The one place where I think 8K and up is really gonna matter is VR, when you’ve got pixels inches away from your eyes, but that tech is still niche and a long-term work in progress (Apple jumped the gun trying to make it mainstream too soon). 4K and HDR are great, but 1080p really does still look good even on a big TV.

Also, I’m the biggest freak in the world about input latency but even in the craziest rhythm games, there is no possible way just over 0.1ms of lag is screwing you up unless you are an actual machine. That’s 1/10,000th of a second! Guessing you either meant .1 second or you’re Skynet.

I don’t think Apple themselves marketed it this way, but viral photos of people being spotted on subways and walking down the street wearing one probably didn’t help sell the product.

No, but it’s the only reason for HDMI (along with AV receivers) because it’s all the manufacturers support, so all of us home theater nerds that do care about this stuff have no real* choice but to keep up with the HDMI world. Yes, you can set up a media server that streams 4K video, but you’re not going to find a DisplayPort 4K UHD player, or a 7.2 AVR that plugs into your 77” OLED and supports all of your game consoles. HDMI is just the unfortunate reality there.

That said, the tech that actually takes advantage of the new cable specs tends to lag behind significantly, and new gaming consoles that support HDMI 2.2 likely will in a limited (ultimately disappointing) capacity for years, just like previous versions.

(Also the top comment in this thread doesn’t really seem to reflect modern reality for most people I know. Most people are using their TV to stream at 1080p - 4K, not watching broadcast TV - in which case, yeah, get a $60 720p LCD or whatever, HDMI specs won’t matter to that kind of viewer. Still, subscription streaming quality definitely doesn’t take full advantage of your expensive shiny new TV the way physical media - or a media server - might, but that’s another conversation).