# "How the hell did Vizio make a $999 4K TV?"



## Nick

*How the hell did Vizio make a $999 4K TV?*

Source: *The Verge*
By Nilay Patel - September 24, 2014 11:42 am

Vizio officially launched its P-Series 4K TVs last night, which start at $999 for a 50-inch set and go up to $2,499 for a 70-inch set - the first mainstream 4K TVs to be that aggressively priced. To celebrate, the company held a party in a New York art gallery, where the TVs were showcased playing high-resolution video art and in side-by-side comparisons to Samsung's 8500 series, which lists at $2,199 for a 50-inch set. "It's not only shipping an amazingly-priced 4K TV, but one that blows the competition away on picture quality," Vizio CTO Matt McRae told me. ...

Full story and video


----------



## inkahauts

It's a Visio.


----------



## WestDC

A poor mans Sony


----------



## inkahauts

I don't care for Sony tvs, yet I still think that's a bit harsh on Sony.


----------



## MysteryMan

As I posted on another thread display experts say you need a 60 inch set or larger to see any difference between 4K and 1080p and that the difference is incremental. Given that I can see how Vizio can sell a 50 inch 4K HDTV for $999.00.


----------



## Nick

inkahauts said:


> It's a Visio.


Vizio


----------



## harsh

MysteryMan said:


> As I posted on another thread display experts say you need a 60 inch set or larger to see any difference between 4K and 1080p and that the difference is incremental. Given that I can see how Vizio can sell a 50 inch 4K HDTV for $999.00.


The ability to discern the difference is a combination of both display size and viewing distance. A 50" TV will allow you get much closer before you start to see the blinkenlights (because the pixels must be more tightly packed) but that's not really what we're after, is it?


----------



## harsh

Nick said:


> "It's not only shipping an amazingly-priced 4K TV, but one that blows the competition away on picture quality," Vizio CTO Matt McRae told me. ...


An article that purports to explain how a miracle was performed spends too much time quoting superlatives uttered by its technical chief about the comparative performance and low price.

The term "phoned in" comes to mind; especially when the author wanted to reserve personal judgement until they had a review unit to look at.


----------



## cmasia

Guys, you can pee all over Vizio all you want. And I'll admit, I wouldn't buy one, but...

This is nothing but good news for this technology going forward, no?

Even a not-state-of-the-art 4K for under a grand should be trumpeted, not dumped on...

You may want a Lamborghini, but a Nissan Versa is still a car....

Lighten up, guys!


----------



## inkahauts

Oh I agree. It's great they are making this. Absolutely fantastic.


----------



## inkahauts

harsh said:


> The ability to discern the difference is a combination of both display size and viewing distance. A 50" TV will allow you get much closer before you start to see the blinkenlights (because the pixels must be more tightly packed) but that's not really what we're after, is it?


There is a lot more to tvs that make them different than just that. A lot more.


----------



## fireponcoal

Sounds ok to me but then again I don't really care about PQ... I care a bit but not like most around here.


----------



## bertman64

Some who paid 5K for the Sony 4K 55 inch or 7K for the 65 inch just one year ago may wish they had waited! Just like when I paid 729 for a JVC VCR in the mid '80's or 999 for that 1st TIVO HD DVR: HR10-250!


----------



## SayWhat?

They'll be in the $300-400 range in a year or so.

Tiger's got a LG 60" (59.5") Class 1080p LED HDTV for $800 right now. Weren't they three times that not too long ago?


----------



## MysteryMan

Looking back, when I witnessed my first HD demo I said to myself I have to have that. The difference in picture quality between SD and HD was astounding. As we all know others felt the same way and HD made a very big splash. Unfortunately I don't see this happening with 4K. I recently witnessed a 4K demo. Yes, the picture quality between 4K and 1080p is impressive but no where near as dramatic as the difference between SD and HD. I didn't say to myself I have to have this. I'm not saying 4K will fail like 3D. I'm just saying it's not going to have the same impact as the introduction of HD. There are several reasons for this. As I mentioned, the picture quality difference between 4K and 1080p is incremental. Then there's the lack of 4K content. Yes it's being introduced but there isn't enough to justify the current prices of 4K sets. Add to that our dismal economy and the fact that millions of Americans own working HDTV's that are less than six years old. Until prices drop dramatically, especially with sets that have 60 inch screens or larger and a abundance of 4K content is available 4K is going to be a hard sell.


