1) I brought up various uses for the TB port which you continually want to deny are viable. Are you forgetting that TB is protocol independent? This is a great technology for anything other than pedestrian use.
2) I may have brought it up first (no idea) but as I've shown you also brought it up, which you denied doing.
no...i don't deny any of the highlighted above...you have mis understood my comments from the start......
I agree with you here; it's not nearly that powerful an industry-changer. But it WILL be successful, and sooner than you'd imagine. Heck, than I'd imagine (which is as soon as you'd imagine, but just from the perspective of someone who thinks it'll succeed ).
I have a 27" iMac. Where do I get 2560x1440 content or is that display a waste?
I have an iPad 3. Where do I get 2048x1536 content or is that display a waste?
I have and iPhone 5. Where do I get 1136x640 content or is that display a waste?
Yeah...
I have similar devices.
It kind of galls that when I AirPlay from my iPad 4 (2048x1536) -- I have to downscale it to 1080P for my iMac or HDTV.
BTW, here's a chart from the Michael Cioni preso link in my prior post -- It shows 4K Data Rates in GigaBYTES per second:
I have no idea what part you object to or don't understand. You clearly stated that there is no 4K content without considering what a TV is how the devices connected to it have have changed and are changing.
I have no idea what part you object to or don't understand. You clearly stated that there is no 4K content without considering what a TV is how the devices connected to it have have changed and are changing.
2) I hope your image doesn't make people think that 2 hour iTunes movies will need to be 8 terabytes.
The slide/figures are Micharl Cioni's -- they are using 10-bit log files (not 8-bit) so that may account for math discrepancy.
Where did you get the "11.6Gb/s" for your conversion?
I believe this chart refers to the original 5K/4K camera source data. This is converted to ProRes (several variants) for editing, then the the edit output is conformed with the original source data.
Watch the video -- it discusses the entire process.
When they have the final video conformed, they make copies for distribution (Theater, Academy, Cable, BluRay, DVD, etc) at various resolutions from 4K (Theater) down to 720P (DVD)...
So, no, your iTunes Movie won't be 8 Terabytes:
Finally, the movie was shot and processed [mostly] in Sweden and the UK... Lower Resolution Dailies were sent to Hollywood as iTunes Podcasts -- Higher resolution copies were sent (more slowly) using traditional methods.
The slide/figures are Micharl Cioni's -- they are using 10-bit log files (not 8-bit) so that may account for math discrepancy.
Where did you get the "11.6Gb/s" for your conversion?
I am certain I read it yesterday as a reason for TB2 to break the 10Gb/s barrier. However, I can't find the source so for all intents and purposes we should assume I'm mistaken.
So, no, your iTunes Movie won't be 8 Terabytes
At most a frame would only be 4x as high as it currently, but the codec should make it much, much lower. And then once H.265 is available we'll see that cut in half.
If Apple is going to release an Apple TV set, then perhaps a 4K Cinema Display would be the logical start in order to test production.
Seems like a fair bet, but I do wonder if they'll release such a display this year when so few Macs could use it or wait until there are a lot more on the market that will support 4K, which means TB2 and Haswell.
That's just foolish… The last thing Thunderbolt needs is idiotic, confusing standard changes like USB: the "universal" bus with six different connectors. What, I suppose there will be a "Thunderbolt 2.5" eventually that does 20 both ways simultaneously, and then a Thunderbolt 3 that does 40Gbps one way…
Thanks, though.
Then you will agree that Apple's variations on existing connectors are equally "idiotic" and "confusing"?
I happened to glance at a cable news program covering the building collapse in Philadelphia...
What caught my eye was a rather jerky [manual] low resolution (jagged) zoom-in shot...
I was able to determine the location, and went to work with Apple Maps on my iPad:
[VIDEO]
It's kinda' weird, but this is the second time this week that I have used 3D Flyover on Apple Maps to supplement information provided on a TV Show. The other show was "Extreme Homes" which showed a home in West Hollywood that had been rebuilt -- gutted except for the exterior shell. The shell was painted solid black... Using 3D Flyover, starting at the Hollywood Sign (shown in the TV Show), I was quickly able to locate the house at 6158 Mulholland Hwy.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
1) I brought up various uses for the TB port which you continually want to deny are viable. Are you forgetting that TB is protocol independent? This is a great technology for anything other than pedestrian use.
2) I may have brought it up first (no idea) but as I've shown you also brought it up, which you denied doing.
no...i don't deny any of the highlighted above...you have mis understood my comments from the start......
It's interesting to note that the aggregate bandwidth is no different, it was 2x10 now it's 1x20, both directions.
Originally Posted by Ireland
WTF?
