Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Best Non-Smart TV Sets? (slashdot.org)
williamyf writes: I have always been of the idea that my TV shall be non-smart, leaving the smarts to connected equipment (in my case my Synology NAS running Plex and a combination of Chromecasts and laptops do the trick). I think that most of my Slashdot brethren are of a similar persuasion. But, over the years finding decent non-smart TVs is becoming harder and harder, unless your are prepared to pay much higher prices for industrial/signage equipment, or are prepared to deal with slightly inferior specs and quality, or get an old (possibly second hand) set, or are prepared to do long, hard internet searches for that needle in the haystack (all slashdot readers can google, but here at least we can hear firsthand experiences from technically-minded people, and not fake-ish reviews).
In view of the recent story about Samsung TVs being bricked by a firmware update, I ask the Slashdot crowd to amass our collective knowledge and see: What TV makers make decent non-smart TV sets? Which are these sets?
Requirements: non-smart, no apps on the TV, no app on the smartphone, no nothing -- the dumber the better. OTA tuner optional. 1080p50/60 or higher (1333x768 was barely adequate in 2008, but KRAP in 2017). 16:9 or 21:9. From 35 inches (for the master bedroom) to 70 inches (for the middle class living room in an apartment complex). Real remote (not app in a phone) with at least volume up/down, input change and sleep function, plus all needed to configure the set. Lots of HDMI 2.0 (or higher) ports. A decent assortment of legacy ports (including component, composite, S-Video). HDR capable. Good build quality. Good price (Ideally slightly lower than similar smart TVs, since we are forgoing the hardware needed for the smart part, as well as the ongoing support cost for firmware updates). Good image quality. Decent warranties. Reputable manufacturers. Reputable sellers.
In view of the recent story about Samsung TVs being bricked by a firmware update, I ask the Slashdot crowd to amass our collective knowledge and see: What TV makers make decent non-smart TV sets? Which are these sets?
Requirements: non-smart, no apps on the TV, no app on the smartphone, no nothing -- the dumber the better. OTA tuner optional. 1080p50/60 or higher (1333x768 was barely adequate in 2008, but KRAP in 2017). 16:9 or 21:9. From 35 inches (for the master bedroom) to 70 inches (for the middle class living room in an apartment complex). Real remote (not app in a phone) with at least volume up/down, input change and sleep function, plus all needed to configure the set. Lots of HDMI 2.0 (or higher) ports. A decent assortment of legacy ports (including component, composite, S-Video). HDR capable. Good build quality. Good price (Ideally slightly lower than similar smart TVs, since we are forgoing the hardware needed for the smart part, as well as the ongoing support cost for firmware updates). Good image quality. Decent warranties. Reputable manufacturers. Reputable sellers.
let me know if there is a bundle with one of those with a unicorn. I would be interested as well.
Why do people insist on others doing their comparison shopping for them? Are you too lazy to look up reviews and filter by specs?
Buddy, what you're looking for is called a computer monitor. You get an adapter box to plug in anything you'd like. You get some good speakers because in-built ones always suck. If you have legacy analogue inputs, there WILL be delay. Don't game with old consoles on modern sets, go find a CRT.
And 1080 is not acceptable for a new set now. Go at least 2k, 4k is better.
Look for a monitor instead. You won't get a handy remote, but if it's any better than 'crap' it'll go into standby after a minute or two without an input signal, and whatever you're using to drive the image will have its own remote anyway.
Last-gen Sony HD CRT. Probably weighs 400 lbs. It has HDMI and no Ethernet.
If it broke down tomorrow I'd gladly pay the price of a 60" Samsung Smart TV to repair it, even if it means flying the service guy down from Japan.
Buy any TV, do not connect it to your network and do not use any of the smart functionality. Boom instant regular old tv!
I use a computer monitor with speakers, connected to a PVR.
Speakers are a pair of USB powered 3.5mm jack cheapo jobbies. Volume is controlled through the PVR,
The only "Smarts" are in the PVR, which the manufacturer has stopped shipping updates for, cos thier next all singing all dancing model was android based, and they seem to have moved the entire team across to develop craplets for that.
**TODO** Steal someone elses sig.
I think I once read something about searching for "display screens", i.e. for showrooms, airports, etc. Can't remember the specific name but I'm pretty sure won't put any "smart" crap in those.
Be prepared to pay the price, though.
#DeleteFacebook
I have a Vizio "Smart" TV. I didn't plug-in an ethernet cable and didn't configure a WiFi router. It is set to HDMI1 and the remote control is used for nothing other than a power switch. So long as they don't make them "require" a network they can be used as a TV. It's a shame that you can't buy one without the smart features in exchange for lower price or more reliability.
I don't understand the hate for SmartTVs. You are worried about "snooping" and you use a Google Chromecast and Plex and Synology??? Give me a break. What is the difference between having a Smart TV or having closed source/hardware "smart" devices hooked up to them? If you don't want the "smart" features then don't hook them up or use them. Google is spying on you.
Get a large monitor, with just a HDMI cable between your TV-reception box and the monitor.
I have a HP LD4200 myself, which has been working perfectly for 6 years or so, now. Did not pay for any unnecessary shit that I would not use anyway. Reasonable image quality. Although presently there is much better stuff available with regard to image quality, the concept still works very well.
Buy a monitor. HDMI.
Like others have said, just don't connect it to your network and all of those concerns go away. I'm not sure I see the problem here.
You're asking for everything in the world and asking for it cheap, and that's just not going to happen. Non-smart TVs yes have less hardware, but because they're made in much smaller quantities, they demand a premium.
