Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Television Businesses The Almighty Buck

Taking the Smarts Out of Smart TVs Would Make Them More Expensive (theverge.com) 329

In a wide-ranging interview, Nilay Patel of The Verge speaks with Bill Baxter, chief technology officer of Vizio, about what the company thinks of some TV vendors adding support for Apple's AirPlay 2, and other things. A remarkable exchange on the business of data collection and selling: Nilay Patel: I guess I have a philosophical question. You guys are committed to low price points and you often beat the industry at those price points. Can you hit those price points without the additional data collection that TV does if you don't have an ad business or a data business on top of the TV?
Bill Baxter: So that's a great question. Actually, we should have a beer and have a long, long chat about that. So look, it's not just about data collection. It's about post-purchase monetization of the TV. This is a cutthroat industry. It's a 6-percent margin industry, right? I mean, you know it's pretty ruthless. You could say it's self-inflicted, or you could say there's a greater strategy going on here, and there is. The greater strategy is I really don't need to make money off of the TV. I need to cover my cost.

And then I need to make money off those TVs. They live in households for 6.9 years -- the average lifetime of a Vizio TV is 6.9 years. You would probably be amazed at the number of people come up to me saying, "I love Vizio TVs, I have one" and it's 11 years old. I'm like, "Dude, that's not even full HD, that's 720p." But they do last a long time and our strategy -- you've seen this with all of our software upgrades including AirPlay 2 and HomeKit -- is that we want to make things backward compatible to those TVs. So we're continuing to invest in those older TVs to bring them up to feature level comparison with the new TVs when there's no hardware limitation that would otherwise prevent that.

And the reason why we do that is there are ways to monetize that TV and data is one, but not only the only one. It's sort of like a business of singles and doubles, it's not home runs, right? You make a little money here, a little money there. You sell some movies, you sell some TV shows, you sell some ads, you know. It's not really that different than The Verge website.

Patel: One sort of Verge-nerd meme that I hear in our comments or on Twitter is "I just want a dumb TV. I just want a panel with no smarts and I'll figure it out on my own." But it sounds like that lifetime monetization problem would prevent you from just making a dumb panel that you can sell to somebody.
Baxter: Well, it wouldn't prevent us, to be honest with you. What it would do is, we'd collect a little bit more margin at retail to offset it. Again, it may be an aspirational goal to not have high margins on our TV business because I can make it up downstream. On the other hand, I'm actually aggregating that monetization across a large number of users, some of which opt out. It's a blended revenue model where, in the end, Vizio succeeds, but you know, it's not wholly dependent on things like data collection.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Taking the Smarts Out of Smart TVs Would Make Them More Expensive

Comments Filter:
  • So how much? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Kokuyo ( 549451 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @10:45AM (#57937122) Journal

    How much money DO thwy make after purchase?

    If it's 200 on a 1200 appliance, I'll gladly give yoi 1500 to just give me a dumb panel and fuck off.

    • Re:So how much? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by MightyYar ( 622222 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @10:48AM (#57937140)

      Most of the time you can opt-out. Nothing forces you to plug your "smart TV" into your network. Use it as a dumb monitor and take your $200 subsidy.

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • If you want to use the 200USD smart part, buy an external device for less than 200 USD.

          Question for 200: What do you think is the reason that the external device goes for less than 200? Well?

          • Re:So how much? (Score:4, Interesting)

            by kalpol ( 714519 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @11:23AM (#57937406)
            Kodi on Raspberry PI is $50, without any data harvesting shenanigans except maybe from third-party applications.
      • Re:So how much? (Score:5, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 10, 2019 @11:23AM (#57937410)

        It is not that simple. I have a "smart" TV and the smart features often crash or simply fail to work correctly, most likely because the app developers suck at writing apps for the TV. All I really want is a monitor to connect to a Roku, except it takes forever to turn on because it has to boot up like a damn computer. Even if I never connect it to a network and never use any of the smart features it is still less fit for the task of "shut up and turn on in a usable state" than a dumb TV.

