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.

188 of 320 comments (clear)

  1. bundle by mwfischer · · Score: 5, Funny

    let me know if there is a bundle with one of those with a unicorn. I would be interested as well.

    1. Re:bundle by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      I'd prefer one that comes with a barely-flying pegasus. Yellow with pink mane preferred. Shy if possible.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    2. Re: bundle by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 4, Informative

      Bunghole: the hole in a cask, keg, or barrel through which liquid is poured in or drained out.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  2. Stop looking for a TV by Baron_Yam · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

    1. Re:Stop looking for a TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah why didn't he just go buy a 70" monitor? What a dummy...

    2. Re:Stop looking for a TV by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      A product I would like to see is super thin TV panel with essentially the LCD only in the display module, with a thin ribbon cable to connect to a driver module/box which has the tuner, power supply, etc, sitting in my AV shelf next to my AVR. That would allow a flat wall mount directly against the wall with a very thin profile. Keeping speakers and other 'tronics' in the display housing just makes it thicker and requires more cooling space and ventilation, plus the extra standoff distance due to the standard mount.

      OR, if not that, I never use TV console speakers so at least sell a TV without those space wasters.

      Maybe that would be a niche product, but I'd like to see it. I'm a bit surprised some high end designer product isn't available like that.

    3. Re:Stop looking for a TV by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      No matter what you do, you're running at least one cable (ideally in your wall for a nice clean look).

      It would be nice if that was omnibus cable that did everything, but there's also something to be said for using multiple standard cables... you can put up standard wall plates and connect to a new screen if you replace the existing one, for instance.

      I'd like to see a standard for recessed wall plates that can handle all the likely connectors and the required cable slack so you can have a truly flush-mounted screen. And a matching standard for the screens to have the most common connectors in the same position every time.

    4. Re:Stop looking for a TV by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      Argh. It's not the speakers in most current televisions causing thickness issues in the display housing. There's a reason sound bars are a Thing now... it's because TV speakers are small, tinny and next to useless.

      Yes, they are smaller and useless, but they are also still part of the limiting factors in how thin tvs are. Its easy to see if you just go to any TV store and look at the profiles.

    5. Re:Stop looking for a TV by darryldale · · Score: 5, Informative

      LG makes exactly what you're looking for: https://www.theverge.com/ces/2...

    6. Re:Stop looking for a TV by StormReaver · · Score: 1

      Look for a monitor instead.

      That's fine if you're willing to pay a 200-300% markup for fewer non-smart, but useful, features (such as remote control and receiving a TV signal).

      For those of us on Slashdot, smart or non-smart should not be an issue. If you don't want the smart features of the TV, block its MAC address at your firewall. Problem solved.

    7. Re:Stop looking for a TV by BorgDrone · · Score: 1

      Alternatively look for a commercial display intended for digital signage. Pretty much a TV without all the bells an whistles. Usually a lot more expensive than an equivalent TV too.

    8. Re:Stop looking for a TV by Holi · · Score: 2

      Sure let me spend 12k on a TV. Did you miss the part where he said cheaper, not ridiculously expensive?

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    9. Re:Stop looking for a TV by LordWabbit2 · · Score: 1

      That's what I did, gave my Sony TV away and bought a big monitor instead. It actually came with a remote, but the monitor is too stupid to send the remote signals to the rPi via HDMI, one thing I miss about the Sony, but it's something I can live with since about the only time I actually use the remote is to turn the monitor on. Volume etc. can all be controlled from the app on my phone / tablet.

      --
      There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
    10. Re:Stop looking for a TV by Killall+-9+Bash · · Score: 2

      The problem with computer monitors is that computer monitor manufacturers think that shitty viewing angle is acceptable, even if you pay a premium... because hey, you're just going to be sitting right in front of it... right?

      But feel free to pay much more for shitty viewing angle, shitty contrast, and an all-around shitty experience.

      --
      "Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
    11. Re:Stop looking for a TV by omnichad · · Score: 1

      If you don't want the smart features of the TV, block its MAC address at your firewall. Problem solved.

      Or just never connect it to the Internet in the first place. If you're not using any of its features, you won't need any firmware updates anyway.

    12. Re:Stop looking for a TV by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Why go through connecting it to your network, and then actively blocking it?

      Just don't set up any wireless / plug in any ethernet. Hey look, updates are disabled!

      And, if they included some ridiculous cellular connection just for updating, you're fucked anyway - don't buy it.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    13. Re:Stop looking for a TV by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      No matter what you do, you're running at least one cable (ideally in your wall for a nice clean look).

      It would be nice if that was omnibus cable that did everything, but there's also something to be said for using multiple standard cables... you can put up standard wall plates and connect to a new screen if you replace the existing one, for instance.

      I'd like to see a standard for recessed wall plates that can handle all the likely connectors and the required cable slack so you can have a truly flush-mounted screen. And a matching standard for the screens to have the most common connectors in the same position every time.

      If you only have the LCD portion in the display, there is nor reason or benefit to having multiple cables between it the the driver module. The driver module can have all the standard I/O connections you desire, and much more easily accessible. The ribbon cable (and there maybe be some signal/noise challenges with that I admit), with a flat connector would allow flush wall mounting (obviously you'd needs a hole in the wall behind it for cable to come through)

    14. Re:Stop looking for a TV by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      LG makes exactly what you're looking for: https://www.theverge.com/ces/2...

      Yes, that's pretty much it! I guess they must have heard my occasional mention of desire for this type of product for the last 5 years. Now they can just not do the soundbar thing and instead put that stuff in a no speaker shelf module, and they've hit the target.

      Thanks for the link.

    15. Re:Stop looking for a TV by tepples · · Score: 1

      Or just never connect it to the Internet in the first place.

      Enjoy staring at the activation screen instead of the picture coming in through the RF, composite, or HDMI source.

    16. Re:Stop looking for a TV by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      I don't get that "thinness" requirement people put on TVs. Sure, no one wants the thing violently protruding several inches from the wall... but anything less than 2 inches should be way more than reasonable.

