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

521–530 of 1001 posts

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

#521

Post by kelnos »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #512
harry8 wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

20 watts standby is only about 14.7 kWh per month. Even at on-peak, summer PG&E rates, we're only talking about $7/month. Granted, I'd much rather pay $0 than $7, and I'd rather not waste energy, but we're probably not talking about anything close to the amount of energy the average household wastes. I'd be looking at refrigerators and other large appliances for energy savings long before I'd be thinking about how mu…

Are you seriously trying to suggest that paying $7/mo for literally nothing is a reasonable thing to do? Not to mention the waste this causes...

Sure, other appliances may suck down more power, but at least you are getting something valuable for that energy use and expense.

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

#522

Post by spacedcowboy »

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…

My smart TV (not connected to the internet) is just a monitor - it switches on, detects the HDTV signal, and shows it.

I'm not aware of any awful flashy interface (I think there is an advert for the manufacturer before it syncs to the HDMI connection - 4 big red letters). That's it.

Personally I can live with that. In fact I was considering getting an 8K version of the same to replace the 3 4k monitors I have.

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

#523

Post by kortex »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #512
harry8 wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

20 watts standby is only about 14.7 kWh per month. Even at on-peak, summer PG&E rates, we're only talking about $7/month. Granted, I'd much rather pay $0 than $7, and I'd rather not waste energy, but we're probably not talking about anything close to the amount of energy the average household wastes. I'd be looking at refrigerators and other large appliances for energy savings long before I'd be thinking about how mu…

That's 20W and $84/yr to do absolutely nothing. There is absolutely, positively no reason the standby power draw needs to be that high. I'm fine with like, 100-1000mW to allow whatever background circuity is required to wake up, but 20W is absurd. That's enough to reasonably illuminate a bedroom (your average 100W-equivalent LED bulb is 14-20W).

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

#524

Post by kelnos »

jader201 wrote: post #460
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…

I was actually pleasantly surprised to see the "just don't connect it to the internet" comments, as most of these smart TV threads are usually full of comments complaining about them on principle, even though most of the world doesn't care (connected to the internet or not), and in this case, I think it does solve most of the issues. It's more common for HN to argue against something on principle, even when there's a…

I suspect if you fully unplugged many smart TVs on the market, and then plugged them back in and turned them on, they'd take a minute or two (or more) to fully turn back on.

When you turn off a smart TV, it doesn't actually turn off. It's similar to a laptop when you close the lid and it goes into standby. Consumers wouldn't tolerate a several-minute power-up sequence every time they want to watch TV -- and rightly so -- so instead, they sit there, wasting power and money in a standby state.

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

#525

Post by prepend »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #512
harry8 wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

20 watts standby is only about 14.7 kWh per month. Even at on-peak, summer PG&E rates, we're only talking about $7/month. Granted, I'd much rather pay $0 than $7, and I'd rather not waste energy, but we're probably not talking about anything close to the amount of energy the average household wastes. I'd be looking at refrigerators and other large appliances for energy savings long before I'd be thinking about how mu…

$7/month is a really high amount. Especially for nothing. Or something I actively don’t want.

I have lots of dumb devices in my house I don’t want piling on $7 so the manufacturer can try to earn $0.30/month in data fees. I have multiple TVs, a washer, a dryer, a fridge, a cryo tank, lots of things. I don’t want them to waste $7 each.

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

#526

Post by 1101010010 »

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…

My "smart" LG TV takes almost an entire minute from when I turn it on to when I can change the brightness settings (because the auto brightness is entirely inaccurate). The whole menu interface is slow, clunky and the remote (which I'd since replaced with a generic universal one) has idiotic buttons for features I don't want and will never use, plus has a microphone. It's a complete train wreck. I also asked LG if I can turn off Wifi/Bluetooth hardware entirely and they said it's categorically not possible, obviously because the data from spying on you is worth more than they make on hardware.

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

#527

Post by tapland »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #512
harry8 wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

20 watts standby is only about 14.7 kWh per month. Even at on-peak, summer PG&E rates, we're only talking about $7/month. Granted, I'd much rather pay $0 than $7, and I'd rather not waste energy, but we're probably not talking about anything close to the amount of energy the average household wastes. I'd be looking at refrigerators and other large appliances for energy savings long before I'd be thinking about how mu…

$7/mo would be something like 1/5 of my electricity bill and we run 2x old overclocked fx-8350s, (w/ dual monitors) and do all cooking at home.

That’s a lot for something functionally off.

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

#528

Post by prepend »

spacedcowboy wrote: post #522
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…

My smart TV (not connected to the internet) is just a monitor - it switches on, detects the HDTV signal, and shows it. I'm not aware of any awful flashy interface (I think there is an advert for the manufacturer before it syncs to the HDMI connection - 4 big red letters). That's it. Personally I can live with that. In fact I was considering getting an 8K version of the same to replace the 3 4k monitors I have.

My dumb tv (sceptre) syncs to hdmi in a few milliseconds and there’s certainly no time to show anything other than the signal.

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

#529

Post by disposition2 »

Pretty unrelated but something that has irked me is the lack of PIP on basically any new TV. I’m not even sure if you can get a TV with PIP anymore.

I bought a 50” Samsung about 7 years ago and at that time I had trouble finding a TV with PIP. I upgraded to a 65” LG OLED about a year ago and the picture is absolutely beautiful, it took a while to get used to…seeing a fly on the video had me thinking I had a fly in the house…but alas no PIP. I’ve found alternatives, I have my OTA hooked up to an HDHomeRun and use TiviMate for viewing…so I can get an octobox if desired, but it would still be nice to have the PIP option, especially for something that costs $1500+

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

#530

Post by doublespanner »

b212 wrote: post #507

I’m amazed home cinema projectors aren’t more popular. There’s nothing better than Apple TV box connected to an Epson or BenQ and screen size of 100” or more. I know, it’s off topic but why so many people still need TVs? Television just makes you dumber and is bad for your children. Also all the smart features are crazy bad. Of course the image quality of good TVs is superior but still worse than the one of good moni…

High end tvs have significantly better visuals compared with projectors; function in more environments, and are much simpler to set up. If you have a dedicated space and want a huge screen then projectors are the only way to go, otherwise they are worse at colour, contrast, cost and noise...
Post reply on HN