        • Re: So how much? (Score:3, Interesting)

          by reanjr ( 588767 )

          So, return the TV for a refund. If the TV doesn't work right, you are entitled to a refund. I assure you that TV manufacturer will not be able to sustain putting in smart components that lead to malfunctions.

        • Why are you rebooting your TV so often? It will sit in standby forever, instantly ready to come on. My Sony comes on instantly and simply shows whatever the hell the AVR throws at it unless I specifically hit the HOME button to go to the Android side of things. I think there are even ways to lock it down ("kiosk mode").

          • by tepples ( 727027 ) <tepples.gmail@com> on Thursday January 10, 2019 @12:43PM (#57937978) Homepage Journal

            Why are you rebooting your TV so often? It will sit in standby forever, instantly ready to come on.

            A TV unplugged from mains does not draw vampire power [wikipedia.org]. Let's say you've used a Kill A Watt meter to determine that each of your devices draws 1 watt on standby. Over a year, each device draws 8.766 kWh, and at $0.114 per kWh, that's a dollar per device per year. Multiply that by all the devices you leave on standby, and consider how much you could save by switching off the outlet when the device is not in use.

      • Re:So how much? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by cyberchondriac ( 456626 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @11:23AM (#57937412) Journal

        I used to have my 50" UHD Samsung TV (2014 model I believe) connected, after I first bought it. Curiosity, I suppose. The picture quality from online services (Prime, etc) however was never quite as good as when I used my older "smart" Sony BluRay player for some reason (both are wireless); then one day, experiencing some issues with the crappy 'banana' remote, I uttered a string of curse words and the TV replied onscreen: "That wasn't very nice". Funny as hell but creepy at the same time.
        I took if off my network after that, I even blocked the MAC in my router just in case.
        If I need to go online for Prime or Netflix, I just power up the BluRay player, which doesn't even have a microphone, and gives me a better picture anyway. Sony is still king where video is concerned, IMO, though I have no complaints whatsoever about the Samsung TV for normal cable use.

      • For now that is. Right now, with the assumption that they gain by data sucking, I wouldn't be surprised to see TVs either having a 3D cellular modem, or just not working unless they have an always-on requirement to the Internet like game consoles do.

        I wouldn't be surprised if the next upgrades, be it 6k or 3D, or whatever, required the TV to have an always on connection for DRM purposes.

      • The problem is that building the smart TV functionality into it kills the experience. You can opt out of connecting it to the network, but it's still going to have a boot up time and the interface of a smart TV. They've made the apps and other smart TV features easy to access but made it harder to just do normal things such as select the input or enable the headphones for sound.

        Also, I really don't think it would be any more expensive. Sure they get money from data collection, but software development isn

      • (Not at Mighty Yar) I guess we can tell which side the dumb is; it's not even on that panel.

      • by doug141 ( 863552 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @12:39PM (#57937950)

        Two smart TV reviews I recently read: One had a minimalist remote, which was mostly just a microphone for telling the TV what to do. Another review, which was for a Visio, was from an angry customer who had opted out of data collection 6 months prior when he bought the TV, but a software upgrade pushed a new data collection option, which he said could not be opted out with the included remote!

    • Re:So how much? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Dorianny ( 1847922 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @10:54AM (#57937194) Journal
      All TV's are dumb panels until you connect them to the network. You don't have to pay more, let all the other idiots subsidize the price with their personal data
      • Re:So how much? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by guruevi ( 827432 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @11:01AM (#57937232)

        How long until they just put in a 4G chip in each of them? It'll cost them $12/year per set in bulk.

        • Who is going to activate that 4G chip? On what carrier? Who is paying for the service plan? Who pays for unexpected data cap breeches?
          • You. When you first "activate" your TV, which you have to do for it to work. For ... umm.... security reasons. Yeah, so it can't get stolen.