      The TV isn't a Phone. When a colleague comes boasting how thin his new TV is I can't help but think "oh God, why is this important AT ALL?"

      aesthetics. A thin TV flush mounted on a wall looks a lot nicer than a thick one protruding outward or spaced away. A thin bezel is generally nicer looking as well. TV's are often right in the main living space, and people want those spaces to look nice, just like their furniture and decor.

    17. Re:Stop looking for a TV by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The problem with computer monitors is that computer monitor manufacturers think that shitty viewing angle is acceptable, even if you pay a premium... because hey, you're just going to be sitting right in front of it... right?

      There is an answer, and it is called IPS. I have two 25.5" IPS displays and they both have excellent viewing angles. On the other hand, one of them also is old, and has annoying persistence problems akin to burn-in except not as long-lived. My 20" Sharp AQUOS EDTV has the same problem, but my 52" Sharp AQUOS full HDTV does not. No idea what kind of panels are used in those, but I found it interesting and relevant since they both have excellent viewing angles as well.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    18. Re:Stop looking for a TV by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      This. A monitor is probably going to have better quality than a regular TV anyway. Get a DVR (like TiVo) for the signal source. Get a monitor with speakers, or no speakers and a home theatre receiver for multi-channel sound.

      Or, as others are suggesting, if you get stuck with a so-called 'smart TV', just never allow it to connect to the Internet.

    19. Re:Stop looking for a TV by asoukup · · Score: 1

      Already exists as of this OLED generation - flat on wall OLED with ribbon cable to box with all the connectors.
      http://www.lg.com/us/tvs/lg-OL...
      $14999

    20. Re:Stop looking for a TV by apraetor · · Score: 2

      Unfortunately the "smart" software requires frequent updates. Not merely for security patches which are potentially moot with MAC blocking -- but for bugs which cause crashes or poor performance. I've had a Samsung for a few years, and they've stopped patching it; the final patch left me rebooting the TV daily, otherwise the video starts to stutter. I'd love a truly non-smart TV without the increased possibility of bugs.

    21. Re:Stop looking for a TV by Rhipf · · Score: 1

      The actual problem with using a monitor for the OP's question is that I haven't seen any computer monitors that come with a remote. One of the requirements was a remote that allowed changing of inputs.

    22. Re:Stop looking for a TV by omnichad · · Score: 1

      You can just return that and buy a different one. It's defective.

    23. Re:Stop looking for a TV by Etcetera · · Score: 1

      For those of us on Slashdot, smart or non-smart should not be an issue. If you don't want the smart features of the TV, block its MAC address at your firewall. Problem solved.

      Crunchy on the outside, chewy on the inside, is not a very "smart" way of handling security issues presented by Smart TVs. The better way is to remove them completely -- i.e., not getting one with a complex control system and feature set in the first place.

      Like the OP, I wish more manufacturers were keeping focus on this area. I have a Mitsubishi 65" DLP from back in the day (2008?) that I still use just for its simplicity (and having 4x HDMI ports, 2x antennae, plus tons of legacy ports is awesome). I'm ready for an upgrade, but I have no need for apps on my TV when I have all these various devices that do better jobs at things already connected to it, and the complexity and attendant security issues seem far from worth whatever functions I'm supposedly gaining. Whatever happened to "do one thing and do it well"?

      Last I heard LG had some good models in this area; perhaps it's time to look closer.

    24. Re:Stop looking for a TV by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      He's bucking for a job as /. editor.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    25. Re:Stop looking for a TV by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      Yes, thanks, another had pointed that out and it is the type of thing I've been waiting for for years now. Next they just need to put that soundbar looking thing in a simple box with no speakers so I can put it on the AVR shelf.

    26. Re:Stop looking for a TV by ZiggieTheGreat · · Score: 1

      My monitor doesn't have an OTA tuner in it. :(

    27. Re:Stop looking for a TV by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The actual problem with using a monitor for the OP's question is that I haven't seen any computer monitors that come with a remote. One of the requirements was a remote that allowed changing of inputs.

      That's why an "industrial monitor" is the answer, they are just TVs without tuners. Some of them come with remotes, some without. Some with one input, some with several. Most of them also have an additional interface, usually a serial port, which can be used to control all of the basic functions like switching power, switching inputs, changing the volume... My Sharp AQUOS TV (LC-52somethingorother) is just a step away from being one of those; it has a tuner, but it also has the serial port. It also has pathetic speakers, which are there only as a last resort, and for testing. It's assumed that you will use something else if you actually want to hear what's going on. This helps keep the face of the television sleek and smooth, which is what you want for a signage application. I don't know which other models are based on the same device, but I can tell that there were some. This television was purchased from Costco, but the same set (with the same model number) was also available with an inferior warranty and a better remote from other retailers. It was also quite some years ago, but equivalent products exist today and most of them are quite a bit thinner and less power-hungry.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    28. Re:Stop looking for a TV by antdude · · Score: 1

      What about internal tuners like ATSC? :P

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    29. Re:Stop looking for a TV by Raistlin77 · · Score: 1

      It's not the speakers, it is the backlighting and the support structure for the VESA standard mounting options. How do you expect to stick it to the wall, with glue?

    30. Re:Stop looking for a TV by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      Check out the link others found to a TV similar to what I was talking about, and you'll understand. Yes, you'd have to eliminate standard mounts. You could attach to the wall with screw head slots, just like any other flush mount object.

      The speakers in TV's are a depth contributor because they moved them to be behind (o partially behind in come cases) the LCD panel in order to have a slimmer bezel.

    31. Re:Stop looking for a TV by stunted · · Score: 1

      The first LCD TV I brought 12 years ago was a 720p Sharp Aquos that worked exactly like this, even with detachable external speakers on either side.

      --
      In order to save our freedom it was necessary to destroy it.
  3. Re:The internet exists. by Spazmania · · Score: 2

    Computer monitors tend to be (A) smaller, (B) faster 50ms) and (C) much more expensive than a common television with the same resolution. So no, he's looking for a nice large television at a television price and speed without the "smart" features.

    --
    Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
  4. Any TV you want by FictionPimp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Buy any TV, do not connect it to your network and do not use any of the smart functionality. Boom instant regular old tv!

    1. Re:Any TV you want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Just be careful that they're not TV's that *must* be connected. Vizio has a line like this.

