Pretty much, hence why I don't see the point of 4K PC monitors.

I'm looking forward to 4K.

I'm currently enjoying a 1080p 15.4" laptop screen, 3 ft away, can't stand a 1366x768 screen anymore. It's very crisp (jaggies are still noticeable though). To get that same crispness on my 92" projection screen, I would have to be 18 ft away. A 4K projector will be my next upgrade, perfect resolution at 9ft.

The living room tv can do without 4K for a while, but a 30" 4K pc monitor at 3ft is exactly the same as a 15" 1080p laptop screen, with twice the field of view. PC monitors and projectors will benefit the most from 4K. And cinemas obviously, still waiting for a 4K screen in my area to check it out. It's all 2K projectors around here.

Not sure if this will happen anytime soon, though.

the 4k "future" (compared to 2k)will be (at best) half as big as blu ray is compared to dvd.

the explanation is very simple.Though Blu ray is far superior(especially in combination with hd-tv's)a lot of people are not interessted in upgrading to blu ray though they own a hd-tv=many people seem to be complacent with dvd.

The visual gap between Hdtv and 4k is a lot smaller=less people will convert from dvd/blu ray to 4k than from dvd to blu ray.I think most people are not interessted nor would spot the difference between 2k and 4 k.

I myself would rather buy a 2k 60inch oled than a 4k 60inch lcd as the brilliance of the oled colours will make the pictures look better despite the lower resolution(comparable to Ryse's lower polygon models visuaps being successfully compensated by better fx) .As the eye can spot the huge increase in details from 2 to 4 k as long as it watches a static picture ,the difference is hardly to spot when non static scenarios are moving with 60fps.

I think the real future will be 8k(japanese super hdtv sheduled for 2025),not because of higher res but because of glassless 3d tv as 8k can create an accepptable sweet spot for 2k 3d movies

A couple recent movies I've seen said they were 4k before showing.  It was "Sony picutres 4k" or something

At 27" you would notice a big jump going from that horrible 1080P resolution to 1440P.
You would probably notice a larger one going from 1080P to 4k on a 27" panel.

24" panels would benefit greatly from 1440P or higher too, anything smaller and you start to get diminishing returns.
The most important thing that needs to happen in terms of monitors is for twisted nematic 1920x1080 panels to dissapear, forever.

News to me. I recall the PC always having the edge over consoles.
Back then even Playstation 1 and Playstation 2 ports looked better on PC (Like Final Fantasy 8) which is still status quo even today.
Just take a look at the resolutions, whilst consoles were rendering games at 640x480, PC gamers were enjoying 800x600, 1024x768 and even 1280x1024.
The PC ended up having advanced Pixel Shaders and Texture and Lighting during the Playstation 2 era, with the former most evidently showcased in Morrowinds (At the time, amazing) water.

Yes, I agree.  I don't remember ANY point in the last 20 years that consoles were better than PC.  It was never even close.

Am I the only one who didn't see a difference between the 1080 p and 4k Avatar screen shots?

When a $1000 graphics card can't even get 60fps at 1080p on current games, I doubt 4k will be a reality any time soon.

That's what Mantle will be changing, Battlefield 4 on a R9 Radeon graphics card at 5760x1080 with 60fps, consoles can't even achieve a 3rd of that.
Bonus is, it's a single GPU and it doesn't even cost $1,000.