LG is showing off the world's largest and highest resolution OLED panel in an 88-inch TV at the Consumer Electronics Show:
Just as 4K and HDR are finally going mainstream, the ambitious folks at LG Display have also been busy pushing its OLED technology to 8K. Come CES, the Korean manufacturer will be letting attendees get up close with its new 88-inch [2.2 meter] 8K OLED display (can we just call it the "Triple 8?"), which is both the largest and the highest-resolution OLED panel to date. But as far as specs go, that's all we have for now.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 02 2018, @05:36PM (3 children)
If you went back 10 years ago and replaced "4K" with "1920x1200" you would have been able to say the same things.
But the future always sucked because mainstream adoption went to 1920x1080.
They couldn't even upgrade from 1024x768 to something cool like 1280x1024 or 1680x1050 to tide them over until 1920x1200--no it had to be a stupid TV resolution.
And now we have "4K" which isn't 4K in either direction. They don't call 1080 2K and they don't call 2160... 2K
which helps describe that the present state of affairs is marketing to ignorant people. Is 8K something like 7168? I mean that's closer to 7k than 8k, and no one talks about that little second number anymore... it's like height is bad or something. I guess letterboxes suck? too bad monitors can make use of all of that space... oh wait right ignorant people and marketing, nvm
(Score: 3, Interesting) by bob_super on Tuesday January 02 2018, @07:10PM
TV "4K" (3840x2160) has a lot of infrastructure in common with movie 4K (4096x2160). The content industry is very happy that SMPTE finally got some of their duck in a row and provided standards (manufacturer-driven, obviously) to simplify many of the workflows. 2K and 4K were originally the shortcuts for the movie side of things (DCM). 8K makes sense because it's 2x each way again.
I did miss 1920x1200 for years (lost 10% of the lines, unless you went portrait mode), until it dropped to $400 for the 2160-line 40-inch "monitor" on which I'm currently typing. There will not be a need for 8K on my desktop, unless I also get very good reading glasses.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Wednesday January 03 2018, @03:03PM
Nope, I had a 1920x1200 screen 10 years (actually, 13) ago and it still needed sub-pixel AA for text to not appear jagged. Actually, I did briefly use a 4K monitor then - an IBM model that used two DVI connectors do get sufficient bandwidth. I now have a 4K screen that's the same size, and there's a small difference if I turn off AA.
sudo mod me up
(Score: 1) by toddestan on Friday January 05 2018, @02:25AM