DJI Phantom 3

what is the best mini series of all time

Embark on a Quest with what is the best mini series of all time

Step into a world where the focus is keenly set on what is the best mini series of all time. Within the confines of this article, a tapestry of references to what is the best mini series of all time awaits your exploration. If your pursuit involves unraveling the depths of what is the best mini series of all time, you've arrived at the perfect destination.

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

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

So, if you're eager to satisfy your curiosity about what is the best mini series of all time, your journey commences here. Let's embark together on a captivating odyssey through the myriad dimensions of what is the best mini series of all time.

Showing posts sorted by date for query what is the best mini series of all time. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query what is the best mini series of all time. 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

.

TVs In 2022 Look Pretty Exciting: A Buyers Guide


Tvs in 2022 look pretty exciting a buyers love tvs in 2022 look pretty exciting i closed tvs in 2022 look pretty in spanish tvs in 2022 look pretty fire tvs in 2022 look like jeeps top tvs in 2022 when were tvs invented
TVs in 2022 look pretty exciting: A buyers guide


TVs in 2022 look pretty exciting: A buyers guide

This story is part of The Year Ahead, CNET's look at how the world will continue to evolve starting in 2022 and beyond.

CES 2022  has come to a close, and the important news about new TVs is out of the bag. Most major TV-makers have introduced their biggest and best screens, talked up improved picture quality and dropped buzzwords like HDMI 2.1, mini-LED and 8K resolution. Most will be familiar to TV shoppers, while some that are actually new, like QD-OLED, are mashups of existing terms that still require lengthy explanation.

As CNET's resident TV reviewer, I can link you to plenty of places to readthoselengthyexplanations, but this article isn't one of them. Instead you'll find my best advice on what those new introductions mean and how, when and even if it's worth buying a new TV. Let's dive in.

Do you need a new TV in 2022?

Unless your current TV is broken, no you don't. But if you want a TV in another room, or your current TV feels like it's getting long in the tooth, its screen is too small or you want better picture quality or a better smart TV system, you might want a new TV. And if you've saved a bunch of money during the pandemic by not traveling or commuting to work or eating out, maybe you have a little extra to indulge that want.

Depending on how old your current TV is, a new model -- whether one released in the last year or a new TV just announced at CES -- could be a sweet upgrade you'll appreciate every time you watch. 

What's the best time of year to buy a TV?

Starting in the fall . New models like the TVs introduced at CES 2022 appear in spring and their prices are highest then. Significant discounts start in November and go through Black Friday and the holiday season. Around the beginning of the new year after CES (i.e. now) they'll remain affordable, and sometimes the Super Bowl in February has the best deals on last year's TVs. Soon those will start to disappear and be replaced by the new models in spring again.

Buy a 2021 TV now or wait for a 2022 model?

It all depends on how long you can wait. If you want the latest and greatest technology, you're probably already set on a 2022 model. But if you want the best value, without missing much, a better move is to buy a 2021 TV now, before they disappear later this spring and summer. A 2021 TV at a given size or price will generally have very similar picture quality and features compared to its 2022 counterpart. 

If you can't decide, and you're not in a hurry, just wait until fall to get the best price on a 2022 TV.

What new CES 2022 TVs and features stand out?

Here's a short list of my favorites so far, based on prior experience and information the manufacturer provided. Reminder: I did not attend the show and haven't seen any of these, with the exception of LG, in person.

9bca1336-a3dd-4b3b-a066-6edcee0a9a5a

The 42-inch LG C2 is the smallest OLED TV yet.

David Katzmaier/CNET

LG C2 OLED TV : As the successor to my Editors' Choice TV for the last two years, the latest version is the odds-on favorite to win again. The fact that it comes in a new 42-inch size is great news for people who couldn't fit bigger OLEDs into their rooms, but I'm excited to see how low the price will fall on the 77-inch version.

Sony X95K Mini-LED TV : Last year the Samsung QN90A earned my respect as the best high-end alternative to OLED, but Samsung has yet to announce any specific 2022 QLED models, so this Sony is my pick for now. Sony has an excellent track record with full-array local dimming and this is its least expensive model with mini-LED. It won't be cheap, however.

QD-OLED: The first Sony and Samsung TVs featuring a new OLED panel by Samsung Display are going to be expensive, and I probably won't recommend most people buy over more-affordable OLEDs like the C2, but I can't wait to see them in person.

Sony's remote finder: This isn't a reason to buy an expensive TV, but it sure is cool and I hope every TV maker adopts it soon. It allows the remote to emit a sound so you can find it under the couch cushions or wherever you lost it.

Samsung's gaming hub : I'm not into cloud gaming, but I love the idea of consolidating all the game-related stuff, including game mode settings and access to consoles, in one place. There's also the ability to split-screen YouTube videos and your game at the same time. LG's game optimizer was my favorite last year, and still seems to offer more options, but so far Samsung's gaming features look easier to use.

samsung-gaming-hub-landing-page-cannot-be-published-in-stories-posting-after-jan-15

Samsung's new gaming hub for 2022 TVs offers one-stop access to cloud and console games.

