When can I buy a TV without smart features? I don't doubt that my smart TV is reporting some data about my usage, but I barely have a choice in the matter.
There is a limited selection of 'dumb' TVs in the world. The 50-inch Sceptre E505BV-FMQK has no "smart" capabilities and lacks WiFi or Ethernet.
The usual advice is to simply not connect the internal "smart" capabilities to anything; disable WiFi and don't connect a Ethernet cable. The built-in host and all the nefarious crap it wants to run can't reach anything unless you somehow connect it. Just use the TV tuner and HDMI inputs. If you need a network connection for streaming from some local source then block the TV at your Internet router.
Like the adware you get with many laptops and other mobile devices there are 'financial incentives' to manufacturers to build this stuff in, so don't expect the practice to abate anytime soon.
The prices don't seem outrageous.
As one of the draws of Ultra HD displays for consumers is HDR content which has become more common with online films/tv, UHD Blu-Rays and games.
Into it I plugged a Denon HEOS receiver, which is WiFi-connected for the purposes of serving as a Spotify and AirPlay output device, and which drives wired and wireless speakers. Into the HEOS runs an Apple TV for video streaming, a DVD player for old times' sake, and my wife's phonograph.
Newegg and Walmart had the lowest prices but turned out to fronting for the same seller, who was running a bait-and-switch. I ordered through Newegg first – and received a different product! A big heavy LCD display. I shipped it back to them for a refund.
Then I ordered through Walmart – and again received that other product! After the seller refused to exchange or refund and stopped answering e-mails, Walmart refunded me the price – and told me to keep the LCD display, which I donated.
Finally I ordered from CDW, who shipped me the right product – but under all the cardboard and styrofoam it was packed in, the corner of the display was bent up 90 degrees! And the display wouldn't light up.
To their credit, CDW shipped a replacement unit right away. It was in perfect condition – you can watch me unbox it at https://youtu.be/o9Mu4K-ApkU – and I'm watching it right now.
Opened it up, disconnected the WiFi module, connected my Apple TV to it and am pretty happy.
You have to find your way to the "commercial" section of LG's website and even then find the ones that are dumb.
I'm very happy with it. 55" 4k, a bit cheaper than its comparable consumer line. Simple remote, doesn't hassle me, quick to start and stop.
I was able to purchase it from "Canada Computers" but YMMV in your region etc. Not always easy to get the "business" line of products as a consumer but very often (TVs, laptops) it is preferable to the junk they'll sell to consumers from the big box stores even at the same price-point.
Unfortunately, outside of rural areas that may not be under your control.
It's not something that should just be left up to chance, but I also don't know of a good solution other than regulation.
Some enterprise systems don’t require users to enter passwords, but the software still uses them internally when talking to the network.
PS: Unless you know of some other exception?
Yes, you can be sure. The network capabilities aren't hidden spy equipment. You can disable WiFi and simply not connect Ethernet. The market for your data is relying on the indifference of 99% of TV buyers to data collection. Manufacturers and advertisers -- at least those not too far down the grey market rabbit hole -- don't care enough about the tiny fraction of people that actively thwart this collection activity to employ some sort of legally dubious super sekrit network capability to capture your precious data.
Ethernet over HDMI is a thing, isn't it?
* https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/325215/appletv-eth...
Consider three ways to play a movie:
1. From a source device (AppleTV, Blu-ray player, etc) connected to an A/V receiver.
2. From an app on your Smart TV, with the TV passing sound over ARC or optical to the A/V receiver.
3. From a source device, as in #1, but with the device connected to one of the TV's HDMI inputs instead of to the receiver. Sound going from the TV to the A/V receiver via ARC or optical.
Everything I've found seems to agree that #1 can handle anything, with the only limit being formats that are newer than your A/V receiver understands. Mine doesn't know about Dolby Atmos, for example, so wouldn't be able to do that.
For #2, the limit seems to be the bandwidth of ARC or optical. Optical can't do 5.1 or higher PCM, Dolby TrueHD, Dolby Atmos, DTS:X, or a view others. It can only do stereo PCM, or matrix surround formats.
ARC, if your TV and A/V receiver implement a new enough version of the HDMI spec, has the bandwidth for all those formats.
For #3, some sources say that there are licensing limits, enforced by HDCP, that disallow the TV from passing a high bandwidth audio signal directly from an HDMI input to an HDMI output. Instead, the TV has to do the Dolby or DTS decoding itself, and then re-encode to a lower bandwidth Dolby or DTS format, and send that on.
