DJI Phantom 3

Samsung The Wall Price

Embark on a Quest with Samsung The Wall Price

Step into a world where the focus is keenly set on Samsung The Wall Price. Within the confines of this article, a tapestry of references to Samsung The Wall Price awaits your exploration. If your pursuit involves unraveling the depths of Samsung The Wall Price, you've arrived at the perfect destination.

Our narrative unfolds with a wealth of insights surrounding Samsung The Wall Price. This is not just a standard article; it's a curated journey into the facets and intricacies of Samsung The Wall Price. Whether you're thirsting for comprehensive knowledge or just a glimpse into the universe of Samsung The Wall Price, this promises to be an enriching experience.

The spotlight is firmly on Samsung The Wall Price, and as you navigate through the text on these digital pages, you'll discover an extensive array of information centered around Samsung The Wall Price. This is more than mere information; it's an invitation to immerse yourself in the enthralling world of Samsung The Wall Price.

So, if you're eager to satisfy your curiosity about Samsung The Wall Price, your journey commences here. Let's embark together on a captivating odyssey through the myriad dimensions of Samsung The Wall Price.

Showing posts sorted by date for query Samsung The Wall Price. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query Samsung The Wall Price. Sort by relevance Show all posts

DJI Phantom 3 Professional Review: Stunning 4K Aerial Footage That Doesn't Break The Bank


Dji phantom 3 professional 4k drone dji phantom 3 standard review dji phantom 3 advanced review dji phantom 3 se review dji phantom 3 pro dji phantom 3 professional drone dji phantom 3 professional battery dji phantom 3 dji phantom 3 standard
DJI Phantom 3 Professional review: Stunning 4K aerial footage that doesn't break the bank


DJI Phantom 3 Professional review: Stunning 4K aerial footage that doesn't break the bank

DJI's Phantom series have become a benchmark for consumer drones -- or quadcopters, if you prefer -- thanks to their simple setup, ease of flying and relatively low price. The current king of the lineup, the Phantom 3 Professional, raises the bar even higher with the addition of 4K video recording from its stabilised camera.

Its design is almost unchanged from the previous Phantom 2 series , with a chunky white plastic body, and it's still incredibly easy to learn to fly. It has improved image sensors too, which provide superior footage than previously available, and ground-scanning sensors to help it fly indoors. If you want to take your home movies to the next level, but don't want to fork out the many thousands for professional-level drones, the Phantom 3 is a superb starting point.

There are currently three versions of the drone available. The Phantom 3 Professional (which I review here) shoots video in 4K (3,820x2,160-pixel) resolution and retails for $1,259, £1,159 or AU$1,950. The Phantom 3 Advanced is functionally identical, but shoots video in 1080p (1,920x1,080); it costs $999, £899 or AU$1,550. Both of those debuted in April, but they were just joined by a third model, the more affordablePhantom 3 Standard ($799, £649 or AU$1,299), which strips away some of the better features of its sibling models and includes the same controller as the older Phantom 2 Vision+. (Meanwhile, DJI has also scheduled a press conference in Los Angeles later this month, making another new drone announcement likely.)

Ultimately, the Advanced is arguably the sweet spot, given the fact that its 1080p video will more than suffice for most eyes (discerning the extra detail on 4K displays is a challenge, to say the least). But for those who must have 4K, the Phantom 3 Pro delivers best-in-class video for many thousands less than you'll pay for professional drones.

Design

The Phantom 3 looks pretty much identical to DJI's previous Phantom models: a stout white plastic body, four rotors and narrow, fixed landing legs slung beneath. It's light enough to carry in one hand and, when you unscrew the rotor blades, it's just about small enough to fit into a decent-sized backpack. It's certainly more portable than the much larger Inspire 1 drone.

Andrew Hoyle/CNET

It feels as well built as before, with the capacity to survive both the odd bump into a wall or a small crash while you're getting the hang of flying it. I managed to fly it straight into the roof of my house where it plummeted three storeys to the grass below. Aside from a few cosmetic scuffs, it was absolutely fine, and continues to fly without any trouble.

The rotor blades are easily replaceable if you snap a few. Just unscrew them from the motors on each of the drone's four corners. You'll know how to do it already, since the blades are the only parts you need to assemble out of the box.

The controller is roughly similar to previous versions, with two main sticks and a clamp to hold a tablet -- I used my iPad Mini without a problem -- which acts as the display for the drone's camera via the DJI Pilot app. There are small, fold-down brackets to hold a smartphone, with the app optimised for use with the iPhone 5S , 6 and 6 Plus . It was easier, however, to view the footage and use the app's small on-screen buttons on the the tablet's larger screen. Android device support is thin, with just the Samsung Galaxy S5 and Note 3 , Sony Xperia Z3, Google Nexus 7 II , Google Nexus 9 , Xiaomi Mi 3 and ZTE Nubia Z7 mini listed.

Andrew Hoyle/CNET

On each top corner of the controller are buttons for starting and stopping recording and quickly changing camera settings like the exposure and angle of view. Using these physical controls is much easier than poking at the tiny on-screen controls while the drone is airborne.

Setup

Getting started with the drone is incredibly easy. When you take it out of the box, just start charging the battery and the controller (a supplied lead charges both through one plug), and download the DJI Pilot app onto your iOS or Android device.

Once everything is charged, switch on the controller and the drone, pop your phone or tablet into the bracket and connect your mobile device with its usual charging cable to the controller. Then, after a few simple steps on the app, you're connected and ready to go -- around five minutes of playing around had me up and running.

Before you take off for the first time, you can use the app as a training guide. You pilot a virtual drone around a field on-screen, allowing you to familiarise yourself with the main controls, without risking smashing your new toy into a tree. Even so, the first time you use it should be in a very open space, and you should stick to basic manoeuvres until you get the hang of it.

Andrew Hoyle/CNET

When you first get your drone, it's worth checking DJI's downloads site for any available firmware updates -- oddly, I didn't see an update notification in the app, even though there was one to download. Updating the camera firmware is a long process, albeit fairly straightforward. You'll need to pop the camera's microSD card into your computer, download the firmware, unzip it and put it on the card. After you insert the card back into the drone and turn it on, it'll take about 20 minutes to install it, bleeping the whole time.

Flying the drone

The DJI 3 is every bit as easy to fly as its predecessors. Even just 10 minutes of casual flying around an open area is sufficient time to learn the basics. It helps that the drone is incredibly responsive and can accelerate -- and, more importantly, decelerate -- extremely quickly. If you see you're getting too close to some trees, a quick movement on the stick will instantly change its course to get you out of trouble or simply return the sticks to neutral to stop it in its tracks.