            • Buy a TV. Plug it in. Turn it on. If it doesn't work now, return it for a full refund, and wait for the TV manufacturer to go out of business.

          • by guruevi ( 827432 )

            The manufacturer probably on Verizon paid for by the manufacturer on an M2M plan.

            Retails at about $5/MB (Looking at my MythTV logs, I could definitely extract about 30 days worth of very detailed viewing history in a single MB of compressed data) but if you go bulk, I've gotten an agreement for $15/month for 200 devices.

            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

              Yeah but why would they bother pissing away money on a 4G modem, M2M SIM and management of the whole shitshow when it's only 0.01% of customers who don't immediately connect to their wifi for free?

              Economics are often a good way to protect your privacy.

              • They don't, it is a single chipset that is cheap. Lots of stuff has it. It gives them enough bandwidth to phone home a batch of hashes a couple times a day.

                Are you really sure it isn't worth $10 for them to have your address, and reports about how you use the device, and a map of your wifi SSIDs? They can measure a lot of things passively.

                • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

                  $10 and a backend and GDPR compliance and the inevitable negative publicity? Not worth it.

              • Re:So how much? (Score:4, Insightful)

                by guruevi ( 827432 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @01:13PM (#57938194)

                A TON of people are not setting up their WiFi on those people, not because they care about data sharing but because they simply don't know how or understand why.

                Many people in my family ask me to come hook up their Roku Stick when they just bought a TV with a Roku app built-in and in some cases they end up giving up completely when it involves buying and setting up another router or extender to get signal in their bedrooms.

                Of the people that buy smart TV's, I wouldn't be surprised if many don't ever get setup correctly, hence why most come pre-loaded with ads even before you connect to the network.

          • Wow, you really didn't know about this stuff? That they have cheap plans for manufacturers, and special low-bandwidth chipsets that deal with the concerns you're fretting over?

      • They'll probably do something to goad people into connecting them. I got an Xbox One S to play 4K content to a new TV, and while I do enough gaming to have wanted to hook it up to the net and my account anyway, if I had mostly just been interested in it for playing blu rays, I would have had to do all of the connections to download the app, as it didn't come preinstalled. To MS's credit, this may save them fees to the Blu Ray association, but it wouldn't be far fetched to have TVs start telling you to dow
    • by guruevi ( 827432 )

      Most people would still go for the $1200 panel especially if it's "smart". You (singular) are not their market. They make some money off you and you end up opting out.

    • How much money DO thwy make after purchase?

      If it's 200 on a 1200 appliance, I'll gladly give yoi 1500 to just give me a dumb panel and fuck off.

      So here is the deal. Would you be willing to pay $300 after the purchase for an update that makes it a dumb TV? You might, but how many people would feel ripped off if a manufacturer offered that? they'd feel like they are paying to remove features; instead of paying not to track and covering the manufacturer's subsidy from the apps. I think a similar problem would occur if that offered two models, a smart TV and higher priced dumb one people would wonder why pay more for less "features?"

      You can get a dump

      • Can you get 60" monitors without paying a hefty difference? Then how do you control one from 3-10 feet away? Yes the easiest option to not connect the smart TV to the network.
        • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • Take a wild guess where that difference comes from.

        • Can you get 60" monitors without paying a hefty difference? Then how do you control one from 3-10 feet away?

          Leave it on and turn of the video source. Most monitors will sleep when the video input is removed and come back on when it comes back.

          Yes the easiest option to not connect the smart TV to the network.

          Of course, but the OP wanted a solution without the apps. I agree simply not connecting is the best solution to avoid tracking, but if you also then want to add your own apps your stuck so you have to have an external video source you can control.

        • Can you get 60" monitors without paying a hefty difference? Then how do you control one from 3-10 feet away?

          meant to add: you can get industrial displays with remotes. A lot of the screens you see in stores are displays. I've seen them in the 1500 - 2000k range for 65" displays.

