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

961–970 of 1001 posts

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

#961

Post by mtrower »

karaterobot wrote: post #65
micromacrofoot wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that you can't buy a decent quality TV that doesn't come with smart features, all you can do is keep it disconnected from the internet.

You absolutely can, as noted elsewhere in this (and about 25 other HN threads). In any case, if the question is "recommend a dumb TV to me" the answer should include at least one dumb TV, even if the editor wants to note that they aren't as good as his favorite TV. This article is like if someone asked for a recommendation on a new bike, and the answer was "cars are faster, buy a car and pretend it's a bike"

Hmm, maybe more like “recommend me a manual transmission vehicle” and the answer you get back is why you really want an automatic, and here are some nice models you can buy that are all automatic.

Infuriating in either case.

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

#962

Post by mtrower »

endisneigh wrote: post #50
ultrarunner wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use them for information displays. Our "smart" TVs boot slowly, show dialogs, and then complain that they can't sense the remote near enough to them, requiring a reboot. All in all it's an incredibly frustrating experience for something that should require zero interaction.

how often are you rebooting TVs for your information displays that this matters? and there are smart tvs with dumb remotes.

So, you say you don’t know why people are upset with these devices, but people are telling you why and you’re just not accepting it. You literally told the other guy that he’s optimizing for the wrong thing, as if his priorities are somehow yours to determine.

It’s totally fine that you have different priorities and values than us, but that doesn’t invalidate ours.

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

#963

Post by avh02 »

capableweb wrote: post #896
cortesoft wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My main issue with smart TVs is how long they take to turn on. I just want it to turn on and off in under a second.

Is that really a problem that happens because a TV is "smart" or not? I'm using a LG 4K OLED TV, connected to the internet with a bunch of apps (so smart) and it's ready to be used in like 2-3 seconds after I power it on. Are other TVs really that much worse? I only have experience with LG ones, so I might just be lucky here.

stayed in an airbnb once where the TV would take ~15 seconds to be ready to control, of that time, about 5 seconds was already playing content but you couldn't control the volume. I don't remember the brand, but it wasn't some unknown thing.

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

#964

Post by mtrower »

mgaunard wrote: post #191
elAhmo wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Monitor is a different device compared to a TV. TV without smart features is simply called a TV.

That is incorrect. A TV is simply a low-quality monitor, possibly with some kind of tuner or extra superfluous low-quality peripherals.

That is incorrect. A TV is a display panel optimized around a 10’ interactive distance. A computer monitor is a display panel generally targeting 2’-3’ at most.

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

#965

Post by mgaunard »

cesarb wrote: post #425
mgaunard wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is incorrect. A TV is simply a low-quality monitor, possibly with some kind of tuner or extra superfluous low-quality peripherals.

> A TV is simply a low-quality monitor, possibly with some kind of tuner The defining feature of a TV is the presence of a tuner. If it doesn't have a tuner for OTA (or cable) channels, it's not a TV.

Over-the-air and cable broadcasts are a thing of the past. How is life back in the 90s?

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

#966

Post by itsoktocry »

tmm wrote: post #535
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

That would be great. My main issue with smart TVs isn't the network connectivity, its their horrible UI. The menus are universally confusing, slow and poorly thought-out. And because these TVs have to have some complicated OS to run all this stuff, they're slow to start up. My AppleTV goes from standby to on faster than my circa 2008[1] (only kinda smart) TV and receiver are ready to display an image. The AppleTV sho…

Why would you want to hang onto a TV for 15 years? Half of the tech you mention will be obsolete.

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

#967

Post by [deleted] »

capableweb wrote: post #896
cortesoft wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My main issue with smart TVs is how long they take to turn on. I just want it to turn on and off in under a second.

Is that really a problem that happens because a TV is "smart" or not? I'm using a LG 4K OLED TV, connected to the internet with a bunch of apps (so smart) and it's ready to be used in like 2-3 seconds after I power it on. Are other TVs really that much worse? I only have experience with LG ones, so I might just be lucky here.

[deleted]

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

#968

Post by bruce343434 »

capital_guy wrote: post #916

As some others are noting - the article is extremely disappointing. A huge number of software developers are wary of this stuff because we know how telemetry works, how operating systems degrade over time, how internet connectivity is its own attack vector, etc. Some people _don't want_ these 'features' that for some reason the article is professing _are_ what you pay for when you buy a tv. The TV is just a display.…

Buy a monitor?

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

#969

Post by thfuran »

dublin wrote: post #362

Another thing to look at in new TVs, both smart and dumb, is egregious boot times. Instead of the expected instant-on, many new TVs take a Looooooong time to start up - the Sceptre 4K TV I bought for the office last year takes 20 seconds to boot and display output - and it's a dumb TV! I built IoT sensors with embedded web interfaces 20 YEARS AGO that booted in under a quarter second. It's intolerable in the third de…

>the Sceptre 4K TV I bought for the office last year takes 20 seconds to boot and display output - and it's a dumb TV

How is that even possible?

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

#970

Post by XorNot »

cweagans wrote: post #919
tmm wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be great. My main issue with smart TVs isn't the network connectivity, its their horrible UI. The menus are universally confusing, slow and poorly thought-out. And because these TVs have to have some complicated OS to run all this stuff, they're slow to start up. My AppleTV goes from standby to on faster than my circa 2008[1] (only kinda smart) TV and receiver are ready to display an image. The AppleTV sho…

Personally, I explicitly do not want a tuner in a TV. I would much rather feed that through my existing system and have the TV be as dumb as possible -- I literally just want a display. Down-facing connections are a must . I also don't want anything except a power button -- no channel, volume, menu, etc. I don't want crappy TV speakers and I'd really rather not have an OSD. I would love a display where I could fire u…

Agree on exactly 1 HDMI input honestly. It's much easier to have the rest of my system mux HDMI (because you either have a receiver, or just a simple switcher, or exactly 1 device anyway).
Post reply on HN