Ask Slashdot: Why Do You Want a 'Smart TV'? 507
Reader kheldan questions the need for a Smart TV (edited for clarity): Yesterday we read about how Samsung is planning on 'upgrading' the firmware in its smart TVs so that it could inject ads into your video streams. This raises the question yet again: Why do you even need a 'smart TV' in the first place? We live in an age where media-center computers and DVRs are ubiquitous, and all your TV really needs to be is a high-def monitor to connect to these devices. Even many smartphones have HDMI connectivity, and a Raspberry Pi is inexpensive and can play 1080 content at full framerate. None of these devices are terribly expensive anymore, and the price jump from a non-smart TV to a smart TV makes it difficult to justify the expense. Also, remember previous articles posted on the subject of surveillance many of these smart TVs have been found guilty of. So I put it to you, denizens of Slashdot: Why does anyone really want a 'smart TV'?
I don't (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't even want a regular TV. I watch Netflix on a 25" monitor that I plug into a laptop.
Re: (Score:3)
This. While the Pi solution the writer posed would work, it won't have Netflix.
Re:I don't (Score:4, Interesting)
Didn't Google recently announce Android for Raspberry PI? If you could get those working together, you could use the Android Netflix app.
Netflix 4K only on Smart TV (Score:5, Interesting)
I had a lengthy conversation with netflix support, apparently, there is NO way to view 4K netflix content except for a smart TV that supports "software" as they call it. Essentially, its DRM as demanded by studio.
So as in my case, I have 40" 4K monitor, all the hardware, a 4K plan with netflix, 50mbps internet, but I cannot get 4K because its only available on these so called Smart TVs.
Before we argue, 4K content is a lot lot sharper. I do want it, but Netflix won't stream it to my PC.
Re:Netflix 4K only on Smart TV (Score:5, Insightful)
As usual, The Pirate Bay and Kickass Torrents have Netflix shows in 4k. Their DRM only serves to drive away paying customers.
Re:Netflix 4K only on Smart TV (Score:5, Informative)
I believe the Roku 4 supports Netflix at 4K. I suspect the Tivo Bolt does as well.
Re: (Score:3)
Roku 4 does support 4k content. However, there is hardly anything on Netflix that is 4k. Not worth it imo.
Re: (Score:3)
It makes sense. Why pay $100 for a smart tv when you can get a basic tv with the same size and resolution and attach a $100 device that is easier to upgrade and replace?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
This is not true. 4K is supported on the Nvidia Shield, and I think it is supported on the latest 4K Amazon TV box.
Re:Netflix 4K only on Smart TV (Score:4, Interesting)
Yet another case of studios being $(*%. Personally, when I'm 10' from my 42" screen, 1080p is already more resolution than I can perceive - sure, when I sit right in front of it I can see the difference, and I have a 30" 4K monitor on my desk that is much better for displaying lots and lots of text at once, but for watching a movie? If I need to see more than a megapixel of resolution to enjoy a movie, there's something wrong with the plot.
Re: (Score:2)
Some of the Android media centers are cheaper than the Pi once you include the cost of the remote.
Re:I don't (Score:4, Informative)
"Some of the Android media centers are cheaper than the Pi once you include the cost of the remote."
KODI allows you to use your TV's remote control in many cases -- there's no need for a separate remote.
Re: (Score:3)
"While the Pi solution the writer posed would work, it won't have Netflix"
And that's important why?
I've been using KODI (more recently the TVMC image) with 1Channel, SALTS, Phoenix or Genesis on my RP for a long time and I watch all the Netflix content -- albeit I'm not burdened with a monthly subscription for doing so :-)
If Netflix want to make a plug-in for KODI available I'll subscribe. If they don't then it's no skin off my nose but in the meantime I'm not switching to Android or a PC just to pay them
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I find that the combination of a 'dumb-with-DLNA' (2011 era) Samsung 40" + Chromecast 2nd gen is killer.
Re: (Score:3)
I love my Chromecast for little things, like youtube videos. It's a little limiting for entire movies, mostly because I have to unlock my phone to pause.
DLNA annoys me due to the transcoding cpu load on my server.
Re: (Score:2)
DLNA annoys me due to the transcoding cpu load on my server.
