If You're Not Streaming, You Should Be

[KOPBET]

Saving money by ditching Cox's TV? I wish.

When I ditched, I believe Cox TV was $70 or $75/mo and Internet was another $70/mo. Together they were approaching $150/mo. Cox Internet goes up every other billing cycle it seems. It's now $80/mo. and Cox won't negotiate. I bought Direct TV Now at I think just under $40/mo because they had the channels I wanted (not OTA crap). Now it's AT&T and $60/mo. Add Netflix at $15/mo. and I'm right where I was and then some. I must be doing something wrong. Help me out.

 

[TerryMiller]

No, that's not true. Whoever said that is confusing refresh rate vs resolution. Refresh rate is how often the frame updates. The human eye/mind can perceive around 60 fps second (some people can see more, some less). So anything higher than say 65 fps doesn't do anything really for clarity. Resolution is completely different. The way an image is "drawn" on a screen is complicated to explain in detail, but a simplified way is the screen is divided into lines, and each frame the lines are drawn either one at a time (progressive) or evens then odds (interlaced). The more lines, they less pixel crop you see (think of comparing the graphics from an Atari 2400 to a playstation 4). The 4k means it uses over 4,000 lines as opposed to 1024 lines in regular HDTV. This means the picture is sharper and moving pictures have more detail. The human eye does not have a resolution because we see all detail at once. So the higher the resolution, the closer the picture mimics real life clarity.

I can actually tell a slight difference between HD and 4K on my Samsung with Directv.

No, that's not true. Whoever said that is confusing refresh rate vs resolution. Refresh rate is how often the frame updates. The human eye/mind can perceive around 60 fps second (some people can see more, some less). So anything higher than say 65 fps doesn't do anything really for clarity. Resolution is completely different. The way an image is "drawn" on a screen is complicated to explain in detail, but a simplified way is the screen is divided into lines, and each frame the lines are drawn either one at a time (progressive) or evens then odds (interlaced). The more lines, they less pixel crop you see (think of comparing the graphics from an Atari 2400 to a playstation 4). The 4k means it uses over 4,000 lines as opposed to 1024 lines in regular HDTV. This means the picture is sharper and moving pictures have more detail. The human eye does not have a resolution because we see all detail at once. So the higher the resolution, the closer the picture mimics real life clarity.

I can actually tell a slight difference between HD and 4K on my Samsung with Directv.

Correct. I have a 27" 5K iMac sitting right beside a Dell 27" 1080P as a second monitor. The difference is stark. That 1080P looks like a 1970 vintage TV screen in comparison.

I'm not saying that one can't tell the difference in sharpness from 1080p, or whatever, to 4K, but the question was whether the human eye can actually "see" 4K.

 

[TwoForFlinching]

I'm not saying that one can't tell the difference in sharpness from 1080p, or whatever, to 4K, but the question was whether the human eye can actually "see" 4K.

Depends on the eyes I suppose. In the store, when they're rolling the sample images, it's night and day... In broadcast, I can't tell either. The main difference I noticed was the jump to OLED. Them colors are vivid.

As far as saving money, I admit, I'm a cheap dude. I have prime, but I buy 95% of my non-food thing there. TP, cleaning supplies, clothes, tools, etc... so the subscription is worth it to me. Otherwise, I don't pay for anything else. Have OTA, Pluto, YouTube and a handful of other free ad-based apps. I do a lot of free trials too. Currently on Hulu's 30-day. It might be worth the $5/mo, probably gonna keep it. Only thing live tv is good for in my home is weather coverage, but it's also available through facebook. I honestly thought giving up cable was going to be hard when I did it a while back. Turns out, I don't miss it at all.

 

[dennishoddy]

We are in the same boat. Live in OKC but no internet except Hughes etc which are about the same as dialup. Have Direct and hate the price but the wife has to have her lifetime shows

Maybe streaming will reach the rural communities when Elon fires up Starlink...

I don't know about now, but a couple of years ago we had satellite internet service as our only source for the net with a 10 gig limit per month. We tried and tried to get a couple of wifi security system cameras on the system and they would not link up. The issue turned out being the length of time it too get the signal to the internet and back down. I don't remember the name of the issue they called it.
Since this new wireless wifi company has built repeaters all over we get internet from them. 12gps upload and 1.3 upload. Pretty slow for you folks on cable but it lets us stream with unlimited gigs per month and most videos won't buffer much.

 

[Hobbes]

Dennis, the term is Latency.
Some people call it ping time but the correct term is latency.

Musk claims that starlink will have latency periods so short that world class gamers will be competitive.
That's hard for a lot of people to believe so I guess we will all have to see when the service finally arrives.

The way to categorize StarLink is not like satellite service but more like 4G cell service.
In this case though, the user is not traveling from one cell tower to the next, the cell towers are in low earth orbit traveling past the user, followed by others in rapid succession.

 

[Tanis143]

I'm not saying that one can't tell the difference in sharpness from 1080p, or whatever, to 4K, but the question was whether the human eye can actually "see" 4K.

You're not understanding the difference between human sight and how tv/monitor's work, otherwise you would understand that yes, the human eye can see 4K, and still see a difference between 4K and real life. They human eye/brain is so fast that when you look at something there is no delay, you see the whole image at once. There is no pixel count, there are no separate lines that have to be drawn in a particular sequence to construct the image. Its just there, instantly. The only thing the human eye can't see a difference in is frames per second, specifically anything past about 65 fps.

If you were to take a 7 different monitors displaying something going on in the background the human eye is so much faster at grasping the image that you would be able to tell the difference from each resolution available (480p to 8K) and real life. Its all on how the image is created vs how the human eye works.

 

[davek]

I ordered a TiVo Stream 4k yesterday.