[HN Gopher] Dumb TVs deserve a comeback
___________________________________________________________________
Dumb TVs deserve a comeback
Author : znpy
Score : 60 points
Date : 2024-12-15 19:29 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.makeuseof.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.makeuseof.com)
| ghjfrdghibt wrote:
| I WISH they would make a comeback. Smart TVs are the single worse
| piece of (shit) consumer electronics on the market. Any time you
| take anything electronic and connect it to the internet you're
| asking for trouble. Throw an operating system in it controlled by
| parasitic advertisers and that's where we are today.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| Thinking about it too much makes me furious. We have
| supercomputers in our pockets and TVs but it all spies on us
| and nobody gives a shit because everything is cheap. It's a
| Faustian deal that sucks! Nobody would actually choose this yet
| here we are.
| g-b-r wrote:
| It's not that nobody gives a shit, it's that the alternatives
| have been taken away
| bdangubic wrote:
| what about laptops? can we connect them to the internet?
| tablets? phones? :)
| ghjfrdghibt wrote:
| I don't get your point. Laptops, tablets, and phones are made
| for that.
| RGamma wrote:
| I only ever use mine as monitor ("PC mode") and have a
| different device drive it. It would take some major market
| dysfunction to lose large monitors with this feature.
| laidoffamazon wrote:
| Let me defend smart TVs for a second
|
| I own a smart TV that was at least partially subsidized by the
| mess of ads I see on the home page. But when manufacturers make a
| high quality panel, I'm not really convinced there's a market for
| dumb TVs - people just use their own box if they want, and the
| marginal cost of the electronics required may even be negative
| now that Android/Google TV can also handle TV settings while
| providing a new revenue source.
| blueflow wrote:
| Ads come with the spyware to target them.
| ghjfrdghibt wrote:
| This sounds like Stockholm syndrome.
|
| I've an old dumb 1080p Samsung TV. Apart from the panel not
| being up to date everything about it is better than the smart
| version that I bought 8 years later.
| nemomarx wrote:
| the smart TV is probably cheaper, but let me buy some pro grade
| version of the panel without it and vote with my wallet right?
| toast0 wrote:
| I've owned several lcd tvs and several tv boxes. A big problem
| with smart tvs is the difference in lifetimes between the two.
|
| Tv boxes have a maybe 3 year lifetime before they get kind of
| junky. Lcd tvs go at least 5 years, sometimes much longer.
|
| If you have a smart tv, around year 3 or 4, you're going to
| want to hook up a (new) tv box, but you're still going to have
| to fight the built in OS anyway, at least a bit.
|
| Economics of ads subsidizing the tv aside, it makes more sense
| to have the tv firmware be focused on the essentials like
| responding to user input quickly and if it has a tuner not
| locking up on poor or malformed signals, and the user can
| choose between the tv box ecosystems they like.
|
| Separately, it'd be nice if the tv box ecosystem got some more
| longevity... Maybe that will happen soon. 4k@60fps with dolby
| vision and/or hdr10+ seems like a likely plateau of streaming
| video for a while... if they'd start regularly putting in 1g
| ethernet to handle peak bandwidth of 4k BluRay rips, things
| would be pretty good. 8k seems unlikely to get mainstream
| adoption (but I could be wrong)
| Terr_ wrote:
| I would love to see this happen. In some ways, it's a story of
| the wrong system boundaries and modules. A mismatch between
| component age, manufacturer expertise, and how long software
| needs to keep being updated or patched.
|
| You can see a similar phenomenon in car media systems, where the
| solution is an _interface_ (e.g. Android Auto or Apple CarPlay)
| allowing the vehicle to be "dumber" but more reliable and robust
| over time. [0]
|
| Televisions can be rescued even more easily, since we _already_
| have standards and conventions from the past to use.
|
| [0] For folks unfamiliar with those systems, basically the car's
| touch-screen becomes an extension of your phone.
| baxtr wrote:
| Please anyone in hardware: come up with a TV brand that features
| no built-in internet connectivity whatsoever.
|
| We'd all buy it in a blink.
|
| It's also kinda urgent. I'm clinging onto my 2007 TV because I
| don't want a smart TV. Not sure how long it will last.
| teh_infallible wrote:
| Get a short throw projector. You can plug anything into it.
| It's the perfect "dumb" screen.
| OrvalWintermute wrote:
| I would totally buy it.
| CharlesW wrote:
| There are always many hundreds of options for "dumb TVs", the
| secret being that they're called "commercial
| [TVs|monitors|displays]". For example, B&H lists 2,105 so-
| called commercial displays as I type this (which you can easily
| filter to your specifications).