That said, look at the Vizio E-Series. the only "Smarts" it has is app controls and a built-in ChromeCast. The E-series comes with a regular remote with volume and input options (don't know about sleep, never bothered with sleeping a TV manually). 4k 60Hz refresh, HDR-capable. That's probably as close as you're going to get to what you want in 2017.
You thought that this sig was what you think that I thought you wanted me to think. I think.
I just did and there's plenty of non smart TVs out there with the specs you're interested in. But as many have already stated, it doesn't matter. Just don't hook up your smart TV to the internet and you're golden.
At that point, specially for the smaller TV screen sizes, you should also consider getting a huge PC Monitor.
Which can give you a very high quality display at a decent size (but might be a bit over priced).
But only llimited connectivity (usually 2 or 3 out of the list of usual suspects : Display Port, HDMI, DVI either pure digital or with combined analog and eventually legacy analog VGA)
Then you can separately tack on everything you need.
- multiple HDMI can be obtained by connecting a separate HDMI switch box. Some even have remote controls
- OTA receiver (DVB-T or whatever it is called elsewhere out of europe) can be found as separate stand alone boxes.
- tiny flat speakers built in the monitor (available usually as an extra option on most PC -monitors) will never beat the quality of a mid-to-high range PC multispeaker set, specially those which feature a decoding box (analog + SPDIF + Optical inputs)
Then you can use either an IR-blaster on your favorite box (NAS, Chromecast, whatever) or even if your smartphone (or some old repurposed PDA) happens to have one with an appropriate app. Or get a complex programmable universal remote. So you can centralize the control of all these dozen of gadgets. Thus :
- the remote is the only complex device.
- if the remote is fried, you can still use all the other non-firmware-brickable devices by pushing their buttons (or trying to find where you put the dozen of specific remotes and find corresponding battery cells).
- absolutely non of the above relies on any cloud stupidity. (nobody is going to hack you "over the air").
The only drawback is the absolutely huge mess of cables of connecting all this disparate devices, and trying to fit everything nicely in cabinet.
For bigger surfaces than largest PC monitors, consider projectors in your choice, with a similar "dump display + separate accessories" approach (so avoid the "professional" projectors geared toward meeting rooms, which tend to have wifi support and even an embed android able to display presentation directly from an USB stick. Just go for the dumb consumer projectors that only have DVI/HDMI).
But the draw back is that projector currently don't support resolutions as high as monitors.
The best long term advantage :
when some function breaks or you want to upgrade, you only have 1 single accessory to upgrade (e.g.: by a new HDMI switch with even more ports) rather than changing the whole smarttv
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Not sure of their current offerings, but I bought a Toshiba about 1.5 years ago based on pretty much the same criteria. Better still Best Buy had a couple of them as Black Friday deals. I've been happy with the set.
You are not going to find S-video on any reasonably priced decent-sized modern TV.
You will get a combination component/composite input, and HDMI, and that's it. Maybe Displayport, but usually not.
S-video is dead. Which is annoying, since I have several game consoles that output S-video as their best source, but there it is.
Where the "Smart TV" functionality was on a Roku "stick". I can just pull the stick out of the HDMI port and presto! Dumb TV.
The Roku stick sucks, by the way. Although I find the Roku UI much better than Samsung's horrible smart TV system (which pops up alerts in the middle of stuff you're watching!) the problem is that stick is crashy, playback isn't as smooth as on an external box, and there's no Ethernet. I prefer not to clutter up my wi-fi networks with streaming media.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Buy a monitor. HDMI.
My mom was paranoid about smart tvs. Best Buy carried a non smart tv that was cheaper than the smart brands. The picture quality was in the middle of the pack.
It is a bit different than what you are asking but...
A few years ago you could find cheap IPS 2560x1440 27" monitors from Korea. The Yamakasi Catleap was one of them. I don't know if you can find them anymore but they are certainly available used.
These monitors were as dumb as a display can be. Single video input (DVI-D dual), a connector for the PSU, and 3 buttons : brightness up, down and power. That's all. No OSD, no scaler nor any kind of image processing, the graphics card has to take care of everything (which it does very well). A good thing is that because of the lack of complex processing on the monitor side, latency is very low.
Do they even make TVs configurable without the remote, no matter how frustrating 4 buttons makes the menu navigation?
I have a Pioneer AV receiver and its remote quit. The remote has a zillion buttons and a bunch of functions can't be configured on the unit itself. A replacement identical remote has proved elusive, and the Harmony I bought seems only capable of controlling a subset of the features.
It's made me think that a preferred feature of many AV devices would be configuration on the unit itself or minimal, basic remote buttons required to do all configuration (arrows and enter, etc). It's also made me think the next time I buy a higher dollar AV item, I ought to source a replacement remote at the same time and keep it stored without batteries as a backup.
Good Luck With That
Just make your own dumb tv. Just take a smart tv and not click on the smart part of it and do not connect it to anything over Wifi or network cable. BOOM! Dumb tv.
I use my tv as a monitor for several years now. Just 1920x1080 55" Philips I bought for 500EUR. It has 3 HDMI ports and some others as well as sound (that is shitty and I do not use) and a normal remote (That I only use to turn it on and off). I looked at the smart part once and just do not use it.
Now if you are really paranoid, you could see that it does not have Wifi and never connect the network cable to anything. If you are aftraid somebody might still come in to your house and connect it, you have serious issues that won't be solved by not buying a smart tv.
