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

141–150 of 391 posts

Re: In Defense of Dumb TVs

#141

Post by yftsui »

smileybarry wrote: post #93
yftsui wrote: post #64

I upgraded my TV to a Sony X950 because I cannot find a decent dumb TV, got really annoyed with the super buggy Google Android TV thing. The cold start time is absurdly high, the basic feature of a TV - built in OTA TV player has a bug that the channel display stays on forever, the Airplay frequently play video with no sound. The only fix is find the 3 level deep restart menu item, because power on / off doesn’t matt…

They're not all bad, at least. I bought a Sony X900H (2020) and I don't have those issues. Heck, it's fast enough that I put my Shield TV away. Also -- you can restart by holding the power button on the remote, then choosing "Restart".

Ahh long press power button works! At least this would make my regular reboot for watching local channels easier.

Re: In Defense of Dumb TVs

#142

Post by systemvoltage »

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 :-/

Physical remote > any app. By far.

Die apps, die. I want dedicated remotes for lights, stereo, curtains, garage door, and TV.

Apps won’t be around – forget 20 years, 5 years if you’re lucky. A company can disappear along with its stupid fucking app.

About the only advantage an app has is a keyboard.

Re: In Defense of Dumb TVs

#144

Post by kccqzy »

culturestate wrote: post #104
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…

> The best available option today is LG and it’s still laden with ads and takes a few seconds to boot up. Sharp offers (most of) their range as dumb TVs[1]. They still take a few seconds to turn on, but not notably longer than a typical computer monitor. 1. https://sg.sharp/products/tv?filters%5B33%3A36%5D=33%3A36

In the U.S., Sharp TVs aren't actually made by Sharp. They are made by Hisense and then rebranded Sharp. The link you posted is the Singapore site.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/sharp-to-americans-you-dont-wan...

Re: In Defense of Dumb TVs

#146

Post by throw2183912983 »

alacombe wrote: post #138
drevil-v2 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They did answer the question:

> 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.

I have no doubt a TV manufacturer selling millions of devices could get any US LTE carrier to sell them a low-bandwidth data service for pennies per device per month. You're talking about retail rates, when a bulk IoT buyer like this will not be paying anything close to retail.

As for the logistics, it's not that hard. They already have to produce separate SKUs for various regions for the power adapters. So you just add another variable: included SIM card. US gets a [Verizon|ATT|T-Mo] SIM, EU gets one of their carriers, etc.

Re: In Defense of Dumb TVs

#148

Post by Groxx »

derwiki wrote: post #37
julianlam wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This may be tinfoil-hat adjacent, but I have heard that the allure of advertising data is so high that TV manufacturers will program their software to connect to any open WiFi network in order to deliver their collected data. By the way, your post is basically the article, except they mention Sceptre TVs, who specialize in making dumb tv panels.

If you connect to a black hole Arduino AP is it smart enough to detect that and roam to an open Wifi network?

I mean, "smart enough" is "can I phone home? no? try other wifi" which is pretty darn simple to build. Even by accident.

Re: In Defense of Dumb TVs

#149

Post by nanidin »

ramraj07 wrote: post #137
WalterBright wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

On iPhone, there is a built in remote app in control center, then you use the volume buttons on the phone to adjust the TV volume. It’s part of the OS, not the remote app from the App Store, and I’ve found it to be a good fit for those emergency volume adjustments. Sharing so others can benefit from what took me a while to discover :)

Re: In Defense of Dumb TVs

#150

Post by Merad »

alacombe wrote: post #61
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.

> Soon they'll be coming with their own 5G chips that phone home over cell networks - no wifi access required This is something I never understood about the IOT bullcrap, even if something can connect to a mobile network, they'd still need the expense of a data subscription which render the whole thing pretty moot. It's not as if 5G providers were operating their network for free.

I'd expect that a company the size of Samsung is able to negotiate data plans at least an order of magnitude cheaper than anything available to the average consumer.
Post reply on HN