The bottleneck there is ISPs. 4K streaming requires 25 Mbps minimum which is uncommon in most households and even provided by many ISPs+region combinations. The national average is 18.7 Mbps [1].
As a tech savvy rural resident that pays extra for faster internet, I just barely got fast enough internet last year for a single 4K video stream (assuming nobody else in the house is browsing Facebook or something).
Although anecdotally that is changing quickly. My ISP (Comcast) has consistently for the last 24 months been increasing my internet speeds roughly bi-annually by about 30% each time. It's hard to tell if this is due to pressure from nearby Google Fiber, which is not available in my area, or something else entirely.
I don't know how to get even 1080p out of Netflix. If you check the video stream properties, it's usually in the range of 560 pixels or something equally low.
It's probably your browser. I don't think it's possible to get HD if you use Chrome or Firefox[1]. I think 4k is only supported on Windows using Microsoft's browsers.
I would... to some degree. The issue with 4k is that the display folks are waaaay ahead of the content producers here. Film and media should be reluctant to adopt 4K for several reasons:
* Many folks have not yet migrated from DVDs to Blu-Rays
* Maintaining production lines for DVD, Blu-Ray, and 4K probably would not be offset by customers willing to spend even more above the Blu-Ray pricing for a 4K disc.
* The mainstay product sold by media is a combo package - DVD + Blu-Ray + Digital. Adding a 4th offering to these combos is very difficult.
* Monopolistic ISPs have little incentive to upgrade bandwidth to support 4K streaming, despite Netflix's apparent willingness to provide that content.
Most of the above fortunately does not apply to video games. There is no need to package or sell the "4K" version of a game. (Or is there? OH GOD THE HORROR. Please don't tell EA about that idea.)
However, the late 2010's saw the conjunction of budget 4K displays and the cryptocurrency boom. Although graphics card prices are just starting to normalize, the crypto boom seems to have forced graphics card pricing to be 1-2 years behind the display market.
Yes, I do. I have a CRT for Smash Bros: Melee, a 144hz monitor for FPSs (at 1080p), and then my comically big 4k TV at 60hz for stuff like Witcher or other casual AAA titles. The TV is coming over Steam Link anyway, performance is dropped in favor of sheer visual beauty.
4K might be useful for a projector if you are using software trapezoid correction. I have a 1080p projector, but mounted it above the vertical centre of the screen, so I have to use the in-built trapezoid correction to make the picture rectangular. This means that only one line in the display had 1920 pixels, and the remaining 1079 lines each have some interpolation.
If I had a 4k projector, even with a 1080p source, the quality of the projection would presumably be higher.
You don't need 4k for that, just lens-shift. Most mid-range 1080p projectors have at least vertical lens-shift these days, and even low end 4k projectors are still >$1000
Hmm... I just looked up my projector model online, and apparently it does have lens shift. I never noticed the lever, and I guess I didn't read the instructions well enough. Will try it when I get home!
HDR is probably of a lot more benefit to most consumers than 4K, in practice, but they're nearly always bundled together (1080p HDR TVs _exist_, but they're rare).
Which is the great scam of 2018 and beyond so far, convincing people that they need 4K video when they absolutely don't.