[HN Gopher] Why the last major U.S. television set maker, Zenith...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Why the last major U.S. television set maker, Zenith, finally gave
       up (1988)
        
       Author : rbanffy
       Score  : 39 points
       Date   : 2022-09-19 11:13 UTC (11 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (spectrum.ieee.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (spectrum.ieee.org)
        
       | hvs wrote:
       | Growing up in the early-80's, my parents were diehard Zenith
       | customers. "They make the best TVs" was something I heard often
       | from them. I was just a young boy, but a few things stand out in
       | retrospect:
       | 
       | 1) Zenith was likely a very popular brand in their Boomer
       | households in the 50's and 60's.
       | 
       | 2) This was an age when there were still "Television Repair
       | Stores" where you would take your TV when it failed for some
       | reason. These probably leaned towards US-built brands.
       | 
       | 3) There was probably not a small amount of "Made in the U.S.A."
       | boosterism by my parents going on. The 80's was a decade when
       | "fear of Japan taking over everything" was very common.
        
         | jimbokun wrote:
         | > The 80's was a decade when "fear of Japan taking over
         | everything" was very common.
         | 
         | What an outdated, parochial view of the world.
         | 
         | Everyone knows China's taking over everything.
        
           | tuatoru wrote:
           | And in the '40s, it'll be "India's taking over everything".
           | And in the '60s, "Nigeria's taking over everything".
           | 
           | Demographics is the least cloudy crystal ball.
        
         | Mezzie wrote:
         | Point 2 is interesting, because one of the reason that foreign-
         | manufactured TVs came to prominence is because they were cheap
         | enough + reliable enough that TVs could functionally be a
         | disposable good. Another is that right during the late
         | 80s/early 90s is when TVs started showing substantial
         | improvements every ~5 years, whereas things were more static in
         | the early 80s and before, which meant that instead of repairing
         | an old TV, you could buy a new one that was substantially
         | better than your old one.
         | 
         | Basically the TV market turned from being similar to the car
         | market to the computer market.
         | 
         | Interestingly, I think we may be heading back in some ways, as
         | the improvements/"upgrades" on TVs are slowing down, and
         | there's also a growing anti-waste movement + a squeezed
         | poor/lower class. I wouldn't be surprised if TV repair makes a
         | comeback.
         | 
         | (My grandfather repaired TVs.)
        
           | hedora wrote:
           | Old TV's had consumable, user-replacible components (the
           | tubes), and were unreliable due to being hand wired.
           | 
           | I don't see the industry moving back to either of those
           | things.
           | 
           | These days, the repairable parts are likely to out last the
           | display anyway. I don't see TV repair becoming common again.
           | I could imagine them encouraging recycling (and local
           | shopping) by adding a "core" fee like they do for lead acid
           | batteries.
        
             | robotnikman wrote:
             | I can see the mainboard being replaceable. The SoC's become
             | slow after a few years on smart TV's and makes using them a
             | pain because of how sluggish and unresponsive the UI
             | becomes
             | 
             | That's wishful thinking though, I don't see this happening.
        
             | smackeyacky wrote:
             | You'd think TV repair was dead, but we have a local TV
             | repair guy who has a few lucrative warranty repair
             | contracts with some of the bigger brand names.
             | 
             | He usually doesn't do much other than replace fried main
             | boards, but occasionally will do a proper repair (where
             | possible) on out of warranty TVs. That work I can't see how
             | he makes money out of it, but he does it anyway.
             | 
             | I'm glad he is still going, he is a dab hand at fixing
             | vintage hi-fi which is subsidised by his TV warranty work.
        
             | kmbfjr wrote:
             | Their replacements were far less reliable because the ICs
             | were socketed, not soldered onto the board. My old man
             | regularly opened the back of his 1980 RCA to "crack
             | knuckles"...firmly seat ICs that had lifted up from the DIP
             | sockets.
             | 
             | The unreliable nature of tube NTSC color TVs was entirely
             | the fault of tubes being pushed to their limits and the
             | need for 600 volt plate supplies.
        
