Absolutely. I didn't claim to represent the majority of PC gamers—each of my graphics cards cost more than an Xbox One—but my point is that 1600p is perfectly achievable with current hardware with just a single GPU and it won't be long until that's true for 4K. Certainly 4K will be quite common in three-four years time when we're half way through the current console cycle, if not sooner. Don't forget that 1080p was starting to take off when the X360 and PS3 launched with 720p support.
I agree that 4K was never on the table for this console generation but they should have at least been able to hit 1080p comfortably. Both Sony and Microsoft took shortcuts this generation, though Microsoft clearly took things too far - especially given the decision to bundle the Kinect and charge significantly more for the XB1 as a result.
I disagree, I think 4k will be slow even once they can put out 55" for $1500, people will not respond to upgrade their already large flat screens without good support for the 4k resolution. So that leaves games out and now we would be down to just a few movies just like there is only a few 3D movies and games which didn't help the 3D movement. Even most peoples Cable TV subscriptions is not even 720p I also don't think the 48fps movies will go anywhere either, some claim they don't even like it.
So considering 4k will only benefit a few newer movies as they come out and no games or other subscriptions media services, I see it being every bit as slow as the move from 420p to HD that started in the 90's.