|
| https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?q=commercial%20display
| crtasm wrote:
| I thought their size filter was missing the . but you really
| can get a 589" display there.
|
| Good to see these have added multiple HDMI ports since I last
| looked.
| Animats wrote:
| Here's a dumb 43 inch screen. It's sold as a gamer monitor.
| It's a UHD TV display with HDMI in and no onboard smarts.[1]
|
| Here's another Samsung dumb screen, at 55 inches.[2] This is
| supposed to be for digital signage, but it's really a UHD
| monitor with HDMI in. But the next size up has "Alexa built
| in".
|
| Sceptre, which mostly supplies Walmart, has a whole line of
| dumb TVs, including some big ones.[3] They're a little company
| in City of Industry, CA, which seems to have found their niche
| in dumb TVs.
|
| There are lots of "digital signage" displays available. They're
| usually very bright, reasonably rugged, OK for 24/7 operation,
| immune to burn-in (they may spend their whole working life
| displaying mostly the same fast food menu), but not that good
|
| [1]
| https://www.bestbuy.com/site/samsung-m70d-43-led-4k-uhd-60hz...
|
| [2] https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08651PB1J
|
| [3] https://www.sceptre.com/TV/4K-UHD-TV/U750CV-
| UMRD-75-4K-UHD-T...
| seydor wrote:
| Tv content is actually dumb nowadays it makes you dumb, not the
| tv.
|
| My cheap smart tv has a youtube app and it's all i need
| linker3000 wrote:
| Well, if you are in the UK or some EU countries, Cello has a
| range;
|
| https://celloelectronics.com/shop-televisions/?filter_produc...
| mhandley wrote:
| Unfortunately the best of them is 1080p.
| eximius wrote:
| Who is this article for? I don't disagree with it, but
| manufacturers aren't somehow unaware of any of it. They don't
| want to manufacture dumb TVs. They're the ones _currently_
| manufacturing smart TVs.
|
| Plus, there is the problem that the vast majority of consumers
| want smart TVs due to a combination of subsidized lower price and
| "simplicity" (e.g., they may be worse but they are simpler)
| coin wrote:
| Just don't use any of the smart TV's "smart" functionality. Don't
| even connect it to the Internet or give it your Wi-Fi password.
| ghjfrdghibt wrote:
| Until they come with their own connection embedded, which you
| know is what's going to happen. Just like cars.
| jqpabc123 wrote:
| Just do your homework before purchasing to make sure this is
| possible.
|
| In this vein, I just bought a Hisense QD6 series TV from
| Costco. I run it in "store" mode connected to a PC and it
| serves well as just a big, dumb 4K display.
| lucasoshiro wrote:
| This won't make the "smart" disappear, nor its problems (buggy
| software, bloatware slowing down everything), and you'll still
| need to pay more for it.
| bee_rider wrote:
| It is still creepy to have tech in my home that is trying to
| betray me, even if it isn't successful. Also you never know if
| some well-intentioned person might connect it to wifi.
| wpm wrote:
| That's why you connect it to an IoT network that has no
| internet access.
| bee_rider wrote:
| I don't think that would obviously solve the problem;
| depending on the UI it might still show up as not having an
| internet connection after all.
| sitkack wrote:
| I have a smart TV but drive it externally, if you even
| visit the wifi menu, it will nag you about not being
| connected until it is rebooted. It has never touched the
| network.
| mcbutterbunz wrote:
| Or they start to require internet access before you can use the
| device. Even if it's periodic. Once a month you have to connect
| to the internet to validate your license and agreement, wherein
| it uploads your watch history and downloads new ads.
| mikestew wrote:
| The box will still be warm from the warm of the store I
| bought it from when I take it back for a return. How's that
| thing going to work at my remote cabin?
| jqpabc123 wrote:
| Why dumb TV's won't make a comeback --- price.
|
| Manufacturers make recurring revenue by invading the privacy of
| "dumb" users with their "smart" TVs.
|
| It's probably only a matter of time before TV manufacturers
| establish their own ad networks.
|
| Why? Because they can. They have the ability to fully control
| *their* "smart TV" (that you paid for) and show you ads that they
| control --- independent of any programming.
|
| https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/12/tcl-tvs-will-use-fil...
| jszymborski wrote:
| Regulation could always fix this.
| jqpabc123 wrote:
| Like regulation has fixed privacy invasion on the internet?
| mcbutterbunz wrote:
| Regulation can prevent the fix as well.
