[HN Gopher] Ask HN: Are there any 4K "dumb" televisions?
___________________________________________________________________
Ask HN: Are there any 4K "dumb" televisions?
With news like [1][2], and problems I've had in the past, I would
like a TV with a modern resolution, but just inputs and a tuner, no
"smart" features. Does anything like this exist? [1]
https://hackaday.com/2021/11/29/samsung-bricks-smart-tvs/ [2]
https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/10/22773073/vizio-acr-advertising-
inscape-data-privacy-q3-2021
Author : luke2m
Score : 318 points
Date : 2021-11-29 17:37 UTC (5 hours ago)
| hindsightbias wrote:
| My Sony Bravia is just a couple years old and I just turned off
| the wifi and watch broadcast and drive it with a mac mini.
|
| I suppose newer systems would use the LAN to update drivers and
| take over smart functions. If in the US, go by Best Buy and ask
| them for the remote for the display tv you like and see that it
| lets you kill internet function. Also that there aren't any
| always-on apps (or if there are, the menus let you disable them).
| duxup wrote:
| I just never use any of the smart features...
| unixhero wrote:
| Yes, Signage.
|
| I for one will stay on Smart screens, but never another Samsung
| again.
| jarcane wrote:
| I don't buy TVs anymore, I buy monitors.
|
| There's no reason to own a television with a shitty computer
| built-in, when I can just buy a screen and plug it into my
| actually good computer.
|
| Right now I have a 27" ThinkVision display and a pair of studio
| monitors, with both laptop and Switch connected to it. Media
| comes over the computer (who even buys cable in 2021 anyway?),
| audio patches into the display over USB-C/HDMI and out to the
| speakers.
|
| I'm moving soon and I'll probably spring for a 30+" 4K for the
| living room at some point, and look into a receiver and theatre
| speakers but honestly I don't see the point.
|
| You do pay a bit more for the display-per-inch, but the reason
| those "4K smart TVs" are so cheap is all the adware money, so
| they're only "cheap" in the way that Facebook is "free".
| ConanRus wrote:
| good luck finding 65" - 85" monitor
| willcipriano wrote:
| I have the Hisense 65U8G, it's not a dumb TV, but you don't have
| to hook it up to the internet and it has a physical switch to
| turn off the microphone. Otherwise according to my research it's
| about the best TV you can get for around $1000, or at least it
| was this summer.
| JanMa wrote:
| There's a German manufacturer called Medion [0] who offers some
| "dumb" TVs without any smart features. Not sure if you can buy
| their products in the US though
|
| [0]: https://www.medion.com
| sc90 wrote:
| What parts can you modify/remove to make a Smart TV dumb? i.e.
| WiFi card
| duderific wrote:
| I posted above - if you have an LG tv it's pretty
| straightforward to disconnect the Wifi Module - instructions
| are here:
|
| https://www.theraffon.net/spookcentral/tcp/2019/07/10/lg-sma...
|
| I'm not the most technical guy in the world and I was able to
| do it pretty easily, took about 30 minutes.
| tombert wrote:
| It's a kind of hackey way of handling this, but what I do is open
| up the TVs and removing whatever components are required for the
| WiFi to work.
|
| Sometimes you can just remove the network card easily, but
| usually the easiest thing to do is find and break the antenna.
| It's inelegant, and of course the smart features are still
| _there_ , but it at least reduces or eliminates the tracking
| crap.
| MerelyMortal wrote:
| I removed the WiFi card from my LG TV before I first turned it
| on, it's been great since.
|
| Apparently some TVs are bad at nagging about missing the
| hardware, so another suggestion would be to add a load or
| something to the antenna. I forgot what that's called, and at
| the time, couldn't really find any details online.
| stan_rogers wrote:
| It's literally called a dummy load - to the 'lectrics, it
| acts like an antenna, but it doesn't radiate or receive.
| AtlasBarfed wrote:
| So if you just use the HDMI port, does the smarttv know what is
| going through the HDMI port?
|
| A smart tv with no internet connection that only uses its HDMI
| ports is a dumb tv, isn't it?
| softfalcon wrote:
| Yeah, that works for several models. I do it with my slightly
| older Samsung to make it dumb.
|
| Unfortunately, many manufacturers are now forcing you to stay
| connected to WiFi to use the TV. "TV phone home!"
| jiveturkey wrote:
| Just don't connect it! LG OLED screens, at least, don't /require/
| network connection and aren't yet proactively connecting to any
| open wifi or have an built-in 4G connection.
|
| Far easier to just not use the smart features than try to find a
| dumb tv.
| rbanffy wrote:
| You may be able to disable non-GDPR TVs by telling whoever is in
| the support phone line that you are a citizen of an EU country
| (lying may work) and that you don't agree with any such abuse of
| your private information.
|
| I also strongly suggest voiding the warranty and disconnecting
| the wi-fi antenna. That's usually easy.
|
| Dell has a 43" 4K monitor that, with a soundbar, can probably be
| a reasonable TV, but it lacks a tuner. It's, however, 3x as
| expensive as an average Smart TV from a rent-a-brand like JVC.
| Mine (5 yo, FHD) has an ethernet jack but all it ever did was
| getting an IP address from the DHCP server and nothing else,
| ever. There hasn't been any traffic for a month or so, before I
| just disconnected it and reused the cable for a small cluster.
| deeblering4 wrote:
| Worth considering a projector, most of them are still "dumb". A
| model with decent brightness and a good fixed screen you can have
| a true theater at home for similar price to a higher end TV.
| mongol wrote:
| Alternatively, are there any secret menu options that can make a
| smart TV dumb? My TV has advanced service menus that I never
| explored fully.
| glial wrote:
| I have a dirt-cheap TCL 43S425 and have never plugged it into the
| internet. Works great.
| jitix wrote:
| I use a TCL 6 series and never connected it to the internet. It's
| pretty dumb. I don't think it can do anything beyond whats
| possible with the inbuilt Roku software. And it can't dial back
| home or receive commands because no internet access.
| nfoz wrote:
| Yes, my TV is an LG 55" 4k dumb tv, and I love it. [1]
|
| As I posted in another thread [2] a few days ago:
|
| In Canada, LG's Business site has tvs branded as "Commercial
| Lite" that are all dumb, and work great. I have a 55" 4k and I
| enjoy its simple features and minimal remote-control. The only
| downsides IMO are that it only has two HDMI inputs and it doesn't
| do HDR. But for $1000 CAD four years ago, I'm still happy with
| it! I bought mine from CanadaComputers in-store. I don't know if
| it's as easy to get one nowadays, and I don't know if/how they
| sell them in the US.
|
| [1] https://www.lg.com/ca_en/business/commercial-lite
|
| [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29343338
| iKnowKungFoo wrote:
| I have a few years old Sony XBR model. I had to factory reset it
| a few months ago due to it randomly restarting itself after a
| system update. I just never connected it to the Internet and use
| an AppleTV and Xbox for streaming and gaming.
| kazinator wrote:
| Smart TV's are pretty silly; why would I install all my apps and
| logins on something attached to wall in one place? Smack in the
| middle of the age of _mobile_ computing?
|
| You can put your streaming box into your pocket and take it
| anywhere where there is a HDMI panel. For instance, when there is
| no pandemic, you can take it to a hotel room in another country.
| Depending on geographic restrictions, you can view all your
| regular content.
|
| One thing that is very important to me is that my livingroom
| streaming box has its own audio out. Bluetooth would be okay; in
| my case, I use a 1/8" jack: even better. That goes straight to a
| stereo amp.
|
| What this lets me do is turn off the TV while listening to audio-
| only material, like music. The streaming box doesn't care that
| the TV is off; it keeps streaming audio to the speakers. Once I
| introduced this practice, my wife takes advantage of it all the
| time, to play music for the kids without the distracting screen.
|
| Can smart TV's do this at all? Completely power down everything
| related to the screen, but keep audio going?
| sam_lowry_ wrote:
| As many people said already in the comments, search for _digital
| signage_ instead of TV. E.g.
| https://www.lg.com/us/business/digital-signage
| jeffbee wrote:
| These do not necessarily have the same video processors as
| actual TVs from the same manufacturers, so you might end up
| being disappointed in the picture quality, depending on your
| application.
| twobitshifter wrote:
| Is anyone just opting for a projector instead? How does that work
|
| It is a bit ridiculous that TVs have to be a computer with
| internet access to sell nowadays, but that's coming to just about
| every household appliance.
| hasmanean wrote:
| Projector + HDHomeRun. Amazing. It's like having a 96" TV for
| under 800$ Cad.
| isaacimagine wrote:
| We got an EPSON 1060 projector, and throw it up on a large
| blank wall about 20 feet diagonal. 4x4 times bigger than our
| old TV, bright enough to move it down from the default setting.
| Has two HDMI ports so might want to get a box to add some more;
| need to get a good soundbar (built-in projector speakers are
| abysmal).
|
| Not sure I would buy it again, but sure can't live without it.
| acomjean wrote:
| I have a older projector which I bought used some years ago. It
| was much bigger than expected (you can't tell the size from the
| image of it..)
|
| https://www.projectorcentral.com/Mitsubishi-UD8350U.htm
|
| Its 6500 lumens DLP and has 2 bulbs. DLP tech is kinda neat
| (Its literally a chip with flippable mirrors). but modern
| projectors are usually laser or led based. New ones have gotten
| brighter for less money too.
|
| I've used it day to day initially and now mainly to project
| movies. It does draw a lot of power and it does get warm.
| They're really best at night or in a dark room and with a
| proper screen. Basically went back to an flat panel tv for TV
| watching.
|
| I also ended up getting a HDMI/ audio breakout box, because
| sometimes we used an appleTV or Roku with it and those don't
| have audio out and my projector lacks it.
|
| The projector central site I found as a decent source of
| information, you can even enter a model and see how big it will
| project. https://www.projectorcentral.com
| cronix wrote:
| All TV's are dumb tv's if you only use them as an external
| display/monitor and don't connect them to the net. I have a
| dedicated computer for a media center and just use HDMI1 input on
| the TV. Never enter menus. Never update the OS. Never agree to
| anything. Never let the TV "phone home." Never set up wifi. Never
| connect a CAT5 to it. Set the input using the remote and forget
| it. Treat it as a dumb monitor. Computer is connected to the net,
| TV is not and has no way to access it.
| jiveturkey wrote:
| not all. some require a network connection at least to get
| started. some find an open network and connect "for you"
| johnklos wrote:
| Anything that requires a network connection should be
| returned, period.
| TheDudeMan wrote:
| And some bombard you with "helpful reminders" to set up
| networking.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| I think Gmail.com has asked me about 500 times to try their
| app and I've said "I am not interested" 500 times in a row.
|
| But they seem to have a good feeling about tomorrow.
| olliej wrote:
| We have the dumbest modern TV I could find, it routinely
| decides to ask us to agree to the T&Cs again, and complains
| about not being connected to the internet.
|
| The problem isn't just that they want to be connected tot he
| internet, it's that that they're terribly written buggy
| bloatware devices that glitch continuously when not connected
| to the internet.
|
| Of course from what others have said it seems like they're also
| glitchy and terrible when connected to the internet?
| thayne wrote:
| If nothing else, it's one more thing in the TV that can break
| down, and probably add a little bit to the energy consumption
| of the TV. And if the trend continues, how long until your TV
| doesn't work at all unless it is connected to the internet?
| Volundr wrote:
| That's sadly not really true. I have an LG that I (thought) I
| was using this way until one day in the middle of watching some
| TV I get a prompt about a OnePlus phone trying to control my
| TV, do I want to accept? Needless to say and didn't, but I was
| baffled by what happened. Turns out that the stupid TV is
| controllable via an app over bluetooth, and there is no way to
| turn bluetooth off. I'm just stuck with my TV constantly
| advertising it's presence to everything around it.
| ab_testing wrote:
| Well, that was mostly a neighbor who accidentally clicked on
| your TV's bluetooth broadcast signal. But still if you leave
| it at that and not let your TV connect via bluetooth, it
| still remains a dumb TV
| amelius wrote:
| Also, HDMI cables support ethernet connections.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI#HEC
| hrrsn wrote:
| Sadly - there's basically no hardware support for this.
| Dead in the water.
| amelius wrote:
| That's what large electronics manufacturers want you to
| believe ;)
| 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
| Bluetooth can be disabled on the phone.
| antiframe wrote:
| That doesn't sound like a great user experience. "I have
| this TV that I want to use as a monitor, but I have to turn
| of a feature on my unrelated device which I want to use
| with a headset, keyboard, etc". I would rather buy a dumb
| TV that didn't require me to lose phone features.
| Volundr wrote:
| It wasn't my phone trying to connect to the TV.
| neltnerb wrote:
| I imagine they'll happily let your neighbor accept the terms
| and conditions you have yet to accept too =P That's a failure
| mode I hadn't thought about, I didn't realize people tried to
| control a TV with bluetooth.
|
| Why would you do this? Initial configuration but then never
| again? I can't think of a technical reason it meaningfully
| helps when you can already type in a wifi password with the
| remote, so I'm inclined to assume that the feature isn't for
| the customer but rather because they want you to use their
| app on your phone because the data on your phone is more
| valuable than the data on your TV.
| laumars wrote:
| I used to quite like BT control of the TV back when my kids
| were babies. Advance warning though, these are going to be
| pretty niche use cases...
