here as an anchor, which predictably leads to slow uploads. n71 is 15x15 here. Sprint B25 is two 5x5 channels. Weirdly, seems like I'm being routed through Nashville, so latency is rather high, and tethering performance is somehow quite poor...maybe it's due to congestion on the PCC meaning that the difference between on-phone and tethered priority is the difference between a usable connection and...not. Also, VZW (with the old Alltel SID for CDMA) is what you end up using inside the Crystal Bridges museum, though the area has WiFi so not the end of the world.
    • The Sprint site at 520/202 was decommissioned a few weeks ago. Everything was pulled off the pole. 
    • It looks like N5 supports 5, 10, 15, and 20 MHz channel widths. I wonder how long they'll wait before they make a change to be able to use more of that spectrum for N5. Possible options I see: Use 15x15 as B26/N5 using DSS (If thats an option, or would it have to match and be N26?) 5x5 as B5 LTE for older phones and that still leaves 5x5 for HSPA.  A more aggressive option would be to use 20x20 for N5 exclusively and 5x5 for HSPA. This still leaves 10x10 B12 and 10x10 B14 for older phones for low band. Hopefully they enable SA if they go this route. Since I believe you can't aggregate low band LTE with low band NR in most cases, phones using the N5 carrier would not be touching the B12 and B14 carriers. If they enable SA on the 20x20 N5 carrier it would also help free up their limited midband spectrum for older non-NR phones. That would also prevent falling back to LTE only inside a building just because the mid-band anchor band was too weak. In Daytona AT&T was broadcasting 5x5 B2, 10x10 B66, and 10x10 B30 and that was it for midband. 
    • I've found 2 decommissioned Sprint sites in Louisville, both were sites with both T-Mobile and Sprint. In both cases all Sprint tower equipment including the rack were removed. I haven't had time to dig through our permit site to see if I can find anything, but I'll be surprised if I do. 
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...