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

471–480 of 1001 posts

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

#471

Post by antegamisou »

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…

> Disconnecting your smart TV from the internet only means it doesn't spy on you and advertise to you.

I'm not even sure that's the case for the ones with WiFi. Software 'kill switches' have become a ridiculous oxymoron.

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

#472

Post by bobthepanda »

q7xvh97o2pDhNrh wrote: post #331
lagrange77 wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PRIMITV

Nice. That is an absurdly good name. I think it needs just a bit of fool-proofing in a couple dimensions though: (1) Ideally, the brand would also be able to speak to the segment of people who aren't going to get the wordplay. (2) Also, there's the age-old pronunciation question. Is it just "Primitive"? Is it "Primi - Tee - Vee"? It's quite close to being a great brand, though. I wonder if it just needs a skillfully-…

Eh, this isn’t that crazy.

Like, most people probably don’t think about the fact that Uniqlo is short for “unique clothing” and yet it’s the #3 clothing retailer in the world.

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

#473

Post by wholinator2 »

harry8 wrote: post #414
delecti wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Maybe my ignorance here but a 70 inch monitor? At what point is it just a dumb tv? Like is monitor a term used to describe its actual engineering and functionality or just how it's used. Also if engineering, is there a substantial price difference?

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

#475

Post by cultureswitch »

ghayes wrote: post #27
KerrAvon wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that would require an accessible WiFi network. I'm sure someday it'll be impossible because they'll embed 5G chips and do it over cell without involving your consent, but that day isn't here yet.

Simple, just put it in a Faraday cage.

I'm thinking a scrambler might be more effective.

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

#476

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan »

ChancyChance wrote: post #462

TCP/IP over HDMI exists and is in use. You cannot just "not connect your TV" because if you connect to ROKU which is connected to the Internet, your TV can access the internet. Source: I bought a TV a few years ago, and it somehow popped up an ad even though I didn't connect it to my WiFi. Did some research, and that's how I found out.

Why would Roku allow the TV to tunnel through it though? AFAIK they see smart TVs as their direct competition.

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

#477

Post by wholinator2 »

moonchrome wrote: post #246
tetromino_ wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1. 32" diagonal, 4 HDMI inputs, and you have another customer.

At that size isn't that basically a monitor ?

What even is the difference between a tv and a monitor other than size?

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

#478

Post by vhcr »

KerrAvon wrote: post #20
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!

But that would require an accessible WiFi network. I'm sure someday it'll be impossible because they'll embed 5G chips and do it over cell without involving your consent, but that day isn't here yet.

It doesn't sounds so crazy to shield a house from electromagnetic radiation (Faraday cage).

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

#480

Post by autoexec »

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

Do you have plans for OLED?
Post reply on HN