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

891–900 of 960 posts

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#891

Post by hda2 »

hnlmorg wrote: post #128
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…

> This is one of the reasons I paid the premium and went for a Sony instead. They haven't done anything stupid like this yet Oh they have. Many times over. Two instances affected me[1][2] and that was enough to swear me off all Sony products for the last 10 years. Only now am I contemplating buying from Sony again (a PS5). I don't think any multinational company is above trading their customers needs for a few extra…

The awful aftertaste of them yanking "Other OS" after I payed for it still hasn't left my mouth. I haven't bought anything Sony since.

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#892

Post by taneq »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #818
dragonwriter wrote: post #762

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1-2 pixel "X" An x requires at least 3×3 pixels.

Not if it's rendered on subpixels :).

Actually the minimum number of pixels to render a close box is three times the number of close boxes (ie. 3x3 for 1 close box). Any fewer pixels will not allow a functional close box to be reconstructed. This is referered to as the 'Nah-quist limit'.

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#893

Post by taneq »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #839
taneq wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm. I feel like there's a spiritual connection between your spreadsheet guys and the apocryphal product expert at Campbell's Soups or wherever that tried to focus-test "the perfect soup" that would optimize sales. In the story, they realized that there's no one "perfect soup" and they had to create different varieties. Likewise, there's no such thing as "the best product" at a supermarket. Everyone has their own spr…

> Likewise, there's no such thing as "the best product" at a supermarket. I think the core observation behind the job of the spreadsheet guys is that, at scale, the choices within a family of products will approximate a normal distribution - so there will be a "best product" within each family; with a limited shelf space and a lot of different products to sell, this gives them a clear way to optimize for maximum reve…

That's probably their thinking, but unless their aggregates include all of the other products that each customer who buys an item also buys (which it should, they have the data thanks to fly-buys schemes) they can't properly assess the overall impact of a given product.

As a trivial example, just looking at the profitability of individual items would lead them to discontinue selling milk (I mean, there's no profit in it so why bother?) because it's generally used as a loss leader.

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#894

Post by taneq »

hinkley wrote: post #689
dvtrn wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Same goes for toddlers. It's harder to unspool the entire roll if it's "the wrong way". I hate it.

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#895

Post by taneq »

tomc1985 wrote: post #609
dvtrn wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.)

But there isn't only one way to order it. Some OS' (I forgot which) had convention dictate that the positive confirmation button was in the rightmost corner, with other lesser buttons to the left. In this order, "Cancel" appears first, but further from the corner.

As long as you're consistent.

Apps which lay their buttons out contrary to the conventions of their platform are evil. Apps which randomize the positions of their buttons are unspeakably worse.

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#896

Post by thefunnyman »

Kipters wrote: post #76
Kelteseth wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. Just buy an NVidia shield and use your TV as a monitor. The UI and the fact that it uses AndroidTV and not some shitty Samsung OS is reason alone to buy it. Also my Samsung TV gets a start signal from my NVidida Shield so I do not even have to bother with using 2 remotes :)

That's exactly what I've been doing with my 2019 Samsung TV and and a Shield Pro. The TV is unplugged from the internet and all my streaming is done from the Shield, which is even better because: 1. The Netflix/Prime Video etc apps are snappier because of the beefier SoC 2. Content looks better, because DLSS does a better job at upscaling than the TV's native upscaler 3. I can use it to stream games from my PC, which…

I have an extremely similar setup as you, however I will note that the quality of android TV apps seems to be rather lacking. Specifically Spotify will randomly disconnect from my phone and stop and Prime Video cannot play UHD video properly (displaying a warning saying to update the app when I’m on the latest version). These are two apps I tend to use frequently on other devices so it’s super annoying that they don’t work. Of course I can use my Samsung TVs built in apps but that defeats the purpose of owning the shield.

While I’m at it I may as well complain about the google assistant support using my home mini. While nvidia advertises this as a feature, it often works much worse than it did on my cheap old chromecast so that’s quite disappointing. For example, the shield will launch the Netflix overview for a show when asked to play it but won’t actually start the show until you wait for the auto preview to start or you explicitly ask it to press play.

Overall, I guess I’m just not as thrilled with this device as everyone else seems to be. I kind of wish I had just gone with the Apple TV at this point so that I could ditch airplay on my TV which is the only reason I have it connected to the internet at all.

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#897

Post by kf »

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…

It took a really long time but eventually Facebook ads started giving me things I actually wanted to buy and have bought.

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#898

Post by [deleted] »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #866
bad_user wrote: post #843

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those optimizations make it possible for prices to keep dropping, for food to be very cheap and plentiful. Global hunger has dropped to an all time low, since 1950 or so, because of that. Yes, squeeze that marginal profit, please. I was born in communism, and guess what, we did not have 20 flavors of yogurt to choose from, or supermarkets for that matter. In Eastern Europe we counted ourselves very lucky to have plai…

There is more than one factor to consider. Food is already way past being cheap and plentiful. Further optimizations go into enabling variety. Meanwhile, some prices are way too low , which is a serious problem in the climate crisis. What's the point of dining on a dirt cheap meat and 15 different flavors of the same yogurt today, only for our grandchildren to starve on a devastated planet? I was born at the tail end…

[deleted]

Re: Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads

#899

Post by ornornor »

kalleboo wrote: post #298
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…

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.

I think it’s a different reason. These products are perceived as commodities and the expectations are rather low in the first place. So why wouldn’t you try to spend as little as possible on a commodity when you know it’s likely to be borderline shitty or at best barely adequate? I have this strategy when buying cheapo China made crap on eBay or aliexpress: I expect it to be low quality, not last, or not even fit the purpose because the specs are fiction so I try and find the cheapest of these widgets I can buy.

Airline tickets are the same: I know I’ll be treated like shit, nickel and dimed, and have no legroom so why wouldn’t I be looking for the cheapest ticket?

Post reply on HN