----------



## Cholly

I received an email from Costco this morning announcing online only availability of two Vizio P series UHDTV's -- a 55 inch model for $1349.99 and a 60 inch model for $1649.99, both with free shipping.

Knock Vizio all you wish. We have two Vizio TV's - a 39 inch model and a 42 inch 3D TV. Both are more than satisfactory. When it came to replacing our old family room Sony 55 inch RPTV, I was tempted to buy a 60 inch Vizio 3D TV, and decided against it because of the lower perceived line count of passive 3D. I instead went with a Samsung 60 inch 3D TV. There are times I wish I'd gotten the Vizio. Active glasses are a pain in the butt, and the Samsung touch screen remote is a pain to use (I bought a Samsung pushbutton remote for the family to use instead). The Sammy is a great TV, but is fraught with gimmickry.

Despite the fact that ;you see a fair number of refurbished Vizio TV's on Woot, their overall reliability is high and the 240 Hz. models have excellent PQ. Vizio will force Sony, Samsung et al to lower their prices even more than Hisense did when they introduced a 4K TV earlier this year.

As to 3D being dead - not so. 3D TV is a niche market, to be sure, simply because there is little over the air content available and you are largely restricted to 3D DVD's. Back when color TV first hit the market, the FCC had approved the CBS color system, which was incompatible with standard black & white TV. It failed, and the FCC quickly adopted the compatible RCA system.


----------



## MysteryMan

3D may not be dead but it has always had one foot in the grave for the same reason. Glasses. Who wants to have to wear glasses? When 3D HDTV's hit the market most sets came with only one pair of glasses. One had to purchase extra glasses for their family members at a hefty price for everyone to enjoy a 3D viewing at the same time. Yes, today's 3D HDTV's come with several pairs of 3D glasses but I'm sure the mucky mucks incorporated their cost into the price of the sets. Then there's the negative impact of wearing 3D glasses many have experienced (fatigue, dizziness, eye strain, headaches). Eliminate the need for 3D glasses and it's success rate increases dramatically.


----------



## Cholly

MysteryMan said:


> 3D may not be dead but it has always had one foot in the grave for the same reason. Glasses. Who wants to have to wear glasses? When 3D HDTV's hit the market most sets came with only one pair of glasses. One had to purchase extra glasses for their family members at a hefty price for everyone to enjoy a 3D viewing at the same time. Yes, today's 3D HDTV's come with several pairs of 3D glasses but I'm sure the mucky mucks incorporated their cost into the price of the sets. Then there's the negative impact of wearing 3D glasses many have experienced (fatigue, dizziness, eye strain, headaches). Eliminate the need for 3D glasses and it's success rate increases dramatically.


Granted. The passive glasses, though, are no more problem than wearing regular glasses (either alone or with sunglasses :biggrin: ). Active glasses, on the other hand, run through batteries if you forget to turn them off after wearing, and have to be paired with the TV -- a real pain. Also, my Samsung came with 2 pairs of glasses.I unknowingly ordered 2 pair of a different model from Amazon and discovered they use different batteries than the ones that came with the TV.

As to glassless 3D, I don't see that happening soon on a practical basis. How do you fool the eyes into seeing left eye/right eye images?

Back to topic: Is there any real benefit to having a curved screen on a 4K TV? On receivers less than 100 inches, Consumer Reports doesn't think so.


----------



## MysteryMan

The TV manufacturers claim curved screens provide wider viewing angles, improved brightness, and cinema-like viewing. I looked at three curved screens on display (Sony, Samsung, LG). My take is the benefits are marginal.


----------



## SayWhat?

^^ The only advantage I could see is that they might fit better into a corner of a room.


----------



## B Newt

I have a 4 year old Visio tv, and it still works like a champ. For the price I can't complain....