Just because something has a feature does not mean you have to use it.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
In view of the recent story about Samsung TVs being bricked by a firmware update
I don't get it. Don't connect your TV to WiFi and ignore all the SmartTV features. Put the TV on the input from your A/V receiver and never touch it again. What's the problem?
Real fucking easy. Go to Consumer reports and look for the highest rated non-smart TV. Failing that go to Google
Why do these submissions get greenlit?
I have a 55in Sceptre 4k TV I got for $430 about 2 years ago shipped to my local walmart.. it has like 4 HDMI 2.0 ports... at least 1 more than other TVs probably as it isn't abusing an input for smart functionality.
I do have motion compensation and whatever else they do I play PS4 games on it so the response time isn't horrible with that off.... and it's cheap. Thier 39in is about 225 and 55in is 309 (same model I have). they even have a 75in for $120 now which is just crazy.
Making TVs smarter has other drawbacks, that won't be alleviated by simply unplugging from the network.
For one, when you turn them on, they have to "boot up", and this takes longer than whatever warm-up period is required. And once they've started, they're in a multitasking OS, so they have better things to do than respond immediately to your remote control presses. This is especially frustrating when you switch inputs; you can't just tap "input" three times. You have to tap "input", and wait for the box to move before pressing "input" again. If it takes too long to move, you might try pressing "input" an extra time, but this time it gets buffered and you end up going too far.
Unfortunately, I expect smart TVs are here to stay, because the presence of those "Netflix" and "Amazon Prime" buttons on your remote are subsidizing the low cost of the TV. And there aren't enough of us nerds that would pay more for a TV that does less.
Some have suggested monitors, but if size is an issue and you having the lighting conditions for it, may I suggest a projector? Head over to Projector Central to check out what may work for you. With 30k hour lamp life, I like the LG PF1000U or PF1500.
You could also drop Robert Heron a line and ask him. He's probably forgotten more about TVs than most of us could ever hope to know.
I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
...have you ever heard of house guests?
I have a Smart TV that I had not hooked up to the Internet. We had house guests with kids stay in that room. As they stayed for a while, they got the house WiFi password (for the guest network). Guess what happened next?
I didn't notice for a while, so there was plenty of potential for forced updates, CIA intrusions, or other tomfoolery (not that I think anything happened). I also discovered that the only way to turn WiFi off for this TV (an LG model) was a factory reset.
There's no such thing as a "dumb TV" any more, only Smart TVs and Smart TVs without apps.
I'm sticking with my LG plasmas from 2008. Component, S-VHS, Component and HDMI inputs. None of them are showing any signs of dying any time soon. By the time I'm ready to buy another one TV will probably be long-dead.
The problem is when you put that arbitrary requirement in you will end up with a far inferior product at doing the basics. Recommendations floating around suggest buy a monitor or a commercial panel.
These are especially daft recommendations as by forgoing the smart functions of the TV I assume you will be using some other smart device.
Well then you're stuck with:
- Will a monitor have the connection options you need.
- Will a commercial panel pass through CDC commands from your remote over HDMI.
- Will you be able to find something with the picture settings adjustable to suit what you want.
- Will you even be able to find the technology you want (e.g. OLED or SUHD panels which as far as I can tell only exist in Smart TV form)
By limiting yourself to dumb TVs you're not just limiting it's intelligence, but it's quality, it's connectability, and by going down this niche route you will be paying far more for far less.
Buy a Smart TV. Don't connect it to the network. Block it's MAC at the router if you're really worried.
I've yet to see a Smart TV that doesn't also function perfectly fine as a dumb TV.
If you're looking for a small display, get a computer monitor. If you need something large, buy a projector and screen. I bought my last projector several years ago, so I haven't looked lately, but there were none that I was looking at that had any smart functionality, or speakers.
If that doesn't work for you, then get a smart TV and disable what you can, don't hook it up to the internet, or configure it to your WiFi and block it at your firewall. From what I've looked at, most manufacturers, if not all, throw in all of the bells and whistles on their higher end stuff. The last two or three TV's I bought were the flagship models from the manufacturers I purchased from and they had all of that crap. The best models that they made without it were much lower quality panels.
An 18 year old fit blonde nymphomaniac virgin who has never left her home state of Nebraska, who prefers the company of poor, broke, balding, fat 50 year old men who need Viagra to get it up.
"Ideally slightly lower than similar smart TVs, since we are forgoing the hardware needed for the smart part, as well as the ongoing support cost for firmware updates"
It would cause it to cost more as they lose revenue from ads and tracking your tv habits.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
5. Not connecting the television to the network often sees the 'smart' feature interfere with normal operation including messages about not being able to check for updates, it being in the list of inputs, etc.
If this is the crux of the issue, then get a recent LG 4K TV with HDR support, like the UH7700 series. Mine isn't connected to a network, and it doesn't complain. I think their OS is webOS, which uses the Linux kernel and a bunch of other open source. The open source is listed in the license attribution screen. All non-portable things in my house connected to a network are never connected over wifi so that I can more easily control the attack surface with a firewall. If it needs a network, it has to be an ethernet port. I still want to get security updates from time to time. I use ethernet for that, and then I unplug it after it's done. Yes, it's a smart TV with unused "smart" functionality.
I don't use their remote normally. I use an old Logitech universal remote, which is helpful for controlling viewing configurations. It's one button to turn on satellite viewing. One button for blueray viewing. One button for Apple TV. One button for turning it all off. I don't need to press multiple buttons to switch inputs and to control their power.