|
| I would feed them and they'd fall asleep in my arms but
| sometimes I would be terrified to move them in case they
| woke (and sometimes I'd just enjoy cuddling them as they
| slept). However the TV remote might have been too far to
| reach, whereas my phone was always in my pocket.
|
| BT became useful again when they became older and started
| playing with the TV remote. It was always getting lost.
| Whereas my phone wasn't.
| neltnerb wrote:
| So that does make sense, for sure, though my thinking was
| about how once it's connected to your home WiFi surely
| your phone is too and is less range limited.
|
| But in terms of involving installing an app on your phone
| to emulate a remote, both are the same so it's no
| different. At least it's for more than just to configure
| it, mandating a connection to a phone you may or may not
| have seems like a stretch. At least by making it possible
| to use your BT for a remote you're expanding the features
| rather than breaking them.
| duderific wrote:
| My LG tv started having an annoying popup message every few
| seconds, "Unknown device is disconnected", which was caused
| by a faulty WiFi module, documented here:
| https://www.theraffon.net/spookcentral/tcp/2019/07/10/lg-
| sma...
|
| Since I use a Roku stick for streaming, I have no need for
| the WiFi module in the TV. I was able to follow the
| instructions in that post, which involve removing the back of
| the TV and physically disconnecting the Wifi Module, and
| correct the issue.
|
| I suppose that's one way to make sure the TV is not silently
| connecting to WiFi, although I'm not sure how difficult that
| operation would be on other manufacturers.
| azinman2 wrote:
| Be aware that Roku is one of the worst offenders in selling
| your watching habits.
| behnamoh wrote:
| What are some better alternatives?
| gh0std3v wrote:
| For anyone with LG TVs, iirc there's a project called
| OpenLGTV which is working to reverse engineer LG software.
| Maybe it could help disable some of these "smart" features?
| goatcode wrote:
| If this is an argument that all TVs are smart TVs, then all
| TVs with an IR control input device are smart TVs (because
| universal remotes).
| snerbles wrote:
| IR is line-of-sight, and the receiver can be blocked with a
| small piece of electrical tape.
| m00x wrote:
| Same for bluetooth, just build a faraday cage around your
| TV and you're good!
|
| /s
| kazinator wrote:
| Only if it's grounded, so that's a step up from the tape.
| the_mitsuhiko wrote:
| Bluetooth can be turned off in the settings.
| Volundr wrote:
| It can't. Which is sort of the point of my comment. If it
| could I'd have no problem with this feature.
| isoprophlex wrote:
| No of course not. The moment you - possibly accidentally -
| grant the fucker an internet connection over BT, it starts
| to rat on you. However briefly.
|
| Aything with an IR remote does not betrays it's users like
| that (through the remote)
| gopalv wrote:
| > grant the fucker an internet connection over BT, it
| starts to rat on you
|
| Or it does that by itself, with a mesh network that your
| neighbours have setup by accident with their Alexa or
| Ring - Amazon Sidewalk is an amazing end-run around your
| own firewall rules.
| isoprophlex wrote:
| Thanks for giving me another invention to be angry about,
| haha.
|
| Makes you wonder about the opportunities for poisoning of
| Sidewalk networks, just to get some petty revenge.
| clairity wrote:
| that's not petty, that's downright patriotic. we have an
| inalienable right to privacy, security, and liberty, and
| absolutely no obligation to let companies (or
| governments) invade or curtail those rights.
| DaiPlusPlus wrote:
| > we have an inalienable right to privacy, security, and
| liberty
|
| I assume you're referring to the US constitution. The
| rights you're referring to constrain the government, not
| companies. You do not have a legal right to privacy
| w.r.t. your TV spying on you.
| clairity wrote:
| no, not just the constitution, it's _inalienable_ because
| it 's intrinsic to being civilized people, not because
| some piece of paper says so. on the contrary, companies
| have no right to spy on us.
| DaiPlusPlus wrote:
| Yet they seem to be able to keep on doing it just fine.
| clairity wrote:
| so people still kicking dogs makes it ok?
|
| note that a right isn't a passive trait, but an active
| assertion. every time we give in to what's easy, we lose
| a little bit of our rights. you maintain rights by
| speaking out and living by them. we wouldn't need a
| second amendment were that not the case (n.b., i don't
| personally own nor desire a gun).
| krustymeathead wrote:
| I wonder when home security setups will start including a
| Faraday cage, at least for certain rooms or areas.
| rightbyte wrote:
| It seems way simpler to short the wifi antenna or
| something than to redo the walls? Bluetooth is probably
| harder to fix though, if the TV has that.
| vineyardmike wrote:
| Not gunna lie, i'm looking at building/remodelling a home
| in the next few years, and i'm seriously considering
| foiling the walls of some rooms just to build a faraday
| cage.
| bick_nyers wrote:
| If you build it into all of the exterior facing walls,
| you can use a cell range extender to tunnel a data
| connection inside your house, and also similarly with a
| Wi-Fi AP connected via Ethernet, in the event that you
| want Wi-Fi signal outside your home as well.
|
| Actually, when I build my next house in 5-10 years I
| think I might do exactly this
| Volundr wrote:
| I mean sure, it's (probably) not an internet connection,
| but Bluetooth and an IR remote aren't really comparable.
| Bluetooth exchanges information in both directions, IR does
| not. Bluetooth works from hundreds of feet away (or more)
| with no line of site, an IR remote does not. Bluetooth
| allows for broadcasting arbitrary content to my TV, an IR
| remote can only change the channel. Given the relative
| complexities I'm also far more concerned about a security
| vulnerability existing in the never updated random
| Bluetooth module/drivers in the TV than an IR receiver that
| emulates button presses.
| foobarian wrote:
| > and there is no way to turn bluetooth off
|
| Challenge accepted! <grabs pliers and soldering iron>
| thih9 wrote:
| Warranty voided?
| rosseloh wrote:
| Most electronics warranties on stuff I've bought have
| been a year, max. Out of that period? Antenna snipping
| time!
|
| ...if there is one to snip, of course.
| kazinator wrote:
| A warranty is never voided if nobody knows what you did.
|
| The profit margins are quite thin on consumer equipment;
| they can't afford to investigate into the chassis, having
| someone look at every chip that might have been tampered
| with.
| willcipriano wrote:
| Return it to Amazon, you could fill the box with rocks
| and they will happily ship it on to the next customer.
| laumars wrote:
| Which model have you got? I have a few LG TVs and there's
| various options across the different firmwares that might
| disable that.
|
| Eg LG Connect Apps
|
| I've also often wondered if "store mode" disabled all of the
| radios because that's the kind of thing you wouldn't want
| enabled in a store.
| Volundr wrote:
| It's an LG OLED55C9PUA. FWIW I went though all the menus,
| as well as searching the internet, and couldn't find any
| way to turn it off, nor as far as I could tell could anyone
| else who discovered this "feature".
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| >Never enter menus. Never update the OS. Never agree to
| anything. Never let the TV "phone home." Never set up wifi.
| Never connect a CAT5 to it. Set the input using the remote and
| forget it. Treat it as a dumb monitor. Computer is connected to
| the net, TV is not and has no way to access it.
|
| so, are there any TVs where this is not possible? For example
| as part of turning on there is a setup procedure that makes it
| phone home and connect to wifi? If so (I wouldn't know but I
| would expect because natural cynicism) then the question
| naturally becomes what TVs is what you suggest actually
| possible on.
|
| on edit: I see jiveturkey just posted that in fact what I
| suspect would be the case of difficulty to keep it from
| connecting is often the case
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29383963
| kazinator wrote:
| How about the remote control?
|
| My dumb TV's remote is so simple, it has room for a dedicated
| button for each HDMI input. I don't have to go through any on-
| screen widget to pick an input: just hit a physical button on
| the remote dedicated to going to that HDMI input.
|
| Cycling through picture modes is just a button also.
|
| Never enter menus? What if you'd like to adjust something
| related to the display; sharpness or something.
| yholio wrote:
| To second this advice, I have a 4 year old 75" Sony Bravia that
| I did not connect to the internet in any way, despite being an
| Android device. I have updated the firmware using the
| instructions on the Sony website, downloaded a package,
| extracted on a USB stick and let the TV boot on that. Figured
| it's best to have an up to date operating system for bug fixes,
| security updates, file format support etc.
|
| Never intend to use the "smart" features on the TV, internet
| browsing, Netflix etc., I handle that perfectly with my "broken
| lid" laptop, which is a well maintained machine, typing these
| very words on it.
|
| So I can vouch that at least for Sony TVs in the KD or KDL
| series XD, XE, XF, XG (most of them launched a few years ago),
| you can use them just fine without internet, and you can even
| update them. You can also turn off Bluetooth and prevent the TV
| from advertising its presence.
|
| Don't know about the newer OLED and QLED devices, you should
| try them on in the store.
| pwdisswordfish9 wrote:
| What do you need security updates for if you don't connect it
| to the Internet?
| tomnipotent wrote:
| Updates include more than just security fixes.
| spurgu wrote:
| Yes but to nitpick he already mentioned bugfixes and file
| format support _alongside_ security fixes (which he
| wouldn 't/shouldn't need). :)
| yholio wrote:
| I disagree. You can have security bugs in non-connected
| devices, for example crafted file formats or metadata
| that can carry executable payload, worms that force their
| way in though some insecure Bluetooth receiver, or even
| by infecting the myriad data channels embedded in modern
| broadcasting; access to such a broadcast stream might be
| very lucrative since it will give you access to tens of
| thousands to tens of millions of devices.
|
| I agree that the target is low value and that the
| attacker will most likely not bother infecting Android
| TVs; he would need to force them to connect to WiFi to
| exfiltrate any data, a very complex and unlikely attack
| if your TV is not used to monitor uranium centrifuge
| data.
| Benjammer wrote:
| I have seen stories of smart TVs doing active scans for any
| unsecured wifi network in range, then connecting and phoning
| home without ever informing the user or showing anything in the
| menus. Is that a real thing?
| hellisothers wrote:
| Do you have a reference for this? I've heard this too but
| have never actually seen a first hand account
| blowfish721 wrote:
| I've heard of this rumour and hope it's true and that someone
| has evidence of a tv manufactor is doing this in the US.
| https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/wi-fi-
| connect...
| jzymbaluk wrote:
| How would the TV phone home if it's not connected to the
| internet?
| rubidium wrote:
| "doing active scans for any unsecured wifi network in
| range"
| 10000truths wrote:
| This doesn't seem like a practical thing for
| manufacturers to implement. How common are such networks
| in actuality? Literally the only time I ever encountered
| unsecured Wi-Fi networks in the past several years were
| guest networks, and all of those were gated by a capture
| portal that would have blocked any sort of attempt at
| telemetry or ad serving.
| monocasa wrote:
| A deal with comcast and their ubiquitous pseudo public
| hotspots would simplify that.
| Firehawke wrote:
| xfinitywifi, the comparable similar functionality from
| CenturyLink, etc, or if you happen to live just a bit too
| close to a McDonalds or other business that has open
| WiFi. And of course the possibility of one of your
| neighbors screwing up his WiFi setup.
|
| There are a lot of ways this can (and has) gone horribly
| wrong for privacy.
| kazinator wrote:
| > _doesn't seem like a practical thing for manufacturers
| to implement._
|
| In terms of what, lines of code? Engineer days?
| jeffbee wrote:
| I doubt any TV does this but if I needed to implement it
| I would just do it the same way that I use wifi in hotels
| that have captive portals without paying for it: tunnel
| IP over DNS.
| beagle3 wrote:
| Amazon had (perhaps still has) whispernet - a global
| coverage of cellular networks. It was used to download
| books to your kindle, essentially anywhere in the world,
| without having to have a local plan or WiFi.
|
| It was 2G iirc, enough for book download. Uploading a
| perceptive hash of what you are watching - e.g. a frame
| every few seconds - also fits on 2G speeds.
| scoopertrooper wrote:
| Whispernet is dead from what I understand. As countries
| began shutting down 3G networks, Amazon was no long able
| to get connectivity at a price point where it was
| economically feasible.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| Not dead, just replaced.
|
| https://www.amazon.com/Amazon-
| Sidewalk/b?ie=UTF8&node=213281...
