....
What?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...
> I don't care what anyone says, the masses are morons. My own grandmother is an idiot. You can't count on them to pick good stuff. Just check out Network TV to see what the masses want for entertainment. There's certainly a place for that kind of thing but it's not on Fark. Now go away and let me finish taking a crap!
And now he wants the "masses" help to elect him?
Do you think that's air you're breathing? Hmmm...
I was one of the early (and later) adopters of HDTV. I've currently got a ~5 year old Pioneer Plasma (Kuro baby!) that does 1080p and, frankly, I'm fine with it. I've seen the 4K TVs and the additional resolution, to my eyes, doesn't seem to do much for the picture. I'm sure there's more detail there. I had the fortune of seeing the Hobbit in both the new HiDef projection screen (with LCD style panning, oooh) and in an IMAX theater back to back and I was amazed at how much more sharper and detailed the HiDef projection was vs the IMAX (EG I could see specific details and patterns on emblems on the clothing) But I only noticed it for a few seconds and then that was because I was specifically thinking about the picture quality. On a "smaller" screen (50" TV screens oughta be enough for anybody!) I just don't think those details are going to be noticed as much.
If I NEED a TV I'm sure I'll take 4k screens into consideration (especially if they're commonplace by the time I need one) but it's not going to make me jump from my current setup.
That said, do I want a 4K monitor for my PC? Oh yeah!
This, a thousand times this.
The one reason that people like Steve Jobs, Walt Disney, et al made such lasting impacts on not only their companies but the world as well was not because of some great business acumen but because they fixed the problems directly. Sure, they were assholes but ultimately they cared about their products and how customers reacted to them.
Degree milled MBA's don't understand this and would not have given this fix a second thought because a> they couldn't do it and b> the economics didn't make sense because some team would've had to be picked to go out, ascertain the problem, determine the solution which might be a larger fix than a one line change and now you're looking at potentially tens of thousands of dollars expense to fix a bug in a product that isn't even YOURS! It just don't make no economic sense and you'd get dinged and the next stockholders meeting.
You see this in all the industries. Apple after Steve Jobs. Car manufacturers who were eventually run by "businessmen who understood the auto markets" instead of "a car geek who understood business" the entire industry turned into regurgitated pablum with a few occasional bursts of brilliance by a car geek that broke through the red tape. I worked in the consumer electronics industry and have seen first hand how once highly held and coveted products have been turned into cheap commodities by a "fresh executive team" because it's easier to sell to the masses who don't understand the finer details of a product than it is to actually push the envelope and innovate your product into the next generation. Then, when that market dies out completely because the enthusiasts don't want your product because it sucks so the masses don't want it anymore because "it's not cool", the CEOs blame the market for being fickle.
Biology is the only science in which multiplication means the same thing as division.