“Make it OLED, dumb TV, instant on, Apple TV box plugs in. Separate box with front facing ports that connects to screen with one cable. A remote designed by someone who thought about it for ten seconds (why do modern TVs have dozens of buttons no one ever uses?).
This entire market is in desperate need of someone to make something decent. The best available option today is LG and it’s still laden with ads and takes a few seconds to boot up.”
I would buy one at least, there’s definitely some low hanging fruit.
I'd probably even lean into it and name the company 'dumb electronics', plus there's a nice sort of symmetry to the word 'dumb' and 'db' would be a decent logo.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26993846
I would love to chat with someone who knows more about the hardware side. How do you get a panel with a "dev kit" where you can load on the copy protection and all the modern stuff needed to play DRM content? I would be up for building a new OS from scratch.
Nobody is pointing their xbox controller at the console.
The only limitation is that you need line of sight to the TV.
Which might be an issue except generally if you're using a TV, you have line of sight to it because... it's a TV and that's its function.
Line of site is often a pain with things in front of the TV or appliances in TV stands behind a cabinet.
The responsiveness is often slow (granted this is the fault of the TV's UI/software more than it is the fault of the infrared).
Having to point the remote at the TV is annoying - often it doesn't register unless you're sticking your arm out (takes a few tries for me most of the time).
The Xbox controllers work instantly and it doesn't matter what's blocking them. Latency is also low (latency matters in game consoles).
I'm not sure I'm persuaded to IR benefits.
Latency to register a button press at the other end doesn't really matter for a TV remote unless it goes to extremes. It doesn't matter if you try and turn the volume up and it takes 50ms instead of 10ms. It does matter if that jumps to several seconds.
And since your remote can now travel through walls (and your TV can now receive remote controls through walls!) you now need to worry about security and pairing since there's no longer isolation being provided just by the simple act of having walls. I definitely don't want to try and support my mother in pairing her remote after the batteries need a change every three months.
Have you tried replacing the batteries in your remote? Is your entire room covered in mirrors? It could be something silly like that or maybe that your remote is just terrible. The basic technology has worked for pretty much everyone for decades now without much issue.
I generally just leave my remote sitting on the floor when I'm down there playing with the kid or resting on the arm rest of the chair or something and press buttons on it without picking it up. If it's pointing anywhere within like 60 degrees on either side of my TV whether at the floor or the ceiling it registers every time. This has consistently been my experience across pretty much every TV I've dealt with in 20 years (and I still have a 20 year old LCD TV here I use frequently whose batteries I've replaced maybe 3 times now).
The remote is simple enough only containing maybe 6 unused buttons.
I don't want a crappy, cheap, panel with no smart features. I want a premium panel without smart features.
Think like Apple Pro Cinema Display in TV form.
I want to make sure that the networking functionality is what I attached to it, not something built into the TV that I have no way of possibly disabling or removing entirely. With some of the relatively recent PiHole posts, it's become clear that some of these smart TVs are including some level of DNS resolution on their end to get around ad blocking functionality. They'll say it's for ensuring they can always download updates, but it's really for retrieving ads.
I want a display that's going to last longer than 3 years. This is one of my concerns with Spectre displays. I'm not sure of their longevity.
I want that display to have a great picture. I also don't think Spectre displays looked particularly great when I looked at them in the past. Maybe that's changed over time.
Set up partners to make custom boxes. Things like SSD's in the same form factor storing media to be shared with other media block devices, (HDMI would be unpopulated), a Roku in the secondary/primary position. DTv Tuners with a Coaxial F-Connector for the antenna, etc.
This "Standard media block" connector could even be retrofit to legacy panels by means of an external box, and one master upstream connector.
Does anything like this exist yet? If not, what would be preventing it?
You can buy a simple office keyboard for $25, but there is a market for custom mechanical keyboards 10x as expensive.
You can watch YouTube for free, but a lot of people buys the premium subscription to remove ads.
Sam thing here: there may be enough people wanting to buy an ad-free, surveillance-free premium TV with user-inspectable, user-updatable open-source firmware, latest HDMI, and in interface for network boxes to taste. Given that it has a good panel, is well-built, has a minimal but premium look, and the producer offers a modicum of tech support, it can easily be sold for at 150% or even 200% the price of an ad-ridden smart TV from big names.
Such a business can be a good business, even though it won't show hockey-stick growth.
Or 100x even
Compared to what I've been hearing about Samsung and LG it's been rather nice in this respect.
Would you? At 2x the price (based on the last time I bought one of them) for just the panel, plus an apple tv ($200) plus a speaker/soundbar (let's say $500) - and you're not getting an OLED with ARC at that either.
The included ads, large volumes, and low margins all drive down the cost of consumer displays. Your dream might also end up quite expensive. [1] https://pro.sony/ue_US/products/broadcastpromonitors
I think there's a middle ground 'good enough' panel that's still high end (think like LG E6) that doesn't have the extra crap and where someone has thought through the design elements (input box, remote, industrial design of case).