Minidlna does no transcoding (it just feeds video files to whatever device asks for them), so I wonder if it's the "DLNA" part that's mandating the transcodes or some other "feature" of your media software.
Re: (Score:2)
Some other "feature" - obviously he's playing back files that are NOT in a format supported by the client device. In which case - duh it's gonna transcode or you can't play it.
A big screen is nice (Score:2)
I don't even want a regular TV. I watch Netflix on a 25" monitor that I plug into a laptop.
While there is nothing wrong with that, I personally prefer watching video on my 65" screen while sitting on a couch. Much more pleasant and comfortable, particularly if more than one person wants to watch which is pretty routine around my home. It's especially nice for movies with a significant other.
That said, I really don't use any of the "smart" TV features. I really just want a huge monitor with inputs for video and sound. I don't even need a tuner since my TiVo handles that. Problem is that all
Re:I don't (Score:5, Insightful)
Slashdot is obviously challenging us with a trick question. The correct answer is "You don't. You want to buy a dumb TV and let the "smart" reside in the boxes you attach to it, boxes that perform much better and can be more easily and cheaply upgraded in the future."
Of course, Samsung and the TV industry masturbate to the idea of TV's being regularly upgraded like cellphones. They got addicted to all that phat cash they made when people moved from SD to HDTV and so now they're throwing everything at the wall to keep us constantly upgrading. It's why they're pushing so hard on 4K, even though you would need a HUGE screen (or be sitting VERY close to it) to even tell the difference between regular 1080p and 4K. Only idiots think they need a 42" 4K TV when the huge screen at their local movie theater is only 2K.
Married with kids. (Score:3, Funny)
I don't even want a regular TV. I watch Netflix on a 25" monitor that I plug into a laptop.
Ah, the single life. Still thinking like you are living out of the dorm. But for social engagements with your wife and kids, friends and family, you are going to need that big screen TV and the sound bar to match --- say hello to the pre-order Disney Blu Ray from Amazon Prime, and goodbye to the rip off from the Pirate Bay.
Re: (Score:2)
Surely if you don't want the smart features, you just don't connect it on to your home network. I have a smart TV and a smart DVD player, neither of which has had wifi configured. I have a Chromecast and regularly use one of our laptops for video, so if I need access to online content, I have far better systems in place than what most Smart TVs can provide.
Re:I don't (Score:5, Interesting)
I bought the best plasma TV panel I could find anywhere. The picture is amazing. The "smart" features mostly don't work (voice and gesture control - nice idea but neither actually works for shit), but they came with the TV. One nice bit is the camera built into the TV folds up to point at the ceiling (that's the off switch), though there's no easy way to physically disable the microphone.
I tried the Netflix app, but the Netflix UI is just a lot better on my laptop, so the TV is just a monitor now. The YouTube app is a sad joke - the TV supports a USB keyboard and mouse, but the YouTube app doesn't, so you have to use the shitty on-screen keyboard to search. Worthless.
Basically, all the apps my TV came with are worthless, but it's a great monitor for watching movies.
Re: (Score:3)
Personally, we wanted a television of a particular size that looked good and wasn't too expensive, and when we went to Target the one we settled on happened to be "smart". If we had spent more time shopping, we might have found one that wasn't smart, but I don't know that it would have been less expensive overall. We haven't used any of the smart features, but we do enjoy the screen.
Re: (Score:3)
Because if you buy a TV for picture quality and non-smart features (4k, deep color, whatever), you'll probably end up with 'smart' just because it's the default now. 'Dumb' is getting hard to find in the middle market segment, it's either $10k audiophile grade nonsense, or $199 Walmart specials that aren't 'smart' because they're still using a chipset from 2008.
Re:I don't (Score:4, Insightful)
you can ONLY buy smart tvs, beyond a certain size or quality.
last year this happened. anything over 37", iirc, was 'required' to be smart.
I got my vizio at costco (for peace of mind) and while its 'smart' I never gave it access to my network, wired or wifi. the as-shipped firmware is buggy but all updates after that trade one bug for another, so I'm not interested in flashing it.