      • by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

        The premise of this article seems a bit suspicious. Looking around, at least where I am, the dumb TVs are ten to twenty percent cheaper.

        • Not sure where you are, but when I went looking for a new TV several months ago, there really weren't any dumb TVs available. And yeah, the "smart" ones were damn cheap. 55" 4k TV for $400 cheap.

          Cheap enough that I now think I'll upgrade my little media box, since it's struggling to output stuff at that size and resolution now. Sad when I have to downgrade online streams to 720p to keep them from stuttering.

        • They also usually have 3.5mm jacks on the back that are actually UART serial remote control interfaces.

          I'm not convinced they can increase the price of the business screens ("dumb TVs") just to force their sales down. They might to actually lower the prices of the smart TV to get more people to buy them if it is a concern. But even here, it doesn't sound like it is. Only a small percentage of non-business users are smart People.

    • Or for people like me they make $0 off the smart TV parts as I don't use them.
    • by shess ( 31691 )

      How much money DO thwy make after purchase?

      If it's 200 on a 1200 appliance, I'll gladly give yoi 1500 to just give me a dumb panel and fuck off.

      The claimed margin is only 6%, so I think it's more likely that they're screwing you out of your privacy for an additional $50. Or $10. Or some other trivial and enraging amount.

    • I came to say exactly that. 6% margin is problematic, fine, jack it to 10 and fuck off.

      I've never quite understood some of these arguments. When I look at a TV I don't really give a shit whether one is $1200 and one is $1320 or $1100. I care about the features and perceived reliability. 10% cost difference is in the noise over the lifetime of the TV. It's less than $1/month.

  • I have a nice 50 (or mayr 55) HDTV. I ewas frustrated by the mandatory software updates the TV woud do randomly when I wanted to turn it on. SO, I simply unplugged it form my internet and now I have a great TV the is not collecting any data. No "software update" in the least 5 years. Basically, it is great monitor to watch DVDs (thank you Netflix) and run an HDMI for whatever screen I device I want it to show It is too much for us to all become data-producers every time we make a purchase.
  • Cost vs. Benefit (Score:4, Insightful)

    by fortythirteen ( 5606969 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @10:57AM (#57937208)

    Look, when we do automatic contact recognition we give the industry a real consumer benefit. And I think that’s sometimes lost in the whole story.

    What real consumer benefit? Not having to type the movie name into IMDB to see who that character actor is? Is that really worth Visio knowing every fucking thing I watch?

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @11:00AM (#57937226)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • by MobyDisk ( 75490 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @12:11PM (#57937732) Homepage

      I knew we'd be hearing "Asshole-speak" and I was right. I'll never use that crap.

      FULL. STOP. This kind of reaction is why Donald Trump is president today. People don't want to hear the full story.

      This is a case where someone wants to explain both sides of an issue and go into the nuance so that the person asking the question knows why things are the way they are, and what the real solution is. But today, people want the 10 syllable-or-less soundbite that oversimplifies things. That's why "build a wall" is so popular, when the actual solution is "fund immigration judges to reduce the number of missed asylum seekers, and execute due process" doesn't win. Because the latter takes a good 15 minutes to explain.

      This is why global warming is so divisive. It takes time to explain that yes, the polar ice extent is increasing but the total volume of ice is decreasing. This is why renewable energy is so divisive: it takes time to explain the difference between baseload power, demand power, and intermittent power. It's easier to say "gas is evil" and "solar is green."

      I too rail against smart TVs. This same thing is why BS is preloaded onto PCs, and phones too. It's part of why Apple products are so expensive: Apple doesn't take kickbacks to install garbage on your phone. I appreciate knowing what percentage of the TV revenue is from the smart features, and the average time people keep TVs. If you don't want to hear that, then go to another site that gives 10 word sound bites.

      • Apple doesn't receive kickbacks from installing garbage on your phone? Then what is Apple Music?