Sent from my iPhone using DBSTalk


----------



## Nick

MysteryMan said:


> The TV manufacturers claim curved screens provide wider viewing angles, improved brightness, and cinema-like viewing. I looked at three curved screens on display (Sony, Samsung, LG). My take is the benefits are marginal.


Balderdash! 

Any assertation of wider viewing angles is a patently false claim. They might as well
say curved screens toast bread faster and make a better cup of coffee. A 6th-grader
well-versed in geometry could debunk that claim.


----------



## MysteryMan

MysteryMan said:


> The TV manufacturers claim curved screens provide wider viewing angles, improved brightness, and cinema-like viewing. I looked at three curved screens on display (Sony, Samsung, LG). My take is the benefits are marginal.


^^My post in it's entirety.^^



Nick said:


> Balderdash!
> 
> Any assertation of wider viewing angles is a patently false claim. They might as well
> say curved screens toast bread faster and make a better cup of coffee. A 6th-grader
> well-versed in geometry could debunk that claim.


As I stated, after viewing curved screens my take on the claimed benefits is that they are marginal.


----------



## Jacksmyname

While I'm a Sony guy when it comes to TV's, I'm also glad to see Vizio pricing this set at that price.
Should help with keeping the price of my next Sony lower.
As to 4k, 3d, etc., I won't be buying my next set because of those features, but for size.
My current set has a wide bezel, and another glass bezel around that. I can go from my current 46" to a 65" with a narrow bezel and it will still fit in the space I have available.


----------



## WestDC

I bet it doesn't have the 2.0 HDMI that's needed for that price - the Sony's released last don't don't and the ones on sale for Black friday don't have it either - just something to think about


----------



## Laxguy

WestDC said:


> I bet it doesn't have the 2.0 HDMI that's needed for that price - the Sony's released last don't don't and the ones on sale for Black friday don't have it either - just something to think about


Don't know this for a fact, but I bet you are spot on.


----------



## WestDC

Laxguy said:


> Don't know this for a fact, but I bet you are spot on.


That's the main reason for Sales to get rid of the old product line


----------



## machavez00

Here is Vizio's page for the P-Series sets. The CTO mentions it has HDMI 2.0

http://www.vizio.com/tvs/pseries.html


----------



## Laxguy

WestDC said:


> That's the main reason for Sales to get rid of the old product line


Often, but not always. Can be used to spur sales on new or old product lines.


----------



## pfueri

Nick said:


> *How the hell did Vizio make a $999 4K TV?*
> 
> Source: *The Verge*
> By Nilay Patel - September 24, 2014 11:42 am
> 
> Vizio officially launched its P-Series 4K TVs last night, which start at $999 for a 50-inch set and go up to $2,499 for a 70-inch set - the first mainstream 4K TVs to be that aggressively priced. To celebrate, the company held a party in a New York art gallery, where the TVs were showcased playing high-resolution video art and in side-by-side comparisons to Samsung's 8500 series, which lists at $2,199 for a 50-inch set. "It's not only shipping an amazingly-priced 4K TV, but one that blows the competition away on picture quality," Vizio CTO Matt McRae told me. ...
> 
> Full story and video


It has to be a hunk of junk like all viso tv.s


----------



## Scott Kocourek

WestDC said:


> I bet it doesn't have the 2.0 HDMI that's needed for that price - the Sony's released last don't don't and the ones on sale for Black friday don't have it either - just something to think about


Not only HDMI 2.0 @ 60 Hz but HDCP 2.2 too.


----------



## Rockaway1836

> It has to be a hunk of junk like all viso tv.s


It's Vizio not visio. My 55 P series has an identical picture to my 55 Sony XBR55850A. I can also watch 4K Netflix on the Vizio, the Sony can't do that without adding a $700 media player. I also own a 65xbr900a which can't play 4k Netflix either, that's even with last years model media player.

The B series Sonys can play 4K Netflix without the help of the media player. If it were not for Vizio's lower prices, you would not be seeing the pricing you are seeing for the big boys today.


