4 ms·

Does anyone care about 4k? Ive been using either 720 or 1080p for years and never had an issue

matheusmoreira 3y ago
I don't particularly care either. These streaming services will compress the video pretty horribly anyway. I saw lagging artifacts in a panning shot once and I started wondering why I pay these people.
bigstrat2003 3y ago
Some do, yeah. I have a friend who is real upset about the change, for instance. But I get you - I don't even have a device with 4k resolution, and I am perfectly content.
bqmjjx0kac 3y ago
I bought a 4k TV and I've been enjoying 4k content on it. I was annoyed enough by this change to cancel my account.
deckar01 3y ago
The Dolby Atmos/Vision standards also provide HDR, dynamic brightness, and surround sound. People spend thousands of dollars on home theater setups to meet those standards. Max has almost completely stopped producing cinematic content, so I can’t imagine the upsell making much sense.
- fbdab103 3y ago
  If you are spending thousands of dollars on a home theater, surely streaming was a no go from the start? Blueray is the only available option which has a chance of delivering the optimal experience.
  - Arn_Thor 3y ago
    A lot of people, myself included, are fine with “less than optimal”. Sure, I’d prefer a blu-ray for my favorite epics, but a great home theater system also makes streaming content a satisfying and convenient experience. There’s also a lot of content one wants to watch that never makes it to blu-ray
  - deckar01 3y ago
    Blu-ray is not raw, it is just HEVC with a higher bitrate. Most content encoded at a high profile level is not even going to hit the bitrate limit of a good streaming service + connection. Other than pausing during an action scene to take a still, I can’t perceive the difference.
boppo1 3y ago
I had a 30" sony wega from 2001. I didn't care about 4k. It finally died and now I have a 65" sony Xsomething. Now I care about 4k. On a good TV, 4k really is impressive.
- ShadowBanThis01 3y ago
  From what source? Nothing streaming at typical cable bitrates is worthy of being called "UHD," let alone "4K."
  - boppo1 3y ago
    The on-device TV demos and Sony's 'core' 4k streaming service >Nothing streaming at typical cable bitrates is worthy of being called "UHD," let alone "4K." I agree! However, by that same token, 1080p streams aren't really 1080p. A not-actually-4k stream still looks dramatically better than a not-actually-1080p stream.
    - ShadowBanThis01 3y ago
      At the same bitrate?

I don't particularly care either. These streaming services will compress the video pretty horribly anyway. I saw lagging artifacts in a panning shot once and I started wondering why I pay these people.

bigstrat2003 3y ago

Some do, yeah. I have a friend who is real upset about the change, for instance. But I get you - I don't even have a device with 4k resolution, and I am perfectly content.

bqmjjx0kac 3y ago

I bought a 4k TV and I've been enjoying 4k content on it. I was annoyed enough by this change to cancel my account.

deckar01 3y ago

The Dolby Atmos/Vision standards also provide HDR, dynamic brightness, and surround sound. People spend thousands of dollars on home theater setups to meet those standards. Max has almost completely stopped producing cinematic content, so I can’t imagine the upsell making much sense.

fbdab103 3y ago
If you are spending thousands of dollars on a home theater, surely streaming was a no go from the start? Blueray is the only available option which has a chance of delivering the optimal experience.
- Arn_Thor 3y ago
  A lot of people, myself included, are fine with “less than optimal”. Sure, I’d prefer a blu-ray for my favorite epics, but a great home theater system also makes streaming content a satisfying and convenient experience. There’s also a lot of content one wants to watch that never makes it to blu-ray
- deckar01 3y ago
  Blu-ray is not raw, it is just HEVC with a higher bitrate. Most content encoded at a high profile level is not even going to hit the bitrate limit of a good streaming service + connection. Other than pausing during an action scene to take a still, I can’t perceive the difference.

boppo1 3y ago

I had a 30" sony wega from 2001. I didn't care about 4k. It finally died and now I have a 65" sony Xsomething. Now I care about 4k. On a good TV, 4k really is impressive.

ShadowBanThis01 3y ago
From what source? Nothing streaming at typical cable bitrates is worthy of being called "UHD," let alone "4K."
- boppo1 3y ago
  The on-device TV demos and Sony's 'core' 4k streaming service >Nothing streaming at typical cable bitrates is worthy of being called "UHD," let alone "4K." I agree! However, by that same token, 1080p streams aren't really 1080p. A not-actually-4k stream still looks dramatically better than a not-actually-1080p stream.
  - ShadowBanThis01 3y ago
    At the same bitrate?