| bdangubic wrote:
| if you write "regulation" as solution to any problem you are
| guaranteed that problem will not only not be solved but will
| be magnitudes of order worse (now it is also a political
| campaign issue :) like talking about shower heads fridges
| during recent one...)
| g-b-r wrote:
| Yeah, because "market" as solution to any problem has
| definitely better outcomes
| bluGill wrote:
| There will always beeoptions without. Some tvs are used in
| industrial settings to show safety information. If someone dies
| and the tv was, showing ads instead of safety information there
| will be big lawsuits.
| g-b-r wrote:
| Yeah, they just cost a ten times more
| lazycouchpotato wrote:
| It's why Walmart purchased Vizio for $2.3 billion.
|
| https://www.axios.com/2024/02/26/why-walmart-bought-vizio
| DoingIsLearning wrote:
| > Why dumb TV's won't make a comeback --- price.
|
| I'm cool with it provided I can use it as a very high quality
| HDMI display. Then I just got a nicely discounted product.
|
| My worry is if they demand connectivity in order to work as a
| display. Or worse come with some kind of LTE transceiver to
| phone home then we're in trouble.
| linsomniac wrote:
| Reminder: They make them, they tend to be "monitors", "digital
| signage" or "commercial". You do have to pay a premium for them,
| for a variety of reasons.
|
| There may be other options, I have a friend that 6-10 years ago
| got a TV, then opened it up and removed a USB stick that
| implemented all the smart features.
| toast0 wrote:
| Digital signage have embedded computers now too. It's only a
| matter of time before they have mandatory analytics and
| advertising.
| Ekaros wrote:
| Wouldn't that be pretty good value add? A mic feeding data to
| some AI model and then camera to track how many people use it
| or stop and watch.
| Workaccount2 wrote:
| > You do have to pay a premium for them, for a variety of
| reasons.
|
| It's not that you pay a premium for the bullshit-free version,
| but rather that you get a discount for buying the bullshit-
| packed version.
| lykahb wrote:
| Both statements are true. As a baseline it's good to consider
| the price of the regular TV's before they got smart.
| bigfatkitten wrote:
| You do also pay a premium because they use use panels
| designed for 24/7 operation, sunlight readability etc.
| linsomniac wrote:
| I've been fairly happy with the Google/Android TV versions, but
| the primary feature I bought them for was the ability to pair
| bluetooth headphones with them. Bluetooth seems to be hard to
| get, but all Google TVs support them.
|
| The lower end TVs can barely do the Google TV features, often
| being flaky. The higher end ones tend to implement the features
| much better, though not perfectly. My TLC 6xxx series is much
| less flaky than the 5xxx series, but I do sometimes have to
| reboot it at the beginning of every watching session, depending
| on the app.
| lucasoshiro wrote:
| When TVs started to be computers, they started to have computer
| problems: bugs, outdated software, freezing, and so on. Recently
| I needed to buy a smart TV to replace a 2015 one that was OK as a
| TV, but its operating system (...) was so outdated that it
| couldn't open the apps anymore.
|
| This is easy: when we buy a smart TV we buy a TV plus a computer.
| I really would like pay less only for the TV, using the
| "smartness" of other "computer" (Chromecast, Apple TV, Fire
| Stick, videogame console, an old computer, etc). If the TV or the
| computer stopped working, it's just a matter of buying _only_ it.
| 1over137 wrote:
| Hell, I'd be willing to pay _more_ for a dumb TV!
| jsheard wrote:
| If you don't mind paying more, they do exist in the form of
| digital signage / commercial displays. They're usually either
| completely dumb or support "smart" features via standardized
| pluggable modules, which can host a normal x86 computer,
| amongst other options.
| MostlyStable wrote:
| They probably meant "a reasonable amount more". My
| understanding is that the digital signage/commercial
| displays are _substantially_ more while often being lacking
| in features that are important to most consumers. I 'd
| probably _also_ be willing to pay a little bit more, but
| not very much since, at the moment, unless you are _really_
| paranoid about your privacy /spying to the point that you
| don't want the TV to even have the connectivity hardware
| _at all_ , most of these issues can be solved by just never
| connecting it to the internet, having it default to
| immediately selecting on of your inputs (I don't know how
| common this feature is by my TCL can do it), and using
| whatever device you choose on that input.
| jqpabc123 wrote:
| Yes, I used to feel the same.
|
| Until I did some research and found out there is no need to
| go to this extreme --- at least not yet.
|
| It is possible to buy a "smart" TV at a price subsidized by
| the privacy of "dumb" users and still run it in a "dumb"
| display mode.