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| Ok, so...
|
| TV phones home a lot, with info about stuff, some info
| big lots of bandwidth.
|
| could there be an attack with buying some tvs and putting
| them on public WiFi - and could one find a way to
| increase the amount the tv was sending so it amounted to
| an attack - but still have plausible deniability.
|
| If tvs were put on public wifi, which I guess there is no
| reason why you shouldn't put your tv on public wifi, and
| the tv is using lots of bandwidth, and your tv is popular
| in a country with lots of free wifi, is that tv
| manufacturer guilty of an attack on the free wifi
| infrastructure of that country?
|
| I'm asking for a short story or several I might write
| some day.
| bogwog wrote:
| Also maybe I'm mistaken, but don't most modern cars have
| a built in modem for sending telemetry to the
| manufacturer as well?
| hellojesus wrote:
| Yes. Toyota seems to like putting the transceiver behind
| the glove box, forcing you to introduce a bundle of
| rattles to your newly purchased vehicle to remove. Also,
| I'm pretty sure removing it disables some of the front
| speakers, requiring manual wire connecting to get them
| back. You could maybe leave the device in there but
| encase it in a Faraday cage, but still rattles are
| introduced.
|
| Ford, iirc, places it on the floor under or behind some
| seats making it much easier to deal with.
|
| I think MA just passed a law about not allowing vehicles
| sold there to sell your telemetry data or something.
| vineyardmike wrote:
| > I think MA just passed a law about not allowing
| vehicles sold there to sell your telemetry data or
| something.
|
| i believe they just have to share the data with others,
| which they don't want to do.
| kazinator wrote:
| Like the parent comment says: scan for some open Wi-Fi in
| range and connect. If that provides Internet access, it's
| good to go.
| _-david-_ wrote:
| Might have 4g or 5g chips in them. I'm sure they could get
| a good deal on data if they put it in millions of TVs.
| sys_64738 wrote:
| This sounds crazily like science fiction. The TV wants to
| live so will do anything to stay alive. Isn't this what HAL
| did to the guy Dave in the end?
| rodgerd wrote:
| Some also:
|
| 1. Scan the HDMI content and send information back to the
| mothership to help vendors know what you're watching.
|
| 2. Scan the local network for shares and look at media on
| them, again to send back to the mothership.
| FearlessNebula wrote:
| Not only this, but how long until they start including a
| cheap modem and paying for their own cellular connectivity?
| 1121redblackgo wrote:
| My god damn CPAP machine does this. Insurance required the
| modem in order for them to pay for it.
| rodgerd wrote:
| That's part of the push for 5G - the idea that it becomes
| much easier to have many more devices, hence you can drop a
| modem anywhere.
| RealityVoid wrote:
| Jesus Christ, at that point I'd just go in the TV and snip
| a trace in it.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| It won't be long until we start taking a ddwrt approach
| and jtagging our tvs and replacing them with custom ROMs.
|
| We'll be okay for another 5-10 years before they securely
| start locking that down too.
| burnt_toast wrote:
| I'm optimistic within 5-10 years we'll start to see the
| rise of open source tvs that'll save us. I have no
| sources to back this up but seeing the release of several
| open source laptops gives me hope.
| bogwog wrote:
| Or they buy access to things like this:
| https://www.amazon.com/Amazon-Sidewalk/b?node=21328123011
|
| No need to include a modem when your customer's neighbor
| has an internet-connected toaster within bluetooth range of
| the TV.
| Benjammer wrote:
| Ugh this is way worse and actually seems far more likely
| and easy to accomplish than the public wifi thing...
| Arrath wrote:
| It's going to be time to crack the sucker open and burn
| out the traces to/from the modem, isn't it.
|
| E: And in the ongoing arms war, then manufacturer's ship
| remotes that no longer use tried and true IR but instead
| go over the same bluetooth or 2.4ghz chip. Some probably
| already do, I would expect.
| mike-the-mikado wrote:
| My new Panasonic TV has dual-mode remote control -
| IR+Bluetooth. Bluetooth means that you don't need to
| point the remote as accurately. Plus you can use a phone
| as remote control.
| aendruk wrote:
| See also Amazon Sidewalk.
| KETpXDDzR wrote:
| My Vizio TV's settings can only be changed with a phone app. It
| comes with a regular remote, but there's no button for entering
| the settings menu. For the app to work, it requires to be in
| the same WiFi. I dodged the bullet by setting up a restricted
| WiFi (no internet), but that shows how TV manufacturers try to
| force you in connecting your TV to the Internet.
| jonnycoder wrote:
| How old is your Vizio? All modern Vizio tvs in the past 6
| years have a remote with a Menu button. And they ask for
| accepting Privacy Policy before you can connect to wifi. You
| can very easily avoid connecting a Vizio to a network and
| just use it as a dumb tv.
| terinjokes wrote:
| I have a 2016 model Vizio that came with a very simple
| remote without a menu button, expecting you to use a mobile
| app for all settings. They made a more complete remote
| available 18 months later as a separate purchase. If you
| didn't buy the remote you could get softlocked not being
| able to navigate away from the Smartcast channel.
|
| While the remote does have a menu button, many settings
| continue to be available only via the mobile app.
| Arrath wrote:
| Oh wow. That is a new low.
| GistNoesis wrote:
| I guess if the TV really want to exfiltrate data, it can speak
| via HDMI-CEC to all peripherals connected to it. For example if
| you have an TV-Box or a game-station, it probably can send it
| remote control commands to the TV-Box, so it can have the same
| user interface than you have on your TV-Box (which quite often
| even when it's connected in Ethernet, can display on the screen
| the wifi password, or surf the web).
|
| There are also quite often free public wifi in the
| neighborhoods. Bluetooth may also be an option. Or they can
| just add a cellular network to get your data. Or maybe they can
| create a wifi mesh network between nearby TVs and share the
| internet if one has access to it.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| What's stopping the TV from taking OTA updates through data
| sub-channels on TV channels?
|
| Satellite receivers have had this type of capability for a few
| decades.
| kazinator wrote:
| That's something that seems like would be feasible in a more
| monolithic world of broadcasting, and smaller firmwares. They
| could probably simply broadcast various firmwares at
| different times; then if the TV detected "hey, that is for
| me", it could capture the packets.
|
| It's hard to imagine streaming services like YouTube, NetFlix
| and whoever agreeing to do anything of that sort.
|
| Indeed, my guess is right about this seems to be in the right
| ballpark:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_and_object_carousel
| spear wrote:
| > Never update the OS.
|
| Unless there are new features or fixes you want. My TV needed
| updates to support Dolby Vision and to fix ARC/CEC bugs. More
| recent TVs have required updates to support HDMI 2.1 features.
|
| At least you can download the firmware separately and update
| through USB instead of a network update.
| davesmylie wrote:
| well, until your neighbours set up an open wifi network, or a
| house member / guest sets up a temporary wifi hotspot with no
| password.
|
| Most TV's will lock on any open wifi network given the chance -
| and that's all it takes to upload saved data and pull down
| updates and ads etc
| alx__ wrote:
| Yes, the key being never let it connect to the internet
| ssully wrote:
| I would check what TV you have and what patches are
| available. I have a smart Sony TV, but I've only connected it
| to a network twice to get patches. I did so once because it
| fixed an audio issue that was very annoying.
| deergomoo wrote:
| You can often download patches to a USB stick and install
| them from that.
| seqizz wrote:
| Stuff is scary. I feel like at some point we'll ask same question
| but for HDMI etc cables..
| coldacid wrote:
| You should be asking that about the cables already.
| Raed667 wrote:
| Telefunken as brand is a safe bet if you can find in stores close
| to you.
|
| They are mostly built in Turkey now, but they are pretty decent
| and don't include bloatware
| Eric_WVGG wrote:
| anyone remember the XMBC project from twenty years ago? Rooting
| Xboxes and replacing the OS with a slick custom media player OS?
|
| I find it a little remarkable that there isn't a similar "scene"
| built around lobotomizing smart TVs. The desire is obviously
| there, and surely rooting Android isn't terribly hard. The OS's
| for smart TVs are barely maintained.
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| Do you object to smartness, or to ads in your TV?
|
| RTings maintains a list of smart TVs that are completely ad-free:
|
| https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/ads-in-smart-tv
| thesuitonym wrote:
| Thank you for this. It doesn't make much sense to say I don't
| want a smart TV and then buy a separate device that's just
| going to show ads anyway.
| zaychikk wrote:
| I like using an ultra-short throw projector onto a nice big
| projector screen. You can get whatever resolution you'd like with
| a super big screen size. They're pretty expensive though [1].
|
| [1] https://www.amazon.com/Theatre-Projector-Lumens-Soundbar-
| Ins...
| chuchurocka wrote:
| Hitachi makes some, I have one and it has been great. Before I
| found their dumb model I was looking at broadcast monitors which
| were much more expensive and didn't have TV tuning ability or
| speakers but checked all of the boxes that I wanted with a
| screen.
| yupper32 wrote:
| Why don't people like their Smart TVs? I've had a 4k smart TV for
| years and love it. Being able to stream without needing my phone
| is great.
|
| It seems ironic that people are complaining about smart TV ads
| while the [2] link in the OP has an absolutely MASSIVE video ad
| that takes up 2/3s of the screen.
|
| And it's not like you're not being tracked when you stream from a
| Roku stick / Chromecast.
|
| Edit: I have a 4k Samsung that isn't laggy and in general is a
| very good experience.
| [deleted]
| tomc1985 wrote:
| Who says I'm using a Roku? My defanged smart TV has a computer
| (and a Shield that only runs Kodi) attached to it.
|
| Many of us still have large personal media libraries. Samrt TVs
| do nothing for that.
| yupper32 wrote:
| > Many of us still have large personal media libraries.
|
| You are a massively small minority if you're mostly using
| personal media libraries as your entertainment on your TV.
| deeviant wrote:
| > Why don't people like their Smart TVs?
|
| The reason why people don't like smart TV's is in literally
| every other comment on this post: we don't like ads and other
| data collection activities TV manufacturers are pushing on us.
| Is that not obvious?
|
| > It seems ironic that people are complaining about smart TV
| ads while the [2] link in the OP has an absolutely MASSIVE
| video ad that takes up 2/3s of the screen.
|
| For the life of me I can't understand why I should dismiss my
| TV automatically downloading uninstallable apps and unmovable
| icons in prime UI real estate, serving ads and generally being
| a menace because there are ads in one dudes link on the
| internet.
| mindslight wrote:
| Even running the site's proprietary software (javascript) on
| that [2] link, I still don't see this "MASSIVE video ad that
| takes up 2/3s of the screen". Likely because everything else in
| my computing environment is Free software, which fosters user-
| representing extensions such as ad blocking that do their best
| to remove such hostile garbage. If I'm spending ~thousand
| dollars on a TV display, the last thing I want is it being
| locked to some proprietary environment where user-representing
| functionality has been discouraged or even outright prohibited.
| mrweasel wrote:
| Ideally your right, but major stream platforms aren't available
| on many smart TVs. Apps aren't updated. The TV is slow, like
| really slow. Press the Netflix button on my two year old
| Philips TV and prepare to wait. Other than being slow, the apps
| are just worse.
|
| The AppleTV is the minimum I accept, and non of the TV make are
| able to produce anything that comes close.
|
| We hate Smart TVs because the manufactures make shitty
| software.
| yupper32 wrote:
| > Ideally your right, but major stream platforms aren't
| available on many smart TVs. The TV is slow, like really
| slow. Press the Netflix button on my two year old Philips TV
| and prepare to wait. Other than being slow, the apps are just
| worse.
|
| Besides ads and tracking, there seems to be a trend: People
| on here are buying shitty TVs and complaining that they're
| shitty.
|
| If you buy a cheap TV, you can't expect it to be good. Dumb
| or smart.
| DiabloD3 wrote:
| Always-on spyware that can brick your TV at any moment due to
| discontinued services you didn't consent. None of this hardware
| is useful for 90+% of TV purchasers, they're plugging it into
| an existing device and never using any self-hosted features, so
| it is just an added cost that only benefits advertisers and
| state sponsored actors.
| caconym_ wrote:
| > And it's not like you're not being tracked when you stream
| from a Roku stick / Chromecast.
|
| Believe it or not, there are ways to deliver content to a
| display that don't involve Roku, Chromecast, or any other
| instrumented "platform".
|
| From the baseline of a society already saturated with ads, I
| don't think there's anything _unusually_ evil about giving
| people the _choice_ to share analytics /see ads in exchange for
| lower hardware prices. But when that choice is obfuscated or
| taken away entirely, and it becomes difficult or impossible to
| buy hardware that doesn't spy on you and/or hijack your
| attention, I see that as a big problem. It's one more step
| along the road to a world where consumers simply don't have
| access to general-purpose computer technology.
| ptmcc wrote:
| Many/most of the built-in interfaces of smart TVs are slow,
| buggy, and ad/tracker-ridden and have a limited upgrade path,
| if any.
|
| Since there are effectively no dumb TVs on the market anymore,
| I bought a fancy Sony TV with AndroidTV built-in, hoping that'd
| it'd be decent enough to use out of the box. Nope. Slow, laggy,
| and some of the big name streaming apps from the app store just
| plain don't work.
|
| Also when the TV updated itself it broke HDMI-CEC for a good
| couple months before another update fixed it. Screw that.
|
| Bought an AppleTV and it's been great. Unplugged the SmartTV
| from the network and treat it as a dumb TV now.
|
| Yes I know AppleTV is tracking me, too, but at least the user
| experience is great with no ads.
| illegalsmile wrote:
| I recently bought the latest Sony OLED and find that
| AndroidTV works just fine for netflix/hulu/hbo/apple/etc...
| yupper32 wrote:
| > Many/most of the built-in interfaces of smart TVs are slow,
| buggy, and ad/tracker-ridden and have a limited upgrade path,
| if any.
|
| And many of the cheap dumb TVs have shitty audio and often
| break or burn in after short enough periods of time.
|
| If you buy a cheap smart TV I don't expect it to be a great
| experience, just like I don't expect a cheap dumb TV to
| provide a good experience.
|
| With smart or dumb TVs, you get what you pay for like
| anything else. I've had a mid-range Samsung for years without
| issue.
| egberts1 wrote:
| Let me Google That For Ya!
