roundaboutnow

blastdoor said:

melgross said:

Greater than 5000 nits? That’s awfully bright. What we’re interested in is resolution, frames per second and latency. Unless AI isn’t giving, or first have all of his info, those are the specs that we all want to know.

Looking over this (https://pointerclicker.com/how-many-lumens-are-bad-for-your-eyes/#:~:text=In%20dark%20conditions%2C%2080%20lumens,luminosity%20of%20over%2010%2C000%20lumens.), I'm wondering if this is some kind of error. It sounds like 5000 nits (aka lumens) is close to being unsafe. (maybe they could call it a 'fried retina' display) 

I wonder if maybe it's more like the 'equivalent' of what a monitor would look like in a lit room at a reasonable distance. In other words, maybe the actual brightness is much lower, but because the light is coming from a screen an inch from your eyeball and sealed off from outside light, the experience is similar to looking at a 5k lumen light source, but maybe it's nowhere near actually being 5k lumen?? 

A nit is not the same thing as a lumen. Nit is also known as candela/sq.m and is often used to describe the brightness of an emissive display. Note the reference to a unit area in there. Lumens are usually used to describe the light output of a luminaire, such a light bulb or projector, where its not normal to stare into the beam or directly at the bulb (also inadvisable as the article you linked says). When the light output strikes a surface, you will get a certain number of lumens/area, depending on how wide or concentrated the beam is. Then, if you know the reflectivity of the surface (usually called "gain" when talking about a projection screen), you can derive nits based on how many lumens you have per area. (In cinemas, ft/lamberts is used to describe the light coming off of a projection screen).

Those outdoor LED billboards (emissive displays) are usually capable of producing up to 5,000 nit so they can be daylight viewable (a deep black between LEDs helps too). So 5,000 nit is not crazy...

I note that the article says "The brightness level Young quotes will be a peak level (emphasis mine) so it's not known what the level will be in regular use."

I do think that if one has AR glasses that are optically transparent with a direct view of the real world, with the glass's display being used to provide an optical overlay over the real world in broad daylight, you might need a display with a peak of 5,000 nit.

However, in the case of completely sealed goggles, this is different. If this is the case, I also wonder if there is some sort nit "equivalent" being made. A couple of hundred nits would surely be plenty in a completely dark environment, although it would probably be necessary for any given microLED pixel to peak above that average for optimal contrast ratios such as one finds in HDR.

eightzero said:

Hotels will not stand for this. They want you to pay for that entertainment system. I've seen HDTV's installed and locked into the wall to cover the HDMI (and other) ports. And you can bet their proprietary software will block anything else.

A lot of hotels have seen the writing on the wall--they see that guests have personal mobile devices to access their own entertainment services now, so the market for in-room on-demand entertainment is nowhere near what it once was, and there isn't anything the hotels can do about it. Now, as an enticement to stay at their property, many hotels have put in place solutions like Sonifi's that include a screen casting feature. Sonifi's solution is basically Google Chromecast which lets guests cast from their iOS or Android device to the room's TV. There are provisions for restricting access to only your room's TV and automatic disconnect when you check out.

So if the Airplay update will facilitate the use of Airplay instead of (or in addition to) Chromecast in hotel TVs, there may well be a market for it.

PS: Another application for Airplay involving "TVs and speakers you don't own" would be corporate conference rooms. Besides Apple TVs, there are several 3rd-party wireless screen-mirroring devices being used in conference rooms that have Airplay capability. Probably most use AirServer software, which also includes Chromecast capability and (FWIW) Miracast.

JP234 said:

roundaboutnow said:

JP234 said:

Still waiting for Matter device support for anything useful like smart doorbell, security system, or Google/Nest thermostat. Guessing it's going to be way longer than expected.

I'm no expert on Matter, but you should check out the CSA website product list. There's a ton of stuff there:
https://csa-iot.org/csa-iot_products/?p_keywords=&p_type%5B%5D=14&p_certificate=&p_family=

I noticed that the Nest is listed:
https://csa-iot.org/csa_product/nest-thermostat-2/

There are a couple of doorbells too. Here's one:
https://csa-iot.org/csa_product/smart-doorbell-button/

There are also quite a few sensors, etc. listed that can be used for security applications, but not too many cameras. I think many other cameras can be part of a Matter compliant system if they are connected to a compliant hub.

Well, the Nest sure doesn't show up in the Home app.

Maybe you have an older Nest? (I assume you have iOS 16.4 or later):
https://www.tomsguide.com/news/apple-homekit-users-can-finally-use-the-nest-thermostat-but-theres-a-catch

JP234 said:

Still waiting for Matter device support for anything useful like smart doorbell, security system, or Google/Nest thermostat. Guessing it's going to be way longer than expected.

I'm no expert on Matter, but you should check out the CSA website product list. There's a ton of stuff there:
https://csa-iot.org/csa-iot_products/?p_keywords=&p_type%5B%5D=14&p_certificate=&p_family=

I noticed that the Nest is listed:
https://csa-iot.org/csa_product/nest-thermostat-2/

There are a couple of doorbells too. Here's one:
https://csa-iot.org/csa_product/smart-doorbell-button/

There are also quite a few sensors, etc. listed that can be used for security applications, but not too many cameras. I think many other cameras can be part of a Matter compliant system if they are connected to a compliant hub.

I don't particularly like the idea of forcing it, but in general (at least for the time being), I'm OK with USB-C. Thing is, whichever next iPhone gets it, it doesn't suddenly make all the existing iPhones (or other devices for that matter) compliant. I guess you have to start somewhere, but until or unless all of these devices stop functioning, there will still be a crap ton of non-USB-C devices/chargers for a long time. Conceivably, by the time the majority of devices/chargers in use are USB-C, there will be another, better connector/charger available and we'll have to start the process all over again. Well I guess we'll cross (or burn!) that bridge when we come to it.

BTW, I do realize that a simple connector/cable adapter could extend the lives of older chargers. I suppose the EU regulation does not allow bundling of USB-C adapters for compliance, otherwise iPhones would already be considered compliant, right?  I recall that Apple has (or had) an adapter for lightning to micro-USB. I think to meet some earlier EU regulation? It was available for when there were a number of chargers out there with micro-USB (ugh, yes, micro-USB):
 https://www.apple.com/au/shop/product/MD820AM/A/lightning-to-micro-usb-adapter