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

The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

adguard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 579 posts

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#91

Post by wongarsu »

scarface74 wrote: post #26
DethNinja wrote: post #6

There is a much better option for HN crowd: Buy a large/modern computer monitor and connect it to your homelab’s media server. Literally there is no need for a smart TV so long as you are capable of setting up a small homelab.

Where can I get a 65 inch computer monitor? I’ve done the homelab media server. I did my first one back in 2006 with a Mac Mini running Front Row. But this is 2022. If you want a set top box without tracking, just buy an AppleTV. It cost more because Apple makes money off of hardware and not advertising. Yes I know the reports about Apple getting even deeper into advertising. Yes it saddens me.

Digital Signage Displays are basically fancy monitors available as large as you want. But they'll cost you a pretty penny, being designed for 24/7 operation and without the ad-subsidy of smart TVs. Maybe hunt for a used one. Or conference room monitors, as suggested elsewhere in the thread.

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#92

Post by sumtechguy »

bilekas wrote: post #29
Gigachad wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d honestly rather watch adverts than have to run a home server again.

Controversial .. Would you care to expand on that ? I don't know anyone who would prefer to see adverts compared to plugging in a NAS / DLNA ? These days there is nothing more than plug and play..

I can comment on that. But I get the sentiment. For my setup there always seems to be some small thing that is wrong all the time. Fix - fine for a few months... borked. When you just want to watch something. I currently have to go thru the system and figure out why it is not acting like an appliance. Start up is constantly an issue with my setup. So when anyone in the house wants to watch something they are coming to find me. Current suspect is the hdmi vs the tv I have is not setting up the connection correctly. For the amount of media I own it is not feasible to go back to the old system though so I stay. Also adverts suck. But I totally understand the sentiment.

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#93

Post by bombcar »

traspler wrote: post #79
Aardwolf wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The few firmware updates I've needed to do were applied using a thumb drive What kind of firmware updates do you need to do on it, when its only purpose is to act as a screen?

There can be all kinds of fixes and features in the FW for the various display modes. From SDR to HDR to audio settings.

Most of the firmware upgrades are to keep the “smart” parts working, but sometimes they fix actual bugs.

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#94

Post by dmurray »

marcinzm wrote: post #81
uptown wrote: post #53

At home, I've never connected my TV to my network. The few firmware updates I've needed to do were applied using a thumb drive, and I use an AppleTV as my interface. When I travel, I bring along an AppleTV and plug the HDMI port into their set. This lets me keep the services I subscribe-to and use them with their display. This has worked great until my most-recent rental, which had a RokuTV -- presumably setup on Wif…

>At home, I've never connected my TV to my network The next (already there?) steps are the TV automatically scanning for open wifi network to leverage and/or having a built in 4g connection.

Or partnerships between the TV company and the ISPs, to put additional wireless networks on their consumer routers that are accessible to the TVs.

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#95

Post by noisy_boy »

scarface74 wrote: post #26
DethNinja wrote: post #6

There is a much better option for HN crowd: Buy a large/modern computer monitor and connect it to your homelab’s media server. Literally there is no need for a smart TV so long as you are capable of setting up a small homelab.

Where can I get a 65 inch computer monitor? I’ve done the homelab media server. I did my first one back in 2006 with a Mac Mini running Front Row. But this is 2022. If you want a set top box without tracking, just buy an AppleTV. It cost more because Apple makes money off of hardware and not advertising. Yes I know the reports about Apple getting even deeper into advertising. Yes it saddens me.

https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-75-4k-interactive-touch...

Not cheap though.

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#96

Post by BeefWellington »

teddyh wrote: post #25
littlecranky67 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "they use any open wifi they can see" myth has been brought up on HN multiple times, and never did anybody provide any credible proof of this rumour (that started as a single reddit comment).

I would be surprised if modern TVs didn’t connect to open WiFis; there is literally no reason for TVs not to do this, and every incentive to do it. Even if we discount the ads as a motivator, it’s still a simple solution to get people’s stuff configured automatically.

It would be pretty easy to check and validate if that's true.

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#97

Post by rovr138 »

littlecranky67 wrote: post #19
teddyh wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TVs will soon, if not already, come with cell phones; the ad revenue is larger than what they are charged for the cell phone IP traffic. TVs also reportedly use any open WiFi they can see, and use DoH to make DNS-based ad blocking impossible.

The "they use any open wifi they can see" myth has been brought up on HN multiple times, and never did anybody provide any credible proof of this rumour (that started as a single reddit comment).

How about one that can do 5G? Samsung and Huawei are doing 5G TV,

https://www.techradar.com/news/samsungs-5g-8k-tv-promises-to...

https://www.techradar.com/news/huawei-is-developing-a-5g-8k-...

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#98

Post by jokowueu »

xoa wrote: post #87

FWIW, it is still possible to get TVs without this stuff, albeit at a premium. TVs are still made for business usage in areas like conference rooms, wall displays etc. They're often found under labeling like "commercial digital signage" or "business display" or the like, they seem to often try to avoid using "TV" (if being cynical maybe to make them harder for normal people to discover and confuse them if they do). B…

Or just get any smart tv and add a android tv dongle . They don't cost much

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#99

Post by reaperducer »

wongarsu wrote: post #71
designium wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depending on the size and brand, it's price is similar to "smart TVs". The bigger ones are costlier.

Of course, after all smart TVs have an ongoing revenue stream from ads and analytics. Despite having more capabilities, Smart TVs are also regularly cheaper than equivalent "dumb TVs".

Smart TVs are also regularly cheaper than equivalent "dumb TVs".

Only if you don't value quality.

A did a price comparison about a year ago, using Best Buy and B&H. The plain display panels from B&H were either the same, or only marginally more expensive than the equivalent "smart" televisions from Best Buy.

People on HN too often parrot that Vizeo CEO's claim that his TVs are only cheap because of all the spying they do. While true, it only holds up in you're interested in watching a Vizeo-quality TV.

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#100

Post by blueflow »

scarface74 wrote: post #90
blueflow wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not having an TV is also a viable option. Around 2016 my last TV broke down and i have adapted to live without it. When i say 'TV' i also mean to include Netflix and Hulu and other services serving the same purpose.

So, yes the alternative is not to use a device used by 95% homes in the US. What next the old Slashdot meme - “I haven’t owned a TV in 10 years. Do people still watch TV?”

This is a non-argument - just because most people do it doesn't mean you have to do it, too.

Edit: The slippery slope: 95% of people are straight.

Post reply on HN