----------



## Nick

pfueri said:


> It has to be a hunk of junk like all viso tv.s


 visio Vizio

Apparently, your opinion is based on the likelihood that you have never owned a Vizio.
I have had a Vizio for several years. It has excellent PQ and has performed flawlessly.
As a retired A/V professional, I rate my Vizio as an excellent tv at a reasonable price
and I would consider buying another.


----------



## pfueri

Rockaway1836 said:


> It's Vizio not visio. My 55 P series has an identical picture to my 55 Sony XBR55850A. I can also watch 4K Netflix on the Vizio, the Sony can't do that without adding a $700 media player. I also own a 65xbr900a which can't play 4k Netflix either, that's even with last years model media player.The B series Sonys can play 4K Netflix without the help of the media player. If it were not for Vizio's lower prices, you would not be seeing the pricing you are seeing for the big boys today.


Here we go again with the grammar police ! My spell checker spelled it Visio not me ! They still suck no matter how you spell it .


----------



## MysteryMan

pfueri said:


> Here we go again with the grammar police ! My spell checker spelled it Visio not me ! They still suck no matter how you spell it .


 !rolling


----------



## Rockaway1836

> Here we go again with the grammar police ! My spell checker spelled it Visio not me ! They still suck no matter how you spell it .


Your spell check may have spelled visio, but it left out the caps for a proper nome. You spell check sucks worse that Vizio.


----------



## MysteryMan

Rockaway1836 said:


> Your spell check may have spelled visio, but it left out the caps for a proper nome. You spell check sucks worse that Vizio.


Pot calling the kettle black ("Your spell check may have spelled visio, but it left out the caps for a proper "nome". "You" spell check sucks worse "that" Vizio."). Perhaps your spell check needs a update. :sure:


----------



## Laxguy

Are there spellcheckers that do a good job with grammar? Won kin halve no misspelled words butt many errs.

Random quote from school-larnin':

"All right is all wrong unless two words"


----------



## MysteryMan

I'm in my sixties and can honestly say I never made a dime using proper grammar or spelling words correctly. But I did achieve financial independence and earn a six digit income by investing in income properties. I remember posting that on the old site to the Grammar Police.


----------



## damondlt

I agree Vizio tvs suck. 

I wouldn't pay $2.99 for a 4 k Vizio.


----------



## camo

damondlt said:


> I agree Vizio tvs suck.
> 
> I wouldn't pay $2.99 for a 4 k Vizio.


You keep paying top dollar all you want. Its your right. :up: Somebody has to keep the economy going. Companies with higher profit margins like Sony, Apple are doing something right.


----------



## Rockaway1836

> Pot calling the kettle black ("Your spell check may have spelled visio, but it left out the caps for a proper "nome". "You" spell check sucks worse "that" Vizio."). Perhaps your spell check needs a update. :sure:


Sometimes,
to prove a point. The kettle must look black.


----------



## damondlt

camo said:


> You keep paying top dollar all you want. Its your right. :up: Somebody has to keep the economy going. Companies with higher profit margins like Sony, Apple are doing something right.


If you call spending $850 for a 55 inch 3D Samsung paying "top dollar"

Or how about $450 for a 40 inch? Is that top dollar.

Difference is those Vizios , sorry imo have extremely poor build quality, and they are marketed like they are one of the big boys.
Magnavox which is considered a economy brand has a much better reliable track record.


----------



## MysteryMan

When it comes to purchasing products it's all about personal preference. That said, rating Vizio quality with the likes of Sony or Samsung is like putting a silk hat on a pig.


----------



## Nick

MysteryMan said:


> When it comes to purchasing products it's all about personal preference. That said, rating Vizio quality with the likes of Sony or Samsung is like putting a silk hat on a pig.


Mixing metaphors is always fun, but one must admit, a pig looks much better wearing a silk hat!


----------



## harsh

Newegg is offering a 40" UHD TV for $299 so it can be done.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

I was at Sam's Club today and they had the 70" P Series for $1998.00 This is really driving the 4K Samsung TVs down in price.


----------



## harsh

Scott Kocourek said:


> I was at Sam's Club today and they had the 70" P Series for $1998.00 This is really driving the 4K Samsung TVs down in price.