If you are removing all "smarts" from the TV and want to do any and all processing outside of the tv, why have more than one HDMI? That's what your receiver is for. Nice receiver with good sound output to component speakers. Multiple HDMI as well as HDMI upconversion for your older video game systems. Let it do ALL of the switching and sound processing. All I wanted for a "tv" was a big monitor with a good picture. I ended up with a "smart tv" that has never seen the internet. It has never been switched off of HDMI1.
Have you consider a projector?
There is a huge variety out there and they are not much more expensive than 70-incher you may consider for your living room.
Catch them before they are getting smart as well.
I would recommand a used plasma 1080p screen. First, colors are much better than lcd, with the exception of very high end 4k hdr lcd. They also very cheap and last for a very long time. They have all the vintage ports as well than hdmi. I really love plasma produced by LG, because they are a good mix of quality and low price. Drawback: consume more energy, so it's not possible to produce a 4k plasma.
Look into old DLP televisions. I got a 70 inch for $150, fixed the alignment and focus and it's been great. And you can actually take it apart and fix it if something goes wrong.
I suggest the Canon DP-V2420 4K Reference Display, 24" display that supports SMPTE ST 2084 and HLG (Hybrid Log-Gamma) broadcast HDR standards.
Simple fix: read the MAC address off the sticker on the back (the one they all have that shows the serial numbers of everything inside it) and block it at the router the same day you take the TV out of its box. Then, no matter how many idiots try to hook it up to your wifi, it won't get through.
ðY' Don't.
ðY' Fucking.
ðY' Connect.
ðY' Network.
Solved.
ATSC 3.0 is an IP based system - an internet protocol that not only delivers a HD 4K picture, and allows directly broadcasting to mobile devices; it lets stations encrypt broadcasts and initiate pay-for OTA subscriptions. (multiple obscenities). If you can wait, LG will be selling TV with both ATSC 1.0 and ATSC 3.0 later this year. ahref=https://www.theverge.com/2017/2/2/14488608/4k-tv-broadcasts-ajit-pai-atsc-3-hdr/rel=url2html-30264https://www.theverge.com/2017/...>
Mfgs have "commercial" product lines for retail, commercial, and trade-show use. They don't have the extra crap, just the panel and a bunch of inputs.
Why not just get a SmartTV and then NOT CONNECT IT TO THE NETWORK??? Cut if off at the knees
I posted this
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c...
to the where do get a dumb tv post
https://slashdot.org/comments....
"Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
I expected my "smart" TV to start off by taking all the guess work out of connectivity, but it doesn't. And surely a Smart TV should be smart enough to take all my preferences -- starting with let me delete all your preinstalled apps and/or only SEE what I want to see (Amazon prime, Netflix, and Pandora) -- and help me get what I want. But it is absolutely incapable of doing that, either. Indeed, it appears to have been "smartly" designed to be sure that I, the supposed owner, have approximately ZERO say in anything any more. And what kind of "smart" does it take to forever be needing a "update"? I mean, what is to be updated but the spyware and the attempts to push new ads? I could go on, but this whole IOT thing is pretty transparently shaping up as taking humanity down the toilet by about the fastest route anyone could imagine. Is is possible to *PITH* a smart TV and still have it function? I see that as a growth industry, in all seriousness. Certainly I would pay for that -- a jailbroken smart TV I would definitely like.
Don't these TV have some kind of a parental lock feature designed to prevent the exact scenario you described? (kids messing with the settings)
They are easy to find, pretty good at playing TV transmissions, and as a bonus they too explode!
Just don't connect the TV itself to your LAN.
As others have stated, either get a monitor, or get a Smart TV and just don't use the smart parts. In other words, don't connect it to your network.
Personally, the TCL 55P607 ( https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06Y... ) will likely be my next TV:
- it is 4K
- it has HDR (both HDR10 and Dolby Vision
- it has local dimming for better contrast
- it has built-in Roku (which you can just not use)
All for $650. It has pretty favorable reviews as well:
http://www.rtings.com/tv/revie...
https://www.cnet.com/products/...
https://www.theverge.com/2017/...
While I'd love to get an OLED from LG, they are just too expensive at the moment. Save for OLED, this TV checks off all of the boxes on my wishlist, and has a nice price to boot.
You're right, "Smart" TVs are a dumb idea, due to the likely obsolescence of the "smart" bit, the fact that you don't want to quickyl replace such a large appliance hanging on your wall and the fact that most electronics makers have no clue about how to write or support software.
I've had good luck with Haier branded TVs from Costco. Inexpensive, decent image quality, plenty of HDMI inputs, no pointless "smart" features. They tend to have crap speakers but I route sound through a stereo anyways so don't care. Try that.
BTW - there are only something like 3 or 4 major LCD panel manufacturers in the world, so the brand of TV only impacts the case and motherboard - the actual display will come from the same factories regardless.
Haier is (or at least used to be) the largest appliance maker in China, so they are quite large and able to deliver reliable products, I'm sure.
Aren't you more or less looking for what would have previously been called a monitor (vs a TV)?
https://www.amazon.com/Vizio-S...
I don't know if that is one, it's frightfully short of details, but essentially you want a screen that displays a video signal, period. At least in the pre-flatscreen days, that was the distinction between a MONITOR (what you're looking for) and a TV.
Curiously (or not, depending on your cynicism) just skimming around for this post, I see stuff like 55" 4k TVs for crazy low prices like $400. Monitors (which should ostensibly be cheaper as no tuning circuitry or other bells/whistles)...not so much.
