Samsung teases CES unveiling of HDTV with 'unprecedented new shape'

15678911»

Comments

  • Reply 201 of 217
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    I can't say I understand when people use some warping of a company's name or product, or when they wish some future endeavor will be a failure. I sincerely want Samsung to release something spectacular next week at CES. I want it to be a game changer. I want it to immediately and instantly change the way we look at television. I want it to be something original that after it's been done seems like the only way to do it going forward. I want this from all vendors at CES.

    We're all biased in the sense that all our experiences are subjective. Even our objective views are all had subjectively but that's getting a little too philosophical. What I'm trying to express is that I do love my Apple products — I think they are the best the market has to offer — but I don't care about Apple outside of what they can offer me just as they don't care about me outside of what I'm willing to buy from them. My bias is wanting the best tech possible every day for the rest of my life. If Samsung can pull television out of this mostly stagnant move into the future then I'm all for it.

    That said, their history for innovating an entire product with seamless integration and a great user experience isn't good but I certainly won't ignore them if they can bring it. They certainly have the resources to compete with Apple if they can change their mindshare, which is far better than I give most other tech companies.


     


    Actually, I completely agree with you. Great products move industries and force competitors to introduce products that answer or exceed the market leader. We don't need more crap, we need more innovation and invention.

  • Reply 202 of 217
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    New Sig.



     


    I noticed and LOL'ed. 

  • Reply 203 of 217
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,953member
    http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/07/samsung-ultra-hd-UN85S9/

    I guess... ...if "black easel" is a new shape.
  • Reply 204 of 217
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

    http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/07/samsung-ultra-hd-UN85S9/

    I guess... ...if "black easel" is a new shape.


     


    They were right about one thing: it's unprecedented.


     


    …ly hideous.

  • Reply 205 of 217
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    jeffdm wrote: »
    http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/07/samsung-ultra-hd-UN85S9/
    I guess... ...if "black easel" is a new shape.

    They were right about one thing: it's unprecedented.

    …ly hideous.

    If it has a VESA mount that would probably look pretty slick on a wall.
  • Reply 206 of 217
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

    If it has a VESA mount that would probably look pretty slick on a wall.


     


    Yeah, get rid of the easel and it doesn't look half bad! image

  • Reply 207 of 217
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    I'm just realizing what thread this is in. That is one ugly new "shape" for a TV stand. They call it a "Timeless Gallery" frame, and I agree if by timeless they mean there is no time that anyone would want to see that frame in a gallery.


    Yeah, get rid of the easel and it doesn't look half bad! :lol:

    It doesn't appear to have a VESA mount but that could just be a CES demo model or a marketing pic.


    1000
  • Reply 208 of 217
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

    They call it a "Timeless Gallery" frame, and I agree if by timeless they mean there is no time that anyone would want to see that frame in a gallery.


     


    Or timeless in that at no time in the past, present, or future will any other company be foolish enough to create something so aesthetically displeasing. 


     


    I got it: timeless in that, when looking back, no one will be able to place the era in which it was released since no other products will ever look like it.

  • Reply 209 of 217
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,379moderator
    jeffdm wrote:
    I guess... ...if "black easel" is a new shape.

    1000

    If you put a curvy girl next to it and turn out most of the lights, you can hide a lot of the design though:

    1000

    The back does look very clean and it's probably quite stable. A lot of the frame seems superfluous but I like that they're doing something unique. I think it would have been a bit nicer to not have the top so far up but more symmetrical in the rest position:

    1000

    It can still be used to carry it. The stand will be one of the easiest to detach from the screen, which is good for wall-mounting. They'll probably have a bracket somewhere that fits into the sides and allows it to be wall-mounted. Unless you're just supposed to lift it onto a couple of hooks like a painting or something.
  • Reply 210 of 217
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,953member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    I'm just realizing what thread this is in. That is one ugly new "shape" for a TV stand. They call it a "Timeless Gallery" frame, and I agree if by timeless they mean there is no time that anyone would want to see that frame in a gallery.
    It doesn't appear to have a VESA mount but that could just be a CES demo model or a marketing pic.
    1000

    I assume it's a concept, an idealized version rather than an exact representation of what ships, so they leave off things that don't present well, such as connectors and mount holes.

    There are so many TVs out there, there's no point in supporting this.