At close range (up to around 30 metres, or 100 feet) I find it easy to pilot the drone simply by looking at it. Once it gets a bit further away -- or it's above you, visibly lost against the bright sky -- then it's more convenient to use the camera view on your tablet, seeing what it's seeing, to help navigate. It automatically corrects for wind, so slight gusts won't throw it off course, but trying to get closeup footage of a tornado is not a good idea.

Andrew Hoyle/CNET

New sensors on the bottom of the drone point down and detect patterns on the floor to lock on to, in order to remain stable when flying indoors, where a GPS signal (used for stability outdoors) isn't available. Although you could technically fly any of the previous drones indoors, the new sensors provide better stability, making it able to hover in a fixed location without any control from you. This made a big difference in my testing as I was able to fly the drone from inside my living room out of the window.

Of course, you have to be much more careful than when flying outdoors as there are various factors which make it less stable. Flying above a plain surface, for example, will give the cameras nothing to lock onto, and above about 2 metres (6 feet), it doesn't detect the ground at all and can easily start to drift off course. I managed to crash it inside the CNET office when I flew it about 6 metres (about 20 feet) above the floor and it wasn't able to hold its position. It was, thankfully, unharmed.

DJI reckons you can get around 20-23 minutes of flight time from a full charge of the drone's battery, which I'd say is accurate. It does depend on how vigorously you're flying though, so if you do plan on really hitting top speed at high altitudes, expect a little less time. Although that's pretty standard for this type of drone, it's still very limiting if you want to take it away to a specific location to capture footage.

The batteries are removable, and you can buy spares, but they'll set you back around £125, $149 or AU$205 each. Batteries compatible with previous models are not compatible with the Phantom 3.

Andrew Hoyle/CNET

A return-to-home function will automatically bring the drone safely back to your location to land when it detects that the batteries are critically low -- it won't simply fall out of the sky. You can also press the return to home button on screen and there's one on the controller too. It will automatically bring the drone back to the location it took off from, which is a handy failsafe option to have if you begin to lose sight of it and want to bring it back to you safely.

Camera

As with the predecessor, the camera is slung beneath the drone -- but this time with a bunch of significant upgrades. It has the same 1/2.3-inch sensor, although it's been tweaked to provide better dynamic range. Exposure is generally more balanced. Bright skies are kept under control, while the darker ground is kept easily visible.

The Phantom Vision 2's camera had a habit of either exposing for the bright sky, plunging the ground into shadow, or exposing for the ground, resulting in a washed-out sky. The Phantom 3 does a considerably better job, producing rich, well balanced footage.

Andrew Hoyle/CNET

The headline feature on the Professional model is its ability to shoot video in Ultra HD 4K resolution. It brings a tonne of detail when viewing the footage on a high resolution monitor, which is particularly noticeable when looking at small details on house roofs far below. The benefit of 4K footage isn't just to look crisp on a 4K monitor, it also gives you a lot of room to crop into the frame, while still maintaining full HD quality or better.

If you're shooting a specific object, this extra resolution allows you to digitally stabilise the footage, smoothing out any slight movements of the drone and ensuring the object stays perfectly central, without sacrificing any quality.

It can do this at frame rates of 24, 25 or 30 frames per second too, the latter of which will be great for long, smooth shots. If your shots require faster motion from the camera and the subject, then shooting at 60fps in Full HD will produce much smoother footage.

With the wheels on each corner of the controller you can tilt the camera up or down, and to pan simply turn the drone on its axis. You can point it exactly down, which gives a really neat view of the landscape, particularly when you take it really high. One of the main differences between this and the pricier DJI Inspire 1 drone is that there's no ability to control the camera using a second controller. If you want to shoot a subject with one person flying the drone past, with a second producer independently controlling the camera (which can pan and tilt in all directions), you'll need to splash more cash for the Inspire.

Andrew Hoyle/CNET

The lens on the camera has a 90-degree field of view, which is narrower than the previous version. That may seem a step down, but it's actually for a very good reason. The extreme wide angles used by the Phantom 2 caused distortion of the image, particularly at the corners, meaning a lot of digital correction had to be used, if the footage was for a professional purpose. It's particularly noticeable when panning around a horizon, as you can visibly see the horizon curving down at the edge.

The narrower angle does make a huge difference, with considerably less distortion of the image. As well as just producing nicer-looking footage for your Facebook feed, professionals among you will appreciate the time saved by not having to digitally correct it.

Andrew Hoyle/CNET

The camera is mounted on the same three-axis stabilising gimbal, which automatically corrects for any slight movements of the drone, and smoothing out vibrations from the rotors. It works incredibly well and results in much smoother footage, without the unpleasant jerks and bumps seen from drones that don't use stabilisation -- including DJI's Phantom 2.

Do keep in mind that when flying the drone at high speeds, or turning quickly, the gimbal will have to move the camera at a more extreme upwards angle to the extent that it's possible to see the rotors in the top portion of the image. Smooth motions will therefore produce the best results. You can see some of our test footage in the following video:

Live streaming

A neat new feature on the Phantom 3 is the ability to stream live video from the drone to YouTube. The DJI app makes it easy to set up live streaming -- you also need to enable your YouTube account for live video on the desktop site. It needs a good data connection, so if you're using a tablet or phone that doesn't have a SIM card, you'll need to tether it to your phone.

Streaming video is no easy task for a mobile connection, so you'll want to make sure you're on a fast 4G LTE connection for it to work properly. When I was on 3G, the YouTube stream being watched remotely was extremely jumpy and froze numerous times. On 4G, however, it was much smoother and gave a good view of the action. Its lower quality and lower frame rate means it's far less smooth than video taken directly from the camera, but it's perfectly watchable, particularly when the drone remains fairly still in the air.

Andrew Hoyle/CNET

It might not be a killer feature for many of you, but it could be handy for news journalists wanting to give a top-down view of an unfolding event. Engineers too may find it useful to be able to fly into a potentially dangerous building and send footage back, without risking injury by entering themselves.

Conclusion

The DJI Phantom 3 Professional drone is simple to set up and incredibly easy to learn to fly, making it an accessible piece of kit even to those with only a vague knowledge of technology. Its drastically improved image quality, addition of 4K resolution and its excellent stabilising gimbal allows it to capture brilliant footage, with none of the jerkiness or exposure issues seen on earlier models.

Ultimately, the stepdown Phantom 3 Advanced -- with all of the same features except a 1080p camera in place of the Pro's 4K one -- is the better choice for most flyers, but anyone who needs the extra resolution (or the comfort of futureproofing) will find the Phantom 3 Pro a solid choice. Either one is a much more affordable entry into aerial videography than any professional drone, and is well worth considering, whether you're an enthusiastic amateur filmmaker or simply want to add cool, creative shots to your home videos.