|
| https://lmgtfy.app/?q=smart+tv+spying+in+you
| ff317 wrote:
| Because it's cheap to replace a roku/chromecast as technology
| evolves, but TVs tend to be longer-term investments. Hating
| smart TVs is akin to hating cars that have built-in factory
| navigation systems. Content streaming devices/services (and
| mapping/navigation/music for cars) regularly evolve/change with
| the fast pace of technology and the Internet, while TVs and
| Cars are hardware you hang onto for a long period of years. You
| don't want outdated tech baked into your hardware forever,
| especially tech built in by companies that don't specialize in
| that stuff to begin with.
| basch wrote:
| If you want to buy a Google or Roku anyway, why wouldnt you
| buy the appropriate tv with it built in, and THEN upgrade in
| 3-5 years when the smarts arent as bright anymore? Are people
| really expecting a 4 year end of life software upgrade to
| disable the hdmi ports? You might be able to find a one off
| freak occurrence, but thats not regular practice.
|
| Everyone buying a Spectre/Insignia to avoid smarts is getting
| a considerably worse picture quality (which I would think is
| almost number one TV criteria after size) in exchange for
| nothing.
|
| People could look at TV OS as a differentiating factor, not a
| burden. Make picking your OS your first choice, and find the
| best panel at budget within that category.
| treesknees wrote:
| One thing you're forgetting is that smart TVs are much
| cheaper because the cost is subsidized by the apps, software,
| and ads. This is why many of these "dumb TVs" aren't hundreds
| of dollars cheaper than their smart cousins.
|
| In my opinion it doesn't matter if outdated software is
| "baked into your hardware forever" because all I have to do
| is disable the Internet settings, and plug in a
| roku/chromecast just like you would on your dumb TV.
| Difference is my subsidized TV cost way less. In terms of
| value over time (which is what I assume you meant by calling
| it an investment) a smart TV makes way more sense even if you
| don't use the smart features.
| justizin wrote:
| Soo..
|
| [1] Having an ad on a web page about concerns with Smart TVs is
| not the same as the TV manufacturer selling ads on your TV. For
| one, it's just one more opportunity for the TV to fail. My
| smart TV won't load its' UI enough for me to select an HDMI
| input if it can't connect to the internet.
|
| [2] Again, there are levels of tracking. I don't know about
| Roku, but I imagine when you use one, you have tracking from
| Netflix while watching Netflix, Hulu while watching Hulu, etc..
| At least, this is my expectation of my Apple TV. If you're
| streaming to a Chromecast, you can limit what it sends to
| Google.
|
| [2] None of this has to do with the fact that a manufacturer
| can apparently brick your TV remotely, and while this is meant
| as an anti-theft measure, it's pretty easy for them to
| accidentally include your valid serial # in a CSV or whatever.
| I'd imagine un-bricking it is very difficult, if even
| practically possible.
|
| All in all, over several years of having Smart TVs, I've still
| not ditched my Apple TV or Chromecast, and I find that both
| tend to give me higher quality, though I expected the inverse
| by avoiding dependence on an HDMI cable.
|
| Smart TVs are also amongst the most notoriously poorly updated
| smart devices, and over time this becomes a risk to your entire
| home network.
| wiskinator wrote:
| I mean, I think the why is answered in [1]. I think a lot of
| people like being in control of what goes on their network. For
| those who care about personal network security I imagine
| there's a big desire to not have a blob of closed source code
| sitting on (or anywhere near) their home network, or for that
| matter, their corporate network.
|
| Also smart features on most TVs feel like they are fairly slow
| and seem to get in the way of using the TV as a device driven
| by a media stick etc. If I've decided that I only want to use
| an Apple TV (or Roku, or FireTV or my L33z plex client running
| on a Raspberry Pi), then I don't want to have to wait for my TV
| to load and boot its own network stack and pile of
| applications.
| bee_rider wrote:
| Sure, but the hypothetical effortful version of myself that
| actually puts his money where his mouth is would play content
| he owns from a Linux machine. If that guy ever shows up, it'd
| be cool to have a TV he could use.
| taylodl wrote:
| I have an LG NanoCell. It has "smart" features, but you don't
| have to set any of it up and it doesn't nag you to do so. It runs
| WebOS because that's how it runs the UI for the remote, which you
| need to change inputs. Yeah, it has a bunch of other whiz-bang
| features but like I said, I don't have any of that setup. I'm
| happy that it's content to let me use it as a dumb TV and stay
| out of my way.
| WaitWaitWha wrote:
| Try Sceptre 65" 4K UHD LED TV, or Samsung QB65R.
|
| I have started to see first industrial then consumer devices with
| embedded SIM cards towards the end of 2000. They were soldered
| in, now mostly socketed. To access them, the device had to be
| disassembled, and connect SPI header.
|
| No average consumer will think to or able to disable or avoid
| using that.
| smolder wrote:
| I've got one, but it's not very good build or panel quality, just
| a random Chinese brand. It was in the first batch of 4k models,
| before all the bonus money from spyware pushed dumb displays out
| of the consumer tv segment.
|
| Your best bet now is to get an industrial display or find a
| generic driver board that is compatible with the panel from a
| smart TV and then DIY a smart TV into a dumb one.
|
| On the DIY perks youtube channel, the host builds a water cooled
| backlight for a 4k panel in order to make an outdoor-capable TV,
| and he uses one of those generic driver boards for it.
| squarefoot wrote:
| For users in the US, Sceptre.com has a good catalog of "dumb"
| TVs; unfortunately it seems we don't have anything similar in the
| EU.
|
| Look also for used _signage monitors_ ; they're built for heavy
| work, from 18/7 to 24/7, and used ones would last more than new
| consumer TVs anyway. Be aware however that some of them have
| already been plagued by Android and other "smart" features.
| Samsung has however some smart models using the Tizen OS, which
| is Linux based and potentially more open to hacking if compared
| to Android.
| jimjams wrote:
| Just don't connect it to the network or agree to any of the
| license clickthroughs, it can't do things behind your back then.
| HDMI and the RF tuner can still work fine.
| [deleted]
| squiffsquiff wrote:
| You know that some devices essentially "require" network
| connectivity for initial setup? E.g.
| https://eu.community.samsung.com/t5/tv/smart-tv-set-up-witho...
| jitix wrote:
| Yeah I was afraid my new TV would do that. I was planning to
| return it if it did because I had bad experience with Vizio
| and TCL smart TVs breaking updates before (I'm an Apple TV
| user).
|
| I can confirm that Roku firmware works great without the
| internet and doesn't nag. I just turn it on and switch to my
| Apple TV.
| khedoros1 wrote:
| Yeah...mine shows a nag about not accepting the online
| agreements, connecting the TV to the network, etc. Hasn't
| stopped me from using it as a display for the inputs I was
| using on my previous non-smart TV.
| jjoonathan wrote:
| Ew.
| johnklos wrote:
| The statement, "just don't connect it to the network" still
| stands. If something requires a connection, return it. It's
| clearly anti-consumer and will do nefarious things (which we
| already know Samsung does).
| rapsey wrote:
| So give it a network connection for initial setup then take
| it away?
| squiffsquiff wrote:
| So you'll still have all the adverts, they just don't
| update?
| gmadsen wrote:
| dns block it at the router
| danudey wrote:
| Run it through pihole to block the ad networks? Or just
| whitelist hostnames/addresses one by one until the setup
| works.
|
| Not exactly a user-friendly option, but an option
| nonetheless.
| bee_rider wrote:
| Annoying, but at least it isn't feeding your information
| in to the weird ad-driven panopticon (we'll leave that to
| the content providers!)
| rbanffy wrote:
| > they just don't update?
|
| That's a cursed scenario...
| flatiron wrote:
| I had to do that. My Samsung couldn't leave "demo mode"
| or whatever without going online first and would restart
| itself every hour. I just let it register and blocked it
| from coming out my router. It stays quiet like that. I
| believe removing the wifi showed some nag when booting
| that I had to deal with. Real scummy stuff.
| [deleted]
| mindslight wrote:
| Buy it from a place with free returns. Then if it insists
| on showing cached ads after the network is pulled (or any
| other undesirable behavior), just return it. This won't
| help you find a better model, but it will save you from
| needing to research these obscure details in too much
| depth.
|
| . o O ( I wonder if some hostile antifeatures go away if
| you buy a TV in the US but then activate it from an EU IP
| address ).
| squarefoot wrote:
| Not just that. Broadband connection for things will become so
| cheap in the future that it could become essentially free one
| day so it can be subsidized by the businesses depending on
| it. 5G aside, It is believable that in a few years most home
| broadband routers, even tightly closed ones, could open a
| channel anyway using a fraction of the bandwidth for
| exclusive use by devices so that only closed source drivers
| will be able to instruct WiFi chips to see and use it. The
| catch being that there won't be any means of preventing the
| TV or other devices from going online, short of opening them
| and removing physically the network hardware. I believe we
| badly need alternative (Open Source, auditable, trustworthy)
| operating systems for smart TVs too. Next will be cars,
| fridges, etc. Pretty much everything.
| fsflover wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28583761
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28045189
| jimjams wrote:
| ... "don't connect it to the network", means don't connect it
| to the network, via a Roku-router or wlan or whatever.
|
| Don't buy one with other networks either, if they exist...
| elsherbini wrote:
| I cant find a source, but I remember a discussion here on a
| brand of smart tvs that still phone home by connecting to other
| nearby smart tvs that are connected to a network, even if you
| don't connect yours to the network.
| theshrike79 wrote:
| It was Samsung TVs that will automatically connect to any
| open Wifi nearby to get their ads updated, even if you tell
| it not to.
| chubot wrote:
| Really? Source? Which models?
|
| I just bought a Samsung 4K TV a month ago. I didn't connect
| it to wi-fi or do any setup. I just plugged my computer in.
|
| I have not seen any ads. It seems to work fine offline in
| all respects.
|
| If it actually did this I would definitely return the TV.
|
| In case it matters it was this Q60A "QLED" 43 inch 4K TV:
| https://www.bestbuy.com/site/samsung-43-class-q60a-series-
| ql...
| lpapez wrote:
| I got this exact same model today. Never gonna connect it
| to wifi anyway, seemed perfect.
| SamuelAdams wrote:
| HDMI cables now come with 10/100 Ethernet built in. So it could
| connect via your devices connection.
|
| So pay attention to the hdmi cable you use.
| xattt wrote:
| There are no receivers on the market that act as HDMI
| Ethernet network switches.
| periheli0n wrote:
| They have been for a while. But are these actually used for
| IP connectivity? If that was the case, a laptop's HDMI port
| should show up as network interface, which it doesn't, at
| least not on my machine.
| danudey wrote:
| I've been looking for years and I have yet to find any
| systems (TV, receiver, or injector) which actually take
| advantage of this feature.
| ARandumGuy wrote:
| Are there any examples of TVs doing this, or is this just a
| hypothetical?
|
| There are some TVs that will try to connect to the internet
| via non-obvious means (Samsung TVs were mentioned elsewhere
| in this thread). TV manufacturers aren't spy agencies though.
| They're not going to put in that much effort to sneak an
| internet connection, when most users willingly connect their
| TVs to WiFi anyway. If I can't find an article about a given
| TV sneaking in an internet connection, I would be pretty
| confident that it doesn't.
| KennyBlanken wrote:
| > They're not going to put in that much effort to sneak an
| internet connection,
|
| The profit from collecting data on you and displaying ads
| on the TV is greater than the profit from the sale of the
| TV.
|
| They absolutely will go to whatever lengths they can.
|
| https://www.cnet.com/news/as-smart-tvs-become-the-only-
| optio...
|
| https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/10/22773073/vizio-acr-
| adver...
| thoughtsimple wrote:
| I have a Roku that I block from the internet. It blinks an
| obnoxious red led to complain it can't phone home. I need some
| gaffer's tape to cover it up I guess.
| IG_Semmelweiss wrote:
| What is your usecase? Trying to understand the point of
| having apps without the wifi.
|
| I have noticed a marked increase in youtube ads in the roku
| app. Prob due to roku has updated itself without permission.
|
| Now i dread having to deal with pihole hacks + routers to
| fence it out of our home network :/
| boardwaalk wrote:
| They said internet, not wifi. Perhaps some Roku apps can
| play media from your local network? Plex, or a built-in
| media player?
| runjake wrote:
| This is what I did for my TCL Roku TV: just taped over the
| annoying blinking light.
|
| If enough people do this, I anticipate that in the next
| model, they'll replace that blinking light with an forced on-
| screen overlay.
| dmd wrote:
| I have a TCL Roku 6-series. If you do a factory reset, and
| _from the start_ don 't let it connect, then you won't get
| the blinking light.
|
| You only get the blinking light if you take away access
| after having given it.
| jrm4 wrote:
| I was curious about this -- I've been digging and I can't
| find a solution, is it possible to tell these things to
| jump straight to HDMI once you turn them on? Or are you
| always stuck with at least that one homescreen jump.
| Trying to make this thing as "dumb" as possible.
| dmd wrote:
| Yes, there's an option in Settings to automatically open
| a specific input on startup.
| mholm wrote:
| If you use any device that correctly uses HDMI CEC, then
| yes. I only have an Apple TV remote with some cheap
| Element Amazon TV, and I keep the TV remote taped to the
| back of the TV. Apple TV and Chromescasts will turn it
| on, off, and swap source to itself when used. I'd imagine
| Roku/Firesticks do as well.