    2. Re:Any TV you want by l20502 · · Score: 1

      But if it takes longer than 8 seconds to turn on from unplugged to ready it's no better than any CRT set you can find in the trash.
      TVs are meant to just work, if it takes too long might as well wake up my laptop from standby and use that.

    3. Re:Any TV you want by thereitis · · Score: 2

      I wouldn't trust a smart TV to not connect to an open wifi. And while your wifi may not be open, doesn't mean your neighbor's aren't.

    4. Re:Any TV you want by thegarbz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But if it takes longer than 8 seconds to turn on from unplugged to ready it's no better than any CRT set you can find in the trash.

      Sure. If you buy a small crap one with poor picture quality 4:3 ratio, crap brightness, low resolution, and in ability to plug in anything to it then yeah it would be no better than a CRT.

      if it takes too long

      You're watching TV, not trying to land a fighter plane. If you can't spare the 10 seconds for it to start then maybe the problem is you.

    5. Re:Any TV you want by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 5, Funny

      You can solve that problem with these simple steps:

      Get a large roll of heavy-duty aluminum foil, a roll of metalized HVAC duct-sealing tape, and the box that the TV came in.

      Cut the box cardboard to form a large pyramid over the screen to form a visor, and tape it to the TV. Now wrap the entire TV and the visor with the aluminum foil, and carefully seal all seams with the duct tape. For added security, you can also tape a piece of wire mesh over the opening of the visor.

      Now you can watch the TV by peering into the visor the same way Mr. Spock looked at his sensors. With absolutely no WiFi.

    6. Re:Any TV you want by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't trust a smart TV to not connect to an open wifi. And while your wifi may not be open, doesn't mean your neighbor's aren't.

      I've yet to see a TV that will automatically connect to WiFi without asking. Even so, the solution is to connect it to your own WiFi and block it at the firewall.

      If that's still too scary, I suggest you move into a Una bomber style shack in the middle of the woods and don't get the electricity or any other utilities hooked up. Because you probably think the CIA is going to send instructions to the TV that tell it to kill you in your sleep.

    7. Re:Any TV you want by RavenLrD20k · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Smart TVs are getting to where they will leech onto any open WiFi signal they can attach to to pull down updates, even if you disable WiFi in the TV's settings. Not so bad when you're out in the middle of nowhere and tech savvy enough that you can just outright perform a block at your router against the TV's MAC address. On the other hand, if live in a neighborhood, apartment, or town-home community where everyone else is a grandmother with an open default network on the other hand and your TV will attach itself to the best signal that allows it to pull an IP.

      It's not even recent that TVs that have started doing this. I have an older Samsung directly wired into my network behind a pfsense firewall and have its WiFi disabled I also used to have an Open WiFi guest network available that logged all connections and also behind its own firewall rules. Guess what the TV would do? At about 2am every day it'd silently enable its WiFi and connect to that guest network in the hopes of pulling an update. IT's stopped since I found the buried setting that allows me to explicitly opt-out of automatic updates... but if I weren't as technically able and diligent, the TV would have been able to successfully connect to the update server nightly. Take your average user ability and blocking the TV from connecting is an exercise in futility.

      Welcome to the future.

    8. Re:Any TV you want by vtcodger · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      "... maybe the problem is you."

      Let me guess. You make your living as a Web site designer and are baffled why anyone would not appreciate your product, use an ad blocker or think Javascript is a really bad idea? Right?

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    9. Re:Any TV you want by vtcodger · · Score: 1

      And if this generation of smart TVs doesn't do that, the next generation will. Your TV knows what's good for you, even if you are a bit confused.

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    10. Re:Any TV you want by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You jest, but the idea that modern devices will start connecting to some sort of mesh network or using their own independent access to mobile/cell networks in order to phone home when you don't want them to and haven't given them access to your own network is disturbingly plausible.

      I saw a TV programme a while back about someone building their own home who was concerned about some of this, and so tried to build in what was basically a Faraday cage to prevent unwanted signals getting in or out. It did cut the signal by quite a bit, but not enough to stop the message getting through...

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    11. Re:Any TV you want by thereitis · · Score: 1

      You're being tracked in detail across the Internet. Your personal data is being sold at every turn. I'm not sure what part of what I said is hard to believe _could_ happen. Especially since our electronics are already being infiltrated with spy chips.

    12. Re:Any TV you want by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Lots of those TVs still work with IR if you can find the right codes - this makes it still possible to work with cable/satellite all-in-one remotes while still including a shiny BT remote in the box.

    13. Re:Any TV you want by bogeskov · · Score: 1

      You forget...

      This might be one of those millennials with a 5 second attention span.

      By the time the time the TV is turned on, they've forgotten what they wanted to do with it.

      --

    14. Re:Any TV you want by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Let me guess. You make your living as a Web site designer and are baffled why anyone would not appreciate your product, use an ad blocker or think Javascript is a really bad idea? Right?

      Nope. I just have a functioning brain that is able to reason what specifications are important and what aren't. Given the amount of time people will spend in front of a TV, having a problem with 10 seconds of turning it on is strange to the point of requiring psychiatric care.

    15. Re:Any TV you want by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      You forget...

      This might be one of those millennials with a 5 second attention span.

      By the time the time the TV is turned on, they've forgotten what they wanted to do with it.

      Millennials have a short attention span that doesn't mean we're forgetful. I just turned my TV on. While it was coming on I also turned on the coffee machine.
      A loading screen does not command attention.

    16. Re:Any TV you want by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      That sounds like a product I *must* not buy. Defective by design - my ISP is having trouble, and now I can't watch OTA content or optical disc storage that has worked without an Internet connection for 20 years?

      Fuck that, and fuck Vizio.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    17. Re:Any TV you want by David_Hart · · Score: 2

      You forget...

      This might be one of those millennials with a 5 second attention span.

      By the time the time the TV is turned on, they've forgotten what they wanted to do with it.

      Millennials have a short attention span that doesn't mean we're forgetful. I just turned my TV on. While it was coming on I also turned on the coffee machine.
      A loading screen does not command attention.