CNET Senior Editor Josh Goldman contributed to this review.


Source

https://nichols.my.id/how-to-fix-your-sleep-schedule.html

.

Why You Shouldn't Take Your Indoor TV Outside For The Summer


Can you put an indoor tv outside can you put any tv outside using an indoor tv outside if you are indoors how to stay healthy indoors why you shouldn t take your child s phone why you shouldn t smoke why you only call me when you re high
Why You Shouldn't Take Your Indoor TV Outside for the Summer


Why You Shouldn't Take Your Indoor TV Outside for the Summer

Summer is here, and with the sunny days and warm weather, you're probably eager to spend as much time as possible outside. If you have a nice outdoor space like a deck or gazebo, covered or not, you might be curious if you can enjoy TV outside too. After all, watching the big game with friends, movie nights with the family, even just sitting by the pool and binge-watching a new show all seem better enjoyed on a big screen rather than your phone or tablet.

Dedicated outdoor TVs are expensive, however. The brand-new Element outdoor Roku TV is one of the cheapest we've seen and it still costs $1,300, mainly because it's designed to be relatively weatherproof. So why not save hundreds of dollars and bring a standard TV outside? A simple wall mount, perhaps an extension cord to a nearby exterior outlet, and you're good to go, right?

Not so fast. Much like putting a TV in the bathroom, even if it seems your display is away from direct splashes of water, it's in peril. Mounting a regular TV outside is the fastest way to destroy it, other than enthusiastic defenestration. Here's why.

A person watching TV while sitting in a tree

No Groot, we can't watch Tree of Life again.

Kelvin Murray/Getty Images

The fragility of televisions

Heat, humidity and direct sunlight are the enemies of all TVs. For example, here's what LG lists as the operating temperatures for one of its LCD TVs: 

CNET Tech Tips logo
  • Operating temperature 0 to 40 degrees C (32 to 104 degrees F) 
  • Operating humidity less than 80%

Most parts of the US fall outside that range at least a few times a year. LG also advises to "keep the product away from direct sunlight" and not to place the TV in an "area exposed to rain or wind." Other manufacturers have similar temperature and humidity ranges for their televisions.

A TV, an empty chair on an area rug and a lamp sit outside

Anyone know where I can get more salt for this margarita? Wait, never mind.

Matthais Clamer/Getty Images

You might be thinking, "I have the perfect spot that's covered and out of the sun." Can you install a regular TV in a seemingly "safe" environment? You could. No one will stop you. I'm sure it will even work the first few times you try. Just know that TVs are intricate, fragile devices. Used normally they can last many years. Used outside of their prescribed environment, like adding heat, moisture and sunlight, the TV will age significantly faster. If you can afford to replace a TV every few months or every year, you do you. I'm sure TV manufacturers will be extremely pleased. Just don't expect any warranty coverage.

People watching TV outside
Samsung

Dedicated outdoor TVs are expensive

Several companies make TVs designed for the elements. This is more difficult than it sounds. Sealing a TV against moisture, plus any curious wildlife, limits the TV's ability to cool itself. Heat, as we've discussed before, is by far the biggest enemy of TV longevity. So this rugged redesign, plus the additional components and weather sealing, increase the price. 

That Element Roku TV is a 55-inch model with IP55 dust and water resistance but at $1,300 it costs four times as much as a regular Roku TV -- and other outdoor TVs cost even more. Samsung's The Terrace is IP55 and costs $3,500 for a 55-inch model. Another big name in the space, SunBrite, specializes in outdoor TVs and its similarly sized TVs cost around $3,000.

A person in a chair watches TV while outside under puffy white clouds

The Nature channel in 8K looks so lifelike!

UrbanCow/Getty Images

Which is to say, doing the job "right" not only isn't cheap, but likely beyond the means of anyone looking to just watch some Netflix on the patio. Fortunately, there are some other options. 

People watching TV outside

What, Mom? You told us to go outside. We're outside.

Andy Ryan/Getty Images

'TV' under the stars

Another option, though still not "cheap," is a TV enclosure. These help protect your TV from the elements, including the front screen, vents on the back, and so on. Some models even have optional antiglare screens, highly important as even a bright TV is going to have trouble competing with the sun. They can also have heaters or fans, to help keep the TV in its comfort zone. However, these enclosures often cost as much as the TV itself. They'll also extend your poor TV's life, but not indefinitely. It's not an outdoor TV now. It's an indoor TV wearing a nice coat.

If you're just planning on watching at night, consider a projector instead. These are likely cheaper than a TV plus enclosure, and are small enough to easily bring back inside when you're done for the night. They can project onto the side of your house, or better yet, a collapsible screen. Even a big sheet works quite well. Battery powered models aren't particularly bright, but just need Wi-Fi to stream. For larger, brighter models, you'll need to run a power cable. These can create images 100 inches or larger with ease, however, making backyard movie night something truly special.

If none of these work for you, consider getting a wheeled cart so the TV is only outside when you're actually watching it. That's definitely not as cool, or as easy, as mounting a TV outside, but it will save you money in replacement costs in the long run. 


As well as covering TV and other display tech, Geoff does photo tours of cool museums and locations around the world, including nuclear submarines, massive aircraft carriersmedieval castles, epic 10,000 mile road trips, and more. Check out Tech Treks for all his tours and adventures.

He wrote a bestselling sci-fi novel about city-size submarines, along with a sequel. You can follow his adventures on Instagram and his YouTube channel.


Source

https://nichols.my.id/how-to-prepare-for-an-interview.html

.

S21 Ultra Vs. S20 Ultra: Samsung Galaxy Camera Shootout


S21 ultra vs s20 ultra samsung galaxy camera shootout hockey s21 ultra vs s20 ultra samsung galaxy camera shootout at wadala s21 ultra vs s20 ultra samsung galaxy camera shootout for soldiers s21 ultra vs s20 ultra samsung galaxy camera shootout lyrics samsung s21 ultra vs s20 ultra camera galaxy s21 ultra vs s20 ultra s21 ultra vs s20 note samsung s21 ultra vs s20 ultra camera samsung s21 ultra samsung galaxy s21 ultra s21 ultra price samsung s21 ultra price
S21 Ultra vs. S20 Ultra: Samsung Galaxy camera shootout


S21 Ultra vs. S20 Ultra: Samsung Galaxy camera shootout

The standout feature of last year's Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra was its camera, a five-lens setup that could shoot at a crazy 100x magnification. A year later, the Galaxy S21 Ultra is Samsung's newest flagship. It improves on its predecessor in numerous ways: A gorgeous matte back, an even more gorgeous 3,200x1,440-pixel display that lets you scroll in QHD and 120Hz for the first time, and a customary processor upgrade.