| mindslight wrote:
| I was asking myself the same question seeing all the recent TV
| deals. I came to the conclusion it was best to ignore the deals
| and look at TVs when I can afford to do some in depth research as
| to which ones have the least intrusive "smart" functionality (eg
| quick startup to same hdmi input source, rarely needing to
| interact with the useless menus, and behaves when given a zero-
| access wifi network or even better with the wifi module removed).
|
| If you're looking for something smaller I'm using a 43 inch 4K
| monitor, LG 43UD79 / 43MU79, that was around $450. I'm using it
| as a monitor, but my backup plan was to use it as a TV if I
| didn't like it as a monitor. It even comes with a simple remote
| that is better than common TV remotes because it leaves out all
| the superfluous buttons (its primary up/downs are
| volume/brightness). They've since discontinued it and the new
| model is up at $700 though.
| kccqzy wrote:
| Consider Sceptre: https://www.sceptre.com/TV/4K-UHD-TV-
| category1category73.htm...
| jzig wrote:
| Never buy Samsung products.
| [deleted]
| ramesh31 wrote:
| No, they no longer exist. TV manufacturers have correctly
| determined that data mining is actually far more profitable than
| just selling panels. It's gone from smart TVs being a value added
| feature to being something that subsidizes the cost of the
| display itself to the consumer through advertising. There's a
| huge race now to win the smart TV OS market that is driving
| companies like Roku to massive valuations based on that.
| bigtex wrote:
| I bought this commercial LED TV from Samsung that I thought was
| dumb,
| https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1573435-REG/samsung_l...
| but it seems it has the same OS as other TV's. However it starts
| up real fast and is not connected to the internet at all. A menu
| across the bottom appears for a few seconds at startup but then
| goes away.
| ChuckMcM wrote:
| Not that I know of, there are however 4K 'digital signage'
| displays which are an industrial product. They are the monitors
| you see in kiosks etc. Be prepared to pay a pretty penny for them
| however. The last time I checked a 65" digital signage display
| was roughly 5x the cost of a similarly sized television.
|
| Also note they may have an HDMI implementation that is 'cheap'
| and doesn't implement the CLEC protocols or HDCP so you may have
| to jump through hoops to drive them from a PC with commercial
| content.
| badRNG wrote:
| >The last time I checked a 65" digital signage display was
| roughly 5x the cost of a similarly sized television.
|
| The question then is why would any company pay 5x for a device
| without smart functionality? Does that mean there's now a
| market for buying smart TVs, stripping out the "smart" tech,
| and reselling at, say, a 4x markup?
| ChuckMcM wrote:
| Perhaps, the signage market is generally targeted to
| equipment that needs to be rather durable and live in a wider
| temperature range. So typically they have better power
| supplies, steel rather than aluminum frames, and in the case
| of LED back lights a longer lasting LED (typically by under
| driving it IIRC).
|
| That said, I think there is solid market for "monitors" which
| are just the display and an industry standard interface.
|
| Sometimes you can get a "tunerless" TV which has fewer
| smarts.
| bo1024 wrote:
| Summing up the main options and linking to some comments that
| mentioned them:
|
| * extra-large gaming monitors,
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29383077
|
| * Sceptre brand TVs (they can be purchased from Walmart)
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29383298
|
| * Projectors maybe, but 4k projectors are very expensive. (On the
| other hand, 1080p projectors look great in my opinion.)
|
| * Most big brands such as LG, Samsung, etc. have "commercial
| displays" or "digital signage" that are dumb or at least have
| fewer problematic features. One kind you'll see is marketed for
| putting in hotel or hospital rooms. Another kind is marketed for
| displaying at e.g. a bar/restaurant, building lobby, etc.
| deeblering4 wrote:
| Came here to suggest projectors. I personally prefer my 1080p
| projector on a 100" fixed screen over a 50" 4k. When looking at
| projectors pay attention to the warranty period, and think
| about throw distance/placement.
| bick_nyers wrote:
| You can DIY a 4k Projector if you don't want to pay nearly as
| much:
|
| https://youtu.be/YfvTjQ9MCwY
| cgriswald wrote:
| Projectors require dark rooms; the less dark it is, the less
| contrast you'll see. I've got a 1080p projector on a wall at
| 100" and it looks fantastic. But it's in my bedroom and I use
| it only at night. I imagine for most people's living rooms,
| especially for daytime viewing, a projector won't work.
| wongarsu wrote:
| Most consumer projectors are built for home-cinema settings
| and don't fair well in normal light. Projectors for
| commercial applications like meetings or trade shows can put
| out much more light, at much greater cost.
| bo1024 wrote:
| I'd like to see a side-by-side comparison. A projector will
| have problem with direct sunlight on the screen, but so will
| a TV. I've found projectors okay in a reasonably bright room,
| depending what's on screen.
| agentdrtran wrote:
| You can disable Smart TV telemetry though something like
| pihole/nextdns
| MerelyMortal wrote:
| If they phone home using a dedicated IP, then no, that won't
| disable telemetry.
| nottorp wrote:
| If there's a hardcoded IP addy you just blackhole it through
| the firewall on said pihole?
| hourislate wrote:
| Samsung QB65R 65 inch 4K UHD LED Commercial Signage Display
|
| https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B07V9ZYV7Q?psc=1&th=1&linkCode=gs2&...
|
| Here are a couple of past threads on the topic.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29343338
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24666968
| thom wrote:
| I seem to remember that one drawback of trying for a monitor plus
| soundbar setup (which has tempted me from time to time) was
| splitting modern HDMI inputs. Can anyone speak to these issues as
| they stand today (to the extent that I've not misremembered)?
| zamadatix wrote:
| For literally trying to make a dumb TV out of a monitor and
| sound bar https://www.amazon.com/OREI-HDA-912-Audio-Converter-
| Extracto...
|
| If you want actual OTA TV on your dumb TV
| https://www.amazon.com/ViewTV-ATSC-Digital-Converter-Clear/d...
|
| If you have many sources consider
| https://www.amazon.com/Output-Switch-Switcher-Support-Contro...
| or getting a receiver instead of all the above (more costly).
|
| If you want to make your own smart TV look at the Shield TV
| with a USB TV Tuner, the extractor is probably still best for
| the sound bar in that case.
| thom wrote:
| These all look good, thanks! I basically just want
| Chromecast/Apple TV or equivalent in an HDMI port, as high
| quality as possible with no weird latency issues between
| video and audio. I don't mind paying for a good panel, I just
| don't like the software and the slow boot times.
| gwbas1c wrote:
| Most TVs have an ARC (audio return channel) labeled HDMI input
| which sends the sound back. I connected my smart TV to my
| receiver via the ARC HDMI port, and it sends sound back to the
| receiver; and I can select inputs from the receiver from my
| TV's remote.
| [deleted]
| transpute wrote:
| Recent thread (~300 comments) on open-source firmware for smart
| TVs: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29338658
| fartcannon wrote:
| Last year I bought a Proscan 55" 4k dumb TV. Maybe you can find
| one of them? My review: it's fine.
| droopyEyelids wrote:
| What is the "startup time" like? Meaning how long it takes to
| go from poweroff/standby to displaying the signal.
| fartcannon wrote:
| A couple second I guess? There's a blue PROSCAN screen that
| turns on first. Is that something people worry about? I guess
| if I was going to watch 30 seconds of TV, waiting 10 seconds
| would be something I'd consider important.
| austinshea wrote:
| Sceptre is fantastic for this.
|
| e.g. https://www.walmart.com/ip/Sceptre-55-Class-4K-UHD-LED-TV-
| HD...
|
| Zero smart features, and all modern capabilities. It's also a TV,
| as opposed to a computer monitor, so it has the expected TV
| speakers and ports.
| memco wrote:
| I recently purchased one of the Sceptre TVs and overall am
| happy with it. The only drawback I found was the sound is not
| great: it is tinny and muddled (possibly because it's wall-
| mounted). I'm planning to buy some external speakers.
| syntheticnature wrote:
| Yes, I have a 4K Sceptre purchased for a song, and the sound
| isn't great (and HDMI-CEC doesn't work as reliably as I'd
| like to bring up the soundbar on HDMI-ARC, etc.)...
|
| ...but it doesn't have any of the smart TV BS. Still takes
| too long to power on, IMO.
| deltarholamda wrote:
| It's been many years, so this is old data, but I purchased a
| half dozen or so Sceptre flat panel monitors for an office.
| Every one of them stopped working after about two years. I
| don't remember for sure, but they may have been LCDs with
| fluorescent backlights, so the fluorescents could have simply
| failed.
|
| I've always had a poor opinion of Sceptre from this, but again,
| it could just be an out of date prejudice.
| pettusftw wrote:
| As a counter-anecdote, I purchased a Sceptre monitor in the
| 20"-30" range in 2010 and used it through 2015 when I gave it
| away. It's still in daily use and working fine for what it
| is.
| dncornholio wrote:
| I could not find a product description. Stopped scrolling when
| I reached the related products and could not find a hyperlink
| in the sidebar. Is this just me stuck in old ways?
| austinshea wrote:
| This will provide more significant detail:
| https://www.sceptre.com/TV/4K-UHD-TV-
| category1category73.htm...
|
| (e.g. https://www.sceptre.com/TV/4K-UHD-TV/U557CV-
| UMRB-55-4K-UHD-T...)
| shoeffner wrote:
| It's below the related and recommended products.
| wodenokoto wrote:
| Iron cast TV aims at exactly this market.
|
| In my recollection HN wasn't impressed when they hit the front
| page
|
| https://displayy.studio/ironcast.tv/
|
| https://displayy.studio/ironcast.tv/
| iramiller wrote:
| They are not without their drawbacks but you can get an excellent
| picture quality 4K home theater projector that has none of the
| 'smart' tv features.
| Spivak wrote:
| The best part is that since they're expensive, niche, and
| bought mostly by businesses, they will never reach consumer
| market adoption to the level where adding telemetry and ads
| makes financial sense.
| koheripbal wrote:
| +1 for projectors.
|
| Some will laugh at getting 4K resolution and then projecting it
| on a regular white wall, but honestly, you'll get used to it as
| you project a much larger image than you'd otherwise get with
| an lcd. Also, there are special paints you can get - or a
| retractable screen if you feel the need after testing out the
| projector.
|
| Note: if it is a room with windows make sure to have decent
| curtains. It's not as FC v bright as a LCD screen.
| cmckn wrote:
| Look, I think it's a legitimate question, and I'm not thrilled
| about most "smart" TV operating systems. But why pigeonhole your
| search like this? You will almost certainly end up with a worse
| actual display, which is what you're spending the money on in the
| first place. Just buy a nice panel and disable as much of the
| smarts as you can---it'll be fine. Android TV is the best option
| out there, in my opinion; and it's what Sony's run (the best
| panels out there).
|
| If you buy something marketed as a monitor, it will have no (or
| terrible) audio, and you will struggle to find something in the
| >=65" class. I think it's a fine option for a spare TV, but it
| doesn't cut it for the living room.
|
| I get why HN hates smart TV's, but unfortunately the ship has
| sailed. I'd rather have a nice TV than be an activist, gotta
| choose your battles.
| cortesoft wrote:
| Smart TVs also take a lot longer to start up than dumb ones.
| cmckn wrote:
| I've seen what you're describing, but it's far from
| universal. Most TV's (like monitors) primarily exist in a
| standby mode and light up within a second or two, especially
| at the upper end of the market.
| jstanley wrote:
| For some people, a TV that doesn't actively view its owner as
| an adversary is a "nicer TV" than one that does.
| cmckn wrote:
| My Bravia runs Android TV, which I legitimately have not seen
| even one frame of in over 2 years. There is a spectrum of the
| kind of thing you're describing. I wouldn't buy a Samsung for
| that reason. But it's not like all smart TV's are dystopian.
| preinheimer wrote:
| Is it a battle? Or is it 45 minutes of google searching and
| reading an HN thread.
|
| Vote with your dollars every time you can.
| cmckn wrote:
| If you'd buy any TV after searching for only 45 minutes,
| we're just different types of consumers. Which is fine! But I
| really like A/V, and I care primarily about the audio and
| visuals, not so much the politics of the thing.
| mattnewton wrote:
| I put a premium on my time to find and disable all the features
| I don't want, (especially with reports of things like the
| Samsung TVs connecting to any open wifi without being
| configured to do so), so I don't mind spending extra to avoid
| this.
|
| If I don't vote with my wallet how can I hope to be able to buy
| what I want in the future?
| dsr_ wrote:
| If you would spend $20 more on a dumb device, spend that on a
| wifi router just for the TV - plug an ethernet cable into the
| TV's port, feed the credentials of a new network to the TV,
| whatever -- and don't connect that to the Internet. Put a label
| on it.
|
| Now you have a smart TV which can whine all it wants, but can't
| phone home.
| luluganeta wrote:
| It's not even an issue of "picking your battles" or "voting
| with your wallet".
|
| Whatever your position, OP is justified in not wanting (and
| looking for an alternative to) a potential surveillance device
| in their home.
| cmckn wrote:
| As I said, I think it's a fair question. But having shopped
| for a TV in the last 18 months, you get a worse TV if "dumb"
| is your goal. I mean the giant colorful thing showing your
| content is worse, in the products without smarts. It is what
| it is.
| zyemuzu wrote:
| I didn't see this mentioned so apologies if it has, but the
| latest version of Google TV has a 'dumb' mode that has no
| external services as an option on first setup. There are TVs
| releasing with Google TV (Android 12) soon.
| [deleted]
| mtmail wrote:
| In last week's "Ask HN: What's the best TV to buy?"