-Styopa
The "4K" term comes from Digital Cinema Initiative. Movie theaters' digital projectors are rated for horizontal resolution. They're designed to show 1.85 movies at 3996×2160 and 2.39 movies at 4096×1716. This means the latter are letterboxed.
I got my 65" 1080 LG for $700 a couple years ago. New, at a walk-in store. It isn't rocket surgery.
Somewhat on topic, as several people are recommending buying a computer monitor instead; How does TV and computer monitors compare:
* Prise-wise and quality-wise?
* HD and 4K?
* For the several sizes segments? (e.g. 30", 40", 50+" or whatnot)
With my floppy search-fu I find:
Monitors are most common in the size range 30"-35", but TVs can be much larger.
Most monitors are 50-60 fps, but some offer far greater fps. (only needed for games?!)
But quality, and the different types of monitors (LED/LCD: IPS, TN, VA etc.. Q-LED, O-LED ...) ?
If I'm looking for a monitor/TV with great colour & black (movies, picture editing) I'll look for ... ?
For Shoot 'em up it's monitors with high fps, but what kind of screen?
Etc. Educate me/us, if you please.
urd
What are the chances that even if you don't hook the TV to your own LAN, it can phone home all by itself via your now mandatory xfinity wifi service which you can't opt out of providing other than switching to another similar service. You know there is some serious big brother being provided by xfinity too. I'm sure they watch all the MACs go by. No need for the federation to strap an ankle bracelet on you since we happily go and buy our own designer model.
Not sure how great the tech is but I'm happy with mine. Sound sucks, but works fine with a soundbar or surround sound and the price is right.
You don't have to have your SmartTV connected to the interweb. I have a SmartTV, it's Mac address is banned from my router, half the apps it boasted about didn't work anyway. Hulu (not my region) etc. It takes a couple seconds to block internet access, buy your kid or the neighborhood nerdy kid a Soda and let him block the smart tv. Continue using streaming on Android Box.
I wanted the same, but discovered the same issues.
Instead I just bought a 65" Samsung and never connected it to a network or enabled any "smart" features.
I refuse to buy a new TV until I can buy one (in the US) capable of natively displaying (and being directly driven at) 23.976, 24, 25, 29.94, 30, 48, 50, 59.94, 60, 72, 96, 100, and 120fps.
It's fucking ABSURD that modern displays are still forced into 50hz or 60hz jails. There's NO good technical reason why any new US TV shouldn't be able to display a show natively shot at 25fps or 50fps AT the show's original framerate, without mangling frames with pulldown or dropped/repeated frames. Temporal rate conversion still universally looks like ass, and always will. The best way to convert 720p50 to 720p60 is... leave it as 720p50 & let the display itself support it directly.
European TVs have natively-supported 50 and 60 (at least, via SCART) since the goddamn CRT era, but most new American TVs STILL give you a blue "no signal" screen & shut off if you try feeding them 720p50 via HDMI. It's BULLSHIT.
It's also absurd how many "240hz" TVs can't deal with 720p120 via HDMI. And have no way to tell the video processor, "I'm feeding you fake-3d SBS 720p60... treat it like 640x720 at 120fps & show each half once for 1/120th of a second".
IMHO, the ideal "native" framerate for video is ~150fps... simultaneous 60 and 100fps (captured with 300fps camera framerate), with overlapping 60/100fps frames removed. You can simulcast 50fps by using every other 100fps frame. You can simulcast 60fps by using the 60fps-timed frames. You can get 100fps by ignoring the 60fps frames. You can get 150fps with non-equal timing by displaying frames wherever they fall within 300fps timing. And you can use all 150fps to derive 120fps (taking the 60fps-timed frames as-is, and using the 100fps-timed frames with them to tween the remaining 60fps)
(300fps is the least common multiple of 50 & 60, but if you had a camera that could capture at 300fps and saved ONLY the frames falling on 50fps and 60fps timing, you'd only need to save 100fps, because every 100ms both timings would line up, so you'd need 60+50 - 10 frames. Adding frames needed to increase it to 100fps (at 10ms/frame) would add somewhere between 40 and 50 frames. And HFR only requires slightly more bits if you also double the GOP length (since the frame-to-frame delta is much smaller, it compresses more efficiently).
only llimited connectivity (usually 2 or 3 out of the list of usual suspects : Display Port, HDMI, DVI either pure digital or with combined analog and eventually legacy analog VGA)
Then you can separately tack on everything you need.
- multiple HDMI can be obtained by connecting a separate HDMI switch box. Some even have remote controls
- OTA receiver (DVB-T or whatever it is called elsewhere out of europe) can be found as separate stand alone boxes.
- tiny flat speakers built in the monitor (available usually as an extra option on most PC -monitors) will never beat the quality of a mid-to-high range PC multispeaker set, specially those which feature a decoding box (analog + SPDIF + Optical inputs)
What upscaler should I use to connect legacy analog sources to DP, HDMI, DVI-D? These include the 240p composite output of my SEGA Genesis console, the 480i output of the VHS VCR with the wedding video and the movies that still haven't been rereleased on R1 DVD or BD, and the 480p component output of my Wii console.
Most Smart TV's sport wireless cards on mini PCIe type slots. If worried about your Smart TV connecting to things when you have explicitly disabled wireless can always pull the wireless card or disconnect antenna.
A non-monitor TV that isn't "Smart" is a lost cause. I recommend against going with big monitors. You either won't find them or they will be insanely expensive. Modern TVs have very snazzy upscaler ASICs (e.g. Reality PRO et al) to deal with old content without it looking like crap that can't be matched with software.