But just like last year, those looking into buying Samsung's new crown jewel are mostly doing so for the camera. Updates this year include dual telephoto lenses, 4K video60 frames per second from all rear cameras, and better zoom-stabilization software. So just how much more Ultra is the S21's photography?

Standard

It'll come as little surprise that there's minimal difference between the two cameras when you're shooting in optimal lighting conditions.

In this shot you'll see the colors on the beer can are similarly vibrant, and the same level of detail is captured. The only difference is in the aperture: The background looks a little more blurred in the S20 Ultra as compared to the S21 Ultra. I personally prefer the latter shot, but that's very much a taste thing.

What about less conducive lighting conditions? I shot these flowers under my living room light, which typically makes for some ugly yellow tinting. The S21 Ultra dealt with this lighting far better, neutralizing the yellow shade and producing a shot with better white balance. It also captured better detail on the flower itself.

One issue I found with the S20 Ultra was that, compared to the iPhone 12 Pro, it struggled with extreme close-up shots. It often couldn't focus properly, and other times colors would be overwhelming.

I recruited yet another flower for help here, and found the S21 Ultra a slight improvement. The red in the S20 Ultra shot is just completely overpowering, whereas it's bearable -- but still strong -- on the S21 Ultra. More data was shot too, as you'll see from the details on the flower's petals.

As for ultrawide-angle shots, I found the cameras to be largely comparable. The S20 Ultra sometimes suffered from blown highlights at times when the S21 Ultra wouldn't. That said, the S20 Ultra's ultrawide shots also looked more vibrant. 

See how the colors pop more here on the S21 Ultra. But the processing around the building's edges results in harsher lighting.

That difference is more evident here, with that harsh sun in the top right being better handled by the S21 Ultra's ultrawide-angle sensor.

Portrait

If the S21 Ultra regresses anywhere, it's in Portrait shots. (Which are now called Portraits, as opposed to Samsung's previous "Live Focus" branding.)

In my testing, the S21 Ultra tended to cool the tone down and capture more detail. It's bokeh, which mimics the depth-of-field effects found in DSLR cameras, is more blurred and creamy. This isn't always bad: See these shots below of CNET Science Editor Jackson Ryan. I much prefer the S20 Ultra shot, as it looks softer and less artificial. But the S21 Ultra has captured more of Jackson's facial features, like his freckles, and more detail in his beard.

This is a nice change. In the past, critics (myself included) have marked down Samsung's Portraits due to their skin-smoothing software, which can result in fake, brushed Portraits.

But more often than not, I found the S21 Ultra's Portraits to be more unsightly than the S20 Ultra's. Look how artificially blue my friend Dan's skin looks here, and note the sunny glow in the S20 Ultra that's absent in the S21 Ultra. The S21 Ultra is a little sharper, but just looks flat compared to the S20 Ultra.

It's less of a problem with selfie Portraits. In the below comparison I look softer in the S20 Ultra shot, and the S21 Ultra's sharpness brings out my monobrow. You love to see it. But assuming you have less facial hair than me, this won't be an issue. Here it's a matter of taste, since the unsightly blue tint isn't as much of a problem.

Zoom

Let's move on to why we're really here. Samsung has been investing big design and marketing dollars into its phones' zoom function over the last year, and that's the case with the S21 Ultra too. Like last year's S20 Ultra, it has 100x Space Zoom. Improvements come with a 3x optical zoom, and a lock feature that makes taking pictures at high zoom much easier.

That 3x optical zoom actually makes a big difference, although it's a qualified one. As you can see, not all 3x magnifications are created equal. The S21 Ultra's 3x zoom is actually less magnified than the S20 Ultra's: These shots of my old and ill-kept Game of Thrones books were taken from the same distance at 3x zoom, yet they look far closer on the S20 Ultra. But they also look clearer and less blurred on the S21 Ultra.

Extending out to 10x zoom, the difference actually shrinks. Both phones do a crazy good job here. The below photo was taken at the standard magnification.

20210309-135856

Now zooming in 10x, you'll quickly notice how much more dynamic the S21 Ultra's shot is. You may not be able to tell on site here, but looking at the raw files I noticed the S20 Ultra is also more grainy than the S21 Ultra. Again though, both Samsung phones do well at 10x zoom.

However, the chasm widens once again when you begin to zoom further than 10x. See that blue building in the background of this shot? Let's zoom in a big ol' 30x.

20210226-123221

The building is adorned with artwork of an Australian kookaburra bird. Apologies for the weird angle, but taking identical shots at 30x zoom is hard! In any case, the S21 Ultra's software is working overtime here and it shows. Both are impressive -- most phones can't zoom this far -- but the S21 Ultra's shot is sharper and with better colors.

Below is another 30x comparison. You'll see that the S20 Ultra's shot is more blurry, has less contrast and captured less detail.

20210225-151422

And finally, the ultimate flex: 100x zoom. Of all the 100x-zoom shots I took, this one exemplifies the difference the best. First, here's the scene I was working with:

20210227-211248

Now zooming as far as both phones can go, we see both do frankly insane jobs at capturing the moon. The S21 Ultra, though, did better. It's more luminescent and impressive.

Night time

The S21 Ultra performs better at night than its predecessor, but it's not without flaws. Generally speaking, it'll capture more light in its low-light photos -- but at a cost.

This shot illuminates the issue. It was taken with Night Mode off. The S21 Ultra took the better photo, capturing more light and more detail, which you can see in the clouds and on the fencing behind the umbrella. But along with that comes some ugly noise, which is particularly bad in the top left of the photo.

Now let's turn Night Mode on. Here I can say the S21 Ultra is an unqualified winner. There are noise issues, particularly on the wall on the right of the photo, but it's worth it for the extra illumination and sharpness.

But there are times where Night Mode can overdo it. Below is a scene with minimal natural light.

20210225-205853

With Night Mode turned on, the S21 Ultra technically does a better job at flooding the scene with light. But it goes too far, resulting in a harsh shot. The S20 Ultra's Night Mode added less light, but produced a more natural-looking photo.

Still, generally speaking the S21 Ultra was a minor improvement over its predecessor. The comparison below is illustrative of what you'll mostly find: The S21 Ultra is a bit sharper, brighter and better at night.