               | hakfoo wrote:
               | I thought that there was some definite economization-to-
               | death in the later years.
               | 
               | From like 1995 until their demise, was there any
               | meaningful enhancement to NTSC tube TVs? There were minor
               | enhancements in on-screen display, flatter glass fronts,
               | and maybe the addition of S-video inputs, but there
               | wasn't really much that could be leveraged as a "premium"
               | set that could demand a higher margin except for _maybe_
               | a Sony Trinitron. There was no meaningful  "Replace your
               | 720-line set with a 1080- or 2160-line one" sales pitch.
               | The obvious way to compete is to go full Madman Muntz and
               | cut every possible corner.
               | 
               | I recall in the early 2000s a fairly newish (at the time)
               | RCA 27" tube release the magic smoke, and the discussion
               | on sci.electronics.repair was very much "oh, that chassis
               | design is all but guaranteed to fail catastropically when
               | it does fail, may as well buy a new set". I don't doubt
               | that group had several thousand man-years of repair
               | experience, and they had very little positive to say for
               | any set made after the Carter administration.
        
             | jmbwell wrote:
             | Yeah, inside the enclosure of a modern TV is an LCD panel
             | connected to a board the size of a raspberry pi that holds
             | a SOC and some input connectors. There just isn't anything
             | to be repaired. The minimum unit of replacement is the
             | entire unit.
        
               | vel0city wrote:
               | It kind of depends on the failure modes. There was a wave
               | of Samsung TVs which were a big victim of bad capacitors
               | at the time. Replacing <$1 worth of caps would often
               | salvage the TV.
               | 
               | Also, a number of TVs these days fail because of poor
               | phosphor coatings on the light strips causing color
               | issues and uneven brightness. The stuff literally starts
               | falling apart inside the TV. A quick clean and
               | replacement light arrays ( often <$75) will then refresh
               | the TV, making it like new again for at least several
               | more years. Hopefully the replacement light arrays will
               | last longer.
               | 
               | Sometimes the power supply, core logic, and inputs will
               | be on separate boards. This means if an input connector
               | gets physically broken it may be possible to replace just
               | the board for the inputs instead of having to replace the
               | entire board. Even then, assuming you can find it the
               | board itself can be significantly cheaper than the entire
               | TV. YMMV on parts availability though.
        
               | nyanpasu64 wrote:
               | Hmm, my family once replaced our LG 1080p TV's mainboard
               | after the HDMI ports failed, then the TV stopped powering
               | on past the splash screen at all. The built-in content
               | apps (the early days of smart TVs before they turned into
               | a surveillance capitalism hellscape) are dead, and 1080p
               | non-HDR is obsolete for pixel-peepers, but for our
               | limited use, the screen still works just fine.
        
           | MomoXenosaga wrote:
           | What changed is that TVs are no longer primarily being used
           | to watch broadcast television.
           | 
           | Nowadays a television is used to watch Netflix and to play
           | videogames on.
        
           | autoexec wrote:
           | It's not that TVs are so cheap that they are disposable, but
           | rather that repairs are so expensive that you might as well
           | just replace the whole thing. Even when all you'd need are
           | some inexpensive parts the cost of parts + service just to
           | get am extra year or two out of a TV before something else
           | fails (as they are designed to do) is less attractive than
           | just replacing the device.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | dredmorbius wrote:
       | It took some close reading of the article to determine that this
       | account is from 1988. I'd thought Zenith had long since ... met
       | its nadir.
       | 
       | As it turns out, the company still exists, somewhat, as a
       | subsidiary of Korean-based LG Electronics, according to
       | Wikipedia:
       | 
       | <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zenith_Electronics>
        
         | Spooky23 wrote:
         | Even weirder, a few years ago Dell was selling Zenith co-
         | branded thin clients.
         | 
         | "Dell Wyse Zenith Zero COOX Thin Client"
         | 
         | https://www.ebay.com/itm/162817003918?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid...
        
           | vidanay wrote:
           | That's a double zombie. Wyse mainframe terminals were popular
           | in the 80's.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dell_Wyse#History
        
             | neilv wrote:
             | The WY-50 and similar models were also popular for Unix
             | systems and microcomputers.
             | 
             | The screen looked great, IIRC they could do smooth scroll,
             | and they were overall kinda stylish. (Though today in a
             | vintage terminal I'd prefer the command set to be ANSI
             | X3.64 or VT-102. Not Wyse, nor Televideo, nor something
             | else.)
        
               | rbanffy wrote:
               | IIRC, some of the WYSE terminals can do Tektronix
               | graphics. AFAIK only DEC ones do ReGIS. Also, oddly
               | enough, the last two generations of DEC serial terminals
               | (the VT 400 and 500 series) dropped graphics support
               | (they kept the 300 line in production for that).
               | 
               | These machines should be extremely inexpensive to make
               | (an 8-bit microcontroller, 68xx or 8032 and barely enough
               | memory to back the display) back then and the high prices
               | they commanded (and that ended up killing them) were very
               | hard to justify in comparison with a PC.
               | 
               | I miss these machines. Smooth scrolling (speed adjusted
               | to keep up with the backlog) should be a thing in modern
               | terminal windows.
        
