I got a 4k 55" TV for $299 earlier this year. It weighs maybe 10lbs, and is super thin and fits on the wall.

Large 4k TVs being this accessible/affordable for most households has not been an option for "decades"..

Screen size makes little difference for an individual they can just sit closer, viewing angels are the problem for a family where 55” doesn’t cut it.

4k also makes little difference here, most people really don’t care as seen by how many people use simple HD vs 4k streaming.

▲

dpark 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Screen size makes little difference for an individual they can just sit closer

This is silly. Most people don’t want to sit in a chair 3 feet from their TV to make it fill more of their visual area. A large number of people are also not watching movies individually. I watch TV with my family far more than I watch alone.

▲

Retric 4 hours ago | parent [-]

> This is silly.

Tell that to every streaming on their tablets sitting on their stomachs. People even watch movies on their phones but they aren’t holding them 15’ away.

Also you don’t need to sit 3’ from a 37” TV.

▲

dpark 3 hours ago | parent [-]

No one says the experience of watching on their tablet matches the experience of watching a movie in the theater.

But this isn’t the point. TVs are furniture. People generally have a spot where the TV naturally fits in the room regardless of its size. No one buys a TV and then arranges the rest of their furniture to sit close enough to fill their visual space. If the couch is 8 feet from the TV, it’s 8 feet from the TV.

▲

Retric 3 hours ago | parent [-]

People watching their tablet on a couch in from of a 55+” TV with a surround sound speaker system says on some level it’s a better experience. I’ve seen plenty of people do this to say it’s common behavior.

> No one buys a TV and then arranges the rest of their furniture to sit close enough to fill their visual space. If the couch is 8 feet from the TV, it’s 8 feet from the TV.

It’s common on open floor plans / large rooms for a couch to end up in a completely arbitrary distance from a TV rather than next to a wall. Further setting up the TV on the width vs length vs diagonal of a room commonly provides two or more options for viewing distance.

▲

dpark 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> People watching their tablet on a couch in from of a 55+” TV with a surround sound speaker system says on some level it’s a better experience.

It’s a more private/personal experience. Turning on the TV means everyone watches.

> It’s common on open floor plans / large rooms for a couch to end up in a completely arbitrary distance from a TV rather than next to a wall. Further setting up the TV on the width vs length vs diagonal of a room commonly provides two or more options for viewing distance.

You’re essentially arguing that people can arrange their furniture for the best viewing experience. Which is true, but also not what people actually do.

The set of people willing to arrange their furniture for the best movie watching experience in their home are the least likely to buy a small TV.

▲

Retric 27 minutes ago | parent [-]

> Turning in the TV means everyone watches.

People still do this while home alone, you’re attacking a straw man.

> least likely to buy a small TV.

People can only buy what actually exists. My point was large TV’s “have been out for decades they really aren’t a replacement” people owning them still went to the moves.

	▲	dpark 15 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> People still do this while home alone, you’re attacking a straw man. Maybe? You’re making blind assertions with no data. I have no idea how frequently the average person sits in front of their 60” TV by themselves and watches a movie on their tablet. My guess is not very often but again, I have no data on this. > My point was large TV’s “have been out for decades they really aren’t a replacement” people owning them still went to the moves. And we come back to the beginning where your assertion is true but also misleading. Most people have a large tv in their homes today. Most people did not have this two decades ago, despite then being available. The stats agree. TV sizes have grown significantly. https://www.statista.com/chart/3780/tv-screen-size/?srsltid=...

▲

vharish 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Living rooms are not that big to start with. I don't think you actually asked anyone's opinion on this! :D

Small TVs are not comfortable to watch. No one I know is okay with getting a smaller TV and moving their sofa closer. That sounds ridiculous. If there's any comfort to this capatilistic economy, it is the availability of technology at throw away prices. Most people would rather spend on a TV than save the money.

As for the theatre being obsolete, I do agree with you, atleast to some extent. I think everyone is right here. All factors combined is what makes going to the theatre not worth the effort for most of the movies. It's just another nice thing, not what it used to be.

Also, the generational difference too. I think teen and adolescents have a lot of ways to entertain themselves. The craze for movies isn't the same as it used to be. And we grew old(er). With age, I've grown to be very picky with movies.

	▲	Retric 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		37+” isn’t a small TVs. Resolution was an issue in the 90’s but midsized TV’s have been around for a long time. Also, I see plenty of people use tablets to watch stuff laying on the couch in front of a big screen TV. So viewing distance is plenty relevant.