      • by apoc.famine ( 621563 ) <apoc.famine@NOSPAM.gmail.com> on Thursday January 10, 2019 @12:43PM (#57937980) Journal

        It seems to be part of a massive shift in the population as a whole. Have you watched any music videos in the last couple of years? Scenes don't generally last for more than a few seconds. Sometimes it's all of a second. This has started to pick up steam across all of media, where it's chop, chop, chop. Cutting from one shot, one idea, one talking point to the next.

        I think social media helps fuel this fire of hyperactivity and ADD. Smart phones are a blast furnace for it. I'm constantly blown away by how many people let everything on their phone notify them of everything. It's a constant ding, ding, ding, pay attention to me! No me! No, over here! Pavlov would be having a field day doing research.

        A sizable percent of the population no longer seems capable of having a conversation over a beer. I don't know how we fix that. I hope it's just the growing pains of the switch to the internet and hyperconnectivity, and that we'll figure it out in time. Note the other /. story where the bulk of fake news sharing is done by old people who didn't grow up with the internet - seems like the kids who did are far less trusting. I'm hopeful that kids growing up in the Pavlovian new world we have can see the impact it has on their parents, and realize that they need to take steps to prevent that.

        We really need to get back to a place where we can have deep, introspective conversations about complicated topics. That's the only way we can really make progress in the world.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      To be fair to the guy he did warn you that his products were cheap crap. 6.9 years is pathetic for a TV, and that's the average.

      Thanks for the warning bro.

  • You lie! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by chill ( 34294 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @11:01AM (#57937230) Journal

    Then how can Sceptre sell 4K "dumb" TVs so cheap? I bought a 50" UHD TV for $299. You can get these at Walmart and Amazon, among other places.

    http://www.sceptre.com/store/TV/4K-UHD-TV-category1category73.html [sceptre.com]

    • Quality (Score:5, Insightful)

      by JBMcB ( 73720 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @11:29AM (#57937454)

      Then how can Sceptre sell 4K "dumb" TVs so cheap?

      Because they use cheap panels. Vizio regularly tops reviewer's image quality lists. And, as the Vizio exec said, they tend to last a long time. My friend bought a Vizio back when they were making decent quality TVs for *very* cheap prices, and it's still going 10 years later.

      • Because they use cheap panels. Vizio regularly tops reviewer's image quality lists.

        When Vizio was new they were known for having the least processing. For people watching movies, this was a liability, unless you could turn on smoothing on your player. For gamers, it's an obvious advantage. They provided very low latency.

        My friend bought a Vizio back when they were making decent quality TVs for *very* cheap prices,

        They're not cheap any more. That's how they can offer high image quality. I bought one back then, too, and subsequently sold it when I bought something bigger. Then I went to Sharp Aquos, which was a dramatic improvement — it had both unprocessed modes (dot by dot an

    • by MobyDisk ( 75490 )

      I wonder if you could buy smart TVs, flash the firmware to disable the smart features, and resell them for a profit. My smart TV just isn't connected to the network, but how long before you get a TV that requires you to complete a registration process and connect online before it displays an image?

  • 6 percent margins (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 110010001000 ( 697113 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @11:06AM (#57937270) Homepage Journal
    6 percent margin is plenty for a mass manufactured product. The tech industry is so greedy.
  • What happens if you never connect it, or just connect it long enough for a firmware update then firewall it off so it may be "on" the local network, but cannot get to the public Internet?

    I assume they don't make money in that case?

  • This sort of business strategy is as old as the hills. I'm not sure why this particular example is all that surprising or reprehensible. Savvy consumers can beat the system in other areas by, e.g., reusing razor blades much longer than the manufacturer intended [neowin.net] or refilling toner cartridges [wired.com], and here it's even easier -- they can just not use the "smart TV" functionality.

    • As for razors, get the ones with 2 blades, not the 4 blades they push nowadays. The 2 blades kind stay comfortable for waaaay longer for some reason.