The "Smarts" in my "Smart TV" is an ODRIOD C2 running your choice of Linux or Android. Less than $50 all in cost. Handles 4k HDR h.264 without breaking a sweat.
Take a hard look at some of the Insignia brand TVs primarily sold at Best Buy. They have "smart" tvs as well, but they have a basic 1080P for a relatively low price for 50"-60".
Is there a body of knowledge of this TV equipment where one could find which sets are the easiest to lobotomize? Meaning, are there smart TVs out there that it's easy to disable or wipe clear, or simply disable and ignore the 'smart' features?
Any set that you don't plug an ethernet into or enable the WiFi security settings on is going to be a 'dumb' set and suitable for use as such.
Non-smart TVs yes have less hardware, but because they're made in much smaller quantities, they demand a premium.
Where the hell have I been? Last time I shopped for a TV was 3 or 4 years ago, and smart TVs were in in smaller quantities and were more expensive. It's now the opposite?
I swear, technology is just killing itself.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Why do you think the CIA will intrude into your living room trough a TV? Asking for a friend.
Block the TV MAC in all your networks? Or wrap the TV in tinfoil, looks like you might have some of it around.
Grab an old wifi router, set it up but don't connect it to your lan. No internet. Connect your "smart" tv to the router. Never worry about upgrades bricking your tv!
:)
Mission accomplished
"Every security scheme that is based on secrets eventually fails." - Steve Jobs
The demand just isn't there for non-smart TVs with the large size high-end OLED/4K/whatever panels from the fancy smart TVs.
Even if there was enough demand to make building such a thing (as opposed to a monitor or special-purpose display) viable, if they sold it at a price that was too close to the price of the "smart" version, it wouldn't sell and if they sold it at a price that was too low it would cannibalize sales of the "smart" version.
Not to mention that you couldn't get rid of the TV tuners (and the hardware to support that like Dolby AC3 and MPEG decoders and such) because the law in America mandates that all TVs sold in the US require an ATSC compatible tuner (I wonder if you could get away with including the mandated tuner in a box that is separate from the main TV electronics but is still in the box with the TV and functions with the same remote and etc?)
My preferred solution actually shoves even more features out to peripheral devices than the OP would prefer... but frankly, you're not going to hit all of those bullet points with most available solutions, anyway. That said: I went with an Optoma HD26 projector for ~$650 in my home theater room, and I (and my family) have been very happy with the results. I get a 1080p image at 110" -- which is a reasonably achievable size for projectors, but outrageously expensive for conventional TVs, smart or otherwise. I'm projecting directly on a light-gray wall, which works quite well with a digital projector, so no screen is really necessary. Additionally, the money you save by going with a middle-tier projector can be put into other devices, such as a mid-to-high end audio head unit with HDMI pass-through to output to the projector. (That gives you the array of inputs that the OP is looking for.)
Obviously, projectors don't work in all scenarios; you do have to have a windowless room (or an easily darkened room) to get the best experience, and the most optimal install option is usually ceiling mounted -- especially if you have kids. But if those hurdles don't seem too high for you, I'd say take the leap. It's well worth it, in my opinion.
Last time I bought a TV, I was unable to find one that had a good quality picture but wasn't 3D enabled. After a while, I asked one of the guys at the store for some help. I was told that all the bells and whistles are so cheap to add to the TV, the manufacturers just kind of throw them into their higher end sets just because. I ended up getting a big samsung tv. I actually ended up using the Netflix and Amazon apps, but that's not what I bought it for.
do not enable wifi, do not connect cat-5, do not collect internet. it's that simple. if it worked out of the box, and can't get to the bad things, it should not become corrupted.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
I also was on the lookout for a dumb TV. Didn't want one connected to the Internet or one that talked to me. Couldn't find one. So no TV here and no plans to get one. The Samsung fiasco was quite enough for me. I say death to smart TV's and their spying.
I won't be buying a new television for my use, and the 'smarts' are a primary reason. Do not want. Will not have.
Having said that, the real problem is that nothing available today shows a better picture than my pre-smarts 58' Samsung Plasma TV.
I have seen some specific situations where a new tv has a slight advantage, but overall, my plasma is fantastic. Until someone either brings back plasma manufacturing (1080 is fine for me for the foreseeable future), or makes a tv at a reasonable price with a better picture than a plasma, I'm out of the market.
The only good thing about the current situation is the pricing. I paid $1500 for the plasma, and I'm still happy that I did.
I have a Smart TV. I have it hooked to a dumb antenna (no cable or DSB). Works good enough, just as a TV should, which includes not sending back telemetry of how the TV's being used, etc.
It happens to be a Samsung, but a couple of years old.
I am contemplating getting a programmable remote, as the ergonomics of Samsung's remote controls sucks.
Netflix and all that, I do through my XBox360, for now.
Given the Samsung firmware update that borked some of their TVs recently...
Other than that...
This.
People whine because the product they want has features they don't need and aren't going to use, but whose presence decreases their price point? This isn't even a First World problem. This is a powerfully magical combination of stubbornness, arrogance, and ignorance, all remarkably manifested in the body of a single idiot.
The OP should grow the f*&# up.
Except updates can be delivered OTA. In the UK at least it happens. Such is the joy of digital.
An external tuner and a coax terminator on the tuner built into the TV fixes that pretty easily.
My UID is prime and so is this number: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0.
Granted, they can be bricked too, but it takes real effort. And the deed is still somewhat reversible.
And they offer a 3D view with good resolution. Not much of a program to start with, but you can organise one yourself.