Small improvements

Samsung made some improvements to the S21 Ultra's video camera, too. Both can shoot video in 8K, but now the S21 Ultra can shoot 4K 60 frames-per-second video from all of its rear cameras, notably including its ultrawide angle shooter.

We'd need a whole new article -- or video rather -- to compare the video capabilities of the two phones. I'll just say in my (more limited) testing of the video capabilities, the S21 Ultra's cameras did better at night, with improved low-light autofocus and also better processing of highlights, which can get blown out on the S20 Ultra at times.

All in all, the S21 Ultra is a solid bump up from its predecessor in most photographic ways, especially zoom, though you may personally prefer the S20 Ultra's take on Portrait modes. This is particularly impressive considering the S21 Ultra ($1,200, £1,149, AU$1,849) actually launched at a lower price than the S20 Ultra ($1,400, £1,199, $1,999).

Sarah Tew/CNET

The Galaxy S21 Ultra is Samsung's flagship 2021 phone, its biggest and best of the 2021 Galaxy S21 line that was originally released in the first quarter of that year. We loved its two telephoto cameras, spectacular 6.8-inch screen and support for Samsung's S-Pen stylus (though you'll need to buy that separately). While it's comparatively heavy and lacks a MicroSD expansion slot, you can find it marked down from its original $1,200 base price. 

Sarah Tew/CNET

The Galaxy S20 Ultra was Samsung's top phone until the Note 20 Ultra was released later in 2020. We liked its 5x optical zoom camera and S Pen support, but felt it was a bit too heavy and expensive compared to other models in the 2020 Galaxy S line. 


Source

https://nichols.my.id/how-to-repair-excel-sheet.html

.

Sony X80K TV Review: Google TV Smarts, Basic Features And Picture


Sony x80j 4k uhd google television sony x800h review rtings sony x80 tv review sony x80 tv review sony x80j tv review sony x80k tv review sony x80j tv review sony x80k tv review
Sony X80K TV Review: Google TV Smarts, Basic Features and Picture


Sony X80K TV Review: Google TV Smarts, Basic Features and Picture

Sony has been making TVs for 60 years and today it's known for best for expensive, high-performance screens. In 2022 it continued the trend by releasing a kitchen sink worth of high-tech displays, from 8K to mini-LED to QD-OLED, and most demand serious cash. So far 2022 is more about tightening belts than bells and whistles, however, so I took a look at Sony's cheapest TV first. The X80K is a decent all-around performer, and could appeal to TV shoppers on a budget who just want a Sony, but you can certainly do better for the money.

Like

  • Accurate color
  • Capable Google TV smart system
  • Plenty of connectivity
  • Subtle, understated design

Don't Like

  • Mediocre contrast and black levels
  • More expensive than competing TVs with better picture quality

In early summer the X80K costs about the same as the Samsung QN60B and the TCL 6-Series. In my side-by-side comparison of the three in CNET's TV test lab, the Samsung looked slightly better overall than the Sony, with superior brightness and contrast, while the TCL totally trounced them both. That might be a surprise if you're new to the TV buying game and just paying attention to brands -- wait, a TCL looks better than a Sony? -- but if you look at their underlying technologies, it makes perfect sense. The Sony and Samsung use basic LCD backlights while the TCL leverages step-up screen tech, namely full-array local dimming and mini-LED.

Beyond picture I did like Sony's Google smart TV system and no-fuss design, and it comes in a wide array of sizes. Later in the year it's sure to receive hefty price cuts, like TVs always do around the Black Friday and the holidays, that could make it more competitive. For now, however, the X80K doesn't do enough beyond its name to stand out.

Sony KD-X80K sizes, series comparison

I performed a hands-on evaluation of the 55-inch Sony KD-55X80K, but this review also applies to the other screen sizes in the series. All sizes have identical specs and should provide very similar picture quality.

Sony KD-43X80K, 43-inch
Sony KD-50X80K, 50-inch
Sony KD-55X80K, 55-inch
Sony KD-65X80K, 65-inch
Sony KD-75X80K, 75-inch
Sony KD-85X80K, 85-inch

The X80K series is the entry-level in Sony's 2022 TV lineup, with relatively basic picture features. It's missing the HDMI 2.1 gaming features, 120Hz refresh rate and mini-LED backlight found on step-up models, for example.

Sony KD X80K TV
James Martin/CNET

Keep it simple, Sony

The X80K blends in rather than stands out with a dark gray color along the bottom of its frame. The other three sides are black and their edges angle in slightly. The stand consists of simple A-shaped legs splayed far to either side. Seen from the side, the X80K is substantially thicker than the Samsung Q60B (2.83 vs. 1 inch), which could be a consideration if you want as flush a wall-mount as possible.

I like Sony's simple remote. The keys are laid out in familiar fashion and the requisite shortcut buttons for YouTube, Netflix, Disney Plus and Prime Video are onboard, and I appreciated the dedicated input key that some clickers lack. I could do without the number key and another dedicated to an over-the-air grid guide at the bottom, but some users might appreciate them.

Sony KD X80K TV
James Martin/CNET

Google TV: Feature-rich and promo-heavy

Among all of the smart TV systems I like Google TV second-best, after Roku, and its implementation on the Sony X80K is the TV's best feature. Highlights include excellent voice results thanks to Google Assistant, tight integration with Google apps in particular YouTube and YouTube TV, and more apps overall, thanks to the Play store, than proprietary systems like Samsung and LG.

Responses were quick enough but felt a step behind most Roku TVs I've used. Once I selected a profile it took a long second or two for the main For You home page to populate with thumbnails, for example. I didn't love the large chunk of space at the top devoted to promotions of shows and movies on various services. I also wish the "continue watching" row was higher-up rather than placed below the "top picks for you" and apps rows. Top picks seemed to take into account my preferences for sci-fi shows and movies once I went through the "improve your recommendations" screen, but there was still plenty of content I didn't care about. Suggestions across different apps are a fine idea, but I personally the simplicity of Roku app-centric menus.

Sony KD X80K TV
James Martin/CNET

Google TV's profiles worked well. I was easily able to set up a kid's profile, and I appreciated that appropriate apps like YouTube Kids and PBS Kids were suggested for me to add, and that Netflix automatically invoked the kids profile. During setup I was also prompted to set screen time limits, create a profile picture and more. Google TV's system provides better parental controls than Roku, although Fire TV is similarly robust.

Modest features, extra connections

Key features

Display technology LED LCD
LED backlight Direct
Resolution 4K
HDR compatible HDR10 and Dolby Vision
Smart TV Google TV
Remote Standard with voice

As an entry-level TV the X80K's lack major picture-enhancing extras. It has a 60Hz refresh rate rather than 120Hz, although it does offer smoothing, aka the soap opera effect, if you want to turn it on. It supports Dolby Vision and Dolby Atmos formats, as well as standard HDR10, as do many other mid-priced TVs.