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29343338 one recommendation
| was to look for commercial televisions which usually lack the
| smart features and are build for reliability.
| somerandomqaguy wrote:
| Commercial TV's are coming more and more with smart
| capabilities. I know LG commercial displays can be equipped
| with WebOS and Samsung displays come with Tizen, though I don't
| know how wide spread they are through their commercial product
| line ups.
| rbanffy wrote:
| > I know LG commercial displays can be equipped with WebOS
|
| It's a real shame to have a TV that runs Linux and can't be
| used as an X Terminal...
| newhotelowner wrote:
| You can buy a hospitality/healthcare TVs. They are quite a bit
| expensive and harder to find. I buy directly from LG.
|
| New latest one comes with an Ethernet port. If you connect to
| internet will communicate with the mothership. I had extra that I
| hooked up to the internet and can see pining lg.com everyday
| after midnight.
| chewmieser wrote:
| There's a lot of info already in here but I just wanted to
| mention that TVs specifically for "Commercial" or "Signage" tend
| to not screw around with all that nonsense.
|
| You will absolutely pay a premium for that though.
| gameswithgo wrote:
| One workaround is to just never set up wifi on the tv, then they
| really can't do anything. That is what I've done at home.
| NaturalPhallacy wrote:
| search for "hospitality displays"
| tareqak wrote:
| The last time this topic was posted someone posted this link
| about advertising displays that are 4K with inputs and tuner and
| no "smart" features:
| https://www.sharpnecdisplays.us/products/displays#1 .
| dhosek wrote:
| Only $10K for a 55" display. Hmm
| 14 wrote:
| More important than resolution would be the type of panel the tv
| had. A good panel will change the way the picture looks
| dramatically. High quality panels the image will look like it
| floats off the screen.
| molestrangler wrote:
| You may have to consider a projector.
| TulliusCicero wrote:
| I seem to recall hearing that certain Google TV's could be set to
| dumb mode?
|
| Ah, here it is: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/02/the-best-
| feature-of-...
|
| > The new Google TV is a fine smart TV interface, but when it
| gets integrated into some TV sets later this year, its best
| feature might be that you can turn it off. A report from
| 9to5Google details an upcoming "Basic TV" mode that will be built
| into Google TV, which turns off just about all the smart TV
| features. Right now, Google TV is only available in the new
| Chromecast, but Google TV will be built into upcoming TVs from
| Sony and TCL. Basic mode means we'll get smart TVs with a "dumb
| TV" mode.
|
| > ...
|
| > When the new feature rolls out, you'll be asked to choose
| between "Basic TV" or "Google TV" at setup. 9to5Google says that
| with basic mode, "almost everything is stripped, leaving users
| with just HDMI inputs and Live TV if they have an antenna plugged
| directly into the TV. Casting support, too, is dropped." The UI
| notes that you'll be turning off all apps, the Google Assistant,
| and personalized recommendations.
| 8note wrote:
| I wouldn't expect that to stop tracking or inserting ads. Those
| are the key features for Google products
| TulliusCicero wrote:
| How would they do these things if you never give the device
| wifi access?
| criddell wrote:
| Built-in cell modem that can only call home?
|
| Also, Amazon and other companies are building out networks
| of their wifi devices. I assume at some point they will
| start selling access to other companies. So, even if you
| decline to set up wifi, the appliance might be able to get
| online through your neighbor's doorbell.
| m-p-3 wrote:
| I keep mine disconnected from WiFi, and I connect it to Ethernet
| maybe once a year just to see if there's a firmware update, then
| I disconnect it.
|
| I have an Ethernet to WiFi bridge that is already configured on
| my wireless network, so I don't need to pull an Ethernet cable
| all the way, and the TV never knows the network passphrase.
| salt-thrower wrote:
| For those who don't require 4K, I was able to find a 1080p "dumb"
| TV from the Insignia brand at Best Buy. All their 4K models are
| smart though, unfortunately.
| Mountain_Skies wrote:
| Walmart sells 4K RCA dumb TVs. The UI is slow and clunky but I
| rarely have reason to use the UI for anything. It has no apps and
| doesn't connect to anything other than video and audio sources.
| The picture quality looks fine to me but I'm not all that
| particular about such things. The audio is passable but you'll
| probably want a receiver or a sound bar. There is a USB port but
| it doesn't appear to do anything. You can't play videos or
| anything from USB. It's about as dumb as you can get these days.
| MightyOwl13 wrote:
| Depends a lot on country. I think the US has more options than EU
| (but I might be wrong...). Framework had a blog post
| (https://frame.work/blog/in-defense-of-dumb-tvs) about this exact
| thing and NEC digital signage displays are an option or Iiyama
| (https://iiyama.com/) makes 55,60 inch 4K displays that are non
| smart.
|
| I was looking for something similar and it's frustrating to see
| you can pick up a 65inch Samsung Q90A for about $2500-$3000 but a
| similarly sized comercial display will cost significantly more
| and use significantly more power (at least as far as I've seen, I
| might be wrong on this one). Comercial displays are rated for
| 16/24 or 24/24 usage, so they should, in theory, last
| significantly longer.
|
| As far as my search went, I ended up going with a Dell U4320Q
| (43inch monitor) instead. It cost a bit more than the equivalent
| Samsung Q90A display, but it does have a USB C port with power
| delivery support, I can keep my desktop and laptop plugged in and
| it works/looks great. It also doesn't have Smart features, it's
| just a display. Depending on country you might be able to get
| some cashback on it and make it even more competitive price wise
| and the stand + warranty are pretty solid.
|
| Hope this helps!
| mrweasel wrote:
| When I last complained about not being able to buy a dumb TV
| someone linked me a Romanian electronics site. There where so
| many option, but non of them are available in Denmark.
| sq_ wrote:
| Hadn't seen that Framework post; maybe if they manage to be
| successful in the laptop world long term they can grace us with
| a TV with the same ideas as the laptops. One can hope, at
| least...
| Mizza wrote:
| I looked and couldn't find any. If anybody feels like making a
| trip to Shenzen, I think there's a huge (well, Framework-big)
| market for high-quality dumb TVs and other devices.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| Here's a list of LG 4K OLED TV models that professionals use for
| color grading, 10 bit HDR movie work, etc.:
| https://www.richardlackey.com/low-budget-davinci-resolve-mon...
|
| You can put those into a special HDMI dumb screen mode using the
| service remote.
| UI_at_80x24 wrote:
| Your best choice is a PC monitor. It'll cost ALOT more, but it'll
| also be higher spec, and perform better.
|
| Another option is a projector.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| Dell's new 32" 8K monitor looks really nice, if I had an extra
| $3,750 lying around.
| Apreche wrote:
| One thing people haven't mentioned is that there are some non-
| smart televisions available that are marketed as extra large
| gaming monitors.
|
| For example, there's the Alienware 55" OLED Gaming Monitor and
| the ASUS ROG Swift PG65UQ that's 65".
| actually_a_dog wrote:
| That's interesting, but it doesn't look like you have many
| choices at the 55" size unless you're willing to pay double
| what I paid 4 years ago for my Sony.
| [deleted]
| floatingatoll wrote:
| What value would additional choices serve, if it's just a
| pane of glass of a fixed size and resolution?
| mikepurvis wrote:
| Downward cost pressure, one presumes.
| FemmeAndroid wrote:
| There can still be differences in color gamut, refresh
| rates, input lag, viewing angle, black uniformity, local
| dimming, image retention, supported resolutions, SDR/HDR
| brightness to name a few.
| y4mi wrote:
| That's exactly the reason why non smart TVs don't sell.
|
| The smart one's are subsidized by their ads and spyware; so
| you'll always pay a massive premium to get a dumb one.
| sethhochberg wrote:
| Thanks for the tip! This is a great search keyword to keep in
| mind.
| the_duke wrote:
| Swedx [1] has really nice, affordable products. I've bought about
| 5 of them over the last few years.
|
| All of their screens come in a "TV version" with a tuner, and a
| "monitor version" without one, but are otherwise identical.
|
| The speakers are pretty crappy, but that's to be expected.
|
| (European company, so not sure where they ship to outside the EU)
|
| [1] https://www.swedx.com
| gnud wrote:
| Second this.
|
| I have a SwedX FHD or UHD or something screen, not 4K. The
| remote is simple. The menus are simple. Turning it on could be
| quicker, but is not horrible. The sound is not great, but
| functional. It has digital audio out, so I use an external amp
| and speakers.
|
| The price is quite nice. The lack of any "smart" features even
| nicer.
| peanut_worm wrote:
| Look for TVs using the keywords "signage" and "commercial" and
| you'll have better luck. They are notably more expensive than
| smart TVs since they can't sell your data.
| justizin wrote:
| There are, and they are more expensive. I gave in a while back
| and started buying "Toshiba Fire TV" because it costs about half
| as much as a comparable model that does not advertise to me. It's
| a tradeoff I'm only moderately OK with.
| justinlloyd wrote:
| Look in to the hospitality line of NEC, LG & Samsung which costs
| a little more but are universally dumb. Lots of input options,
| but none of the smart features or network connectivity unless you
| actively plug an ethernet cable in to the ethernet port that some
| of the models have which permit you to control the TV or send
| video over TCP.
|
| I have a 4K Dell 55" which is really a Samsung panel.
| dncornholio wrote:
| Just don't connect the TV to the internet
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| You can simply connect them to the internet then disconnect them.
| Change the WiFi SSID or password id necessary.
| ThatMedicIsASpy wrote:
| Why connect them in the first place?
| basch wrote:
| Firmware updates, changes to post processing, motion
| processing, fald backlighting software, enhanced gaming
| features.
| ff317 wrote:
| Sceptre has been my favorite. They're not the most-premium brand,
| but I've been buying them for years for home TVs and they're
| decent. They do make Android TV models, but they also continue to
| make non-smart models with 4K and other basic AV bells and
| whistles: https://www.sceptre.com/TV/4K-UHD-TV-
| category1category73.htm...
| sorum wrote:
| If you use a regular (smart) TV just as a HDMI-out and watch
| everything through a connected streaming player e.g Apple TV,
| Chromecast, Roku...how many of these problems could one avoid?
| notananthem wrote:
| Just don't let it connect to the internet. I have a lot of
| firewall rules to block my TV off, but you can also just
| literally turn off the features.
| mattnewton wrote:
| My experience with an LG panel was it slowing down to wait for
| network requests that would never complete and asking for wifi
| every time it was turned back on. I just use a projector now;
| it's a dumber, bigger screen (and as a plus it encourages me to
| limit screen time to after dark for better picture quality)
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| Digital Signage.
|
| https://www.sharpnecdisplays.us/products/displays#1
|
| https://www.samsung.com/us/business/displays/
|
| https://www.lg.com/us/business/digital-signage
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| Even digital signage is becoming increasingly "smart", although
| perhaps not in a way that HN would object to. Most of them
| these days have the ability to display videos and stills from
| attached storage devices, or stream content from a network
| address.
| jenscow wrote:
| A monitor + external TV tuner (and perhaps a HDMI switch)
| vizzier wrote:
| https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/gigabyte/aorus-fo48u-... -
| Looking out for tv panels attached to "gaming" monitors might be
| a route.
| alliao wrote:
| my bravia is so dumb it's got a 100Mbps ethernet port, and the
| USB port is USB 2.0 so the best wifi is bounded by USB2.0! yay.
|
| I think they just don't want people stream high bitrate stuff
| directly
| mandelbrot wrote:
| The best Smart TV alternative I've seen so far is probably this
| 55" gaming monitor from Philips [1]. The previous model (558M1RY)
| could be also an option if you don't care about HDMI 2.1. At
| least on paper it ticks a lot of boxes, but there are not many
| reviews online and it might not be easy to get your hands on one.
|
| [1]
| https://www.usa.philips.com/c-p/559M1RYV_27/momentum-4k-hdr-...
| michelpp wrote:
| Seems like this would be a good use case for a "TV Honeypot" that
| would intercept phone-homes, recognize the model, imitate
| whatever jank rpc is needed to keep the unit happy, and dump all
| telemetry to /dev/null.
| kwertyoowiyop wrote:
| Imagine if it could replace the ads with pictures of your
| family, news, inspirational quotes...
| ldehaan wrote:
| I don't know who you are, I can't prove to you I am real, but
| I love you. Have a nice day, and please, down vote this, I
| was doing so good being invisible until Someone upvoted me to
| a 1 again...
| artificialLimbs wrote:
| With pihole you could. Have the ad domains pointed to your
| own webserver that served you such things.
| h2odragon wrote:
| Get one into your neighborhood switch; and show your own ads
| to everyone. Local advertisers desperately want someone to
| hand their money to.
| mlok wrote:
| Imagine if (when ?) the AI chip in each TV in the near future
| could smartmix(c) ads with pictures of your family, news,
| inspirational quotes...
| oblio wrote:
| Even better, product placement.
|
| Your 5 year old is now magically holding
| BrandNewKoolAid(tm) instead of the original Coke. You
| grandpa has a fishing rod from BobsFishingEquipment(r).
