Ask Slashdot: Why Do You Want a 'Smart TV'?

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'?

Comments

I don't

[coldsalmon]

I don't even want a regular TV. I watch Netflix on a 25" monitor that I plug into a laptop.

Re:I don't

[Jason Levine]

Didn't Google recently announce Android for Raspberry PI? If you could get those working together, you could use the Android Netflix app.

Re:I don't

[lgw]

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:I don't

[TheGratefulNet]

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:I don't

[NotDrWho]

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.

Re:I don't

[NewtonsLaw]

"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:I don't

[amicusNYCL]

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, 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.

Simple:

[Avarist]

I don't.

That isn't the link you are looking for . . .

[UnknowingFool]

The link goes to the story yesterday on how Panasonic is stopping production of LCDs for TVs.

Are there any "dumb" TV's left?

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

App Store Wars

[Austerity Empowers]

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:App Store Wars

[clarkn0va]

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

[CastrTroy]

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.

Netflix in 4k

[IDreamInCode]

As of right now, Netflix only plays in 4k directly on a smart TV or a few authorized media devices but no mention of a self made computer.

I want not to have one

[linuxwrangler]

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?

I don't

[the_skywise]

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 a TV at all?

[Archeopteryx]

A computer monitor makes a great dumb TV. I use a Raspberry Pi with one as a media center.

Smart for Who?

[DidgetMaster]

Everyone wants a 'smart' device until they realize that all the smart logic is designed to take control away from the user and give it to someone trying to sell you something. Your device (phone, tv, home security system, appliance, etc.) becomes an another avenue to push advertising at you or sign you up to some subscription service. That might be something you actually want. For the rest of us, it is just annoying chatter that we want to turn off.

Fewer Remotes!

[burhop]

I mean, I have a remote for Roku, one for the TV, one for the cable box, one for the dedicated skype device, one for Bluray, one for the speakers and two not-as-universal-as-I-thought remotes. Sure, 4K on 60 inches with some apps was what I thought I wanted but being able to sit down and turn on Netflix with a single remote? Priceless.

Netflix 4K only on Smart TV

[mrops]

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

[AmiMoJo]

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

[steppin_razor_LA]

I believe the Roku 4 supports Netflix at 4K. I suspect the Tivo Bolt does as well.

Re:Netflix 4K only on Smart TV

[JoeMerchant]

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.