      Actually, a Millennial would be tweeting about how much the TV sucks for taking so long to turn on and instagraming a selfie with a frowny face.... (grin)

    18. Re:Any TV you want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      You obviously don't have children.

      Saturday - 5 AM - Kids come running into the bedroom...
      Kids: daddy...daddy .... daddy .. DADDY! DADDY WAKE UP IT'S AN EMERGENCY!!!

      Me: Wh...What's wrong!?

      Kids: The TV is broke - it won't turn on!

      Me, not wanting to argue...
      OK, show me. (begrudgingly throws on robe, trudges to the living room)

      Kids: (pressing power button every 3 or 4 seconds)
      See, it won't turn on! It's broke! You need to go buy a new one!

      Me, pushing them out of the way
      *clicks power button ONCE, waits 8 seconds - TV comes on*
      It's just fine. Why are you awake so early?

      Kids:
      It was broken, how did you fix it?

      Me: I pushed the button ONCE and waited for it to turn on. You have to WAIT a few seconds.

      Kids:
      I'm not good at waiting. You need to make it faster.

      Me:
      Watch your shows. I'm going back to bed until the sun comes up.

    19. Re:Any TV you want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      These things can be etched directly into the PCB now - possibly even within the multiple layers of the board. Good luck getting to, much less cutting, the right trace.

    20. Re:Any TV you want by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Even so, the solution is to connect it to your own WiFi and block it at the firewall.

      Or, keep a shitty old thrift-store WiFi router around and turned on that isn't connected to anything. It's the 'null' router that you connect stuff to that you don't want to be connected to anything outside.

    21. Re:Any TV you want by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      I was being somewhat facetious. That being said, you're on the internet, so you are being tracked. I'd guess you probably have a mobile phone too. So you must not be too concerned. In a lot of ways, we give up our privacy for convenience.

      I'm going to guess that more can be found out about someone by their Facebook identity than when they turn on their TV, or what they watch. It's funny how people get up in arms about Google tracking them, but put every detail of their life on Facebook, or whatever social media thing is popular right now.

    22. Re:Any TV you want by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Turning on the TV once a day means that you're wasting about an hour of your life every year waiting for the TV to boot up.

      Maybe. Then again, when I turn the TV on, I'm not just standing in front of it staring blankly, hoping that it will come on sooner. That's the point when I get a drink, get comfortable, etc.

    23. Re:Any TV you want by JThundley · · Score: 1

      I thought this too when buying cheap TVs with built-in DVD players that I never intend on using (at least one never even worked, don't care). These TVs take 5 times as long as my other regular dumb TV to actually show a picture, it's obnoxious.

      That being said, I have a bigger LG dumb TV because I love my smaller LG dumb TV and how fast it turns on. This big one takes 3x as long to show a picture.

    24. Re:Any TV you want by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      Good enough to use. That was the disappointing thing. Almost all of the transmission standards that matter are digital these days, so even if you've managed to block 90% of the signal strength, as long as that last 10% is enough to be detectable a message is potentially going to get through.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  5. Re:The internet exists. by Spazmania · · Score: 1

    Slashdot and it's HTML interpretation despite being set to plain text. That was supposed to be < 10ms and > 50ms.

    --
    Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
  6. Computer Monitor by ErroneousBee · · Score: 1

    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.
  7. Display screen by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    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
    1. Re:Display screen by bigfinger76 · · Score: 1

      What's the price range on those?

    2. Re:Display screen by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Probably in the "if you have to ask, you can't afford it" range.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    3. Re:Display screen by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 1

      I found a 50inch that was under a grand. These prices seem pretty good, but lack HDMI or the other hookups. Is there a dongle that I can use?

  8. Just don't plug it in by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:Just don't plug it in by MachineShedFred · · Score: 2

      I'd bet that the "smart" features come with a lower price because they're able to sell that information gathered by the "smart" or the advertising space available through the "smart" to other people besides you. Taking that away deprives the company who made the thing of another revenue stream, therefore you will need to pay more up front.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  9. You need SmartTVs by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

    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.

    1. Re:You need SmartTVs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      More than likely he's tired of the crap processors and the shit software that comes with the smart units. I'd rather have a unit where that processor is dedicated to image processing than running a firmware that I, or my customers, have no control over.

    2. Re:You need SmartTVs by PhYrE2k2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The need is simple:

      1. The display panel and its HDMI ports will be the de-facto standard for the next 10+ years, much the same way televisions still have composite/component/s-video inputs despite no component built in the last 15 years using them

      2. The 'smart' feature will quickly become outdated and will lack long term support. A smart component based on the AndroidOS, for example, is unlikely to have security support or functionality many years down the road on the useful life of the television

      3. While once can replace/upgrade a $50 component connected to a HDMI port, few will seek to upgrade their television.

      4. Once such security support is gone, this network-connected television will see the real possibility of what's been going on (enabling cameras and microphones, privacy issues, etc)

      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.

      6. As features evolve, you will now have two 'smart' devices (one in the TV and one that does what you want, such as adding H.264 decoders, etc) and this is unnecessary for (a) power consumption, (b) security, (c) user confusion, (d) user experience.

      In general, the 'smart' feature should always have been a module that, while it comes with the television and could be proprietary, should be upgradable and replaceable.

      --

      when you see the word 'Linux', drink!
    3. Re:You need SmartTVs by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      What you guys should worry about is closed hardware/software rather than any of those things.

    4. Re:You need SmartTVs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      More than likely he's tired of the crap processors and the shit software that comes with the smart units.

      I feel the same about Infotainment Systems in cars. But cars are made for gadget-loving millennials, so there you have it.

    5. Re:You need SmartTVs by Wycliffe · · Score: 1

      In general, the 'smart' feature should always have been a module that, while it comes with the television and could be proprietary, should be upgradable and replaceable.

      I agree completely. A friend of mine has a "smart" TV. Comes to find out, it is really basically only a TV with a built-in chromecast. Although this is a step in the right direction, it would be much better if they just had a small compartment in the back and it came with an *actual* chromecast. That way, if it breaks or needs to be upgraded, it can be a quick swap.

    6. Re:You need SmartTVs by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      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.

      Citation required. I've never seen a smart TV complain about being unable to get updates when not on a network. The only thing I've ever seen is a smart TV complain that the network went down while downloading an update.

