| ▲ | Kon5ole 21 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
>> You can get 8K TVs for <$1000 now. >8K at jumbo TV size has relatively large pixels compared to an 8K desktop monitor. It’s easier to manufacture. I don't think that's true. I've been using a 8k 55" TV as my main monitor for years now. It was available for sub-800 USD before all such tv's vanished from the market. Smaller pixels were not more expensive even then, the 55"s were the cheapest. 4k monitors can be had for sub-200 usd, selling 4x the area of the same panel should be at most 4x that price. And it was, years ago. So they were clearly not complicated or expensive to manufacture - but there was no compelling reason for having 8k on a TV so they didn't sell. However, there IS a compelling reason to have 8K on a desktop monitor! That such monitors sell for 8000 usd+ is IMO a very unfortunate situation caused by a weird incompetence in market segmentation by the monitor makers. I firmly believe that they could sell 100x as many if they cut the price to 1/10th, which they clearly could do. The market that never appeared for tv's is present among the world's knowledge workers, for sure. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | dmayle 19 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I've been using an 8k 65" TV as a monitor for four years now. When I bought it, you could buy the Samsung QN700B 55" 8k, but at the time it was 50% more than the 65" I bought (TCL). I wish the 55" 8k TVs still existed (or that the announced 55" 8k monitors were ever shipped). I make do with 65", but it's just a tad too large. I would never switch back to 4k, however. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||