|
| With the TV I just bought, this is called "store" mode. I use
| it as a big, dumb 4K display connected to "smarts" that I can
| control.
| starkparker wrote:
| I wouldn't mind smart TVs if they were as serviceable as most
| computers. There was that Sharp M551 panel that had a Pi CM4 as
| the onboard CPU and that seems ideal: a modular, replaceable,
| upgradable board.
|
| The fact that this both exists and is utterly unrealistic in
| the consumer space just makes it more infuriating.
| xethos wrote:
| Why not just... do the thing you want? IE, the solution you
| alluded to in your comment: have a dumb [which here exclusively
| means not internet-connected] TV with an externally "smart"
| device like a Chromecast?
|
| This is essentially your own preferred solution to a problem
| that just cost you several hundred dollars when you "had" to
| replace your 2015 TV
| thom wrote:
| What's my best bet if I just want a normal computer monitor
| hooked up to some sort of sound bar, and I'm happy using
| something like a Chromecast for all TV needs? Or are there
| monitors with good enough speakers now?
| bluGill wrote:
| get a seperate usb to audio adaptor and speakers. you can do
| better than a soundbar.
| teh_infallible wrote:
| I use a short throw projector with an Apple TV. There's also a
| little device called Micca which you can use to play video
| files you've downloaded.
| causality0 wrote:
| So what's the best solution? Suppose you have a dumb TV, or a
| smart TV locked to a single input. It seems like there are big
| downsides to most approaches. Rokus and Fire sticks have the same
| downsides as smart tvs, with ads and laggy interfaces. I
| currently have one output from my desktop hooked to my TV, but
| the UI leaves a lot to be desired and of course now I have two
| input devices to deal with, one for the TV and one for the PC.
| What's the best way to do it?
| tomwheeler wrote:
| I use an HDMI switch and it works fine for me.
| maxglute wrote:
| Find a decent media remote you can single hand with built in
| keyboard, i.e. lenovo n5902 (discontinued) - a bunch of cheap
| airmouse works pretty well. Setup macro for browser, boomarkts
| , microphone use etc. Adjust desktop UI scaling.
| timClicks wrote:
| My workaround is to use a computer monitor connected to a Linux
| box that I actually control.
| mikenew wrote:
| I bought my 65" TV for $299 recently, including shipping to my
| doorstep. Clearly all the bullshit that's baked into it is
| subsidizing the price by a lot.
|
| I just never gave it network access and I use it like a dumb TV
| with a streaming box, so I get to benefit from a price subsidized
| by the the other 98% of the population who are getting exploited.
| The whole thing is kinda gross.
|
| It's like there's this enshittification tipping point that you
| can't come back from. Realistically, who is going to buy a dumb
| TV at a much higher cost? People who are already savvy enough to
| get around a smart TV? People who aren't? I don't see it working.
| ghjfrdghibt wrote:
| I worry about how long it'll be before the manufacturers either
| make the TV demand an internet connection, or simply build one
| right into it.
| robg wrote:
| Just turn off the privacy invading features. LG's options are
| pretty great, I've seen little bloat, and get the native apps for
| streaming services just fine.
| scosman wrote:
| Just don't connect it to wifi, connect an Apple TV or similar to
| hdmi 1, and move on.
|
| I'd love a dumb TV, but if you don't let them online and don't
| use built in software it is close enough.
| verisimi wrote:
| It's almost like there an agenda to allow for corporate and
| government control of all technology.
| RevertBusload wrote:
| I run airbnbs and would love a low cost dumb TV since I just
| equip each one with a apple TV box anyways
| maltalex wrote:
| Some dumb TVs still exist, only they're called computer monitors
| now. And they're a lot more expensive than TVs because TV-sized
| monitors are a niche product, and because manufacturers don't
| subsidize them in exchange for your data.
| mandmandam wrote:
| There used to always be some smug commenter in these threads
| pointing out that life's better without any TV at all... Guess
| it's my turn.
|
| Really - why bother? Can't you feel how it dominates the room?
| Don't you resent being constantly programmed by a handful of
| giant companies hiding behind different brands? Not to mention
| the ads shouting muck into your brain.
|
| The main benefit of a giant HD TV - and please correct me if I'm
| wrong on this - is that the bigger and brighter the TV, the
| heavier the mental domination. After a long day/week working, you
| get to subside into the minima of mental and physical effort.
