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

Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#391

Post by pupdogg »

corrigible wrote: post #305
pupdogg wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't done much market research in that aspect yet but we currently sell our industrial 70" display @ around $9-12k/ea depending on the configuration (ie type of metal shell aluminum/stainless/carbon-steel, ethernet support, protective polycarbonate screen in the front to prevent damage from industrial machinery). However, I expect the consumer grade to be much more cost effective considering the sizes in demand…

will they retail globally?

We ship globally to our customers right now but I believe having a distribution channel for global retail would be much wiser. I'm definitely open to it once we get to that point.

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#392

Post by mattl »

rolenthedeep wrote: post #376

"just don't connect it to the internet" is such a typical HN response that completely misses the point. A smart TV with no internet connection is still a smart TV. It still has an entire operating system that needs to load wifi, ethernet, Bluetooth, usb driver stacks. It still has an awful, flashy interface that adds unnecessary steps between changing inputs. It still tries to load god knows what apps every time you…

You can build your own with a monitor and SFTP, etc.

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#393

Post by nfRfqX5n »

rolenthedeep wrote: post #376

"just don't connect it to the internet" is such a typical HN response that completely misses the point. A smart TV with no internet connection is still a smart TV. It still has an entire operating system that needs to load wifi, ethernet, Bluetooth, usb driver stacks. It still has an awful, flashy interface that adds unnecessary steps between changing inputs. It still tries to load god knows what apps every time you…

What TV takes minutes to turn on?

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#394

Post by ianai »

pupdogg wrote: post #133

I've designed and built many such TVs for the commercial/industrial vertical. I am currently working on developing such a TV for the consumer market and launching it under the name DUMBO.TV Let me know your thoughts. Reference pix of 70" industrial display using Samsung LCD panel and in-house LCD controller with physical OSD menu buttons along with IR/RS232 control capability: https://imgur.com/a/k6zrH3s

Is like a “null” branding instead of “dumb” for what it’s worth. A Null TV sounds techy.

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#395

Post by Thorentis »

Buy a projector. This has two benefits:

1) Most projectors are not smart, so it solves that problem.

2) You don't have a gaping black hole in your living space urging you to be sucked into watching it. I despise TV and mass media and what it has done to our society. A projector at least hints at film being more of an art form that can be appreciated for its own sake. You have a movie night, you set everything up, you pack it up when done. It's intentional, it's not just "I'm bored, let's scroll through Netflix and find something watchable".

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#396

Post by Terretta »

rolenthedeep wrote: post #376

"just don't connect it to the internet" is such a typical HN response that completely misses the point. A smart TV with no internet connection is still a smart TV. It still has an entire operating system that needs to load wifi, ethernet, Bluetooth, usb driver stacks. It still has an awful, flashy interface that adds unnecessary steps between changing inputs. It still tries to load god knows what apps every time you…

The problem is when HD video standards evolve (DV, HDR10), or bugs are found, etc., as well as handling things like VRR or lip-sync.

Unless you externalize smarts to e.g. HDFury VRRoom (strongly recommend), these panels need some smarts, regardless.

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#397

Post by wyldfire »

schappim wrote: post #186
pupdogg wrote: post #133

I've designed and built many such TVs for the commercial/industrial vertical. I am currently working on developing such a TV for the consumer market and launching it under the name DUMBO.TV Let me know your thoughts. Reference pix of 70" industrial display using Samsung LCD panel and in-house LCD controller with physical OSD menu buttons along with IR/RS232 control capability: https://imgur.com/a/k6zrH3s

You're going to want to change that name... Disney... They have the class 9 Trade Mark for Dumbo, and call out: "television sets;"[1][2]. [1] https://search.ipaustralia.gov.au/trademarks/search/view/115... [2] https://files.littlebird.com.au/Shared-Image-2023-04-08-06-5...

Probably best to avoid the conflict, per your advice. But if they're not really using the mark that way I doubt it's enforceable.

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#398

Post by dublin »

tanelpoder wrote: post #287
gpm wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or SimplyTV

Basic.tv Edit: as in you have to code BASIC to change the channel

GOTO no longer considered unsafe! (Actually, it never really was all that unsafe, anyway, the function guys just established themselves as the new programming hipsters...)

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#399

Post by bscphil »

karaterobot wrote: post #351
bscphil wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it’ll likely be missing several other salient features that you may actually want I disagree with you; the answer they give is pretty reasonable. Sceptre TVs are recommended everywhere you look if you search for dumb TVs, they're not hard to find. But people looking for a brand new TV often want common modern TV features, like HDR. Heck, I'm holding on to an old plasma set until I can get a decent OLED at a reasona…

> It's not "denying the premise" of wanting a dumb TV to point out these limitations, as well as offer what is the most practical alternative for most people - just don't connect it to WiFi. They denied the premise of the question. The question was "Can You Recommend a Not-Smart TV for Me?" and the answer wasn't just "no, there are none I can or will recommend", which would be one thing. Instead the answer was "I'm n…

> "because you don't actually want the thing you said you want"

I guess I didn't feel, reading the article, that they were saying that. They never said that you don't really want a dumb TV, they said that none of them are good purchases because the vast majority of people are looking for features that the dumb TVs don't have. From the article:

> If you can find one manufactured recently that isn’t smart, I don’t know that I would trust it to be worth what you’re paying for it

It's not that it's a mistake to look for a dumb TV, it's that that none of them are (in the opinion of the author) good buys. So it's not so much denying the question as it is making the assumption that the question-asker is probably looking for more than just the one "feature" of "dumbness".

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#400

Post by jke »

NoraCodes wrote: post #278

This article misses the point. I desperately want a non-smart TV because I don't want to deal with the absolute mess that is smart TV software. I want to have a TV with a nice panel, a basic OSD that lets me switch inputs and set up color/HDR profiles, and that's it .

Exactly! Smart TVs are a pain, software-wise. There should be a way to disable all that BS firmware.
Post reply on HN