Why Ultra HD 4K TVs are still stupid:

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57566079-221/why-ultra-hd-4k-tvs-are-still-stupid/

The problem with 4k is that they have to fill it with detail for it to work, at least if we talk games. But more detail means higher development costs means butts.

I love going to sony style. You can invite your friends to sit on their big sofa and watch the movie their showing with their 50-60 inc tv with surround sound.

I want a 4k passive 3D TV to have 1080p(or higher) resolution per eye during 3D playback, because the 1920x540 passive sets have right now per eye just isn't enough for me - it looks interlaced

This again. It was the same with 720p and 1080p, no noticeable difference, no point upgrading. Same with dvd to blu-ray, upscaled dvd looks the same as blu-ray...

http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html
That chart is based on 20/20 vision or 30 cycles per degree / 60 pixels per degree viewing, which represents the boundary where you can still make out line pairs, i.e. make out individual pixels and read the smallest text. That does not mean image quality does not improve substantially beyond that.

Other tests have shown people can still pick out the better / more 'real' looking picture in side by side tests all the way up to 200 pixels per degree. So you can sit 3 times further away then that chart and still have a benefit from that resolution. Full benefit means a person with 20/20 vision can read the smallest text, i.e. see the pixels.

Prices will come down quickly too. $1300 for 50" 4K led. I paid $2.5k for my first 52" 1080p tv back in 2006...
http://gizmodo.com/5994573/wow-you-can-actually-afford-this-1300-50+inch-4k-led-hdtv

So full benefit, ie reading the smallest print, would be possible up to 3.3 ft away. However you would still get the benefit of a clearer more solid picture up to 10.8ft away.

Anyway better reason not to jump in yet is no HDMI 2.0.
HDMI 1.4a is limited to 2160p24 no 60 fps support. Another HD ready 1080i fiasco waiting to happen.

^ exactly, the HDMI guys should hurry up with 2.0

That's why there will be no PS4-gaming at 4k. Or did they announce PS4 will feature hdmi 2.0?

I'm not saying there isn't a difference. I'm saying there isn't enough of a difference for the average joe to give a poop.

They will see this as a minor difference, hell most regular people don't even care about 720p vs. 1080p as is.

This is going to be like 3DTV all over again where most people simply don't care.

I think 4K is more notable for PC monitors where you are sitting very close to the screen or extremely large displays (like a movie theater screen).

The fact is too most people simply are never going to be cool with like a 60+ inch TV in their house. The guy may like it for football, but his wife sure as hell isn't going to be cool with it.

You may, but you're not the average consumer.

I have a pretty good sense for image quality too, I have spent probably in the range of $10k+ on televisions over the years. 

I'm not saying there isn't a difference, I'm saying the impact to the "average joe" person is not going to be that apparent. This is nowhere close to the jump from SD to HD.

People often fail to see the advantage of the advancement of technology.

You might even think 1080p is overrated, but you cannot argue that it does not benefit to advance. 720p is cheaper because 1080p exists, so will 1080p become cheaper with 4k's existence.

Nothing but good news for consumers.