I can't imagine ever WANTING to connect a wholly untrustable closed-source network node like a 'smart tv' (or even blueray, and so I refuse to suppor the bd standard) to a network of mine.
my content comes from non-paid sources. which means, it is commercial free and de-bullshitted.
the entertainment industry can go fuck itself. I'm not playing by their rules. let the unwashed idiots do that. folks here generally know how to manage network nodes that can't be trusted. we simply don't connect them to any network.
and things will only get worse, too. yet another 'war' on consumers by content pigs. fuck them. pirate bay still lives on.
Re: (Score:3)
Even if the smart features are ok on the TV you can often get better performance by using an external device. The TVs won't upgrade the hardware and for the cost you're paying you don't want to replace it for a long time, so if the wifi sucks then it's stuck that way for a decade or more. The Roku handles 802.11N with MiMO, 5GHz, etc.
Re:I don't (Score:4, Informative)
May not be a "requirement" but you can't find anything non-"smart" to purchase new.
Yes you can, they are called names like "display panel" instead of "TV". Here you go [necdisplay.com], notice that many of those have integrated TV tuners. That's essentially a monitor with a TV tuner, which sounds exactly like what people in this thread are saying they use their TV for.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds fine.. as long as they don't start requiring people to connect to the internet, and there is no difference in cost for the 'smarts'
1. No smart TVs require an Internet connection.
2. Smart TVs are actually cheaper, through the wonders of mass production.
3. Advertisements cannot jump an air gap.
So buy a smart TV, use the features you want, ignore the features you don't want. You will pay nothing more, and there is no drawback. You can even invite your mom down to the basement to watch Netflix with you.
Re: (Score:2)
I just use a video projector. I have an Epson unit that's about four years old now, does 1080p. I've got an high-definition ATSC tuner (as opposed to one of those converter-box things) connected to the projector along with a computer, the Blu-ray player, the S-VHS deck, and a Laserdisc player.
The Epson was the first new one that I bought. I've had three different projectors over the past fifteen years or so, going from 800x600 t
Re: (Score:2)
What's the advantage of having a dedicated monitor instead of using a TV as monitor?
Good lord. Do you have a day?
Televisions make piss poor computer monitors. Start with chroma and expand to pixel blend, and then go on from there.
If you're color blind, or you have Retinitis Pigmentosa, I will overlook the question.
Re: (Score:3)
Good Lord! Elitist much?
Are you next going to tell me that I shouldn't listen to music encoded to MP3 because only the hearing impaired could possibly have an excuse for doing so? Going to tell me what lube I should use when I masturbate because everything else is beneath contempt?
I, of course, am typing this on my 1080p 32" LG Television that I use daily attached to my laptop. And I am neither color blind, nor do I have Retinitis Pigmentosa. This is the fourth TV I've used as a monitor, and the only iss
Re: (Score:2)
These days? Monitors have Display Port for 4k, which is what pretty much every computer is using. TVs have HDMI 2.0, which pretty much no video card supports.
If you're not doing 4k or you've managed to find the rare laptop that has an HDMI 2.0 output instead of Mini DisplayPort, then it doesn't matter as long as you can turn off the TV's "cinematic" motion blur.
Re: (Score:3)
Mini Displayport can output HDMI-compatible signal. It doesn't have to be HDMI 2.0 to work with HDMI - it's backward compatible - but Mini Displayport to HDMI adpaters do handle 4k.
Re: (Score:2)
Stupid question: I'm using a TV as a monitor for the past eight years now, it works very well and is sharp enough (but I don't watch any TV on it). When I bought it, there were no monitors of that size available.
What's the advantage of having a dedicated monitor instead of using a TV as monitor?
I used to only have one display: I would unplug my desktop monitor and carry it across the living room when I wanted to watch a movie on the couch. It took about one minute to switch. Since I upgraded my monitor I have an extra that I use just for watching TV/movies. I prefer using a monitor as a TV -- rather than using a TV as a monitor -- because I like a smaller display. I don't watch TV very often, so I want something that I can move out of the way when I'm not using it. If I preferred a larger display,
Re: (Score:2)
Until the recent 4k models came out, it was just pixel density as far as I know. That is, for the "rest of us". If you have specialized color needs, then you already know what you are looking for. Gamers are also often unhappy with the lag times on many/most TVs.