    7. Re:You need SmartTVs by Holi · · Score: 1

      except, for the most part, open devices do not exist.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    8. Re:You need SmartTVs by morethanapapercert · · Score: 1
      I don't know what the Chromecast does snoop, but it'd be trivial for it to snoop and report the internal network details. How many computers/devices on your network, what their MAC addresses are, what WiFi password and security level you use, whether you have a home media centre and what files you have hosted on it. It's conceivable that, using checksums or metadata, it is possible to detect which video or audio files match legally licensed digital downloads and from that, make an inference about how many were home rips and/or copyright infringing material.

      From there, using the massive database that someone like Google could amass, it would be easy to then track your mobile devices if/when they appear on other networks. (your cell phone on your carriers network, your tablet/laptop on WiFi hotspots.

      In my opinion; the problem with any internet capable of device hasn't been what it may or may not snoop on its own, it's been what the manufacturers and software developers can compile or infer on the back end when all the data from multiple sources has been collected. What your cell phone does, for example, is only one piece of the puzzle. For any large internet savvy company, it is straightforward, even comparatively cheap to build a surprising and even scary profile on individuals by collecting all the little scraps our devices send.

      Because of that, I've often felt that reports, and consumer pushback, about privacy violating stuff often miss the real dangers. It's not enough to disable/forbid all the privacy eroding functions on this or that hardware or software, not when the same data can be so easily collected through other hardware or software. What's needed is effective laws banning the collection of such data in the first place, regardless of data source. Ideally, such laws would be backed up by a firm resolve by consumers to totally boycott any company that pushes that boundary. I don't mean refusing to use something until the company makes minor changes and promises to not err again. I mean being caught infringing is an effective death sentence for the company. Never buy or use anything from that company ever again. That will ensure that no other company will be willing to risk it. As it is now, every company acts like the camel with his nose in the tent. They ease in a bit further at every opportunity, stop only when caught and back up the minimum they think they can get away with only to resume pushing in when they think the attention is off the them. And it's not just one camel is it? We have dozens of camels all trying to nose their way in and not only are they basing their encroachment on what they are getting away with, they are closely watching and copying any encroachment they see the others getting away with.

      --
      I need a wheelchair van for my son. Help me get the word out. https://www.gofundme.com/wheelchair-van-for-jj
    9. Re:You need SmartTVs by omnichad · · Score: 1

      No HDCP, no useful content. That's the world we live in.

    10. Re:You need SmartTVs by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      We know google is collecting information - we're giving implicit permission for it when using one of their devices. We're not giving a particular TV manufacturer any permission, and yet they will do it anyway - even possibly monitoring what we watch OTA. Like built in devices in cars, they get old and out of date and unsupported. You don't buy a new $25k car every few years (well, maybe you do, I don't) because your GPS doesn't update with new maps any more. Far easier to replace a third party gps box or, really these days just update the app on your phone. On my TV, it's far easier to replace the device I'm using for streaming - a new Roku or FireTV or Chromecast than to rely on the built in (usually sub-standard) features on the TV.

      So yes, the biggest problem with "smart" is that in a few years they are not so smart, and not so supported. The solution is to just not use those features, it's true, but then you still have privacy implications and, again, I realize you have that with other devices, but in those cases you are implicitly giving permission and, ultimately, if you just watch OTA, you're not giving any permission at all.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    11. Re:You need SmartTVs by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      So the discussion has expanded to even more reasons to dislike "smart" TVs. That's how public discourse is supposed to work. If the subject changed to other internet enabled devices, you might have a point.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    12. Re:You need SmartTVs by sjames · · Score: 1

      Things plugged in to the TV are often quite a bit cheaper than the TV, so when the manufacturer inevitably loses interest in providing decent support, it's cheaper to unplug and replace with something new.

      Which would you rather the manufacturer screw up and then declare WONTFIX, your $1000 TV or the $70 dongle plugged in to it?

  10. Uh by mknewman · · Score: 2

    Buy a monitor. HDMI.

    1. Re:Uh by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      You say "Uh" as if it's obvious and easy, and a simple name means you get what you want.

      A "monitor" is often very different than a "TV". In terms of input, in terms of picture settings, in terms of panels and technology.

      Your simple recommendation is very limiting, especially if you want to, for example, watch TV.

  11. No network by narced · · Score: 1

    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.

  12. Good, Fast, Cheap: Pick Any Two by Wolfstar · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.
    1. Re:Good, Fast, Cheap: Pick Any Two by bjdevil66 · · Score: 1

      After what Vizio pulled recently with spying on their customers and collecting data on them without telling anyone (me included), and then paying a paltry $2.2M fine, I'm going to have a hard time coming around to buying something they make again. And that's after putting up with the shoddy Vizio quality (horrible remote responsiveness, apps didn't work right, etc.)...

    2. Re:Good, Fast, Cheap: Pick Any Two by Virtucon · · Score: 2

      And Accuweather and others. You're the product!

      Legislation on consumer devices and software needs to be enacted to prevent this stuff from happening. Until then, intelligent firewalls, leaving devices "unplugged" and rigorous use of privacy settings are the only defense.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    3. Re:Good, Fast, Cheap: Pick Any Two by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Yeah... I remember Christmas a few years back. I was a Sam's Club member. We went the day after Christmas and there must have been a dozen people in the parking lot pushing carts back towards the store with Vizio boxes, and I said "I'm never buying a Vizio." Things may have changed since then; a working Vizio might actually be really good, but why take the chance?

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    4. Re:Good, Fast, Cheap: Pick Any Two by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Well, it's been evolving to that point. When they first came out, they were new and cool and had all these extra features, so people paid more for them. As time went on, they started making smart TVs more than non-smart TVs. Then it becomes a matter of volume, and any time you make something in less volume, it's production cost per unit goes up. So I don't know what country you're in, but if it hasn't happened already, it will.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    5. Re:Good, Fast, Cheap: Pick Any Two by retchdog · · Score: 1

      Dumb TVs are also more expensive because they're not partially-subsidized by an industry practically aching to put a microphone inside you.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    6. Re:Good, Fast, Cheap: Pick Any Two by retchdog · · Score: 1

      that's because the new features are for advertisers, not you.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
  13. Just do a quick search on Amazon. by jcochran · · Score: 1

    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.