      Smart TVs... yeah I hate being spied on. They are obviously making way more money than they let on, otherwise they wouldn't have bothered.

    • This sort of business strategy is as old as the hills. I'm not sure why this particular example is all that surprising or reprehensible.

      I wonder how many people here remember the old AOL computer bundles. Shortly after W95 made Windows computers a lot easier for the masses to use, AOL and I think Compuserve would subsidize part of the cost of a computer. You had to sign up for a few years of their service.

  • A very good example of this. Any answer that starts with "this is a great question" is usually the only part of the answer that's honest. It is a great question, and an uncomfortable at that, because it puts the finger exactly on what we do not want to answer.

  • I don't doubt making them smart makes the cheaper to purchase -- because you become the product they're selling to someone else. But the idea that they'er so well made. Maybe 11 years ago, but I've taken them apart and their build quality is crap.

    • A lot of people aren't understanding that the "dumb TV" is a business screen, and the "smart TV" is a cheapo consumer screen for people who don't mind being spied on.

      There is not generally a reason to presume that cheap consumer stuff has high build quality. But they're somehow confused and don't realize they're buying the lower grade product.

  • There already exists this market that people want for a "dumb" tv. A commercial or hospitality display, you can turn any feature you want completely off. They are of course, more expensive, but usually meant to be run 20 hours a day or more, so better components too.

    And of course, nothing says you have to connect it to the network ever.

  • by StandardCell ( 589682 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @11:30AM (#57937458)
    My background is in TV SoCs, so I can definitively say that this whole industry has been a very low margin business for years. Mr. Funai, who ran the Funai brand that owns Sanyo and Magnavox brands, used to negotiate with us and was taking off fractions of pennies for certain features. That was over a decade ago...

    SoCs have changed a lot since those days (waving at DivX). Yet the most important features of the last decade driving increased margins from a pure display perspective are HDR / wide color gamut, quantum dot and OLED, and even those TVs are starting to become more "mainstream" in some respects.

    The other half of this is streaming services, and this is what modern SoCs can finally provide. While boxes like Roku were predicted to go the way of the dodo and haven't, most brands have an app platform that supports not only streaming media, but analytics (read: data collection) as well. Some set-top boxes / streaming players (and I increasingly suspect TVs) have microphones to collect ad impression information for advertisers, but the terms controlling this data collection will be buried in some contract of adhesion aka EULA you click through to get access. Even Android phones going by Cast devices or Apple phones going by AirPlay sinks can and often do collect this information today for Google/Apple. Remember that Vizio was already caught in a scandal fingerprinting image buffers once a second and sending that to third parties, so the flippant attitude of the interviewer is both humorous and frightening.

    What the interview doesn't discuss is how far this will actually go. I, like many /.ers, will simply not connect our TVs to a network and use our player of choice, like Kodi on a Pi3 or HTPC, plus an antenna for the tuner. Today's ATSC tuners will go the way of the dodo, and in a few years they will be relegated to having a 16:9 SD-ish signal of a limited number of channels for a few years until they shut that off and ATSC 3.0 becomes your only choice. Even tuners will not be protected long-term, as various sub-committees in ATSC, EBU and others are talking about having a 5G modem in displays and set-top boxes to collect viewer information using some IoT stack even when not connected to the user's network. It won't matter if there isn't PII, as statistical correlation and deep learning with this and other data (e.g. mobile network location) will be enough to pinpoint not only your house, but who is viewing what at a given time.

