> Sony dropped playstation support for my 4K monitor in an irreversible software update What kind of support does it need? Isn't it just an HDMI cable?
Nope. It was a specific HDMI codec that was common to early 4k TVs and monitors, and it worked great until they decided it shouldn't anymore. Something about HDMI 1.4 vs HDMI 2.0.
Sounds like something a $20ish active adapter should be able to fix. The box shouldn't care what's on the other end of the cable as long as whatever it is speaks the right version of the protocol.
We have our smart TV just acting as a display for a mini PC via HDMI connection. TV knows nothing about our WiFi so no phoning home.
Have you had fun hunting for and turning off all of the awful picture "enhancing" features yet? and then figuring out how to make it persistent. Modern TVs really seem to ruin the video even though they are perfectly capable of just showing a color adjusted signal, quickly becomes obvious when you plug in a computer.
I don't know to be truthful. The TV remote has loads of buttons bottom the only ones I use are on/off, source to find the HDMI and volume sometimes.
I'd love just to have a dumb monitor of the same size but they're not available. A bonus then would be no need to have a tv licence.
I begrudgingly bought a 'Smart TV' just because I wanted a 4K monitor. But I use it as a dumb monitor and watch app-based content through an Apple TV. At least I'm reasonably sure the Apple TV will be updated for 5-10 years, and is a lot more disposable than a giant TV. My last TV worked great for about 12 years. No way Panasonic would've kept supporting it that long. Honestly, the thing I hate most about smart TVs,…
> ... I wanted a 4K monitor. To all the folks reading at home... I would remind everyone that a TV is not a monitor. I got a relatively inexpensive LG 43in TV to use as a desktop monitor. I've had issues. Beyond the usual "make sure your graphics card actually supports 4K" and such, you also need to take some time to dig through the TV settings when you are using it on a PC. In particular, you definitely want to turn…
TVs can make pretty serviceable monitors. I was using a 4K Samsung as a monitor for quite some time and it worked fine, but the "smart TV" features were definitely annoying.
I begrudgingly bought a 'Smart TV' just because I wanted a 4K monitor. But I use it as a dumb monitor and watch app-based content through an Apple TV. At least I'm reasonably sure the Apple TV will be updated for 5-10 years, and is a lot more disposable than a giant TV. My last TV worked great for about 12 years. No way Panasonic would've kept supporting it that long. Honestly, the thing I hate most about smart TVs,…
Someone on HN recently floated the idea of a company that would make quality, non-smart electronics and appliances that would also be easily serviceable. I wish this existed and would pay significantly more for products like this. To address your question, I think they’re all “smart” now. I ended up getting a low-end Samsung 4K a few months ago and it’s been good so far. It starts up very quickly, maybe 1-2 seconds.…
> I’m just waiting for the day when all TVs require a working internet connection
We're not there yet, but we're on our way. My Philips Ambilight TV pops up a warning every few weeks to remind me that I should connect the TV to the network to benefit from all the smart apps it has bundled. Immensely frustrating.
Smart TVs are the worst. Unrelated to TLS: I work for a video streaming company, and while almost all of desktop/mobile Chromium-based traffic is Chrome v80+ or at least v70+, the smart TVs have webviews based on Chromium v45~55 (most TVs) or ~v60 (cutting edge modern Samsungs), and some older ones (~2016) are even worse, based on a very outdated webkit which is more or less Safari 8.0 - basically hardly better than IE11.
But coming back to TLS again: even if the old devices have an up-to-date root store, they typically have an outdated TLS stack which does not support TLS 1.2 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ and this one is probably even harder to update. And since most of the companies want to drop TLS 1.1- support on their servers soon, this should also doom those outdated devices apart from the root stores issues.
A working device should never stop working because of an expiration of some made-up entity. It is a signs of compete failure in basic system design.
For sure. Add to the fact that in every crypto-library I’ve used, you can’t tell it to ignore the expiration date without also ignoring actually harmful certificates, and this is what you end up with. If devs could just say: yeah we are not ever going to update the certificate, I’d be ok with that. An expired certificate is not inherently untrustworthy, it should just mean that it can’t sign anything. They’d then die of their own accord or be revoked.
Tin foil hat: To me, it smells more like CA’s wanted to make some cash by forcing their customers to buy certificates every so often instead of actually solving the problem and are now being bitten by their own rules.
TIL about Network Error Logging[1], which is having browsers send you reports that your DNS isn't resolving, your load balancer is timing out (HTTP / TCP errors in general), or your TLS certificate is invalid. Basically all types of issues that don't end up in your own application server logs.
Report URI should lead with this (it's not even mentioned on the front page)! It's super useful for every site, I can't think why anyone wouldn't want this. CSP monitoring on the other hand, which seems to be their focus, is a much harder sell, a pain to setup and maintain, and a bit questionable value in my opinion.
I begrudgingly bought a 'Smart TV' just because I wanted a 4K monitor. But I use it as a dumb monitor and watch app-based content through an Apple TV. At least I'm reasonably sure the Apple TV will be updated for 5-10 years, and is a lot more disposable than a giant TV. My last TV worked great for about 12 years. No way Panasonic would've kept supporting it that long. Honestly, the thing I hate most about smart TVs,…
They are all smart, because that is actually cheaper. The manufacturers earn money on selling what your view, ads and selling subscriptions. And they make more on this than it costs to make the TV "smart". There was a Vergecast with the Vizio CEO and he said this is the new business model. Notice that both Samsung and Sony are testing with ads on the homescreen, if those two are willing to do this as premium brands you can be sure everyone else will try as well.
Someone on HN recently floated the idea of a company that would make quality, non-smart electronics and appliances that would also be easily serviceable. I wish this existed and would pay significantly more for products like this. To address your question, I think they’re all “smart” now. I ended up getting a low-end Samsung 4K a few months ago and it’s been good so far. It starts up very quickly, maybe 1-2 seconds.…
> Someone on HN recently floated the idea of a company that would make quality, non-smart electronics and appliances that would also be easily serviceable. I wish this existed and would pay significantly more for products like this. You know, I've wanted something like this as well for a while. I know next to nothing about startups or companies, but I wonder how hard it would be to create a hardware startup around th…
I've thought about this, too. I don't know if you could sustain a company on this idea. The profit margins on consumer tech are miniscule, and if you do it well, you will have very few repeat customers. But I think it could do well as a one-off Kickstarter thing, if you have the knowledge & reputation to back up your claims, or in small, infrequent batches. Buy a bunch of flat panel displays, slap 10 HDMI ports on the back; an optical audio out; and TV tuner; write up some extremely fast and barebones software to switch inputs. Market it to gamers and tech nerds like us. Hell, open-source the software and make it easily upgradable. I dunno. I think it could work.