| bentcorner wrote:
| Oh god - there's the recent posts I've seen about people
| losing their social media accounts and then having
| deepfakes of themselves posting about BTC.
|
| But what happens when the platforms get into it
| themselves?
|
| Today using a loved one's image in a deepfake
| advertisement might seem invasive and wrong. But I wonder
| in the future if this would be seen as something
| acceptable. I'm sure somewhere there's a social media
| site that is carefully constructing their T&C's to allow
| them to do this if they so wish.
| Spivak wrote:
| You don't need AI, just social media and reviews. It's
| been tried. Crazy effective but also feels creepy despite
| it just being a way to surface reviews and ratings from
| people you know on FB or Google+.
| rtkwe wrote:
| Just don't connect your TV to wifi? That's what I did when I
| finally had to get one when I was replacing the ancient energy
| hungry plasma I'd been using. I already have other devices for
| watching Netflix/YouTube/ChromeCast.
| artificialLimbs wrote:
| Also make sure there are no open access points anywhere
| nearby. Some models automatically connect to them.
| drexlspivey wrote:
| That isn't going to work for long, your neighbor's Alexa is
| now automatically sharing his internet with you, it's just a
| matter of your TV manufacturer striking a deal with amazon
| for access to their mesh network.
| andrewjf wrote:
| Thanks, I really hate this.
|
| But seriously, what can we do here? How to I inform people
| like my parents of this kind of thing without being an
| alarmist? Should I even care?
| cmpb wrote:
| PiHole[1], with the default adlist/gravity configuration,
| actually works pretty well for removing ads from my LG smart tv
| from about 3 years ago. Doesn't keep it from updating, but you
| can easily configure pihole to block whatever domains you want
|
| [1] https://pi-hole.net/
| ceejayoz wrote:
| Some TVs have gotten wise to this, and are using IP addresses
| or serving ads from domains that are also needed for things
| like installing the various apps like YouTube/Netflix.
| Grustaf wrote:
| I'm considering buying a projector for this reason, and because I
| don't want a tuner.
| haunter wrote:
| 4K monitors. You need a soundbar though or some kind of audio
| setup + remote. Also no built-in tuner or such but I assume you
| get a set top box from your service provider or use a streaming
| device (Apple TV, Fire stick etc.)
|
| 4K OLED
| https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#r=384002160&P=7
|
| 4K IPS https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#r=384002160&P=2
|
| 4K VA https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#r=384002160&P=4
|
| 4K 55" or bigger monitors (there aren't many choices)
| https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#P=2,7,4&r=3840021...
|
| The 4K 55" OLED Alienware has speaker but I doubt that it is any
| good https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/new-alienware-55-oled-
| gaming... (actually comes with remote too)
|
| Linus made a video of it
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3oqktdx2a8
|
| Last but not least you can go even higher resolution than 4K but
| these are all IPS only and they are not bigger than 34"
| https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#r=768004320,57600...
| [deleted]
| femto113 wrote:
| Another approach is to look not for things advertised as
| "monitors" but instead look for "digital signage"[1]. Nowadays
| most of these contain some networking features but they'll be
| oriented at local control (i.e. by you via something on your
| LAN), not some third-party control center accessed via the
| internet.
|
| Anecdotally this is the approach I took ~20 years ago when
| buying a (then slightly exotic) plasma flatscreen from
| Panasonic. It is still working flawlessly today, though I keep
| hoping it will die so I can guiltlessly replace it with
| something newer/bigger/higher-resolution.
|
| [1] A random example
| https://www.usa.philips.com/p-p/86BDL3050Q_00/signage-soluti...
| vineyardmike wrote:
| But does digital signage have good panels like "real" TVs?
| Eg. the high end oleds with deep blacks and stuff?
| wiredfool wrote:
| It depends. I have an Iiyama 44" and the display, while
| nominally 4K, is noticeably not as good as a good 32" 4K
| monitor. It's not really visible when watching video, but
| using it as an external display looks horrible close up.
|
| This is one of the ones with an android board in it, and if
| I did it again, I'd be getting someone sold as a computer
| monitor.
| bentcorner wrote:
| Digital signage is good but from my understanding (and I
| could be wrong) probably over-engineered for home usage.
| They're intended to be powered on 24x7, and last a long time.
| Probably more resistant to burn-in too. All of which is good,
| but if your use case isn't so intensive you could get by with
| something lower-end. (Especially if you want to eventually
| replace the device and are looking for an excuse ;) )
| femto113 wrote:
| My direct experience is somewhat out of date, but from an
| engineering perspective the unit I have is much simpler
| than any TV, since it lacks a tuner or any fancy video
| scaling capability, and has no audio capability of any kind
| (that was a feature to me, since I use an A/V Receiver for
| sound). I think in general screens meant for signage are
| probably brighter than most TVs/monitors, but depending on
| the room that could be a useful feature as well.
| ungamedplayer wrote:
| The model that I have js definitely over engineered. I have
| a 2k sign display which uses display port and its 8 years
| old.
|
| It's It's bit ugly, but as long as you are okay with that.
| dr-detroit wrote:
| all it needs is a computer... then youre on the systemd botnet
| thats one hilarious tradeoff.
| lvass wrote:
| >Apple TV, Fire stick etc.
|
| That's just offloading the problem to a separate device.
| acomjean wrote:
| I think they help by siloing the snooping.
|
| Our smart TV seems to actively try to figure out what is
| attached to the HDMI. Its probably reporting that back. At
| least every time I plug my notebook into the tv it seems to
| wait at least 20 seconds before forcing me to select "PC" as
| the input device. The old tv the notebook shows up
| instantaneously.
| CapitalistCartr wrote:
| The price spread seems so drastic, more than four times. There
| is obviously much that I'm missing.
| bmitc wrote:
| 4K OLED monitors are insanely expensive. You can get an LG 65"
| OLED TV for $1,800. The OLED computer monitors I have seen
| start at $4,000.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| AW5520QF (55" 120Hz) is on sale for $2500. That's getting
| down to about double the cost.
| [deleted]
| matja wrote:
| A Gigabyte FO48U (48" OLED, same LG panel as the C1) goes for
| around $1500
| sliken wrote:
| 83% of the price for 54% of the area.
| uyt wrote:
| With 4k monitors you usually pay a larger premium for latency,
| refresh rate, gsync/freesync, etc. All of which gamers care a
| lot about but are irrelevant for TVs.
| convery wrote:
| Not really, just like TV's there's certainly a 'premium'
| range for those that are interested but there's a wide range
| or regular 'work' monitors. e.g. a few years ago I got a 43"
| 4K monitor with 10-bit colour-depth, 60Hz refresh, good local
| dimming etc. for $800.
|
| In OP's link for IPS, a monitor of the same size and brand
| that seems to be the next version after the one I got is
| $550. It's hardly a premium over a comparable TV.
| bitwize wrote:
| I got such a monitor earlier this year for around $600.
| It's amazing for work but could totally work as a
| television with an appropriate device connected, especially
| since it has decent, loud audio built in.
| deadmutex wrote:
| Console gamers care about TV latency too.
| jjoonathan wrote:
| Why does (consumer) monitor tech always seem to lag TV tech by
| a few years?
|
| It looks like the situation is still that in the 4k OLED space
| there are a few ~$4000+ monitors and dozens of ~$1000 TVs. Per
| the pcpartpicker link, maybe the Gigabyte FO48U will change
| that, but it's still out of stock. Besides, I feel like this
| has happened before with HDR and 4k and IPS. First it shows up
| in TVs, a year later it is cheap in TVs, a year later it is
| expensive in monitors, and finally it becomes cheap in
| monitors. But it takes years. Which seems odd, since surely
| they use the same panels? Is it an industry structure thing,
| where panel manufacturers integrate and co-develop with TV
| manufacturers but monitor manufacturers are separate, only get
| the panels after release, and need a year or three to turn
| things around?
| 8note wrote:
| Monitors are built for being an arm's length away. TVs are
| built for being several yards away. The pixel density changes
| accordingly
| lodovic wrote:
| There are monitors built specifically for digital signage,
| these have the same specs as large TVs but no tuner or
| adware.
| cyberge99 wrote:
| And so does the ability to use IR or some other remote
| control mechanism.
|
| A "dumb tv" would just be a monitor with a remote to
| control power and volume.
| ksec wrote:
| >Why does (consumer) monitor tech always seem to lag TV tech
| by a few years?....
|
| Monitor used to have "much" lower input latency, higher PPI,
| much higher refresh rate and generally higher reliability
| because they are expected to be constantly on. i.e Their
| panels have different specifications.
|
| Although I am not sure if most of the above are true anymore
| especially with OLED. Given how TV manufactures have also had
| focus on gaming. But reliability is still a thing on monitor.
| That is the similar to reference TV that uses panel from one
| of two years prior.
|
| Edit: I had to look up Panasonic TV set and panel and then I
| discovered they are pulling out of TV production and
| outsource to external partner. Sigh.
|
| https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=.
| ..
| jjoonathan wrote:
| Yeah, I use gaming mode for my TV-as-a-monitor and if I
| don't the lag is noticeable even on the desktop. It has the
| nice side effect of disabling the obnoxious sharpening
| filters, too.
|
| My dedicated monitors have had dismal reliability: one died
| right after the warranty, one died inside the warranty and
| they flaked on the warranty anyway. My reliability
| expectations are rock bottom, my TV will have to work hard
| to undershoot them.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > Why does (consumer) monitor tech always seem to lag TV tech
| by a few years?
|
| Well, "always" seems like an exaggeration; consumer monitors
| were far beyond 480i before consumer TVs were.
|
| > It looks like the situation is still that in the 4k OLED
| space there are a few ~$4000+ monitors and dozens of ~$1000
| TVs.
|
| That's not monitors being behind in tech, that's TVs being
| cheaper because of economies of scale and opportunity for ad
| serving and data harvesting.
|
| > Is it an industry structure thing, where panel
| manufacturers integrate and co-develop with TV manufacturers
| but monitor manufacturers are separate
|
| AFAIK, LG, Sharp, Samung, and Sony are all four
| panel/TV/monitor manufacturers; I dont think that's an issue.
| jjoonathan wrote:
| Scale and ads are plausible explanations for why monitors
| are behind in tech, but they're still behind in tech.
| antisthenes wrote:
| What a weird nonsensical statement.
|
| Monitors and TVs are manufactured with the same "tech",
| just to different specifications to fit their desired
| purpose/niche, and to capture the maximum possible value
| from that market.
|
| You could maybe make an argument that Samsung panel tech
| is behind LG's or something, since companies have
| separate R&D labs and actually have different technology,
| but in order to do so you'd have to be an industry
| expert.
| jjoonathan wrote:
| In what world is a comparison "nonsensical"? They both
| displays pixels. Each can be substituted for the other
| with a modest amount of non-panel-related effort. They
| compete. We can compare them.
|
| > the same "tech", just to different specifications to
| fit their desired purpose/niche
|
| Clearly not. I am using a TV as a monitor right now,
| because 4k + OLED + HDR + 120hz was just not available
| for $1100 in the monitor space six months ago (I think
| there was a $6000 offering, lol). Looks like it still
| isn't. This situation has been going on for years. Before
| OLED it was HDR, before HDR it was 4k, and so on. TVs are
| always far ahead, monitors are always far behind.
|
| I'd rather not use a TV as a monitor because it's a PITA.
| I have to put up with substantial non-panel-related
| silliness to make this happen (turn the TV off/on with a
| remote, deactivate the laggy filters, tolerate the
| "smart" BS, etc). If monitors are so well tailored to
| their own niche, why are they losing so badly to a
| competitor who isn't even trying?
|
| > to capture the maximum possible value from that market
|
| That's the only explanation I can come up with: monitors
| are a backwater that the industry just doesn't care much
| about because volume is lower. Tech has to trickle down,
| and that takes years.
| abdulmuhaimin wrote:
| that looks like a price problem, not a tech problem. you
| said it yourself, the tech exist, just much pricier.
|
| And like the other person said, one of the reason is just
| basic scale. TV is multitude much bigger market than
| monitor ever is.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > TVs are always far ahead, monitors are always far
| behind.
|
| Your own description isn't of TVs being ahead in tech,
| but offering the same tech at a lower price point. (There
| often is some actual tech lag, for many of the same
| reasons, but it's much shorter.)
|
| > I'd rather not use a TV as a monitor because it's a
| PITA. I have to put up with substantial non-panel-related
| silliness to make this happen (turn the TV off/on with a
| remote, deactivate the laggy filters, tolerate the
| "smart" BS, etc).
|
| Usually, all of those except for the filters are
| effectively bypassed when using an input that supports
| CEC.
| wongarsu wrote:
| I don't quite see how "TVs are cheaper because they earn
| money beyond the sale and have more economies in scale"
| translates to "monitors are behind in tech"? They have
| similar tech, but at different price points.
| kube-system wrote:
| Volume? Whether we're talking about TVs or monitors, the most
| competitive offerings are always the segments that sell in
| volume.
|
| Just because OLED tech "exists" doesn't mean the equipment
| exists to make it economically at any particular size,
| format, etc. We have affordable TV-sized and phone-sized
| OLEDs because LG has invested in the equipment to make those
| particular panels in those particular sizes.
| fragmede wrote:
| TV's are such a big business that they overwhelm the rest of
| the display manufacturing world. That's why 16:10 monitors
| basically disappeared - 16:9 is 1080p is a TV.