Can verify.
His mom does some freaky shit in front of her TV.
That is called a monitor. If it has a tuner, it becomes a television.
Well, not exactly the right analogy since you need the brains, but cut out its tongue and ears.
Remove or disconnect the Wifi module (search for youtube videos on replacing a broken one).
True, you lose your warranty, but if you've ever tried to actually make use of a warranty these days, you know it's more productive and less painful to just hit yourself in the head with a hammer repeatedly.
"35 inches (for the master bedroom) to 70 inches (for the middle class living room in an apartment complex)"
There is seriously something wrong with you. People who put TVs in their bedrooms are already pretty pathetic, but the idea that you need a 35" TV is laughable. I've used a 32" TV in my "middle class living room in an apartment complex" for the last 10 years, and it has served me extremely well. I can't even imagine a 70" TV in such an environment. That's absolutely ridiculous.
TV is just not that important, people!
Unfortunately, without the updates, the built in software is buggy and can crash.
With the updates, the built in software is less buggy but still crashes.
My TV needs rebooted about once a week as the simple act of turning it off and on with the remote is too much for the built in software. I don't even have a True OFF state unless I unplug the TV.
Maybe I bought a crappy TV, but it seems this should be functionality that works out of the box.
I bought a Hisense H3C Series 40" non-smart TV. Cost under $200 from Best Buy.
Has three HDMI ports, VGA, AV inputs, analog, digital and audio outputs. Will play media on devices plugged into its USB port.
Has a real remote controller.
For me, "smart" TVs aren't secure or worth the other hassles they bring.
Best Buy makes their own brand called an Insignia that does all of this. They made tons of them, so you can still buy them. The only issue for the paranoid is that Geek Squad has been caught working with intelligence agencies.
Craigslist has deals all damn day long on older sets without all the smart-garbage. People are buying up the smart TVs and shit-canning the old ones. Super cheap and hits all of your bullet points+ name brand proven performance.
Why people buy anything new anymore is beyond me. Must be all the commercials people put up with for the privilege of paying for cable/media. Suckers.
You are being ripped off every second of every day, so that advertisers can help rip you off even more tomorrow.
After having this problem for years and not caving until I find something, the solution I've landed on is a projector. Really the only true solution without paying through the nose. All is left is finding someone with a decent understanding of the things so I don't buy a dud, and can manage a compact setup preferably with set top box options etc. Any help appreciated.
I just keep watching my old Plasma TV. Image quality is amazing. Was in a hotel with a brand new 55" Samsung and the image was shit. My wife even commented, "this must be what you are talking about when you say our old plasma looks better than a new TV" "Yep." "Sorry I didn't believe you." LOL. The best part is it was supposed to have "burn in" but it doesn't. It's a power hog, but better than the alternatives it seems.
Why don't you want a smart TV? Because you're 'dumb'? The whole article is stupid and written by a moron who can't see his penis from his zipper. If the TV has the word "smart" associated with it, then it must be bad.
Wow. This must have been written by a millennial as nothing says stupid as slashdot articles.
Get a projector. Almost none of the serious front projectors are "smart." I'm running a Panasonic projector to a 90-inch screen for good stuff, and backing it with an older 50-inch Panasonic plasma monitor for everyday stuff. None of the displays have any smarts. Not even a receiver. I feed them with TiVo for off-the-air TV, plus Roku and an Oppo BD player for streaming. The Oppo gets me 3D movies from discs or Vudu. No cable feed either.
do not enable wifi, do not connect cat-5, do not collect internet. it's that simple. if it worked out of the box, and can't get to the bad things, it should not become corrupted.
And what if it turns on the wifi on it's own in order to send back the data it's creators crave. Seriously, if they want the datas then why the fuck would they let something that simple stop them? It's not like corps even care about laws, they break them every day regardless of the hand-slaps they occasionally get.
swedx.se sells both TVs and tuner less TV-like monitors cheap int the 40"-75" range.
I have never seen one in real life so I can't say much about their "smart" features, but the manuals does not have any.
The reviews I have seen have said that they are worth their price (which, again, is pretty cheap).
You should look into their pixel policies before buying one.
They're going to need to use *your* wi-fi. What do you mean you don't have a password?
if it worked out of the box, and can't get to the bad things, it should not become corrupted.
I have had one do exactly that. The solution was to burn an image on an SD card, remove the guard coving the slot on the back of the TV and re-flash. The TV works today, but I have the SD card taped to the back with instructions just in case it needs to be used again.
do not enable wifi, do not connect cat-5, do not collect internet. it's that simple. if it worked out of the box, and can't get to the bad things, it should not become corrupted.
One problem with that is that even the "dumb" functions like, say, switching the TV channel, are implemented like shit on "Smart TVs" these days. On Samsung TVs it can literally take you 10 seconds to switch to another channel because the onscreen UI is such a monumentally slow piece of crap. So you have to use an external tuner too, preferably one with a decent UI and remote/app and speech recognition or something because tapping buttons may have worked decently 30 years ago when you had like 5 TV stations, but it's definitely not the best way to choose from 50+ cable channels. I'm not even sure whether something like this exists. Maybe we'll have to tough it out until absolutely everything can be streamed over the net, where people tend to build somewhat less sucky user interfaces.
Only brand I know of is Spectre, making large dumb TVs. I have a couple of their monitors, no complaint.
My damned Samsung 5' plasma has always WiFi, no off capability. Very powerful WiFi transmitting (blocking all use of) channel 1 but only when set has power on input jack.