How do you figure?

HDTVs (especially plasmas) shouldn't be pressuring the UHD marketplace unless UHD doesn't have much to set it apart from HD.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

harsh said:


> How do you figure?
> 
> HDTVs (especially plasmas) shouldn't be pressuring the UHD marketplace unless UHD doesn't have much to set it apart from HD.


What plasma are your referring to?

The Vizio P series is a 4K TV LED http://www.vizio.com/p-series


----------



## camo

damondlt said:


> If you call spending $850 for a 55 inch 3D Samsung paying "top dollar"
> 
> Or how about $450 for a 40 inch? Is that top dollar.
> 
> Difference is those Vizios , sorry imo have extremely poor build quality, and they are marketed like they are one of the big boys.
> Magnavox which is considered a economy brand has a much better reliable track record.


Well your opinion is just that, everyone has one.


----------



## Cholly

damondlt said:


> If you call spending $850 for a 55 inch 3D Samsung paying "top dollar"
> 
> Or how about $450 for a 40 inch? Is that top dollar.
> 
> Difference is those Vizios , sorry imo have extremely poor build quality, and they are marketed like they are one of the big boys.
> Magnavox which is considered a economy brand has a much better reliable track record.


The prices you quote for the Samsung TV's are Black Friday specials with limited quantities, which typically sold out very early. Regular sale prices are several hundred dollars higher.
As to Vizio build quality, you apparently are looking at old news there. Build quality of the Vizio line has of late been quite good. That doesn't mean there haven't been problems, as one can see by looking at Woot and seeing refubs being offered. Refurbrished Samsung and Sonys can be found at major retailers.
We have two Vizio TV's - a 37 inch and a 42 inch 3D (both bedroom TV's), as well as a 60 inch Samsung 3D TV in the family room, which replaced a 10 year old Sony 55 inch RPTV. The Samsung was bought in preference to the 60 inch Vizio 3D because it doesn't use passive glasses, which restrict the vertical resolution to 540 lines per frame instead of 1080. Downside of the Sammy - freaky touch screen remote. I bought a conventional Samsung remote for the family to use.

For more info on Vizio quality, take a visit to avsforum.com. For example, here's a report by a senior avsforum writer on a Samsung vs. Vizio comparison:
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/166-lcd-flat-panel-displays/1564969-vizio-demo-m-series-vs-samsung-h7150.html


----------



## camo

Its easy to know when people have no clue, coming out with blanket statements like there junk. Seems thats what the internet has become, tough guys sitting behind their keyboards spewing their tilted opinions as fact.


----------



## damondlt

You mean like the guy who claims I quoted black Friday prices? LMAO. 
Do some research.
Clueless! 

Enjoy your crappy Vizios.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Guys, Please keep the discussion civil.


----------



## satcrazy

saw that 999$ at wallmart 2 weeks ago. Actually, it wasn't bad. The video they were running on it [ separate from the others] was a forest scene, so it looked good., Actually better than most led's on display there.

Since I watch more than trees and stuff, I'd need to see how it handles movies with some action, like skyfall, or the like.


----------



## Snydley

B Newt said:


> I have a 4 year old Visio tv, and it still works like a champ. For the price I can't complain....
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using DBSTalk


I have 2 Vizios , and unless you're a TV snob, they are fine TVs. :sure:


----------



## Snydley

damondlt said:


> I agree Vizio tvs suck.
> 
> I wouldn't pay $2.99 for a 4 k Vizio.


Yes you would, ANYONE would!


----------



## Jhon69

I just purchased a Vizio M55-C2 4K UHDTV from Best Buy for $999.99.

Best Buy included Free Delivery&Setup,Free Electronic Recyling(hauling away my old non-working HDTV).

Depending what you will use your new 4K UHDTV for you can check out all the 4K UHDTV ratings at www.rtings.com


----------



## seern

Best Buy now has some very well reviewed, by rtings.com, Samsung 4K sets under 2000 for 60" and will be taking a look at them. Always have had Samsung since going to flat screen and no issues with any. Know there is not yet any broadcast content but the up scaling seems like a nice feature.


----------