I'd expect that to be possible for around $5k - maybe that's just not feasible?
I'm sure there's a market for $600 (or $1000) TVs that don't have all the "price-lowering" (I'm skeptical) features of $300 TVs.
I mean, maybe the prices of ad-TVs are so low as a loss-leader to get a new advertising vector into your house? Yes, of course TVs already have ads, but they don't have this particular pipeline, one that benefits the manufacturer/brand more than normal OTA ads.
How much is a less-annoying TV worth to people? I'm guessing more than is usually estimated, and at any rate probably pretty close to price+ad revenue of a "consumer display."
It seems pretty reasonable to me. Is there a catch with that device that makes it not appropriate to use as your main TV?
If you're just using it over HDMI, it would work fine as a main TV. The added brightness would may be appreciated.
The gotcha is that it already runs an outdated version of Android(9.0). Sony consumer TVs that released back then didn't have ads. It was only a later Google update that added ads to the UI.[1] No guarantees these signage displays will be safe if you updated them over the internet.
[1] https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/ads-in-smart-tv#remove-sony-...
(If Tesla had to be “a better car that’s also electric”, I think this would need to be “a better TV that’s also private”.)
It used the same components that you'd find in the LED billboards alongside highways in the US.
I'd be happy to pay at the same price without the smart features.
Another fun fact: When Samsung started in 1938, they specialized in trading dried fish. They came into the electronics industry in 1960s.
You can already get dumb TV, they are often used for signage or other commercial purposes, but they cost a lot more than consumer equipment.
Is the "smart features" actually making money for the TV manufacturers?
A good question to think about. How can we, as consumers, incentivize the TV manufactures to focus on building good product that actually liked by users, and still making good money.
Very difficult to answer though...
They also generally are just better built. The expected hours of operation and MTBF of the components is generally much higher than consumer displays. Many of the ones I dealt with had metal cases and stronger glass.
They're expected to stand up to much more abuse or often be installed in places where they're inconvenient to service.
If you wanted to build a non-smart panel with the expected lifespan of a typical consumer TV a significant portion of the current cost could likely be cut if it were done at scale.
Personally my ~8-10 y/o Samsung LED has a periodic problem that I’ve been diagnosing with YouTube, it seems like a lot of issues are caused by something simple like loose connectors inside.
A big bonus with my industrial design would be that the casing itself is made out of metal and harder to damage than plastic casing of most large format displays.
For your specific case, is that a consumer grade panel? What issues are you having?
If you get the full image but its dark (you can hold a flashlight to the panel to see), then it's the LED strips. You simply take off the panel and replace the strips that are broken (though you should probably just replace them all). Fairly easy to do.
Rarely it could be the PSU that drives the LEDs, but that would usually mean the entire screen is dark.
TVs are actually quite nice to work on. They usually have big circuit boards which are nicely labeled and enough space that you could easily replace a capacitor or two with a soldering iron. :)
I don’t care much about the panel issues - a few dead pixels I can live with and anything worse I’d rather replace it. But everything else should be easily swappable.
Also, I’m assuming you’d at the minimum support HDR and preferably Dolby Vision and Atmos. How easy/hard is that?
I purchased a Sony TV that runs Android and adore it. I initially purchased it because it was a no-nonsense take on Android with high-rated privacy support. Sadly, over the past year they have begun introducing ads, promotions, and privacy policy readjustments that I don't agree with.
An unlocked Android store would be great value. I can currently sideload Android apps on my TV. I can SSH into it if I want to, run my own server, etc. It has a high powered processor and good RAM so I can even multitask apps in it. I love everything about the TV except the privacy changes.
Anyway, best of luck - I love the idea of dumb/privacy focused TVs :-)
You take one of those (which currently have reverse-engineering efforts for drivers ongoing with Sunxi project) and simply run a stock Android AOSP without any code signing. The end user would need to install the Play Store and video wouldn't play above HD for the lack of Hardware-supported DRM, but then you would just model your remote control to work like a Game Controller (which Android supports decently).
At that point you're back to square one though right?
½ of these comments asking for AirPlay, the other ½ asking for Android TV or wtf Google is calling it these days. Next someone will want Roku, while someone else wants Amazon, and we’re right back to where we started.
The purity of your idea is in the dumb TV. Don’t put a Raspberry Pi on the back, don’t build a mini-ATX PC in.
5 HDMI ports. Power. That’s it. People can bring their own set top boxes and everyone will be happy.
* people who want a completely dumb display with a bunch of inputs, as you say
* people who want a display with some smarts but that is "open", can be "hacked", etc
I totally understand the desire to have more things to hack, but there are already numerous little boxes, pucks, sticks, etc to scratch that itch. What's really missing is a way to get a display that doesn't have any of that at all and also doesn't cost 5x because it's made for commercial entities. (Incidentally, my early research suggests a lot of commercial displays actually have "smart" BS in them already, it's just more targeted at device management than serving content-based ads, so that inflates the cost if I'm not going to use it.)