  • Four HDMI inputs (One with eARC)
  • Two USB 2.0 ports
  • Composite AV input (3.5mm)
  • Optical digital audio output
  • RF (antenna) input
  • Ethernet (LAN) port

Physical connections are better than many basic TVs' however, with a fourth HDMI as well as analog video. It's also the least-expensive TV so far to include an ATSC 3.0 tuner, so it's ready for NextGen TV broadcasts. Such broadcasts are rare today and once they become more common you'll be able to buy a tuner box to allow any TV to watch them, but it's a nice extra on the Sony nonetheless.

Sony KD X80K TV
James Martin/CNET

Picture quality comparisons

I set up the 55-inch Sony X80K next to its direct competitor from Samsung, as well as less expensive Fire TV and a TCL with superior picture quality specifications. Here's the lineup:

Samsung QN55Q60B
Amazon Fire TV Omni
TCL 65R646

TV and movies: The Sony delivered the second-worst picture in the lineup overall, beating out only the Omni. Its main weakness was relatively weak contrast, caused by both lighter (worse) black levels and dimmer highlights than the Samsung.

Watching Hustle on Netflix, for example, the black around the credits and the shadows in the locker room were lighter and less realistic than on the other TVs, if only slightly worse than the Samsung and the Omni. The Samsung was also significantly brighter than the Sony in its most accurate picture modes, which made the film's HDR image pop more in comparison. The skin tones of Adam Sandler and the basketball players looked truer than the Samsung and Omni, but overall I preferred the Samsung's picture by a hair.

The story was similar with the challenging Spears and Munsil 4K HDR Benchmark montage on Blu-ray, where the Samsung looked a bit brighter than the Sony. Both outperformed the Omni, which showed less high-level detail in snowscapes for example, but the difference wasn't enough to justify the Sony's much higher price.

The TCL, meanwhile, was superior in pretty much every way to the others, with excellent contrast, deep black levels and powerful brightness that made the Sony, Samsung and Fire TV pale by comparison.

Sony KD X80K TV
James Martin/CNET

Gaming: Playing Horizon Forbidden West, color was more realistic and accurate on the Sony, and similar to the TCL and LG, while the Samsung in every mode appeared more saturated and, well, game-y. Again the Samsung won for contrast and punch, handily, although to its credit the Sony revealed more details in the shadows, which is an advantage in dark games with enemies lurking in the shadows. The Sony lacked the comprehensive gaming stats display of the Samsung and both had similar (excellent) input lag, but overall I preferred the Samsung's punchier look. The TCL, meanwhile, combined a brighter image than either one with excellent shadow detail and, yes, colors as accurate (and better-looking) than the Sony.

Bright lighting: The Sony measured relatively dim, backing up my subjective impressions, and both it and the Samsung were less-bright than the TCL and a less-expensive Vizio, both equipped with local dimming. Below are my measurements in nits for select comparison TVs in their brightest and most accurate picture modes, using both standard dynamic range (SDR) and high dynamic range (HDR) test patterns.

Light output in nits

TV Brightest mode (SDR) Accurate mode (SDR) Brightest mode (HDR) Accurate mode (HDR)
TCL 65R635 1,114 792 1,292 1,102
Vizio M65Q7-J01 791 562 764 631
Samsung QN55Q60B 549 343 540 514
Sony KD-55X80K 369 357 446 387
LG OLED65C2 413 389 812 759

Despite its lower light output numbers the Sony is still bright enough for all but the most light-filled viewing environments. As with most TVs, the brightest modes for HDR and SDR (Game and Vivid, respectively) are less accurate. For the accurate results listed above I used Custom mode and I recommend X80K owners do the same to get good color in bright rooms. Note that with SDR, you'll need to disable the Auto Energy Saving setting (Settings > Display & Sound > Picture > Light Sensor > Off) to get full brightness.

The Samsung's screen was better than that of the Sony at dealing with bright reflections in the room. Sitting under bright lights, I saw my reflection in the black screen of the X80K more clearly (and it was more distracting) than in any of the other TV screens.

Uniformity and viewing angle: The screen of the X80K sample I reviewed showed no major issues with bright spots or dark areas, and in test patterns appeared more uniform than the Omni and similar to the other displays. Watching hockey I saw very little evidence of irregularities as the camera panned across the ice. From off-angle the Samsung maintained superior black level and contrast but Sony had better color, much like the TVs' respective performance from straight on.

Sony KD X80K TV
James Martin/CNET

Picture settings notes

The most accurate settings were Cinema and Custom mode for both HDR and SDR, and Custom measured slightly more accurate so I went with that. Game is best for gaming, thanks to its low input lag, and color was similar to Custom and exceedingly accurate.

The X80K offers settings that engage smoothing, aka the soap opera effect, as I prefer to turn it off for TV shows and movies. You can experiment with the settings (Settings > Display & Sound > Picture > Motion > Motionflow > Custom) and it's off by default in the Cinema and Custom modes.

Geek box

SDR Result Score
Black luminance (0%) 0.075 Poor
Peak white luminance (SDR) 357 Average
Avg. gamma (10-100%) 2.46 Poor
Avg. grayscale error (10-100%) 2.27 Good
Dark gray error (30%) 2.07 Good
Bright gray error (80%) 3.04 Average
Avg. color checker error 3.08 Average
Avg. saturation sweeps error 2.52 Good
Avg. color error 2.67 Good
Input lag (Game mode) 11.93 Good



HDR10

Black luminance (0%) 0.084 Poor
Peak white luminance (10% win) 446 Poor
Gamut % UHDA/P3 (CIE 1976) 94.73 Average
ColorMatch HDR error 8.08 Poor
Avg. color checker error 1.54 Good
Input lag (Game mode, 4K HDR) 11.67 Good

See How We Test TVs for more details.

Portrait Displays Calman calibration software was used in this review. 

§

NextGen TV, aka ATSC 3.0, is continuing its rapid rollout across the country. Major markets like Los Angeles, Atlanta, Denver, Houston and more all have stations transmitting. Meanwhile New York, Boston, and many other markets are slated to have broadcasts later this year. While not every station in every market has a NextGen TV counterpart, more and more are coming on the air.