    As frightening as all of the above may be, it means we need to be vigilant. Security researchers need to keep on top of these privacy violations and monitor not only network traffic but wireless as well. When the 5G IoT data collection really starts rolling out, we'll have to look at the FCC filings for the devices and see which have these radios in them. I hope it doesn't get to the point where I have to start cutting traces and clipping MMCX antennas out of a display, but I'm ready to do it. We need to use privacy enhancement tools on more open platforms and at low levels of our home networks and reject the closed ecosystems and control of embedded devices. Most importantly, we need to be very vocal and very public in calling out privacy violators. Everyone is trying to establish economic rents, but it can't be at the expense of individual privacy simply because the inevitable data breaches will inevitably expose too many of us to unwarranted public scrutiny.
  • An Idea (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DickBreath ( 207180 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @11:37AM (#57937534) Homepage
    How about a law that mandates that the "smart" part of a Smart TV be a distinctly removable and upgradeable module?

    Simply removing it changes it into a Dumb TV. So you can get your Dumb TV as the lower price of a Smart TV.

    Furthermore, the "smart" part, which becomes obsolete much faster than the "dumb" part can be replaced by simply swapping out modules if that actually becomes necessary.

    Extra Credit: require an industry standard interface for how the smart module is connected to the TV so that all smart modules work with all TVs. Third parties (eg, Roku, Apple) could create their own module. Maybe the "industry standard interface" could be something called HDMI ?
    • by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

      HDMI is kind of a stupid name. Better to call it HDMI-CEC or something like that. Much clearer and understandable.

  • you've seen this with all of our software upgrades including AirPlay 2 and HomeKit -- is that we want to make things backward compatible to those TVs

    My parents bought a Philips "smart" TV. Within 6 months, the Youtube app (the only one they used) became useless because YouTube switched to a different encryption algorithm (IIRC) and we found out the TV wouldn't be updated to support this.

    Still, smart functions only included to increase profit for the manufacturer? No thanks. So for my TV replacement, I'm looking at a computer monitor and an HDMI switch box with remote control. The "smart" part will be provided by a Mac mini that's under MY control. I'll

  • I'm wondering if anyone has ever successfully rooted a TV? I doubt these consumer grade devices could possibly have much in the way of security.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 10, 2019 @12:20PM (#57937788)

    And the reason why we do that is there are ways to monetize that TV and data is one

    Yeah, no, fuck you ... it's my TV, you've been paid for the product, you have no further right to monetize a fucking thing from me.

    I have a smart TV, it's never had a network connection and never will, I've never used any of the apps, it plays no role in changing of channels or volume ... it has a single HDMI input, is on permanent mute, and is just a dumb device.

    The problem with all smart devices is the underlying assumption that they're going to collect and monetize your data.

    If I bought a TV, and it couldn't work without a network connection, I would take it back to the store and say it's not suitable for the purposes and demand my money back.

    I swear, the modern idea of a business model is "be as much of an asshole as possible".

  • It's about post-purchase monetization of the TV.

    I think market forces just jumped the shark. Do not want.

  • If manufacturers have an interest in monetising smart TVs, why are they so ugly, so hard to use, and so featureless after just a few years?

    While I understand the position presented here, I see no evidence that they are actually putting in the effort.

  • by Jason1729 ( 561790 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @03:01PM (#57939080)
    I just bought a 75" TV last week. I chose a Sony because it's the only major brand that didn't include on-screen advertising. I figured I was overpaying $200-400 compared to Samsun or Visio, but showing ads is a hard deal-breaker for me.

    This is also the first Sony product I've bought since the rootkit fiasco.

    I absolutely would have paid another $500 above what I did for a dumb version of the same TV. I was seriously considering buying a commercial display but it was about 3 times the price, that was just too far to go.
  • by p51d007 ( 656414 ) on Thursday January 10, 2019 @03:07PM (#57939124)
    I remember when I worked in a television repair shop in the late 70's, as everything was transitioning out of vacuum tubes to solid state tv's, we would ROUTINELY repair 10-15 year old TV's, replace the HUGE & heavy glass CRT's. My parents had a Zenith 19" color tv that lasted almost 25 years, and their 25" Zenith console TV lasted over 20.

All seems condemned in the long run to approximate a state akin to Gaussian noise. -- James Martin

Working...