|
| On the other end of the spectrum is professional industry
| displays which are ahead of consumer facing devices, like are
| shown at NAB (vs CES) and there you'll find 8k monitors for
| tens of thousands of dollars.
| iypx wrote:
| Maybe in the high-end only?
|
| Speaking of low to mid end tvs, the ones I saw on display in
| local shops, they were just overpriced junk..
|
| Even though it's smaller, I installed my 7? year old 24" benq
| fhd e-ips monitor as a tv for my parents. $120 + $20 for the
| cheapest 2.1 sound (I think 2x10W + sub), cranked the bass
| much higher than advised, put the speakers behind the monitor
| and the sub on the floor + ISP tv box with remote. Speakers
| and monitor are always on, they got their own power saving
| stuff. My parents are ecstatic, guests are asking where they
| got the TV from... apparently it looks better that the ones
| you could buy for $500+...
|
| Last time I checked, I remember finding somewhere most tvs
| don't actually operate at the advertised resolution, they got
| all kinds of "prettifying" algos. Not going to trust them
| ever.
| jjoonathan wrote:
| The panels have the advertised resolution, but yes, for
| "smart" TVs you always have to figure out how to turn off
| the gross sharpening/compression filters that they use to
| win the Great Best Buy Screensaver Battle. It can be done,
| though, and certainly if the manufacturer wanted to omit
| them in a monitor offering it could.
| ansible wrote:
| Two of the most important settings:
|
| Game mode. This turns off most/all the image processing,
| which greatly increases the lag.
|
| Overscan. Also turn it off. This zooms in the picture a
| little to crop out artifacts around the edge.
| jjoonathan wrote:
| ^ This.
| mrzimmerman wrote:
| If I had to guess I'd say it's just market size. I'd bet
| there's a larger market if people who want a large, high
| definition TV for movies and shows than there is for people
| who want a high definition monitor.
|
| Most business uses for monitors don't require high
| definition, so you're really looking at specific industries
| and gaming.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| Excluding that Mac market, I don't think Apple sell
| anything new anymore that is under 200 PPI.
| bsedlm wrote:
| > Why does (consumer) monitor tech always seem to lag TV tech
| by a few years?
|
| because there's more money to be made selling TVs than
| monitors?
|
| consequentely, it's TV manufacturers pushing the entire
| display maker industry ahead? and so they get the newer tech
| first??
| jjoonathan wrote:
| That's what I suspect, yes, but if that's the case it feels
| like integrating a monitor manufacturer would be a quick
| and easy business win for the TV guys.
| antisthenes wrote:
| > it feels like integrating a monitor manufacturer would
| be a quick and easy business win for the TV guys.
|
| What does this even mean? The same companies that make
| panels for monitors usually make panels for the TVs as
| well. They already have production facilities that can
| manufacture panel sizes ranging from cell-phone size to
| 200" commercial wall panels.
| bluGill wrote:
| Most people don't buy the volume to get a special size
| panel. Want a panel, you can save a ton of money buying
| one we already make. My company has obsoleted perfectly
| good embedded systems and had to redesign a new UI just
| because the panel we used went out of production. (I knew
| all along doing pixel perfect UI instead of one that
| scaled was a stupid idea, but I got overruled, now we
| spend a ton of money making our UI scale)
| brtkdotse wrote:
| TV manufacturers can offset the lower price by selling ads to
| show you on your "smart" tv
| jjoonathan wrote:
| That wouldn't explain the delay, and do they really expect
| to sell $3000 of ads per customer? I have doubts.
| Hamuko wrote:
| They get money from the ads, they get money from selling
| your usage data, they get money by selling space on the
| remote for streaming apps, and probably through some
| other means as well.
| jjoonathan wrote:
| Sure, but my intuition says they might get a few hundred
| dollars that way, tops. Is my intuition off by an entire
| order of magnitude?
| WillPostForFood wrote:
| Vizio, as a public company, now has to share their ad
| revenue data:
|
| https://www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2021/11/10/22773073
| /vi...
| jjoonathan wrote:
| > from $10.44 to $19.89.
|
| Yeah, I thought $3000 sounded silly, and my only mistake
| was that I thought it was one order of magnitude silly
| when in fact it was two orders of magnitude silly.
| cgriswald wrote:
| No, that's completely wrong.
|
| That number is specifically for their SmartCast
| subscriber service. It's not clear what the rate is, but
| they subsequently talk about Roku making $40/mo; so it's
| possible that's the monthly rate. Assuming it is monthly,
| a television lasts for five years, and that is their
| _only_ other source of revenue from the televisions, that
| 's ~$1200.
|
| The telling part of the article:
|
| > ...[Vizio's] Platform Plus segment that includes
| advertising and viewer data had a gross profit of $57.3
| million. That's more than twice the amount of profit it
| made selling devices like TVs, which was $25.6 million,
| despite those device sales pulling in considerably more
| revenue.
| jonnycoder wrote:
| Most of the ad money comes from WatchFree Plus app on the
| tv.
|
| "Vizio execs said 77 percent of that money comes directly
| from advertising, like the kind that runs on its
| WatchFree Plus package of streaming channels, a group
| that recently expanded with content targeting. The next
| biggest contributor is the money it makes selling Inscape
| data about what people are watching."
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > That wouldn't explain the delay
|
| That and expected maximum market size (or, more
| precisely, expected shape of the demand curve) _do_ , I
| thimk, explain the delay, and higher price even before
| considering subsidy from advertising/data revenue,
| because there are fewer units to amortize fixed per-
| design production line costs across.
|
| 4K OLED _laptops_ are more available and at a much
| smaller premium, perhaps because people buy a lot more
| laptops than desktop and larger monitors.
| caymanjim wrote:
| TV display quality is dogshit compared to monitors. Even
| cheap low-end monitors tend to have better displays. They
| aren't the same panels at all.
| [deleted]
| jjoonathan wrote:
| Nope. I'm using an OLED TV as a monitor on my main PC, and
| it kicks the pants off any monitor I've ever used before,
| including the 2021 MBP monitor I'm typing this on right
| now.
| onemoresoop wrote:
| Which one are you using if you don't mind me asking?
| jjoonathan wrote:
| LG C1. I have to turn it off and on with a remote, take
| the usual OLED precautions, and tolerate its "smart"
| nonsense, but the color is gorgeous and the contrast is
| magical.
| KptMarchewa wrote:
| Does autodimming work decently on C1? It's really
| bothering me when I try to use my CX as a monitor.
| jjoonathan wrote:
| Agreed, auto-dimming is rough. I turned it off. 60%
| constant brightness for work, uncapped HDR mode for play.
| 14 wrote:
| Any worries of "burn in"? I read the risk of using one as
| a monitor is that with a computer there is often static
| images like your task bar. Those can burn into the screen
| permanently where as if it is just tv the image often
| changes. Shows like news often have a bar at the bottom
| and was warned those too can cause burn in. Curious what
| your experience has been? Thanks
| jjoonathan wrote:
| Yes, OLED care is a concern, and I take the usual
| precautions: no fixed menubars, no tiling WM, rotating
| desktop wallpapers, and reduced brightness (which isn't a
| compromise -- anything above 80% makes light-mode content
| uncomfortable, and auto HDR raises the limit for actual
| HDR content).
|
| Even if I were not taking these steps and generally
| abusing the monitor, I wouldn't expect to see burn-in
| yet, so I can't really speak to how the situation will
| develop.
| uyt wrote:
| I used to have the Acer B326HK (32 inch 4k) which is
| marketed as a monitor and it still had really bad burn in
| jjoonathan wrote:
| Isn't that IPS though?
| intrasight wrote:
| same question
| halfmatthalfcat wrote:
| It's amazing how much more expensive those are than traditional
| TVs, non-starter even.
| danudey wrote:
| Economies of scale, and subsidies. TVs that ship with Netflix
| buttons on the remote, Prime Video app, and built-in crappy
| ads all over the place are being subsidized by those
| companies.
|
| Meanwhile, no one is buying non-smart TVs, so lower
| quantities are more expensive.
|
| (Or they know that non-smart TVs are a niche product that
| they can charge more for.)
| acchow wrote:
| Netflix is paying to have the button on the remote? I
| actually thought it would be the other way around.
| Wistar wrote:
| Here's a nice NEC 220" display. Helpfully, BH offers monthly
| payments.
|
| https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1533261-REG/nec_led_f.
| ..
| mjcohen wrote:
| $317,999.00 $13250/mo. suggested payments with 24 Mos.
| Promo Financing* Learn More Important Notice This item is
| noncancelable and nonreturnable.
| Wistar wrote:
| Well... it is 18ft diagonally. Of course, you need a
| place capable of housing such a thing.
| bin_bash wrote:
| A stadium?
| salamandersauce wrote:
| You can get OTA tuners for incredibly cheap. Like $30 for a
| basic one. These come with the bonus of allowing you to plug in
| a USB HDD and record live TV. For a little more you can get a
| HDHomeRun or Tablo and have a network connected tuner so you
| can stream live TV to tablets or phones and streaming boxes
| like the FireTV.
|
| Powered bookshelf speakers are also an alternative to
| soundbars.
|
| I personally use a monitor as a TV. One con is that some
| devices like the Fire Stick don't send HDMI display off signals
| but instead a black screen in sleep mode which wakes the
| monitor and keeps it on. You need a smart switch to easily turn
| it off.
| mikepurvis wrote:
| I would assume most setups leveraging a monitor as the
| display would also be going through an AVR and that should
| take care of this kind of thing?
| salamandersauce wrote:
| Sound bars and powered speakers are also an option and
| don't require an AVR but also typically don't offer HDMI/AV
| pass-through at least on the cheaper side. Going the AVR
| route adds even more cost and more space as a decent sound
| bar or powered speaker set costs less then even a low-end
| AVR. I went the monitor route as I just don't have room for
| both a desktop PC setup and a TV. I do have an HDMI switch
| with audio extractor but that also picks up on the Fire TV
| stick and auto switches to it. TBH it's just a design flaw
| with the Fire TV and I really wish Amazon would fix it but
| I bet it saves them 7 cents or something to do it this way.
| mikepurvis wrote:
| That's good to know. I've been through a few units
| (Denon, Pioneer, Onkyo) and they really feel like the
| weakest link in my setup, with fussy menus and strange
| failure modes involving cryptic error codes-- the Denon
| in particular would go into a fault state that was
| _probably_ a thermal problem but might also have been a
| voltage regulation issue.
|
| It's definitely overkill given that I'm only driving
| stereo speakers anyway, so maybe next time I have issues
| I'll go this direction.
| guidedlight wrote:
| Modern Sony Bravia TV's ask whether you want a "Basic TV" or a
| "Google TV" when you first set them up.
| KennyBlanken wrote:
| It's Google TV either way. The setting is for whether you want
| to neuter any sort of functionality involving the network or
| not.
|
| That doesn't mean the TV isn't still reporting your viewing
| habits back to them; it's still running Android, still has a
| network connection.
|
| Hilariously, they allow you to go back to "smart" Google TV
| with a click of a button, but going to 'basic' mode requires a
| full reset.
|
| Oh, and they're petulant about you disabling "smart" functions;
| you lose chromecast, even though there's no technical reason
| for it. Probably because it's the only actually useful feature
| people want if they have an external streaming box.
| dangerboysteve wrote:
| why not just leave the tv off the network?
| lvl100 wrote:
| I recently opted for Sony Google TV because at least I can trace
| where my stuff is going with Google. Also it's hard to find a
| capable 4K120Hz devices so you're pretty much stuck with in-
| device apps to get the best quality.
| pedrocr wrote:
| 4K dumb projectors are easy to find. They're not for every room
| but can give you a great home cinema result while still working
| for normal TV and games.
| boardwaalk wrote:
| Projectors are still a fairly poor substitute for a TV in the
| same price range, though. Every time I look at them, I'm not
| happy with the trade offs even if they've been getting better.
| Most recently it was a combination of price, brightness (HDR)
| and framerate (VFR, 120Hz).
| pedrocr wrote:
| It depends on what you value. For us it was image size, low
| noise and good color to get a great cinema experience at
| night. We couldn't get the same at any reasonable TV price
| and we also hid it really well so that when it's not on it's
| just an empty white wall and the room doesn't seem to have a
| TV at all. It's definitely a tradeoff and not for everyone.
| lpapez wrote:
| Cant you just get a smart TV and never connect it to wifi?
| MerelyMortal wrote:
| Can you trust it?
| jancsika wrote:
| How about the shitty Sceptre specials from Walmart?
|
| https://www.walmart.com/ip/Sceptre-50-Class-4K-UHD-LED-TV-U5...
|
| > Let's you view your pictures as a slideshow or listen to your
| favorite music via the USB port. Just insert your flash drive
| into the USB port for the ultimate entertainment.
|
| I'm pretty sure this is the one I have. But even if it's not, the
| fact they're advertising playing music via USB flash as the
| "ultimate entertainment" tells me this is _not_ a smart tv.
|
| Enjoy.
|
| Edit: Oops, looks like it's out of stock. But you can probably
| find others if you just look for the shittiest 4k you can find.
| (You'll probably need to wait a bit as black friday probably
| annihilated the stock in this class of dumb tv.)
| [deleted]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-29 23:01 UTC)