  14. PC Monitor by DrYak · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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 ]
    1. Re:PC Monitor by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      - multiple HDMI can be obtained by connecting a separate HDMI switch box. Some even have remote controls

      No. God no. You lost me at the first point. The last thing I need is another box and another remote.

      Better suggestion. Buy a small smart TV and don't connect it to a network. That lone removes 3 boxes you suggest (several of which need their own power, have their own standby, and own remotes).

    2. Re:PC Monitor by almitydave · · Score: 1

      - multiple HDMI can be obtained by connecting a separate HDMI switch box. Some even have remote controls

      No. God no. You lost me at the first point. The last thing I need is another box and another remote.

      I got cheap (< 10USD) HDMI switch box for my TV that doesn't require power and automatically detects signals and switches based on port priority. No remote, although you can get one if you want - there are also buttons on the box to force it to a specific input. I currently have my XBox360 and Steam Link plugged in, and maybe the rPi.

      --
      my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
      I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
    3. Re:PC Monitor by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      I agree with "thegarbz." What you suggest works, but i's all too much... too much to plug in, too many wires, too many devices sucking power on stand-by. Yes, I know, only a watt or two, but they all add up. I've also never found a reasonably priced universal remote that actually does everything I need it to.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
  15. Toshiba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    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.

  16. I settled on a Hitachi Roku TV by hey! · · Score: 2

    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.
    1. Re:I settled on a Hitachi Roku TV by IhateMonkeys · · Score: 2, Informative

      Just bought a TCL Roku TV. 55" of 4k goodness for $399 on sale at Target. Its got plenty of inputs (3xHDMI 2.0, USB, Ethernet, and more), just no component video. The OS is quick smooth and easy to navigate. OTA setup is a breeze, it will even scan a cable connection for channels if you have "basic cable" that doesnt require a set top box. Removng undesirable channels is a simple as clicking a check box on the channel listing and boom they are gone. The remote is very simplistic. There are no numbered buttons. It seemed awkward at first, but if you hit the left arrow on the remote it brings up the channel listing and you can scroll to the channel you want. http://www.tclusa.com/products...

    2. Re:I settled on a Hitachi Roku TV by omnichad · · Score: 1

      The Roku UI is great, but stick hardware is terrible. Get yourself a full-size Roku and you can have Ethernet support (get the right model) and a smooth experience. I've been using their hardware for at least 5 years now and I've never wanted anything else.

  17. If you really want non-smart... by GuB-42 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  18. Configurable with the remote? by swb · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:Configurable with the remote? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      My secret has been to only use the OEM remotes for programming my cheap learning remote and put it in a closet. They're probably never going to wear out at this rate. I only get out the OEM remote for my A/V receiver occasionally (like first-time setup) and don't program most of the functions into the univeral.

    2. Re:Configurable with the remote? by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      OSDs and configuring with the remote don't make the TV "smart." Those things have been around a long time. TFS even indicates willingness for the remote to have what it needs to configure the TV.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    3. Re:Configurable with the remote? by equivocal · · Score: 1

      My LG 24LF452B from BF2016 has a joystick control which can manipulate everything the OSD does. Don't need the remote at all except for direct numerical input.

  19. Make your own by houghi · · Score: 1

    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.
  20. I don't get it by jon3k · · Score: 2

    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?

  21. Re:The internet exists. by Khyber · · Score: 2

    2k *IS* 1080p.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  22. Re:The internet exists. by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

    And 1080 is not acceptable for a new set now. Go at least 2k, 4k is better.

    Surely that depends on size. If it is 40 inch or smaller from a reasonable difference, no one is going to notice the difference between 2k and 1080. Or 4k and 1080.

    Large TVs, or ones you sit uncommonly close to are the ones that require higher resolution. For small and midsized sets anything over 1080 is overkill and you're paying for something you won't notice.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  23. Consumer Reports by redmid17 · · Score: 2

    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?

  24. Sceptre by cb88 · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

    1. Re:Sceptre by millert · · Score: 1

      I think you mean $1,200 for the 75" set which is still pretty amazing for such a large screen. A 55" Sceptre can be had for $310. Either way, Sceptre is probably the only brand right now still making non-smart TVs.

  25. Smart TVs will never go away by Pentomino · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Smart TVs will never go away by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      Well, the same thing happened with computers, and I don't hear people complaining about it every day. My Apple II would immediately start booting from disk upon powerup. Now, we have to wait through an exhaustive memory check, look for boot devices, etc. every time you power on your PC. I wouldn't be surprised if self-driving cars needed a couple of minutes to warm up from power-off as well.

    2. Re:Smart TVs will never go away by omnichad · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't be surprised if self-driving cars needed a couple of minutes to warm up from power-off as well.

      My non-self-driving car will not let me control my radio volume until it finishes booting. And Android Auto audio is much quieter than radio, so when I first turn on the car after listening to podcasts the previous time the radio is blasting way too loud and I can't do anything but wait until the UI becomes responsive.

    3. Re:Smart TVs will never go away by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

      PCs tend to boot much faster now than a decade ago.
      Game consoles on the other hand... A friend of mine actually sold his PS3 for that reason, he is a casual gamer and didn't want to wait through endless loading screens and updates just for a quick play. In a sense, it is worse than just complaining every day.

  26. Projector? by pr0t0 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
  27. For All Those People Saying Just Don't Connect It by gspeare · · Score: 2

    ...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.

  28. Don't by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re: Don't by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Fuck you. I don't care about any of that other bullshit if it means my TV literally has a transmitter in it to send back any data it pleases to anyone passing by.

      Not sure if you're off your meds or your cheap chinese tinfoil hat is resonating at a government satellite frequency.

    2. Re:Don't by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Most people don't care about HDMI-CDC any more, because they have bluetooth remotes. This is superior anyway.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Don't by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Most people ... have bluetooth remotes.

      Most people ...
      Never before has there been a more relevant time to say: "I don't think you know what that means"

    4. Re:Don't by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Most people ...
      Never before has there been a more relevant time to say: "I don't think you know what that means"

      Most of the boxes which replace smart tv functionality have a bluetooth remote, or at least an rf one. So if we stay on topic...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Don't by pak9rabid · · Score: 1

      Most people don't care about HDMI-CDC any more, because they have bluetooth remotes. This is superior anyway.