Regarding the Wii :
- lots of modern consoles (all the way back from the SEGA DreamCast and some of the early PlayStation 1s) are actually able to emit VGA 480p signal or higher, if you provide the correct cable.
(usually a resistor between some pin to signal the console to emit VGA, and the component output wired to a VGA connector)
I've successfully used such a cable.
If the monitor only has digital inputs (DP/HDMI/DVI-D), you can find very cheap (usually less than 10$ on ebay, free shipping from China) converter box that get VGA+Audio jack to HDMI.
(Again, I've successfully used such a cable)
If the projector only has digital inputs (e.g.: only 2 HDMI ports), read carefully the documentation (or ask the manufacturer) - it's possible that one of the HDMI ports actually can accept analog input and you only need a VGA-to-HDMI connector cable (about a doller on ebay, free shipping from China) not even signal conversion required (typically, the previous model offered HDMI + DVI-I. They replaced the second connector for convenience, but kept the analog capability just in case)
(I've never found such one myself, but they do exist - hence the presence of simple VGA-HDMI cable on ebay).
Regarding the other device (VCR, Genesis, etc.) :
- Lots of 16 bits consoles are actually able to output separate RGB components (the Genesis does) because that's what was used in the European scart *cables* (as opposed to simple connectors that convert from composite to scart).
- VCR are able to emit S-Video (Luma and Chroma as 2 separate signal on the mini-din / or on the scart) - (though read beneath for this peculiar).
- Only extremely old stuff (like NES) are actually limited to composite-only without mods.
There exist literally tons of different models of converter box that supports RGB, S-Video and composite inputs, with automatic switching and output to modern connectors. (I can't be much help, because back then we used our to convert to *VGA* output. I'm sure you'll find modern ones that output to HDMI though. Internet shops specialising into older consoles, such as Play-asia, are a good point to start).
Now regarding VCR in particular :
after all this time, the thing is getting very fragile - tapes are losing magnetic signal, VCR could die, VCR could accidentally mangle the tape, etc.
at this point, the best advice (instead of trying to plug the VCR into a monitor) would be to plug the VCR into a capture device (one capable of S-Video input for slightly better results) and try to save all old movies onto the NAS.
(Note that: as electronics the old and fail, eventually the same problem will happen with old consoles. Dumping ROMs and getting an emulator would be a reasonable advice)
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
too many devices sucking power on stand-by. Yes, I know, only a watt or two, but they all add up.
Most of the smaller boxes are usually designed to be USB powered.
(e.g.: You can power the corresponding VGA-to-HDMI converter using the USB port of the Wii).
The interesting answer is master/slave power plugs
(the slave sockets only get powered if the device plugged in the master socket is turned on).
You also find other variations of the same, like USB-activated (slave sockets are only powered if the USB detects 5V - helps for low-power laptops that are under the level of the above and aren't detected when turned on. Or for huge laptops which, when sleeping but charging the battery, might still causes spikes in consumptions that you be wrongly interpreted as "computer is on").
The real ultimate nerd solution is network controlled smart-plugs (as used in data center) and have an always on device (like the NAS or a RaspPi) pilot it.
The dead cheap guerrilla thing would by a simple power plug with individual button, one per socket.
I've already used all the above in various situations.
I've also never found a reasonably priced universal remote that actually does everything I need it to.
Mine's literally an old slavaged PalmOS PDA (a Palm IIIc) and the "Remote IR" app (this once has low-level to both the emit and receive diods. You can record the signal from one remote to replicated it).
Total budget : a few bucks to replace the old lithium battery.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Regarding the Wii :
- lots of modern consoles (all the way back from the SEGA DreamCast and some of the early PlayStation 1s) are actually able to emit VGA 480p signal or higher, if you provide the correct cable.
(usually a resistor between some pin to signal the console to emit VGA, and the component output wired to a VGA connector)
NTSC Wii consoles support only YPbPr, not RGB. And citation needed that the original PlayStation and Nintendo 64 could do 480p at all. They struggled to do even 480i; most games were in 240p.
Lots of 16 bits consoles are actually able to output separate RGB components (the Genesis does) because that's what was used in the European scart *cables* (as opposed to simple connectors that convert from composite to scart).
I live in the United States, the land of no SCART. I think Europe got SCART because of the SECAM/PAL split. Besides, the output from 16-bit consoles is 240p, and I've seen modern TVs that sync to 480i component and 480p component and RGB but fail to sync to 240p component or RGB. One would need an adapter that line-doubles 240p to 480p. And a lot of consoles lost their RGB output in later revisions because not enough end users were using the output for the manufacturer to find it profitable to maintain it.
VCR are able to emit S-Video
Most do not. Though I've used S-Video with my Super NES, N64, and GameCube, I've never seen a VHS (not S-VHS) VCR in mainstream electronics stores in the United States that outputs S-Video when playing VHS. I've seen VHS/DVD combo players with S-Video and component outputs, but the S-Video and component outputs are inactive when not playing a DVD. And with VHS VCR production having been terminated, I doubt that there are enough VCRs with S-Video out to replace all those that lack it.
- Only extremely old stuff (like NES) are actually limited to composite-only without mods.
Unfortunately, that's a big one, as the NES is the only console for which I've been paid to develop games. Is the RetroUSB AVS worth $180?
at this point, the best advice (instead of trying to plug the VCR into a monitor) would be to plug the VCR into a capture device (one capable of S-Video input for slightly better results) and try to save all old movies onto the NAS.
Until the capture device pauses the recording, with the resume button grayed out: "Paused (gain control copy protection)"