Simple: (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And in the meanwhile, shameless promotion for the Libertarian party! Socially liberal, fiscally conservative, nothing beats that. A vote for the lesser evil is still a vote for evil.
Avarist, did Samsung 'upgrade' the firmware in your computer so that it could inject ads into your text streams? :-D
That isn't the link you are looking for . . . (Score:5, Informative)
Are there any "dumb" TV's left? (Score:5, Interesting)
I just bought a new TV over the weekend, so I have recent experience with shopping. When it comes to large screen 1080p or 4k monitors, I didn't see any in the stores that weren't "smart" in one way or another.
That said - I have no use at all for those features excepting one... The set I bought can act as a Chromecast receiver (and it does so marvelously, I might add). I won't use any of the other apps on it since I already have other devices that run those apps and more perfectly well, but I am definitely happy with the ability to wirelessly cast to it because none of my existing devices had that capability.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
There is no price difference. It's a selling point to get consumers who don't care about picture quality to actually buy a little nicer TV. Or at least it was, now it's a selling point brand vs. brand.
Either way, I wouldn't use any of that. It's about as fun as using a cable box (and just as fast, too). I'll stick to my Roku.
I don't (Score:2)
And should I ever end up getting a TV that has the capability, I'll never connect it to the Internet (internet tomorrow :) ). I can manage my laptop/workstation/whatever device to make sure it has the patches it needs. I can't do that for a TV.
Therefore, the only way a smart TV will be showing Netflix/Youtube/whatever is through a device that *I* have control over. Period.
App Store Wars (Score:5, Insightful)
Consumers want a Roku/Fire/Mythbox/AppleTV-like function that lets them play video on their TV with a convenient UI. They don't especially want a smart TV, although boy wouldn't it be nice if we could eliminate a box... dream on.
However TV makers, long under the knife of commodity bottom diving, would like to get a piece of the higher margin smart-device business. It is they who are forcing their lousy smartTV functions on us. We all know better: they are very slow, they end up being unsupported after a year, they rarely support all the apps that a user may want, and it takes 60s for your TV to "boot up" as a result of the cruft. They are forcing this crap on us in the hopes that we'll find it "good enough". It's not making them any money, so I expect it will eventually be dropped, I don't know anyone who bought a TV because of its "smart" functionality.
Re: (Score:2)
Consumers want a Roku/Fire/Mythbox/AppleTV-like function that lets them play video on their TV with a convenient UI.
I had a MythTV box (2 analog tuners) for 9 years and it did everything I wanted. Unfortunately, Cox recently went "all digital" and I didn't want to have to deal with their (apparently) random employment of Copy-Once so I got a 4-tuner, 1-TB Tivo Bolt. It's actually pretty nice, but wish I had local system access so I could code up a few web pages and CGI scripts, like I did for MythTV. (sigh)
Re: (Score:2)
Basically your only choice is to get an HDMI video recorder and an illegal HDCP stripping device and have MythTV change channels on your cable box over IR (or firewire if that's still an option for remote control).
If you put up an antenna (attic or even hidden on a wall behind the TV depending on where you are), you can get an HDHomerun and get the experience going again with HD local channels with no DRM.
Re:App Store Wars (Score:5, Interesting)
I have a Smart TV that was given to me as payment of a debt. I like the TV, but after trying to get the smart features to work satisfactorily I ultimately gave up and plugged in my Roku.
The tv's smart interface and all apps are dreadfully slow to respond. The Netflix UI is terribly dated in appearance and functionality, and the Plex app wouldn't connect to my plex servers. I sideloaded a plex app from the deveoloper and this was able to connect to my servers, but stopped functioning shortly thereafter. The Youtube app was slow and pairing it with an android device was always a crapshoot.
The tv was missing a critical app for me, so the Roku purchase was inevitable, but the apps included with the smart tv are by no means a working substitute. If Samsung et al would actually provide a positive user experience with their smart suites then I would certainly be onboard. But in reality, much like SOHO router vendors who pathetically attempt to provide 'premium' features with their device firmware, tv vendors should stick to selling tvs.