I agree with you here; it's not nearly that powerful an industry-changer. But it WILL be successful, and sooner than you'd imagine. Heck, than I'd imagine (which is as soon as you'd imagine, but just from the perspective of someone who thinks it'll succeed
Yeah...
I have similar devices.
It kind of galls that when I AirPlay from my iPad 4 (2048x1536) -- I have to downscale it to 1080P for my iMac or HDTV.
BTW, here's a chart from the Michael Cioni preso link in my prior post -- It shows 4K Data Rates in GigaBYTES per second:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
BTW, here's a chart from the Michael Cioni preso link in my prior post -- It shows 4K Data Rates in GigaBYTES per second:
That's probably uncompressed, yeah?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland
Not being expandable and not being internally upgradable are two different things. And "CNET News" is an oxymoron.
Well, you know everything. Congratulations!
"Content is King" -- Didn't John Phillip Sousa compose a march about that?
What will drive the sales of 4K TVs are:
Some leaders in the video industry think that Broadcast TV will not be a major industry by the end of this decade.
I have no idea what part you object to or don't understand. You clearly stated that there is no 4K content without considering what a TV is how the devices connected to it have have changed and are changing.
1) When I convert 11.6Gb/s I get 1.45GB/s.
2) I hope your image doesn't make people think that 2 hour iTunes movies will need to be 8 terabytes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz
Is there anyone besides the manufacturers who believe that Retina Cinema Displays, or Retina TVs, have any real world purpose?
In what scenario is 1080p not good enough from 10 feet away?
If Apple is going to release an Apple TV set, then perhaps a 4K Cinema Display would be the logical start in order to test production.
Originally Posted by Richard Getz
…a 4K Cinema Display…
But… unless they magically release card GPUs with Thunderbolt, I'll never be able to get one…
The slide/figures are Micharl Cioni's -- they are using 10-bit log files (not 8-bit) so that may account for math discrepancy.
Where did you get the "11.6Gb/s" for your conversion?
I believe this chart refers to the original 5K/4K camera source data. This is converted to ProRes (several variants) for editing, then the the edit output is conformed with the original source data.
Watch the video -- it discusses the entire process.
When they have the final video conformed, they make copies for distribution (Theater, Academy, Cable, BluRay, DVD, etc) at various resolutions from 4K (Theater) down to 720P (DVD)...
So, no, your iTunes Movie won't be 8 Terabytes:
Finally, the movie was shot and processed [mostly] in Sweden and the UK... Lower Resolution Dailies were sent to Hollywood as iTunes Podcasts -- Higher resolution copies were sent (more slowly) using traditional methods.
Welcome to the cutting edge of innovation!
Population: the early adopters
Expect whining from mainstream users
I am certain I read it yesterday as a reason for TB2 to break the 10Gb/s barrier. However, I can't find the source so for all intents and purposes we should assume I'm mistaken.
At most a frame would only be 4x as high as it currently, but the codec should make it much, much lower. And then once H.265 is available we'll see that cut in half.
Seems like a fair bet, but I do wonder if they'll release such a display this year when so few Macs could use it or wait until there are a lot more on the market that will support 4K, which means TB2 and Haswell.
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
And then once H.265 is available we'll see that cut in half.
Delicious H.265… do you think there will be any mention of it and a new iTunes at WWDC? Or at the iDevice event this fall?
I hope so yet I see nothing that makes me think it will be announced next week.
Note that the Samsung Galaxy S4 already supports it. I have no idea how effective it is but they can certainly check that box on the spec sheet.
LOL
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Note that the Samsung Galaxy S4 already supports it. I have no idea how effective it is but they can certainly check that box on the spec sheet.
I guess 12 frames per second counts as "support".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
That's just foolish… The last thing Thunderbolt needs is idiotic, confusing standard changes like USB: the "universal" bus with six different connectors. What, I suppose there will be a "Thunderbolt 2.5" eventually that does 20 both ways simultaneously, and then a Thunderbolt 3 that does 40Gbps one way…
Thanks, though.
Then you will agree that Apple's variations on existing connectors are equally "idiotic" and "confusing"?
Mini VGA
Mini DVI
Micro DVI
Mini Displayport
OK, maybe, just a little WWDC foreplay...
I happened to glance at a cable news program covering the building collapse in Philadelphia...
What caught my eye was a rather jerky [manual] low resolution (jagged) zoom-in shot...
I was able to determine the location, and went to work with Apple Maps on my iPad:
[VIDEO]
It's kinda' weird, but this is the second time this week that I have used 3D Flyover on Apple Maps to supplement information provided on a TV Show. The other show was "Extreme Homes" which showed a home in West Hollywood that had been rebuilt -- gutted except for the exterior shell. The shell was painted solid black... Using 3D Flyover, starting at the Hollywood Sign (shown in the TV Show), I was quickly able to locate the house at 6158 Mulholland Hwy.