               | neilv wrote:
               | Thanks, I didn't know that about Tek graphics in Wyse,
               | nor about DEC dropping ReGIS. (I once tried shopping for
               | an original Tek terminal, to play with the graphics, but
               | prohibitively expensive, and also large.)
               | 
               | One attraction of the later DEC terminals is that they
               | can take a PS/2 keyboard, which are somewhat easier to
               | find in good condition, and in compact versions, than the
               | original DEC parts.
        
               | rbanffy wrote:
               | > they can take a PS/2 keyboard
               | 
               | The bright side is that their fonts are somewhat nicer.
               | IIRC, a VT330 has 240 scanlines (even though ReGIS
               | pretends it's 480)
        
             | dredmorbius wrote:
             | Right. Also Unix serial terminals.
             | 
             | There was a brief hint of a resurgence in the late 1990s
             | with "thin-client" craze.
             | 
             | We've got thin clients now, but they're phat, made by Apple
             | and Samsung mostly, and fit in your pocket. For
             | increasingly large values of pocket.
        
               | rbanffy wrote:
               | > but they're phat, made by Apple and Samsung mostly, and
               | fit in your pocket.
               | 
               | Also Chromebooks and those Windows laptops that can't do
               | much more than running Chrome (and swapping to eMMC).
        
               | jerf wrote:
               | Reminds me of RISC vs. CISC. Who won? Yes.
               | 
               | Thin client or thick client? Yes.
        
             | aidenn0 wrote:
             | My first IBM compatible was an AT class WYSE with passive
             | main board.
             | 
             | It was a decommissioned CAD machine so it has that high
             | resolution Hercules monochrome display.
        
           | MisterTea wrote:
           | This is just some weird keyword spam the seller has added. I
           | have one of those and there is no Xenith, Zenith, Zero or
           | COOX branding on them, Just Wyse. I ran it as a light ssh
           | server with an external USB disk for extra storage. Upgraded
           | the internal 44pin ATA flash disk to 8GB and it ran Debian.
        
         | tablespoon wrote:
         | > It took some close reading of the article to determine that
         | this account is from 1988. I'd thought Zenith had long since
         | ... met its nadir.
         | 
         | Your mental ad-blocker may have caused you to ignore the box
         | that explained that:
         | 
         | > This article was first published as "The longest survivor
         | loses its grip." It appeared in the August 1988 issue of IEEE
         | Spectrum. A PDF version is available on IEEE Xplore. The
         | photographs appeared in the original print version.
        
           | dredmorbius wrote:
           | The box uses small type and isn't prominently placed. It is
           | of course what I ultimately did stumble on.
           | 
           | I'd searched the top, bottom, and sidebars (usual places) for
           | a dateline without luck. There _is_ a notation presently
           | reading  "23 h" (I presume "23 hours ago) at the top of the
           | article. This is of course misleading.
           | 
           | There's no other prominent notice that the piece is
           | historical, and very little context within the text itself
           | placing dates, though the notion that CRT masks would be a
           | _current_ (2022) technological development struck me as
           | unlikely. IEEE should do better.
           | 
           | Hiding datelines, amongst other sins (relative times, e.g., X
           | time-units ago, or JS-dependent datelines), are an
           | increasingly common Web annoyance.
           | 
           | Contrast _The Guardian_ who rather refreshingly note
           | prominently when a piece is no longer current. E.g.,
           | <https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/apr/04/offshore-
           | secrets-...>, which notes _in a bold black-on-yellow box at
           | the top of the page_ "This article is more than 9 years old".
           | (From an earlier comment of mine.)
        
           | dpkirchner wrote:
           | That box only appears after you tap the "read more" button
           | that is styled as plain text, at least when viewed in mobile
           | Safari. It's an odd pair of decisions made by the folks at
           | IEEE.
        
         | cf100clunk wrote:
         | I similarly found myself irritated that there was no mention of
         | Zenith's prominent place in the advent of the ATSC digital
         | television system and their subsequent role as technical
         | shepherds of ATSC hardware and software development, which went
         | with all the rest over to LG. My bad for not noticing the 1988
         | timeframe of the article.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-09-19 23:02 UTC)