      Don't you mean HDMI-CEC? If so, you are wrong. Using one remote to control everything is far less shitty than having to sift through a pile of remotes to do what you want. It's especially nice when running Kodi on something that supports it (like, say a Raspberry Pi).

    6. Re:Don't by Rakhar · · Score: 1

      The smart equivalent of my TV would have cost more, not less. I bought it new two holiday seasons ago.

      I don't have serious worries about spying. I have serious worries about extra points of failure that give me zero benefit in return. I'm on my third living room TV in 15+ years and the latest wasn't a huge technological upgrade, just a much larger size for a low price. The old one was just moved to the bedroom and is still in use.

      I didn't skimp on quality to get a "dumb" TV. I just didn't buy a smart TV, and I wont for as long as I have that option. I can already access streaming video on at least 8 devices in my home off the top of my head, every one of which can be connected to my TV. The TV itself has zero need to have internal apps to do the same thing.

      See also the recent Samsung brilliance.

  29. Re:The internet exists. by vtcodger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "without the "smart" features."

    And presumably without the "smart" klunkiness. Really guys. There is no reason in this day and age that it should take 10 or 20 seconds for a solid state device to turn on and present one with an image.

    --
    You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
  30. Computer monitor or a projector by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

    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.

  31. You mean slightly more expensive. by Holi · · Score: 2

    "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.
  32. Re: Get an LG by UTF-8 · · Score: 2

    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.

  33. Plasma by Leninix · · Score: 1

    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.

  34. DLP by ArylAkamov · · Score: 1

    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.

  35. You might want to wait by Humbubba · · Score: 1
    You might want to hesitate buying a new TV right now. Chairman of the FCC, Ajit Pai, is pushing for a new ATSC 3.0, Over-The-Air (OTA) TV standard that will require new tuners. It could have a major impact even for cable and dish users. As this new standard becomes ubiquitous, TVs not compatible with the new format may go the way of the analog TV.

    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/...>

    1. Re:You might want to wait by omnichad · · Score: 2

      Or since they want a non-smart TV, they could just be prepared to buy a new external tuner later. 4K signalling over HDMI has already been fairly well standardized.

  36. Re:The internet exists. by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    Yeah, why did they switch from vertical to horizontal resolution anyway? 4K is really 2K, and so on.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  37. Professional/commercial displays by Archon · · Score: 1

    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.

  38. where to get a dumb tv by Frederic54 · · Score: 2

    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
  39. Re:The internet exists. by almitydave · · Score: 2, Offtopic

    You need to type &lt; and &gt; to get the symbols.
    And you need to type &amp;lt; and &amp;gt; to type the previous sentence.
    And &amp;amp;amp;amp; .........

    --
    my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
    I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
  40. Re:The internet exists. by almitydave · · Score: 2

    Yeah, why did they switch from vertical to horizontal resolution anyway? 4K is really 2K, and so on.

    So they could advertise bigger numbers to dumb customers.

    --
    my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
    I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
  41. "Smart" is another con - like "Don't be Evil" by tanstaaf1 · · Score: 1

    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.

  42. Re:For All Those People Saying Just Don't Connect by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

    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)

  43. All "smart" the can be ordinary ones by real+gumby · · Score: 1

    Just don't connect the TV itself to your LAN.

    1. Re: All "smart" the can be ordinary ones by real+gumby · · Score: 1

      Yes, you can transport Ethernet over HDMI. What a disappointment if the receiver or cable box or whatnot acted as a router. I suppose you could block the MAC from your DHCP server but how many people will know how to do this,

  44. Smart TV, labotomized by Jaegs · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  45. Re:The internet exists. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    My guess would be that he figured that much out by now since his second post was actually legible.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  46. Monitor? by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    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
  47. Digital Cinema Initiative by tepples · · Score: 1

    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.

  48. TV vs. computer monitor by Unnamed+Chickenheart · · Score: 1

    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
  49. I've been using Sceptre TVs by Thalaric · · Score: 1

    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.

  50. Simple by Thundercat007 · · Score: 1

    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.

  51. I want high-framerate by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

    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).

  52. Analog video from legacy peasant boxes by tepples · · Score: 1

    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.

  53. Re: The internet exists. by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

    And make it less obvious if a TV advertised as "4k" achieves it using RGBG subpixels. And to give them more ways to avoid disclosing the actual, physical resolution of the display (eg, calling a display with 1280 red, 1280 blue, and 2560 green subpixels per row "4k class" to hide the fact that it's not going to display 3840x2160 with 1:1 mapping).

    If they called it "2160p", they could still fudge the horizontal resolution, but they'd at least get fined by the EU if they tried to pawn off a display advertised as "4k class" that only had 1920x1080 physical resolution by muttering bullshit about how the "4k" refers to the "internal" video-processing resolution.

  54. Re:Easy Solution For *ANY* TV by arth1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ÃY' Don't.
    ÃY' Fucking.
    ÃY' Connect.
    ÃY' Network.

    Solved.

    Except that most TVs today have wifi, and if someone nearby runs an open AP, it'll reach out anyhow.

    I'm with the OP on this. I also don't want at TV with a microphone or built-in speakers that can be subverted to microphones.

  55. Re:The internet exists. by Immerman · · Score: 1

    Hey, uncommonly close can be good. I find 40" is a good size for sitting at ~monitor distance when playing games, or even using it as an incredibly cheap jumbo computer monitor. 1080p is just barely good enough for a monitor at that distance though.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  56. Lobotomize? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

    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.

  57. Where have I been? smart dumb? by gosand · · Score: 1

    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.

  58. easy solution... by juniorkindergarten · · Score: 1

    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
  59. What you want wont get made by jonwil · · Score: 1

    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?)

  60. Or... a projector? by zarmanto · · Score: 1

    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.