    The style of mounting reminds me of the roll around classroom chalk boards that you could flip horizontally to reveal another chalkboard. With silly concepts as this, I've one more reason to avoid Samsung TVs.
  • Reply 211 of 217
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

    …an idealized version…


     


    THIS is idealized?! image

  • Reply 212 of 217
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,953member
    THIS is idealized?! :lol:

    I guess TV design had to have its crinoline at some point:

    700
  • Reply 213 of 217
    vorsosvorsos Posts: 302member


    Yeah, there's only so much they can do with the form factor. I wouldn't be opposed to HDTVs having nicer front-facing speakers, maybe a thin integrated soundbar similar to the iMac "chin." And improved auto picture scaling, so people stop stretching 4:3 content.

  • Reply 214 of 217
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,953member
    vorsos wrote: »
    Yeah, there's only so much they can do with the form factor. I wouldn't be opposed to HDTVs having nicer front-facing speakers, maybe a thin integrated soundbar similar to the iMac "chin." And improved auto picture scaling, so people stop stretching 4:3 content.

    Because of VESA mounting, I see stands as independent of a TV. My current stand is something I designed and put the stock stand into storage. If even Apple made a TV and the stand was integral like the iMacs, then I wouldn't consider it.

    Better speakers would help, but they're a harder feature to market. A "chin" isn't totally necessary, but it's one way to do it.

    I think picture scaling is a solved problem. The only reason people stretch 4:3 content is some odd morbid aversion to black picture area, at least more so than seeing egg-shaped circles and other oddities caused by a stretched picture. In my experience, most TVs have scaling modes that preserve the aspect ratio.
  • Reply 215 of 217
    sockrolidsockrolid Posts: 2,789member


    @ Chandra69 re: "It has to invest in Bada OS. It has to kick the bloody Android OS."


     


    Samsung is gradually ramping up their work on Tizen, the open-source, standards-based alternative to Android.  In the meantime, while they're still shipping Android on their products, they should probably fork Android the way Amazon did.


     


    Why fork Android?  Because that's the only way for Samsung to 1. control their own destiny, and 2. build out their own content and services infrastructure.  Because, as we all know, it's no longer just about hardware.  It's no longer just about the OS and apps.  It's all that plus content and services now.  


     


    Samsung has crushed all other Android hardware partners, and they'll fight to maintain their position.  Even against Google, who are evidently clinging to their hope that they can re-animate Motorola as a viable competitor.  Relying on Google for their OS, and more critically for their app / content / services infrastructure, is a risk that Samsung should eliminate.

  • Reply 216 of 217
    vorsosvorsos Posts: 302member


    JeffDM View Post

    I think picture scaling is a solved problem. The only reason people stretch 4:3 content is some odd morbid aversion to black picture area, at least more so than seeing egg-shaped circles and other oddities caused by a stretched picture. In my experience, most TVs have scaling modes that preserve the aspect ratio.


    Acknowledged. Maybe I just want to entirely eliminate modes that distort the AR, especially the fisheye mode. Val Kilmer is fat enough lately; he doesn't need to gain another 40 pounds every time he's not centered in the frame. I certainly share Apple's proclivities for content control: "You'll experience this the right way, or not at all, dammit."


     



    SockRolid View Post


    Samsung has crushed all other Android hardware partners, and they'll fight to maintain their position.  Even against Google, who are evidently clinging to their hope that they can re-animate Motorola as a viable competitor.  Relying on Google for their OS, and more critically for their app / content / services infrastructure, is a risk that Samsung should eliminate.



    Sounds crazy, but Samsung could certainly pull it off. They have enough experience with various appliance interfaces, and their general mucking about in Android modifications. It wouldn't be elegant at first, but it would be entirely under their control.

  • Reply 217 of 217
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,953member
    vorsos wrote: »
    Acknowledged. Maybe I just want to entirely eliminate modes that distort the AR, especially the fisheye mode. Val Kilmer is fat enough lately; he doesn't need to gain another 40 pounds every time he's not centered in the frame. I certainly share Apple's proclivities for content control: "You'll experience this the right way, or not at all, dammit."

    I can understand that. If it's like their iOS scaling, then if the video doesn't fit the screen, your choices would be uncropped with black bars or cropped. I would take cropped before I would take the stretch, and I bet that most users would be fine with cropping.

    Sounds crazy, but Samsung could certainly pull it off. They have enough experience with various appliance interfaces, and their general mucking about in Android modifications. It wouldn't be elegant at first, but it would be entirely under their control.

    Samsung is roughly half of the total Android ecosystem. If anyone strikes out on their own, I think it would be them. I wonder what they would to do replace the services Google provides. We saw how controversial replacing the mapping service was for Apple. Going with Bing would be switching from one competitor to another.
Sign In or Register to comment.