EDIT: formatting
* people who want a completely dumb display with a bunch of inputs
This leaves the option to hack it with whatever input device the user sees fit.
It separates out the input box from the display (makes it easier to plug things into) and allows just one cable to come from the TV. You can also have a lot more ports this way (8 HDMI?)
Samsung has a TV that implements something like this (of course it has all the rest of the smart crap too that you could nix).
Also this makes it easy to potentially have upgradeable/future input boxes with new ports without having to modify the display.
It's still 'dumb', but I think breaking out the inputs is a better design.
My Sony OLED smart tv works the same way it did when I got it.
I remember seeing them on HN a year ago, I assume that they haven't moved that far because COVID etc?
But they don't seem to have updated their info for a year.
What I'd like is a 55" 4K monitor display that is minimal bezel and has a bunch of HDMI inputs and support HDCP etc.
Displays should be to video like speakers are to audio. I can connect multiple sources to speakers without the speakers imposing their own idea of what to do other than make sound.
> "This TV has everything you need, to start streaming your favourite content, from your favourite devices."
This sounds like exactly the opposite of what I want. Just give me a dumb display, ffs.
Seriously, I don't want any screens in my home that don't respect the user.
This means privacy. It also means I don't want any branding. I don't want any logos visible, either on the case or when the screen powers on.
I want the screen to be completely controlled by my Apple TV. It should implement HDMI-CEC or whatever protocol is necessary such that it does not ship with a remote control of its own. (I have had trouble with various displays requiring me to keep their stupid remote control around.)
It should have no visible lights on the case. When the screen is off, I don't want any lights at all distracting me.
How much do I need to pay for this? Every time I ask a genius at an Apple store, they have no idea.
You shouldn't ask your mom about the viability of an idea because she will be biased towards thinking good things about you (and your ideas). Similarly (sort of...), Hacker News will be biased towards wanting your product and not say anything bad about it.
I'd love a 'dumb' display, but it would be hard for me to justify dropping thousands to have one, when I'm perfectly satisfied just leaving the internet disconnected from my $400 'trash tier' TV.
This isn't knocking the idea, it's a genuine question that also kinda ties into the question of how much money mfgs are making from this privacy invasion.
I guess you have to deal with bad units and other stuff but just wondering.
I think people will have different ideas of "dumb". For example.
* A TV with only 1 input. If you want more inputs get an external switch etc...
* A TV with no audio. If you want audio use external speakers
* A TV with no remote. With the 2 things above all you need is on an off? And/Or maybe just support whatever the protocol is so that other devices can control it.
Just thinking out loud, I'm sure there's a big disagreement on what's the minimal features.
If you want to use your own speakers or external video input switcher or whatever then you can still do that, just like you could before, but not including multiple inputs or speakers on a dumb set makes it an incredibly niche product.
The TVs coming out today are great if they just ditched the smart aspect of it.
I have a 48" RCA dumb TV from like 10 years ago and I live in perpetual fear of it dying. My list would be: HDMI input and some kind of speaker, although I'd be willing to buy an external speaker if building one in made a bare-bones setup impractical.
Consider making this a kickstarter!
2) I'll suggest you setup a website with info regarding this with more details and so on, again so that people can get in touch with you, you can measure interest and perhaps even build a few one off TVs for some people to kick start.
Rest will follow..
Would it not be hard to secure licenses for HD-playback for a small player with privacy focus for a smart tv?
One concern on “dumb” though. It’s one thing to skip apps and streaming, but I suppose some smarts are required to support things like upscaling or advanced frame interpolation ( https://blurbusters.com/frame-rate-amplification-technologie... )
With their software, you can record Netflix/Hulu/Peacock/Disney+/Whatever to your computer or stream videos from those services to a Kodi box. They've never been sued from any of these services because of their (interesting) legal argument.
If you could integrate their services or techniques, you wouldn't need any approval from the streaming services.
It's very fragile and almost like they use Selenium or some other automation tester for UI then just screen cap the whole thing. I say this because it breaks frequently when providers change their UI.
Plugins constantly come and go and stop working.
They amount of support required to keep it going is tremendous and they're pushing the cloud as a service to support and maintain it.
Even better if you can do an OLED copy of this without all of the crap, I'm 150% in:
https://www.crutchfield.com/p_68965CXP/LG-OLED65CXPUA.html?t...
edit: I am getting old. AppleTV used to be $99 and it seems prices have gone up a little since. Either way, AppleTV would be my goto method whenever AirPlay is required.
Is there a good Raspberry Pi SD image for the Pi 4 that can be used to receive 4k airplay streams and output to HDMI?
I ask because I don't think that is a viable solution compared to the ATV4k.
Granted, their products aren’t dumb, but they seem to be very consumer and quality focused. I have loved everything they’ve done.
Currently just really frustrated using my roku, which has insanely bad latency and occasionally reboots for no reason.