Samsung

What else does a 2022 TV buyer need to know?

Basically, it's early. CES is the beginning of what we know about new TVs this year, not the end. 

Brands I've lauded as the best TV values in the past, namely TCL and Vizio, haven't unveiled their bread-and-butter 2022 models yet. Both are still selling their older TVs, including models I still highly recommend like the TCL 6-Series Roku TV and the Vizio MQ7 series.

And if you're looking for an inexpensive TV, something you can put in a kid's bedroom or guest room and stream smart TV apps with ease, my top pick is still TCL's 4-Series Roku TV. This venerable workhorse hasn't changed much in the last couple years, and I don't expect any major differences when the new version is inevitably announced soon. Maybe it will get Google TV, but the safe bet is still Roku in my book.

My buying advice will continue to evolve as prices are announced, new models appear and I get the chance to review them in person. Stay tuned to CNET throughout the year for updates.


Source

https://nichols.my.id/how-to-repair-damaged-hair-after-permanent-straightening.html

.

Best MacBook Pro Alternatives For 2022


Best macbook pro to buy 2022 what software comes with macbook pro 2022 best laptop similar to macbook pro best macbook pro m1 alternatives apple macbook pro similar products best macbook pro deals best macbook pro docking station best macbook best macbook for students best macbook 2022
Best MacBook Pro Alternatives for 2022


Best MacBook Pro Alternatives for 2022

Fortunately for Apple users, Apple has made some much needed changes to MacBook Pro in the latest generations. That means no more awful keyboardannoying Touch Bar or overreliance on Thunderbolt/USB-C connections. The latest models of the 14-inch MacBook Pro and the 16-inch MacBook Pro come with M1 series processors, a top-notch design and displays with mini-LED backlighting. Apple also added back some of the ports that were missing in previous generations and removed the Touch Bar. 

But the fact remains that there's a far bigger variety of designs, feature sets and display choices for Windows laptops and Chromebooks, and Windows remains the preferred platform for playing games locally. Cloud gaming lets Macs circumvent the gaming problem to a certain extent, but not completely; only a fraction of the universe of games is playable via the cloud.

An entry-level MacBook can stretch the limits of your budget, and those who've set aside a nice chunk of cash might want something a little more customizable. No one can deny that one appealing thing about Windows laptops is the variety. Even when trying to imitate the offerings of a MacBook (or an iPad or iPad Pro) there are all sizes of far less expensive Chromebooks, as well as 14- and 15-inch laptops that are slightly smaller and lighter than the 16-inch MacBook Pro, but not quite as small as the 13-inch MacBook Air, across the price spectrum. You can also get more variety, with alternatives like 2-in-1s. Plus, we're seeing lots of experimentation with multiscreen designs.

This list is periodically updated with new models we've tested and reviewed. It's a great place to start to get an idea of what's available. If you need advice on whether a particular type of laptop or two-in-one is right for you, jump to our laptop FAQ at the bottom of the list.

So when you want to go Windows, here are our recommendations for laptops to fill that MacBook-size void in your life.

Lori Grunin/CNET

If, like me, you're not a fan of OLED screens for photo editing -- they're not optimized for Adobe RGB and aren't great at tonal range in the shadows -- then what you need is a laptop with a good IPS display. The Dell XPS 17 9720 with the 4K screen option delivers that, and it's not as reflective as the OLED screens I've seen. Dell's PremierColor software isn't perfect, but it gives you more control over screen settings than most I've seen, and it has two Thunderbolt 3 controllers to make your external drives happy. It's heavier than the MacBook, but not much bigger, especially given its larger 17-inch screen. And while its battery life isn't terrific, its performance can certainly keep up. 

And a great lower-cost alternative is the Dell Inspiron 16 Plus, which doesn't head to the front of the line primarily because of its lower build quality, and I'm assuming that if you're looking for a MacBook Pro equivalent you want the metal chassis, better screen and higher-end components. But if you also want to save as much as $1,000, it's worth considering.

Read Dell XPS 17 9720 review


Lori Grunin/CNET

If you're drawn to a MacBook Pro for its featureless-slab aesthetic, Razer's your Windows go-to. If you want one that roughly matches the 14-inch Pro for design, size and weight, the Blade 14 is your option; its little brother, the Razer Book 13 makes a great alternative to the 13-inch MacBook Pro when you want something a bit smaller and less expensive. 

A smaller version than the 15-inch staple, the 14-inch Razer Blade delivers a lot of gaming power for its size without feeling small -- an important consideration for a gaming laptop, and one that Apple doesn't need to worry about -- but has decent battery life, a nice size for travel and a subtle design (for a gaming laptop) that's buttoned-up enough for sitting in a meeting with the top brass or clients.