I think that the very latest version of HDCP will remove that restriction, if both the TV and the the A/V receiver support it (not sure if it also needs to be on the source). But I don't think that is expected to start showing up on consumer equipment until next year.
Unfortunately, my receiver is not 4K, and I really don't want to get a new receiver until that latest HDCP is out, to maximize future proofing. So for now I have to choose between #2 and #3 when I want to watch something in 4K. I think the ARC supported by my TV and/or my receiver probably only has enough bandwidth to support matrix formats for surround sound, but with #2 I think it will be using a matrix encoded bitstream from the source, just passing it through. With #3, it's going to be going through decoding and re-encoding on the TV, to then be decoded again on the receiver. #2 seems better, then.
This is all WAY too freaking complicated.
Is everyone just putting up with the shitty built-in smart interface, but then switching inputs to their separate unit of choice?
for a while you couldn't find a tv with decent features that wasn't 3d. happy to see that trend be over.
unfortunately, it seems that industrial tv panels seem to be going away as well.
Huh, why would one avoid TVs that have 3D?
Don't care enough about 3D to buy my own 3D glasses though, so solution (don't watch 3D movies) is the same.
1. A TV that just displays video from an HDMI input.
2. An A/V amplifier that just receives an HDMI A/V signal from a single input, passes the video from that to to the TV, and does Dolby/DTS/whatever decoding of the audio, amplifies the result, and sends it to my speakers.
3. An HDMI switch that I can plug assorted A/V source into (FireTV, Roku, OTA TV tuner, Blu-ray player, Cable box, etc) into, which I'll connect to the A/V receiver.
(Actually, what I really want is for the switch to split the A/V signal into separate audio and video on two different HDMI ports. Video goes to the TV, audio the A/V amplifier--except now it is just an A amplifier. But I think there may be licensing restrictions on that kind of splitting that make it so you can only split at the step that converts to analog for the speakers).
All of the HDMI connections should support Ethernet over HDMI.
None of these should have WiFi built-in. They networking should be via Ethernet. If I want WiFi, I'll add a WiFi access point to the home theater LAN.
I'm not sure how Ethernet over HDMI interacts with HDMI switches. If you have, say, a 4 input, 1 output HDMI switch, does that switch all signals, so that you only have Ethernet between the one selected input and the output, or are the Ethernet lines treated specially and connected like a hub, so that all devices on both sides of the switch can communicated over Ethernet, regardless of which input is currently selected for A/V?
If the later, then the home theater LAN can use the HDMI ports. If the former, then all the devices need an Ethernet port.
I frequently use hdmi but I still use the my tvs smart functions as it has dedicated amazon and netflix buttons and other buttons to control those apps. Works 99% of the time perfectly and than I'm not at risk of hdmi cable connections to my laptop so i use it all the time. Oh, and mine was a pretty good deal at the time (65 inch with 4k and smart functions for $1,000 3.5 years ago). What is so shitty about the smart tv functions you use?
This is no different than PC makers who make money from bundled crapware and stickers plastered on the computer.
People use to complain about the “Windows Tax” and thought the computer would be cheaper without it being bundled, but the PC manufacturers actually loss money when Windows wasn’t bundled because they also couldn’t bundle third party crap.
Took me 30 seconds, three of the TVs on page 1 are not smart: https://www.bestbuy.com/site/tvs/all-flat-screen-tvs/abcat01...
[1] eg https://www.dell.com/en-au/work/shop/accessories/apd/210-aqx...
You build your own set top box to connect to it, which can be pretty good quality while being pretty cheap [1]
If you need free to air tv plug a usb dvb dongle into it. Use Kodi, possibly witha mythtv plugin and enjoy.
[1] https://www.pine64.org/devices/single-board-computers/rock64...
Not everyone here is a pre-IPO employee. I'd say 90% maybe, not everyone.
55'' for 380. Google is easy.
I've found other brands. It's hard to find a dummy, but doable.
I couldn't find anything in stock that was larger than 55'.
The thing is, in my opinion that you shouldn't have to set-up PiHole in the first place.
If we do that and don't vote with the feet and wallets we won't see a single DumbTv in a few years. It is still possible to find a non-Smart device. Don't pay for someone's ad-space!
Projectors are safe for now, but I think it's because they are seen as a niche/hipster thing.