3D TV is over and 4K won’t succeed either says HBO boss

submit to reddit Mar 23, 2013 5 Comments by

Bob Zitter 3D TV is over and 4K won’t succeed either says HBO boss


During the seventh TV Connect conference in London (March 18 – 20) Bob Zitter warned against being over optimistic about Ultra HD.

The soon to retire executive VP and chief technology officer of HBO told conference attendees: “We never thought that 3D with glasses was ever going to get off the ground.  Consumers have shown they do not want to wear glasses in the home. 3D with glasses is dead.” 
Many people would agree with him on that, but would disagree with him about his thoughts on Ultra HD (including 3D Focus) when he said: “I’m very sceptical that consumers are going to want to buy it,” 
He suggested that this was because the benefits of 4K resolutions are only distinguishable on very large screen sizes of which only 25-30% of US homes had the space for.
There are scientific arguments for not going beyond HD, in terms of what resolution the human eye can register.  Check out this “Why 4K TVs are Stupid” article.  However anyone who has seen 4K TVs will notice a huge difference compared to regular HD screen of any common size, in the same way as anyone could tell the difference between 4K and Super Hi-Vision.  I remember hearing similar arguments about HD.
Zitter also said 4K TV could possibly gain traction if auto-stereoscopic 3D – which would require 4K transmissions to deliver a 3D HD experience – did take off or, alternatively, if new technologies such as wall-panel TV or OLED-based flexible ‘wallpaper’ screens emerged and won over consumers.


  • james

    his a real clown this bloke , lets start from the beginning show we . When Avatar came out everyone liked 3D , get it ? now what happened to the momentum was studios first up warner bros released films , clash of the titans anyone? marketed as 3D and ultimately had pretty much NO! 3D in the film because supposedly they spent 6 weeks using undeveloped technology to deliver terrible 3D quality and as i said ultimately wasn’t 3D , soo when everyone seen this film world wide and it brought in around 450 million , was convinced 3D was a gimmick , a lie dident deliver ( there should of been some sort of licensed standed that had to be approved before a film could be released in 3D ) so alot of audience at theaters was convinced 3D was terrible . Now when 3Dtvs came out there was like at one point perhaps 5 movies to chose from most been family children CGI films , soo ultimately there was NO FILMS NO! FILMS!! and to go further theres TVS cost minimum 2 grand ? would you buy a Play Station 4 if there was no games for 2 grand lol , its common sense you wouldent , sooo lets race forward to today , there is around 100+ movies availible to buy , rent , watch as appose to early 2010 soo 3D is more alive then it was when it was pushed and marketed everywhere 3 years ago . as i said
    Bob Zitter is a clown , with quility of movies been great these days 3D will take off and get bigger and better , yes 3D with no glasses will help but because when you buy a tv for 500 or 5000 theres no rush to go buy a new one until you usually get whats worth in the tv you already own , 3D is here to stay and will get better , and if only hypothetically tv shows ( say big bang theory , 2 and a half men ) including sports and perhaps even news was filmed and broadcast in 3D YES! it will get better , its the new generation to watch tv and it takes time to became installed by the people in this world .

  • Chris

    I remember a few years ago a client being absolutely adamant that HD would never catch on; nobody wanted it and it was a complete waste of money by broadcasters. As soon as people saw how much better it could be of course they wanted it. I think the same is true of 3d but it’s suffered from half hearted promotion and a lack of quality content. I bought a 65″ LG and everyone who’s seen it wants one. It was a gamble because in the shop the only demo was mounted so high on a wall so all you could see was ghosting until they lowered it a bit for me. The active sets were better displayed but no customers seemed to like the aggro. of active glasses. 3d may not replace HD for routine viewing but for special events like films & sports it’s a fabulous enhancement. 4K I suspect will be the same for those that are willing to pay for it.
    Lowest common denominator shouldn’t be the answer in broadcasting – we consumers are a wide and diverse group.

  • Mike

    He says this while wearing glasses. Luddite.
    I love 3D and am happy to wear glasses if I must to get the best effect.

  • 3dtvr

    This guy is an idot and should be fired. He is stuck in the past and doesn’t have the vision to see the potential of 3D. We are just getting to the point where there is enough content to make 3D a viable business model. And the eventual adoption of glasses free 3D will be the event that brings 3D to the mass consumer.

    Maybe his problem is that the future of 3D (and TV in general) is internet streaming. Look at a company like Sensio. They are at the forefront of 3D technology and are launching a 3D streaming service this month that solve all of the problems with 3D except for the glasses…


  • Loran

    Zitter looks like he might have Strabismus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strabismus I suspect the small vocal group of folks out there that say they hate 3d and it’s dead might be suffering from some form of strabismus.I had a lazy eye that prevented me from seeing 3d and affected my real world depth perception. It was not excessive so I was able to correct it with strengthening exercises. Now I love 3d!!!