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

411–420 of 1001 posts

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

#411

Post by emodendroket »

delecti wrote: post #405
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…

A smart-but-disconnected TV can meet all of those functional requirements, and your nonfunctional requirements (low processing power) frankly don't matter to most people. My smart-but-disconnected TV turns on just as quickly as my PC monitors can return from sleep (a second or two); changing inputs is just as quick (input button on remote, left/right to select, okay to confirm), and the automatic input selection when…

I also wonder if an older device with lower processing power doesn't draw more power, which is a metric I find it easier to care about.

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

#412

Post by rootusrootus »

lr1970 wrote: post #121
was_a_dev wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hasn't some models (thinking Samsung) been shown to connect to any WiFi network they can? edit: Appears to be an urban legend, with not much substance to back it up!

There is Amazon SideWalk [0] that could potentially allow devices join mesh WiFi behind your back. [0] https://www.amazon.com/Amazon-Sidewalk/

The existence of Sidewalk is what prompted me to remove all Amazon devices from my home. I hope the range on that network is less than the distance to my neighbors house (but they're old folks, definitely don't have an Echo).

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

#413

Post by xp84 »

nfRfqX5n wrote: post #393
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?

Maybe minutes was hyperbole, but my Sony Smart TV (to be fair, it's the circa-2015-ish one relegated to the bedroom today) is unresponsive to silly human concerns like "changing inputs" or "adjusting volume" for a good 30-40 seconds when it turns on. ("Please wait.")

To mitigate this, you can pick a certain 4-6 hours of each day (24h isn't allowed) during which it'll make sure to stay "booted" but with the panel off. Or if you don't enable this, you'll enjoy lower power consumption but have to deal with this foolishness every time you turn it on.

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

#414

Post by harry8 »

delecti wrote: post #405
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…

A smart-but-disconnected TV can meet all of those functional requirements, and your nonfunctional requirements (low processing power) frankly don't matter to most people. My smart-but-disconnected TV turns on just as quickly as my PC monitors can return from sleep (a second or two); changing inputs is just as quick (input button on remote, left/right to select, okay to confirm), and the automatic input selection when…

I have a 75" Sony bravia smart tv and it draws 10-20 watts in standby.

I have a 70" dell monitor used as a a tv in another room it draws 0 watts in standby.

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

#415

Post by fb03 »

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

Please! Dumb, and as low latency as it can be (PC/Game Mode). I've never asked you anything, man...

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

#416

Post by emodendroket »

aidenn0 wrote: post #321

> “Any TV worth buying is very likely going to ask to connect to your Wi-Fi, and that’s been the case for many years now,” he says. “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, because it’ll likely be missing several other salient features that you may actually want, like Bluetooth compatibility, HDR functionality, built-in chan…

You are obviously not the target audience for this article. They also are not going to put high-quality panels in any "dumb" TVs they do deign to manufacture.

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

#417

Post by xattt »

dymk wrote: post #323
xattt wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this is the way that new TVs will be used, Ethernet-over-HDMI will see a comeback from the dead like nobody’s business!

I doubt Apple would be allowing unfettered ethernet access through the apple TV, privacy is kind of their shtick

Apple, no, but Microsoft and Sony would be more than happy to share.

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

#418

Post by pupdogg »

dogma1138 wrote: post #346
pupdogg wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Majority of our customers use our displays for Digital Signage so I would assume we would've heard of their issues if they couldn't playback their 4k or 8k content. Some of them play this content back on videowalls, as large as 14x8 configuration, without any issues. I will double-check with our firmware designer to be sure. From what I know, I believe HDCP is supported by all versions of HDMI. Older TVs, specificall…

Signage displays do not need to display protected content, they do not need to support standards like DolbyVision and they do not need to support three-two pull-down to display cinematic content without judder. HDCP isn’t supported on all versions of HDMI it’s not part of the spec it is a standard that is supported on top of w/e display interface you are using.

You're right, firmware designer just confirmed that Digital Signage applications don't use HDCP (he actually said "prefer not to use") but he does believe that our controllers using MediaTek SoCs support HDCP and a separate firmware build could be made for this use case...or maybe even a toggle DIP switch could serve this purpose on the controller PCB.

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

#419

Post by mattl »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #408
mattl wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

What does SFTP mean in This context? Only thing I can think of is SSH FTP, but not sure how that ties in?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15605423

It’s a classic HN reply

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

#420

Post by xp84 »

aidenn0 wrote: post #321

> “Any TV worth buying is very likely going to ask to connect to your Wi-Fi, and that’s been the case for many years now,” he says. “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, because it’ll likely be missing several other salient features that you may actually want, like Bluetooth compatibility, HDR functionality, built-in chan…

I actually turned off HDR as soon as I got an HDR-capable TV, because it's apparently code for "eye-searingly-bright whites, including in the Apple TV interface itself." I don't understand who wants this. Maybe I'm a vampire?
Post reply on HN