What's NextGen TV? It's an update to the free HDTV you can already get over-the-air in nearly every city in the US. There's no monthly fee, but you do need either a new TV with a built-in tuner or a standalone external tuner. The standard allows broadcast stations to send higher quality signals than ever before with features like 4K, HDR, 120 Hz, and more. ATSC 3.0 proponents also claim better reception indoors and on-the-go -- whether it's on your phone, or even in your car. The best part is that if you're watching it on your TV it uses the same standard antennas available today.

One potential downside? ATSC 3.0 will also let broadcasters track your viewing habits, information that can be used for targeted advertising, just like companies such as Facebook and Google use today. 

Read more: Best TV antennas for cord cutters, starting at just $10

NextGen TV to you

nextgen-tv-logo
ATSC.org

Here's the top-line info:

  • If you get your TV from streaming, cable or satellite, NextGen TV/ATSC 3.0 won't affect you at all. 
  • The transition is voluntary. Stations don't have to switch. Many have already, however, for reasons we'll explain below.
  • It's not backwards-compatible with the current HD standard (ATSC 1.0), so your current TV won't be able to receive it. Your current antenna should work fine though.
  • Stations that switch to NextGen TV will still have to keep broadcasting ATSC 1.0 for five years.
  • There are multiple models and sizes of TV with built-in tuners available now from Hisense, LG, Sony, Samsung and others.
  • As of the beginning of 2022 the majority of the largest markets in the US have at least one channel broadcasting NextGen TV. By the end of 2022, nearly all major and many minor markets will have multiple channels .
atsc-3-stations-2022

Here's the map of actual stations as of January 2022. Orange denotes stations that are live now. Blue is launching before summer. White sometime after the summer.

ATSC

How it will work in your home

Put simply: If you connect an antenna to your TV you will receive free programming, just like most people can get now. Yet, that is selling the potential benefits of NextGen TV short. 

NextGen TV is IP-based, so in practice it can be moved around your home just like any internet content can right now. For example, you connect an antenna to a tuner box inside your home, but that box is not connected to your TV at all. Instead, it's connected to your router. This means anything with access to your network can have access to over-the-air TV, be it your TV, your phone, your tablet or even a streaming device like Apple TV. There will be traditional tuners as well, of course, but this is a new and interesting alternative.

This also means it's possible we'll see mobile devices with built-in tuners, so you can watch live TV while you're out and about, like you can with Netflix and YouTube now. How willing phone companies will be to put tuners in their phones remains to be seen, however. You don't see a lot of phones that can get radio broadcasts now, even though such a thing is easy to implement. We'll talk more about that in a moment.

'Voluntary'

In November of 2017, the Federal Communications Commission approved ATSC 3.0 as the next generation of broadcast standard, on a "voluntary, market-driven basis" (PDF). It also required stations to continue broadcasting ATSC 1.0 (i.e. "HD"). This is actually part of the issue as to why it's voluntary. 

During the mandatory DTV transition in the early 2000s, stations in a city were given a new frequency (channel, in other words), to broadcast digital TV, while they still broadcast analog on their old channel. These older channels were eventually reclaimed by the FCC for other uses when the proverbial switch was flipped to turn off analog broadcasts. Since a changeover isn't occurring this time around, stations and markets are left to themselves how best to share or use the over-the-air spectrum in their areas.

atsc-transmitter-sharing

Because there's no new bandwidth, broadcasters will temporarily share transmitters. Two or more stations will use one tower for ATSC 1.0 (HD) broadcasts and those stations will use another tower for ATSC 3.0 (UHD) broadcasts. This will mean a temporary reduction in bandwidth for each channel, but potentially a limited impact on picture quality due to the better modern HD encoders. More info here.

ATSC/TVTechnology.com

While it's not a mandatory standard, many broadcasters still seem enthusiastic about NextGen. At the beginning of the roll-out, then executive vice president of communications at the National Association of Broadcasters Dennis Wharton told CNET that the improvement in quality, overall coverage and the built-in safety features mean that most stations would be enthusiastic to offer ATSC 3.0.

John Hane, president of the Spectrum Consortium (an industry group with broadcasters Sinclair, Nexstar and Univision as members), was equally confident: "The FCC had to make it voluntary because the FCC couldn't provide transition channels. [The industry] asked the FCC to make it voluntary. We want the market to manage it. We knew the market would demand it, and broadcasters and hardware makers in fact are embracing it."

Given the competition broadcasters have with cable, streaming and so on, 3.0 could be a way to stabilize or even increase their income by offering better picture quality, better coverage and, most importantly, targeted ads.

Ah yes, targeted ads…

Broadcast TV will know what you're watching

One of NextGen TV's more controversial features is a "return data path," which is a way for the station you're watching to know you're watching. Not only does this allow a more accurate count of who's watching what shows, but it creates the opportunity for every marketer's dream: targeted advertising. 

Ads specific to your viewing habits, income level and even ethnicity (presumed by your neighborhood, for example) could get slotted in by your local station. This is something brand-new for broadcast TV. Today, over-the-air broadcasts are pretty much the only way to watch television that doesn't track your viewing habits. Sure, the return data path could also allow "alternative audio tracks and interactive elements," but it's the targeted ads and tracking many observers are worried about.

The finer details are all still being worked out, but here's the thing: If your TV is connected to the internet, it's already tracking you. Pretty much every app, streaming service, smart TV and cable or satellite box all track your usage to a greater or lesser extent.

Return data path is still in the planning stages, even as the other aspects of NextGen TV are already going live. There is a silver lining: There will be an opt-out option. While it also requires Internet access, if this type of thing bothers you, just don't connect your TV or NextGen TV receiver to the internet. You will inevitably lose some of the other features of NextGen TV, however.

That said, we'll keep an eye on this for any further developments.   

Free TV on your phone?

Another point of potential contention is getting ATSC 3.0 tuners into phones. At a most basic level, carriers like AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are in the business of selling you data. If suddenly you can get lots of high-quality content for free on your phone, they potentially lose money. Ever wonder why your phone doesn't have an FM radio tuner? Same reason.

T-Mobile made a preemptive strike along those lines all the way back in September 2017, writing a white paper (PDF) that, among other things, claims, "In light of the detrimental effects that inclusion of ATSC 3.0 can have on the cost and size of a device, the technology trade-offs required to accommodate competing technologies, and the reduced performance and spectral efficiency that it will have for other mobile bands and services, the decision as to whether to include ATSC 3.0 in a device must be left to the market to decide."

"The market" determined you didn't need an FM tuner in your phone, and in the few phones that had an FM tuner, if you bought it through an American provider, it was almost always disabled.

TV broadcasters, on the other hand, are huge fans of ATSC 3.0 on mobile phones. It means more potential eyeballs and, incidentally, a guarantee of active internet access for that return data path. John Hane of the Spectrum Consortium feels that tuners built into phones is "inevitable," and that international adoption of ATSC 3.0 will help push it forward. Wharton says that the focus is getting TVs to work, but mobile is in the plan.