Read our Razer Blade 14 (2021) review.

Josh Goldman/CNET

Dell's XPS 13 is a 13.3-inch laptop that's so trimmed up that the body is basically the size of an older 11.6-inch laptop. Being part of the company's XPS line means both its chassis and components are top-notch for its class, so you're getting great battery life and performance, too. Power delivery is via USB-C and it comes with a microSD reader and headphone jack. It comes in both a standard clamshell as well as the two-in-one, but I prefer the two-in-one because you can fold it up into a tablet if you have to work in a cramped space.

Read our Dell XPS 2-in-1 review.

Josh Goldman/CNET

What's better than the Touch Bar? An entire half-screen second display, that's what. The Duo's tilt-up second screen can act as an ancillary display, an extension of the primary display (for viewing those long web pages) or a separate control center from which you can run Asus' custom utilities or as control surfaces for select creative applications. Plus, Asus excels at squeezing every bit of performance out of its high-end laptops, and the 14-inch delivers great battery life, as well. 

It comes in two models, 15-inch and the 2021 14-inch Duo 14 that we reviewed. The Duo 14 has either 11th-gen Core i5 or i7 processors, optional Nvidia MX450 discrete graphics and up to 32GB of memory.

Read our Asus ZenBook Duo review.

Commonly asked questions

Which is faster, a MacBook or a Windows laptop?

That's an almost impossible question to answer. 

For one thing, it's a moving target. We're starting to see Windows models featuring Intel's new 12th-gen CPUs, which has the same hybrid core architecture as Apple's M1 chips, as well as new mobile GPUs. We haven't yet had a chance to test out many of these next-gen models, but it's safe to assume that Apple's M1 processors will be facing some stiff competition. 

And thus far, Apple hasn't even launched an M1 MacBook with a discrete GPU, though its integrated graphics seem to scale up to compete with current low-end Nvidia and AMD graphics up to about the RTX 3070 and Radeon RX 6800M, and definitely improves on previous Intel-based Macs though neither is really surprising. But it means that at the high end we're still in sort of a MacBook holding pattern when it comes to comparisons with heavier Windows options.

Plus, differences in operating systems complicate things. Mac OS has long been more efficient than Windows and that's only improved now that Apple owns its entire food chain. But it doesn't need to worry about compatibility with partner systems and myriad different components. Then toss in difficulties getting repeatable, comparable, representative and broad-based benchmark results for cross-platform comparisons... well, I don't feel like going down that rabbit hole right now.

Is a MacBook Pro better for content creation than a Windows laptop?

Once again, a difficult question to answer because there's no sweeping generalizations you can make. If you're basing the concern on Windows' old reputation for being inferior for graphics work, it was accurate at the time but is no longer true. 

Screens on Windows laptops have come a long way, and convertibles (aka two-in-ones) mean you can paint or sketch directly on the laptop screen. With a MacBook you'd need to buy an iPad as well.

Some graphics applications are only available on one platform or the other, so figuring out which ones you need and which you can switch away from is the first thing to decide before you choose between Windows and MacOS. Also consider that MacOS no longer supports 32-bit applications, so if you've got an old favorite that hasn't been updated -- this happens most with small utilities -- but still exists on Windows, that's something to think about.

Some applications may also be better optimized for one platform than the other, or rely on a specific GPU from AMD or Nvidia for their best acceleration. Since you can't really use an Nvidia card with a Mac and none of the M1 MacBooks incorporate any discrete graphics, Windows is probably a better bet, especially for programs that rely on Nvidia's CUDA programming interface. Think about any accessories you need, as well -- the drivers and utilities you need to use them may not be available or be stripped down on one or the other.

MacBooks may run faster than equivalently configured Windows laptops simply because MacOS is a lot more tightly integrated with the hardware than Windows can ever be on its side of the fence. Microsoft simply has to support a much wider variety of hardware than Apple will ever need to, and that adds performance overhead; this can be especially important for activities sensitive to latency, like audio recording. Windows' flexibility is both its strength and its weakness. 

How we test computers

The review process for laptops, desktops, tablets and other computer-like devices consists of two parts: performance testing under controlled conditions in the CNET Labs and extensive hands-on use by our expert reviewers. This includes evaluating a device's aesthetics, ergonomics and features. A final review verdict is a combination of both those objective and subjective judgments. 

The list of benchmarking software we use changes over time as the devices we test evolve. The most important core tests we're currently running on every compatible computer include: Primate Labs Geekbench 5, Cinebench R23, PCMark 10 and 3DMark Fire Strike Ultra. 

A more detailed description of each benchmark and how we use it can be found in our How We Test Computers page. 


More computing recommendations


Source

https://nichols.my.id/how-to-repair-fatty-liver.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