  61. don't connect, don't enable, don't use. easy-peasy by swschrad · · Score: 3, Informative

    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?
  62. Re:The internet exists. by Immerman · · Score: 1

    The first point deserves an addendum - upscaling can bring a lot of value to the game, though it's rarely done well on integrated hardware, and I'm not sure what (if any) options there currently are on the PC. But, for example, with the jump to 1080p you could upscale DVD content (480i) to 1080p (with sidebars) using the better filters in the free VLC media player, and while the results weren't on par with a 1080p bluray, they were still a LOT better than the original.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  63. Dumb TV by shubus · · Score: 1

    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.

  64. Re:The internet exists. by flargleblarg · · Score: 1

    2k *IS* 1080p.

    No, it is not. You are incorrect.

    2k is 2000 pixels wide.
    1080p is 1920 pixels wide.

    2000 != 1920.

  65. Re:The internet exists. by Rakarra · · Score: 1

    "without the "smart" features."

    And presumably without the "smart" klunkiness. Really guys. There is no reason in this day and age that it should take 10 or 20 seconds for a solid state device to turn on and present one with an image.

    Depends also on whether the "smart" device that is doing the video outputting (tivo/playstation/roku/PC) is actively outputting the right resolution, and that the appearance of an output device won't make that video signal reset and renegotiate. This is doubly true if HDCP copy protection is involved, which is often what takes video signals and output devices so long to sync. Putting an HDCP-aware EDID caching device on the output device ought to greatly reduce or eliminate that negotiation time.

    Worst part for me is flipping through channels on the Tivo, where lots of HD channels will output in different resolutions. (Some will actually be SD, some will be 720p, some will be 1080i, etcetc) Each time the resolution changes, it makes the whole setup lock up as the TV or whatever tries to switch resolutions, which it does slowly, and I doubt the Tivo is fast at it either. It makes the whole "scan through TV channels" thing pretty frustrating.

  66. Re: don't connect, don't enable, don't use. easy-p by I+kan+Spl · · Score: 1

    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.
  67. Re:The internet exists. by Tolleman · · Score: 1

    And 3840 != 4000. But that is the vertical resolution of what, 95% of 4K monitors?

  68. Re:The internet exists. by Khyber · · Score: 1

    Hi, I worked as a panel repair tech. You're entirely 100% wrong.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  69. Privilege by hackel · · Score: 1

    "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!

  70. Re:don't connect, don't enable, don't use. easy-pe by ZiggieTheGreat · · Score: 1

    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.

  71. Re:Easy Solution For *ANY* TV by mschwanke97402 · · Score: 1

    Except if I want to do any settings on a Vizio. You have to use a cell / tablet app to set the damn thing up. So, I guess I can connect to the network long enough for making changes to settings, then disconnect it again. They claim that you can turn off all smart functions with a single setting. I think I'll keep disconnecting the network.

  72. Re:Easy Solution For *ANY* TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I've owned both Samsung and LG "Smart" TVs. I've never experienced either attempt to connect to an open AP on their own. I personally don't connect either to a network unless I wanted to update firmware then I disconnect their Ethernet connection.

  73. Re:The internet exists. by zifn4b · · Score: 1

    There is no reason in this day and age that it should take 10 or 20 seconds for a solid state device to turn on and present one with an image.

    Easy for you to say. LCD TV's have to warm up just like CRT TV's did. That's why they are drawing a low current from the wall so they don't really ever turn all the way off. Instead of complaining, why don't you go invent a TV that does as you say, if you can.

    --
    We'll make great pets
  74. USED. by WolfgangVL · · Score: 1

    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.
  75. Re: The internet exists. by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

    I have a Samsung SmartTV and it's basically 1-2s from start to picture (sound is almost instant).

  76. Projector by MojoSF · · Score: 1

    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.

  77. Re:Easy Solution For *ANY* TV by arth1 · · Score: 2

    I've owned both Samsung and LG "Smart" TVs. I've never experienced either attempt to connect to an open AP on their own.

    How do you know?
    Have you placed it with an open access point inside a WiFi blocking cage, and seen that it doesn't access it?

    Recently there have been reports of devices doing just this - connecting to open WiFi when networking was "turned off".

  78. Re:The internet exists. by flargleblarg · · Score: 1

    It may be the case that some uninformed people say 2K when they really mean 1080p. That does not make them the same.

  79. Re:don't connect, don't enable, don't use. easy-pe by synp71 · · Score: 1

    They're going to need to use *your* wi-fi. What do you mean you don't have a password?

  80. Re:The internet exists. by vandamme · · Score: 1

    They only need a few seconds to warm up the filaments on the tubes. LED TVs don't need any time at all, they can just come on after booting the operating system. Look at how long it takes your computer monitor to turn on.

    The rest of the time is spent on your TV phoning home to .. somewhere.

  81. Re:don't connect, don't enable, don't use. easy-pe by multi+io · · Score: 1

    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.

  82. Analog video on modern screen by DrYak · · Score: 1

    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 ]
  83. Watts by DrYak · · Score: 1

    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 ]
  84. SCART not in North America by tepples · · Score: 1

    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)"

    1. Re:SCART not in North America by tepples · · Score: 1

      I've got SCART cables for all of my RGB-capable consoles and a multitude of displays (both CRT and LCD) capable of receiving 240/288p-480/576i RGB input, and without spending a fortune to boot. You make it sound like it's way more difficult than it really is.

      What would one put into a search engine to find a modern TV that takes 240p or 480i RGB, doesn't introduce excessive lag, ships to a given country, and is in stock? Or is it a matter of bringing your sources into a showroom to try them with each make and model of TV?

  85. Re:Easy Solution For *ANY* TV by KingBenny · · Score: 1

    i constantly have a piece of tape over the front cam of my smallphone ... i'm like total para-nut but i simply dont trust it ... to use the words smart and tv in one sentence seems to be a contradiction of its own but i suppose we're talking spy-enabled devices that track you where you stand ? and call the cops without asking if your wife throws a plate or knife at you in the usual foreplay ? im gonna have to pass unless it comes with a "disable tv-brain here" button

    --
    Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
  86. Re:The internet exists. by Khyber · · Score: 1

    No. 2K refers to the horizontal resolution, 1920 pixels, much like 4K refers to 3840 pixels horizontal resolution.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  87. Re:The internet exists. by flargleblarg · · Score: 1

    2K = 2000

    2000 != 1920

    If someone says "2K" when they really mean 1920, they're an idiot.