Re:App Store Wars (Score:4, Interesting)
I basically had the exact opposite experience. I got a smart TV because that's basically all they were selling in the size I wanted with other specifications such as 3+ HDMI ports. I thought for sure I'd end up buying a Roku in less than a year because of all the comments similar to yours that people post.
3 years later I still don't have a need for another device to be hooked up to my TV. It connects to Plex using DLNA, no specific app needed. Although there is a Plex app, I've never felt the need to download it. The Netflix and Youtube apps work well enough for my usage. The ability to stream videos directly from my tablet or phone is a big plus. It still gets updates every couple of months, so they are doing some stuff to keep it up to date. I haven't found any deficiencies with my Smart TV. It's an LG tv if anybody is wondering.
Re: (Score:3)
Or there's Samsung, whose "smart" tv puts up notices about changes to services you don't use in the middle of shows you're watching, and because it's built into the TV you can't do anything about it. Fortunately the backlight failed (common problem on Samsungs) so I replaced it with a "Roku TV" from Hitachi where the smart TV functions are on a HDMI dongle you can chuck out if you don't want it anymore. And in fact the Roku is a much better desktop box than any of the built in smartTV functions I've had
Why wouldn't you want a TV with SystemD (Score:2, Funny)
Why wouldn't you want a TV with SystemD and a fucking web browser that tells all your data to HQ. If you get a hard one when the TV fails to boot again thanks to PoetteringD or you want to pay ransom to the hackers of the TV company who made photos of you naked to not release them then smart TVs are something for you.
Netflix in 4k (Score:5, Informative)
I want not to have one (Score:5, Insightful)
I want a TV that specifically does NOT have those "smart" features.
Putting a EULA-requiring TV with a camera, microphone and internet connection in the bedroom. What could possibly go wrong?
Re: I want not to have one (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well...she's wealthy. Maybe she wants a vacation.
Re: (Score:2)
OK, who let the guy from the Samsung ad department get to my coke?
Yes (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Roku. Universal Remote. You might have to get an IR remote for the Roku elsewhere to program the universal, since they don't ship with them anymore (they come with bluetooth remotes but still have IR receivers).
I wanted a particular size. (Score:2)
There's a space on the wall where the TV goes. 55" is too big. 48" is about right.
So on walking into the store, there was exactly one TV available off the shelf with that size. It was a Samsung.
If it was a dumb monitor, then that would have been simpler. The 'smart' features remain unused. The TV isn't plugged into the ethernet (but the ROKU is).
I tried using the TV features a couple of times, but it comes across as a really, really bad attempt at a ROKU like thing. They add no value.
Why do you want a TV in the first place? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And how much is a 42" or 50" monitor?
What is the market? (Score:2)
Speakers (Score:2)
The author seems to assume that we're talking about the big TVs in the living room or family room where you might have a separate audio setup. For other TVs in workout areas, kitchens and bedroom, the built-in speakers and "low cord-ness" of no separate media center or DVR is a big plus.
I don't, I want an Android TV stick (Score:2)
And I have one, the Fire TV stick. It serves my needs just fine. I wish Amazon were a little more competent but I can always just run Kodi if I don't like their client.
I don't (Score:5, Insightful)
I know it's weird but I just want this unitasking display that does ONE THING GOOD - Generates a purty picture with good resolution and color depth and supports the current HDMI standards and maybe displayport. I don't want or need to play angry birds on it or skype on it or any countless numbers of apps that I'll use my computer or iDevice to run and I certainly do NOT want it networked (unless you're going to allow me to update the HDMI controllers - which you guys never do anyway preferring to make me buy a whole new display)
YOU. SELL. TVs!!!
That's the extent of your access into my life!
Why do you presume I want one? (Score:2)
The only processing I want my TV to do involves image artifact cleanup and frame rate smoothing (to prevent jarring pans and stuttery motion on a large TV where objects cross great distances between frames).
If I want more, I have many devices of my own choosing and preference I can.connect. If I must view android on my TV I can use chrome cast. The overhead on price is a turnoff, and the built in hardware can't possibly keep up with how long I will have my TV, which is probably like 10 years. In 10 years I'
Wait a TV minute... (Score:2)
Why a TV at all? (Score:4, Insightful)
A computer monitor makes a great dumb TV. I use a Raspberry Pi with one as a media center.
