Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

In Defense of Dumb TVs

frame.work

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 391 posts

Re: In Defense of Dumb TVs

#131

Post by AndrewUnmuted »

lbotos wrote: post #27
the_only_law wrote: post #19

Last time this topic came up, I asked about the idea of a company producing dumb TV. I know a number of “normal” people who don’t particularly care for internet connectivity in anything so I was curious why no one was doing it, at least not with the sizes and resolutions you see on top of the line TVs. Apparently the margins on commodity hardware like TVs are too small. Someone did bring up and interesting idea of ru…

These displays exist now. "Digital Information Displays". Example search here: https://www.cdw.com/Search/computer-monitors-displays/large-... Looks like you can't check out without an account, but I'm sure you could find a shop that would sell you one. Here is a basic one: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1242029-REG/samsung_3... It looks like since I last checked the "smart" is creeping in, but these are desi…

These kinds of displays are not really calibrated to present television and cinema video content. Watching long-form visual media on these kinds of displays could be a frustrating experience - at least, these have been my prior results.

Re: In Defense of Dumb TVs

#133

Post by toast0 »

Arn_Thor wrote: post #58

While I let my smart TV connect to the internet for firmware update reasons (bug fixes), I’m running my entire home network through NextDNS, and before that a PiHole. Not seeing any ads in the UI, and I note some attempted logging traffic is blocked. Before I upgraded to LG last year I had a Samsung and it was trying to ping home constantly. It constituted 80% of outbound requests denied by the PiHole

My smart TV will update the firmware via USB. Other than the fact that it's a 1.5 GB download [1], it's quick and easy.

[1] There's a couple 4k test videos in the system menu, which I guess is some of the hugeness. Seems crazy though.

Re: In Defense of Dumb TVs

#134

Post by sjy »

snuxoll wrote: post #90
ravenstine wrote: post #89

Question: Does a smart teevee need to be hooked up to the internet? I have a dumb teevee so I genuinely don't know. If not, can't one simply not ever give it access to a WiFi network, plug in a Chromecast/Firestick/Xbox, and call it good?

There’s no way of knowing it won’t decide to connect to an unsecured network without asking, and some have done just that.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a working open wireless network (ie. no captive portal) in public, let alone been able to access one from my living room. Are they more common in other countries?

Re: In Defense of Dumb TVs

#135

Post by Spivak »

kstrauser wrote: post #82
Spivak wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just wish you could buy TVs with either Apple TV or Chromecast built in like we have for Android Auto or CarPlay. (some, usually lower end, TVs do have chromecasts but they’re not super common)

I’d never voluntarily buy one. Tech ages much more quickly than TV panels and I don’t want to have to replace my entire TV unit just to upgrade the computing part. Also, you just know that the quality of the computing bits would be tied to the quality of the screen: you wouldn’t be able to get a high-end Apple TV paired with a reasonably priced screen. I think the current combination of dumb or defanged screen plus a…

I agree with you completely but since it seems like we’re already in a future where basically every TV is smart this seems like the least bad option. At least Apple TVs ans Chromecasts get updates for a decent amount of time.

Re: In Defense of Dumb TVs

#136

Post by ttt0 »

throwawayboise wrote: post #33
freedomben wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Soon they'll be coming with their own 5G chips that phone home over cell networks - no wifi access required. Or, like the Amazon Echoes, they'll form a mesh network with your neighbors TVs and other devices and then just use your neighbor's wifi to phone home. It's coming. I'm buying Spectres and I suggest others do the same.

I just don't have a TV.

Modern problems require modern solutions.

Re: In Defense of Dumb TVs

#137

Post by ramraj07 »

WalterBright wrote: post #130
gonehome wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes - I wish Apple would just make a TV. Call it a living room screen or a living room monitor or something. Make it OLED, dumb TV, instant on, Apple TV box plugs in. Separate box with front facing ports that connects to screen with one cable. A remote designed by someone who thought about it for ten seconds (why do modern TVs have dozens of buttons no one ever uses?). This entire market is in desperate need of someo…

> A remote designed by someone who thought about it for ten seconds (why do modern TVs have dozens of buttons no one ever uses?). I'd prefer the remote as an app on my phone. My desk is covered with remotes. Remotes are so 1980s :-/

You'd prefer it until you try using it. When you want to reduce the volume the last thing you need to do is go looking for the app. Now a watch app, that's something.

Re: In Defense of Dumb TVs

#138

Post by alacombe »

drevil-v2 wrote: post #111
alacombe wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How low can you get these ? Even at $5/month, that's $60... is a single user's data worth that much ?

It will be only tracking and surveillance data that the TV uploads to the mothership. It's not like they will let you stream YouTube, Netflix or Prime on their inbuilt 5G connection. So the cost will be minimal and further reduced by the bulk volume that the manufacturer would purchase from the telco. Like how Amazon Kindle comes with a free 3G connection to download your books and upload your reading habits.

You're not answering the question, I'm not asking anything about streaming anything over 5G. I'm asking about the cost of IoT subscription, plus all the logistic to put in place in every country where a company intend to your product.

Re: In Defense of Dumb TVs

#140

Post by jedberg »

WalterBright wrote: post #130
gonehome wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes - I wish Apple would just make a TV. Call it a living room screen or a living room monitor or something. Make it OLED, dumb TV, instant on, Apple TV box plugs in. Separate box with front facing ports that connects to screen with one cable. A remote designed by someone who thought about it for ten seconds (why do modern TVs have dozens of buttons no one ever uses?). This entire market is in desperate need of someo…

> A remote designed by someone who thought about it for ten seconds (why do modern TVs have dozens of buttons no one ever uses?). I'd prefer the remote as an app on my phone. My desk is covered with remotes. Remotes are so 1980s :-/

The AppleTV lets you use your iPhone as a remote. I always reach for the physical remote first. The phone remote is just a huge pain — the physical remote just works.
Post reply on HN