Then there's portable TVs, of which there are HD versions on the market and have been for years. The next-generation ATSC 3.0 versions of these will likely get better reception in addition to the higher resolution offered by the new standard.

antennas-09.jpg
Sarah Tew/CNET

Cost (for you)

NextGen TV is not backward compatible with current TV tuners. To get it, you'll eventually need either a new TV or an external tuner. 

However, you shouldn't feel a push to upgrade since:

1. NextGen TV/ATSC 3.0 isn't mandatory, and it doesn't affect cable, satellite or streaming TV.

2. HD tuners cost as little as $30 to $40 now, and NextGen TV tuners, which currently sell between $200 and $300, will eventually be cheap as well.  

3. Even after they start NextGen broadcasts, stations will have to keep broadcasting regular old HD. 

Here's the actual language:

"The programming aired on the ATSC 1.0 simulcast channel must be 'substantially similar' to the programming aired on the 3.0 channel. This means that the programming must be the same, except for programming features that are based on the enhanced capabilities of ATSC 3.0, advertisements and promotions for upcoming programs. The substantially similar requirement will sunset in five years from its effective date absent further action by the Commission to extend it."

In other words, the HD broadcast has to be essentially the same as the new 3.0 broadcast for five years, perhaps longer depending on future FCC actions.

Which brings us to point 3. By the time people had to buy them, HD tuners were inexpensive and are even more so now. The HD tuner I use is currently $26 on Amazon. The first generation NextGen tuners available now are more expensive than that, though they're not outrageous. We'll discuss those below. By the time anyone actually requires one, however, they'll almost certainly be affordable.

Which is good, because there aren't any planned subsidies this time around for people to get a tuner for cheap. I'm sure this is at least partly due to how few people actually still use OTA as their sole form of TV reception. Maybe this will change as more stations convert, but we're a ways away from that.

atsc-upgrade-path

As you can see, there are lots of parts that need to get upgraded all along the chain before you can get 3.0 in your home.

ATSC/TVTechnology.com

Here's another way to think about it: The first HD broadcasts began in the mid-90s, but when did you buy your first HDTV? As far as the 3.0 transition is concerned we're in the late-90s, maybe generously the early 2000s, now. Things seem like they're moving at a much more rapid pace than the transition from analog to DTV/HDTV, but even so, it will be a long time before ATSC 3.0 completely replaces the current standard.

How to get NextGen right now

lg-evo-cropped-for-door.png
LG

If you want to check it out for yourself, many of you already can. The first stop is to go to WatchNextGenTV.com. That website will help you find what stations in your area are broadcasting, or which ones will soon. 

Next up you'll need something to receive it. If you're in the market for a new TV there are several options available from Hisense, LG, Samsung, and Sony. Here's our list of all the 2022 TVs with built-in next-gen tuners.

If you want to check out NextGen TV without buying a new television, you'll need an external tuner. It's still early days, so there aren't many options. 

tablo-atsc3-quad-hdmi-in-situ-straight-crop-new.png

The Tablo ATSC 3.0 Quad HDMI DVR

Nuvvyo

At CES 2022 Nuvvyo announced the Tablo, a quad-tuner box that can connect to a TV directly, or transmit over a network to Rokus, Apple TVs, or computers on your home network.  

The Silicon Dust has two models, the $199 HomeRun Flex 4K and the $279 HomeRun Scribe 4K. Both have ATSC 1.0 and 3.0 tuners.  

If you want a more traditional tuner, BitRouter plans to start shipping its first ZapperBox M1 tuners in the spring. You can reserve one now for $249. It doesn't have internal storage, but BitRouter plans to add the ability to save content on network-attached storage, or NAS, devices via a firmware update. They also plan to add the ability to send the content around your home network, like what the Scribe 4K does.

zapperbox-front-scaled
Zapperbox

Then there's what to watch. Being early in the process, you're not going to find much 4K content, possibly not any. This was the same with the early years of HDTV. It's also going to vary per area. There is certainly a lot of 4K content being produced right now, and that has been the case for several years. So in that way, we're in better shape than we were in the early days of HD. 

Basic and paid cable channels over-the-air?

One company is using the bandwidth and IP nature of NextGen to do something a little different. It's a hybrid paid TV service, sort of like cable/satellite, but using over-the-air broadcasts to deliver the content. It's called Evoca, and right now it's available only in Boise, Idaho. Edge Networks is the company behind it, and it wants to roll it out to other small markets where cable offerings are limited, and broadband speeds are slow or expensive. 

It's an interesting idea for underserved and often forgotten-about markets. 

Read moreCable TV channels and 4K from an antenna?

Seeing the future

The transition from analog broadcasting to HD, if you count from the formation of the Grand Alliance to the final analog broadcast, took 16 years. 

Though many aspects of technology move rapidly, getting dozens of companies, plus the governments of the US and many other countries, all to agree to specific standards, takes time. So does the testing of the new tech. There are a lot of cogs and sprockets that have to align for this to work, and it would be a lot harder to fix once it's all live.

But technology moves faster and faster. It's highly doubtful it will take 16 years to fully implement NextGen TV. As we mentioned at the top, dozens of stations are already broadcasting. Will every station in your city switch to NextGen TV? Probably not, but the bigger ones likely will. This is especially true if there are already other NextGen TV stations in your area. There's a potential here for stations to make additional money in the long run with 3.0, and that's obviously a big motivator.

There's also the question of how much content there will be. If it follows the HDTV transition model, big sporting events in 4K HDR will come first, followed by lots and lots of shows featuring nature scenes and closeups of bugs. Seriously -- this was totally a thing. Then we'll see a handful of scripted prime-time shows. My guess would be the popular, solidly profitable ones that are produced (not just aired) by networks like CBS and NBC.

So should you hold off buying a new TV? Nope, not unless you only get your shows over the air. And even if you do, by the time there's enough content to be interesting, there will be cheap tuner boxes you can connect to whatever TV you have. 

For now, NextGen TV seems to be well on its way.


As well as covering TV and other display tech, Geoff does photo tours of cool museums and locations around the world, including nuclear submarines, massive aircraft carriers, medieval castles, epic 10,000 mile road trips, and more. Check out Tech Treks for all his tours and adventures.

He wrote a bestselling sci-fi novel about city-size submarines, along with a sequel. You can follow his adventures on Instagram and his YouTube channel.


Source

https://residencey.costa.my.id/

.

Search This Blog

Menu Halaman Statis

close