|
| Relaxation and escapism _are_ valid human pastimes, and we have
| 'choice' over what to watch to a higher degree than ever
| before... And it's a golden age for TV in many ways. But I can't
| help but feel that TV's hooks into people's minds are _also_ more
| cunning than ever.
|
| There isn't a nice way to say this, but... I can't help but
| notice that people who watch cable news, for example, become
| quite predictably wrong on important topics, and get very worked
| up over whatever the weekly outrage bait is. It's a toxic brew..
|
| And the same goes for all kinds of other 'programming', from
| reality shows to celeb gossip to sportsball. Doesn't it ever feel
| like you're being... Subdued? Or even herded?
|
| /smug
| mikestew wrote:
| _Area Man Constantly Mentioning He Doesn 't Own A Television_
|
| https://theonion.com/area-man-constantly-mentioning-he-doesn...
| AndrewDucker wrote:
| I have a Samsung smart TV.
|
| I removed all of the broadcast channels and it's now an excellent
| TV. The apps just work, it doesn't show me ads for anything, and
| I'm perfectly happy with it.
|
| Am I just lucky to have found a good manufacturer?
| init2null wrote:
| My Hisense with Google TV has proven to be decent. I never
| connected the TV to the internet and went with an external
| Apple TV instead. It always starts on the last video input. I
| was able to refuse all the EULAs and was still left with all
| the visual niceties that I don't use like upscaling and motion
| smoothing.
| Brian_K_White wrote:
| cars too
| poisonborz wrote:
| However important, this is a niche problem. Most users will not
| be able use a dumb TV. Everything becomes more clunky for them.
| Instead of fighting the uphill battle of making legislation, more
| people should be made aware of the issue and the - not that
| complicated - ways to counter this.
|
| Pihole, not giving internet (only local network) / and/or only
| use a trusted device via HDMI to display content.
| YaBa wrote:
| LG owner here. I won't connect it to wifi, lan or BT. Once in a
| while nags me to do it, I might do it eventually, in it's own
| VLAN and without Internet access.
|
| Here in Portugal all ISP provide a smart box, most of them also
| have common services like Netflix and so on, no need to any
| "smart" feature from the TV itself. Completly useless.
| DoingIsLearning wrote:
| > Completly useless.
|
| Not enterely useless, since you payed a lower retail price on
| it based on manufacturers projected revenue from ads.
|
| The best way to kill the business model is to buy them for the
| high end display tech but then keep them offline.
| sitkack wrote:
| PSA, HDMI carries ethernet, so you depending on the device you
| connect your TV to, it might get internet access without your
| knowledge.
| mikestew wrote:
| This come up every time, and yet I have never seen an actual
| demonstration or example of this. HDMI _can_ carry Ethernet,
| sure, but you honestly think an (for example) Apple TV is going
| to let arbitrary devices use its network connection? You gotta
| show that it even implements the spec first.
| ortusdux wrote:
| I just want a somewhat trustworthy group to develop a DUMB
| certification. I would absolutely pay more for a certified DUMB
| TV.
|
| https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/10/22773073/vizio-acr-adver...
| medhir wrote:
| "Smart TVs are, unfortunately, more like smartphones: designed
| for frequent replacement."
|
| Except unlike smartphones, these TVs are not built with high-end
| components due to the razor-thin margins that have to be
| optimized for. So you end up with underpowered hardware and janky
| software that benefits only these companies through ad revenue.
| pfych wrote:
| I bought a 4K 240Hz OLED gaming monitor a week ago and it
| connects to the internet & has streaming services on it. By
| default, it has annoying popups on startup that can't be turned
| off in the default menus[^1]. It's extremely frustrating, but it
| is on me for not doing my research and just getting the highest-
| rated monitor across review sites...
|
| [^1]: https://pfy.ch/programming/disable-samsung-game-bar.html
| hingusdingus wrote:
| If you want the closest thing to a dumb tv search for the
| hospitality version of a specific television brand.
| smitty1e wrote:
| Can we generalize this point to the idea that the user might want
| to manage the complexity level of products?
|
| It's great to have the fully-integrated television that can be
| controlled by a phone app. This may seem great, until the spyware
| implications come to mind.
|
| In a similar vein, I like all of the gadgetry on the recent car
| purchase. The sensors are nice; we can all back in an "park
| tactically" like a pro with these rear cameras.
|
| But part of me longs for a purely analog chariot with 1960s-level
| tech that, sure, requires more skill on my part to operate, but
| I'm OK with that.
|
| This invites the question: if there were a market for a brand
| new, but de-gunked car, could it even be legally built? Would
| there be a market? Why not?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-12-15 23:01 UTC)