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

Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

flatpanelshd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

681–690 of 960 posts

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#681

Post by lostlogin »

mercora wrote: post #174
lucasverra wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also https://nextdns.io/ on the cloud. I run my ios devices with no ads thanks to this honest service. Can i modify the DNS resolver on a samsung tv (i do not intend to have one ever)

you can but if it cant resolve it will fallback to googles resolver automatically. At least this is what happened on my model.

Yes, this happens. But then you make a firewall rule to route outbound port 53 traffic that doesn’t come from the Pihole to go back to the Pihole. It gets rather elaborate.

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#682

Post by jlv2 »

foepys wrote: post #39
neya wrote: post #31

Fuck the guy who wanted to suck up to the management in some stupid meeting projecting estimated revenue out of this to ask for a raise later because he "contributed to a revenue increase" to the company. There's absolutely no after thought to this decision - If I paid 1000s of dollars for an "idiot box" that's supposed to reproduce faithfully the signal that I pass it, showing ads is unacceptable, no matter what the…

I also bought a Sony Android TV for this reason. Then last month Google pushed an update for the "Android TV Home" app and now there are many people complaining about ads on the home screen [1]. This is not really Sony's fault but rather Google's but it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth… https://9to5google.com/2020/08/18/android-tv-homescreen-ads-...

My Sony TV from 2014 has ads in the TV Guide that gets content from the Internet.

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#683

Post by GordonS »

yholio wrote: post #129

The life time of TVs is simply on a different time scale than most smart thingies you connect to them. It's an appliance like the air conditioner or dishwasher, not a gadget you throw into the bin and replace. The intelligence of your media center should be elsewhere, in a dedicated gadget that you can easily replace and upgrade, connected via a standard, dumb interface like HDMI. I own a 2012, 60" Sony Bravia and th…

I have a 2012 Bravia too, albeit a smaller one, something like 42" - the black levels in particular are absolutely amazing.

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#684

Post by hinkley »

avian wrote: post #122
neya wrote: post #31

Fuck the guy who wanted to suck up to the management in some stupid meeting projecting estimated revenue out of this to ask for a raise later because he "contributed to a revenue increase" to the company. There's absolutely no after thought to this decision - If I paid 1000s of dollars for an "idiot box" that's supposed to reproduce faithfully the signal that I pass it, showing ads is unacceptable, no matter what the…

In some stupid meeting somewhere: A: ...and in conclusion, it's a win-win situation. Users will benefit from ads and our revenue will go up. B: People don't like ads on their TV. A: But they do. I refer you to slides 18 through 25 where you can see engagement metrics for our ad rollout on the old model. If people wouldn't like ads they wouldn't be clicking on them so much . B: I don't like ads. Do you like ads on you…

There's a practically throw-away line in Ready Player One where the Bad Guy says, "And research has found that we can cover 49% of the screen before our customers begin to experience seizures."

Yep, sounds about right.

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#685

Post by gverrilla »

20after4 wrote: post #481
brahyam wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> looking at the companies who buy Google AdWords on their own brand - if someone's searching for your brand on Google your website will already be the top result - a click on the ad is not a true "conversion" in this case and is just wasted money Could be a true conversion given that all competitors are paying adwords on your brand name search also. If you don't have them you will probably appear after a long list o…

It's incredibly sad that it's even possible to bid for the top spot above a competitors trademark. The worst blow to the health of the web was likely google's merger with doubleclick.net. Google has devolved into a shitty search engine even ignoring the advertising. Someone please build a search engine comparable to google in the mid-2000s. No duckduckgo isn't it.

would you tell more about why you think ddg is not good? I'm not using it for some reasons so I'd like to know. Thanks

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#686

Post by bluGill »

Freak_NL wrote: post #286
bluGill wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is called a monitor. Works just fine for whatever and people use it for work. The factory I work at had large one scattered around to show line information. Some of the information is safety critical and so if it is inyeruped with an ad there will be legal issues.

I've wondered about this. The TV I have (a Sony Bravia) is now almost a decade old (works fine). We got it specifically because it has a slot for a DVB-T module (terrestrial broadcast). DVB-T is now gone (replaced by DVB-T2, but I doubt this will remain in the air long), so we have no broadcast TV now, only our HTPC connected to it with Netflix, local media files, and a browser. Frankly, we don't miss the TV channels…

Historically monitors has better pictures at the expense that you couldn't look at them off angle, while TVs you could look at from anywhere in the room. I think that is gone today but it might be something that comes up again... Though in the safety critical application I brought up off-angle viewing is a requirement.

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#687

Post by hinkley »

reaperducer wrote: post #363
taneq wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem is that this "engagement" will mostly be just annoyed customers mis-clicking or trying whatever it takes to dismiss the ad and not actually intending to purchase the advertised product "Amazing! The smaller we make the 'X' button, the more people love them!"

Or make the X button almost the same color as the background. TuneIn does this.

Just this week I had an ad popup with no button. Before I gave up and left the site I tried clicking where the button was supposed to be. Sure enough it worked.

Of course now I'm part of the problem, because some asshole has a graph that shows that (a suspiciously small fraction of) users are able to opt-out so there's no legal liability for having the ads that way.

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#688

Post by reaperducer »

hinkley wrote: post #684
avian wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In some stupid meeting somewhere: A: ...and in conclusion, it's a win-win situation. Users will benefit from ads and our revenue will go up. B: People don't like ads on their TV. A: But they do. I refer you to slides 18 through 25 where you can see engagement metrics for our ad rollout on the old model. If people wouldn't like ads they wouldn't be clicking on them so much . B: I don't like ads. Do you like ads on you…

There's a practically throw-away line in Ready Player One where the Bad Guy says, "And research has found that we can cover 49% of the screen before our customers begin to experience seizures." Yep, sounds about right.

Sounds like Blipverts in Max Headroom.

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#689

Post by hinkley »

dvtrn wrote: post #510
summitsummit wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best method I've found to increase positive engagement is actually to just have a fake 'x' such that clicking it just triggers the ad. I've noticed this more frequently on the web nowadays, and based on the click through rates, the target demographic is absolutely _obsessed_ over this feature.

Don't get me started on dialog boxes that put the "cancel" button on the wrong side. Much like toilet paper, there is one way to display it, all other methods are heresy worthy of nothing less than immediate exterminatus. (partially kidding, but only partially.)

If you have cats, the 'proper way' to hang the TP is the opposite way of what you absolutists think is the One True Way.

I'm starting to suspect that the loudest voices are cats who have either learned to type or to pay for lobbyists, trying to push your feline agenda on the rest of us.

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#690

Post by ascot_attn_atol »

SteveGerencser wrote: post #451
kalleboo wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it's more like "people hate ads, but next time they buy a new TV, the ads will make our TV $10 cheaper than the other guy and they'll buy it anyway" It's the same thing in the airline industry - people will complain all day long about legroom and being treated as cattle, but the next time they buy a ticket they vote with their wallets when they sort the flight list by price and choose the cheapest option.

But, do people actually know that when they purchase? If it were clearly stated anywhere on the box/sales copy that "you will see ads on this device" while the other one says "we won't shove ads on your device" I would wager the $10 more would be a bargain to nearly everyone. But that information is never available at the point of purchase so most people get the surprise of see ads when they had no idea that was even…

Amazon has offereed their Kindle devices with and without homescreen ad's at different price. I don't have the information on how many people chose the cheaper version with ads but I can say anecdotally that it what I went with.
Post reply on HN