Re: (Score:2)
SmartTV vs Cast'able TV (Score:2)
The only features I use on my Netcast-OS bearing, mid-2014 LG model is Netflix, Youtube, Spotify, PCT and DLNA casting. The problem is, I know at some point, only the later will keep working due to TV-side firmware upgrades deciding to no longer support the model, thus not even including the app. level cast protocol anymore.
I think the new Vizio TVs and other Google Cast'able new products are going the right way in defining a long-term supportable framework across corporate interests. Why would I even consi
Most people don't (Score:2)
I think most people (myself included) don;t care about smart TVs. It didn't factor in at all the last time I replaced my TV (about a year ago). I did end up getting one, but that is because any TV that isn't super cheap is a smart TV. I do use the Netflix app on mine, but that is because I use Windows Media Center as my main TV control and support for the Netflix app for that has been dropped. If I couldn't use the TV app, I would have just used my PS4 instead, so it's not like it was a big deal for me. But
Simplicity? (Score:3)
It's a bit strange to me to ask the question, "Why do you want a smart-TV when you can just buy a Raspberry Pi?" Because then I'd need to figure out and set up a Raspberry Pi, obviously. It may be that it sounds to you like a fun project, but a lot of people don't want to go through that process. I don't want a media center computer, adding another device that I need to manage and update, I just want the simplest way to watch Netflix without worrying about yet another device.
Now I'm playing the devil's advocate a little here. I have a Smart TV because the TV model I wanted at the time I was shopping for TVs came with those features. I don't use it, because I use an Apple TV (if I weren't in Apple's ecosystem for other reasons, I'd probably have gone with a Roku box). If there were a TV with a built-in Apple TV, I might buy that as a matter of simplification and convenience, but if I kept two separate devices, it would probably be so that I could upgrade the "smart" components without upgrading the screen. Still, if it were an option to have a TV with the Apple TV components integrated, I might go for that, just to make things really simple.
All I want is to watch Netflix/Hulu. As long as it has that functionality, I want the simplest, easiest, most elegant, and most trouble-free method of doing that. I suspect that many people have a similar approach to the problem.
botnets (Score:2)
Nope (Score:2)
I actively look for TVs without the smart functionality. That's getting harder and harder to find with the larger models.
Smart TV == planned obsolescence (Score:3)
I don't (Score:2)
But try to find a dumb one. I predict that in the near future it might even be more expensive to get a used TV that isn't infested with crapware than getting a new one that is.
Re: (Score:3)
No smart TV for me if I can help it. (Score:2)
Replacing my Roku when it becomes obsolete, or doesn't have a feature I want, that the new model has is easy and fairly inexpensive. (>$100) Having to replace my entire 50" TV for the same reason is lousy. It's many times more expensive, creates a ton more waste, and is just stupid because the screen still works just fine.
The fact that the manufacturers will do invasive things like inject ads and siphon viewer data is icing on the BS cake.
One less device (Score:2)
I used to love my Samsung TV + DLNA (Score:2)
It's still a great TV... it's a 58" Plasma and still blows away LCD/LED TVs after 6 years.
That said, an Android TV box with Kodi is fully replacing the AllShare functionality on the TV, as I have better control over closed captions/subtitles, no aspect ratio issues, h.265 support, and a lot more options moving ahead into the future. After all the years of dealing with the quirks of Samsung's DLNA support, I'm ready to move on to a richer, "smarter" experience.
The threat of ads being inserted into my video s
To bad the cable co's just about killed tru2way (Score:2)
To bad the cable co's just about killed tru2way.
Now that was a good idea that got pushed to side and we got stuck with the iguide shit and still in use DCT-2000's.
Smart TV for a smart TV experience. (Score:2)
Some of us bought Smart TV's back when that was the only realistic option to run something like Plex without needing four remotes and a list of a dozen buttons that have to be punched in some magic sequence to make it all work. I want one basic remote to control the whole thing, one usable user interface, and for everything to be nicely integrated. That ruled out a ton of hardware back in 2010-2012, and a lot of it since then too.
Today, the AppleTV 4, with its Plex client and HDMI CEC capabilities, comes
What's the use? (Score:2)
That's being said, I just love when my "Smart" TV show me a popup, telling me that a 248MB patch is needed...
(My "Smartass" tv is now disconnected).
obvious reasons (Score:2)
Its more likely to ask why wouldn't you want a smart tv. Otherwise its one more device, two more wires, one more power brick wasting energy, one HDMI port used and extra complexity for non nerdy gadget types.
The answer is because Smart TV UI's always suck (performance too) and that the tv manufacturers can be counted on to do stupid things no one ever asked for. Like including microphones and cameras (could easily be add-ons for the rare people who actually want it), and injecting ads into tv streams.
Thes e
Smart for Who? (Score:5, Insightful)
Fewer Remotes! (Score:4, Insightful)
I do not want, nor do I have, a smart TV (Score:2)
.
If a content origination device starts doing something stupid because of a software "upgrade," then that device is history.
e.g., the AppleTV that was a part of my home entertainment system is now history because of the disaster that is AppleTV gen 4. What a buggy pile of goo
Netflix in the bedroom / kitchen- (Score:3)
Why? No extra box, limited headache, decent UI.
All the other Smart stuff is pretty worthless IMHO.
When are we going to get a decent UI that lets me watch whatever I have access to in a single UIX? Let me put Netflix, Amazon, Hulu credentials in and have a common interface. I know Amazon opened up some, but a wider standard would be idealtastic.
The big problem with the Modern World (Score:2)
We have Smart Cars Smart Phones Smart TVs
when are we going to get smart USERS???
Just unplug it. (Score:2)
Samsung SmartTV blows (Score:3)
I always tell people not to spend the extra money because it's a "smart tv." I recently challenge myself to that assumption and bought a Samsung smart tv for the bedroom and I can say it still sucks. I suggest buying a Roku if you want plug and play streaming: Netflix, Amazon prime, slingtv, and it even talks to my media server running Serviio (plex works too).
I will add my mother in law just bought an LG with their webos software and I was really surprised by it. It works pretty smoothly, close to my favored Roku.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, considering the size of the panel and all, they're still cheaper than most PC monitors...
Re: (Score:2)
In theory, it is nice. In practice, you find that your smart TV won't play from Amazon Prime Instant Video and your smart Blu-Ray player won't play from Netflix. Before long, you give up and just buy an Apple TV or buy a Chromecast and use it with your phone.
The whole "one device" thing only really works if the people writing software for it have an incentive to update it and fix it. People who sell hardware that consumers buy once and keep for a decade don't have that incentive. By the time you replac
Re: (Score:2)
In theory, it is nice. In practice, you find that your smart TV won't play from Amazon Prime Instant Video and your smart Blu-Ray player won't play from Netflix. Before long, you give up and just buy an Apple TV or buy a Chromecast and use it with your phone.
That's exactly why you keep hearing the media clamor for Apple to make it's own TV set instead of the set-top box. It doesn't make sense though, because you know it's going to be twice as expensive as a regular TV and for what, app store integration? What I'd really like is if my Apple TV could also act as my cable set top box & DVR, but Comcast would never allow that.
Re: (Score:2)
...until the update requires you to go online every couple weeks to download a few new ads or it breaks down for some odd reason...
Re: (Score:2)
You should disconnect them anyways a roku, chromecast, Apple TV, or any other device can be your smart tv functions and don't insert ads by Samsung into your streams.
Re: (Score:2)
Think Grandpa, who barley manages to run the microwave
Bad example: microwave ovens have been around since Grandpa was in his prime.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know anyone offhand who wants a "smart TV", other than it might save them the need for another box and wall wart. Especially with the fact that it will be a pretty much foregone conclusion that the apps on the TV will never be upgraded... actually, nothing upgraded on the TV, other than an "enhanced advertising experience", which no consumer wants.
I just like displays that display accurately whatever signal I feed them, be it VGA, DVI, HDMI, DP, MiniDP, or whatever. If I want additional features,
Re: (Score:3)
Get a harmony remote. Wife presses watch movie button all the right bits come up etc etc, wife presses off button things all go off.