Hacker News Reader

Comment by pessimizer | Hacker News Reader

> Why is everyone so confused that smart TVs are popular?

Also the real reason that they're popular: there are no non-smart TVs available.

It stretches credulity to suggest that the lack of non-smart TVs on the market causes the popularity of smart TVs. Would you also suggest that the lack of black and white TVs on the market causes the popularity of color TVs?

Does it similarly stretch credulity to suggest that the lack of commercial-free cable channels on the market causes the popularity of cable channels with commercials. Something may be "popular" because it's the only game in town.

I challenge the premise. At least in the United States, the number of subscribers to commercial-free cable channels has decreased significantly in the last 10 years, during which time the number of subscribers to streaming services which show fewer or no ads has increased significantly.

I think it was more of example as using term ”popular” in different context, regardless of it is true or not. Arguing if it is not true, does not take this example away.

Of course it does, because “popular” in the original example was referring to their ubiquity and lack of over viable alternatives. An example of a once-dominant product that appears to be losing in the market to a fast-rising new alternative is not analogous.

Argument goes then more for “is this scenario possible at all for term ‘popular’?”, when it certainly is. Example was just weak.

Another example could be, why driving a car is “too popular” on country side to move between places. It might be popular, because there is no public transportation. Is the situation same with public transportation? Can we call it popular, because it is forced?

The whole point is that there's a difference between saying that the popularity of a product can be caused by the lack of what would be a viable alternative (like your example of public transportation versus cars), and saying that the popularity of one feature of a product is caused by the lack of alternatives that do not have that feature. The latter is more like saying "the popularity of 4-wheeled personal automobiles is caused by the lack of 3-wheeled personal automobiles on the market" or "the popularity of touchscreen smart phones is caused by the lack of smartphones with physical keyboards on the market."

Why weren't TVs with built in VCRs and DVD players more popular?

They were mostly small TVs and not the highest quality. And separate VHS or DVD players had more features.

They were great for a child's bedroom or similar but a big screen with a VHS would just look sort of silly.

I never wanted one because I was afraid that one or the other would break, then it would be half-useless.

My parents had one where the TV part stopped working, but the VCR still worked. It had video/audio out jacks so dad plugged it into their other TV, so they had a dead TV sitting next to their working TV for use as a VCR.

Smart TVs from at least the last 5 years have a similar problem. You update the software and they become excruciatingly slow, or you can't update the software and they gradually become useless.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

But I can replace an old Roku for $39.

True, my old LG TV UI kept getting slower and slower with each update, finally I stopped applying updates and switched to a Roku.

Though the good thing is that I can't see the carcass of the old SmartTV laying around, the TV stays connected to the Roku so unless I accidentally hit the Channel up/down button and switch it to TV mode, I never see the LG SmartTV features.

They work exactly as intended, too bad that among the intended features there is also their planned obsolescence.

I hit that point with my 5 year old Sony android TV. I just plugged in an Nvidia Shield TV device, though, and now it's buttery smooth again with nearly perfect integration.

They were popular!

But there was also the tradition in higher end A/V equipment of selling components instead of complete systems so it was limited to the low end.

I think the issue with Smart TVs is that people became aware of the extent of the downsides only years after they became aware of the convenience.

Smart TV’s are negative costs to the manufacturers as in they get paid more to install them than they actually cost.

Manufacturers therefore have zero incentives to manufacture non smart TV’s.

There would be a damn good incentive to manufacture dumb TVs if governments added taxs/duties to their smart TVs if they did not also manufacturer dumb ones.

Color TVs superseded black and white because it was objectively an improvement for the customer. There wasn't any benefit to the manufacturer besides selling a new unit.

the "Smart" TVs of today are riddled with spyware and telemetry that provides a second revenue stream to the manufacture since 95% of the population is too lazy or uninformed or doesn't have the time to turn it off.

Yes, there benefits to the consumer in the form of convenience but it's not a paradigm shift like the switch from color to b & w. Also you could buy black and white televisions for _decades_ after the introduction of the color TV.

In the course of about 5 years "dumb" TVs have almost completely disappeared from he market. Maybe I'm just cynical but I have a hard time believing that it was because everyone just _had_ to have a TV with a buggy UI (in many cases) and/or loaded with spyware.

The average customer doesn't even know what spyware or telemetry is. I'd even argue that broadcast TV is dying making some form of video streaming service necessary which the smart TV accomplishes in a nice form factor.

… while also making a product out of the user through data collection.

What do the smart ones in possession of a smart TV do? Because I constantly bleed time fine tuning pi-hole to limit telemetry and retain functionality…

Don't give it network, and use it as a dumb terminal connected via hdmi to a secure pc

Eventually they will all likely have cellular modems.

But if you are using an external video source and the tv as a dumb display via hdmi, what is that cellular modem going to transmit? Screenshots?

The TVs track the content you’re watching by sampling a subset of the pixels. So yes.

Wow. I never knew about that. It’s called ACR (automatic content recognition).

I remember reading some tvs will actively search (open?) networks to connect on their own.

This might be unpopular in these parts, but... just don't do anything and actively choose not to care about things like telemetry which have no tangible effect on my experience.

I removed the WiFi card from mine.

Do you remember which model it was and the format of the card? M.2? Card-express?

Probably M.2 since its the most common form factor for them

Sorry for the late response. I don't check this account every day. It isn't my main TV it is a TCL 49S405. It wasn't any form factor I recognize. I looked up the replacement part and found an image.

https://i.imgur.com/FlbKQEu.jpg

It was super trivial to remove. There is actually a removable panel on the back of the TV that lets you access it. Once I saw the antenna connector I knew what it was.

Hey, no big deal. Thanks a lot for coming back and even posting a picture. Now I know what to look for. Didn't even think they'd have the wifi as an separate module, what with integration these days.

Turn off the WIFI, unplug the ethernet, ban the MAC from DHCP, and then plug in an Apple TV 4K.

(I trust Apple more than Samsung. Except when it comes to remote control design.)

Yes TV channels are being replaced by apps.

I think smart TVs are great, the chips that they put in the €1000 models are good enough for 4k streaming now. No more cheap mediatek crap. The only remaining problem that needs to be solved is long term support.

Roku TVs have handled 4k for years with much lower price points. They also have the best track record for supporting their product lineup.

They know what ads are, they know what poorly designed laggy interfaces are, and they know about TVs that weirdly behave slowly if you load to many apps without rebooting your TV.

It really makes more sense for smart functionality to be a different box so you can pick it independently

> The average customer doesn't even know what spyware or telemetry is.

The average customer doesn't know what telemetry is. They usually know what spyware is, and, if they don't, they will find out very quickly. Of course there are exceptions like your favourite Smart TVs or Google (MS, Apple) products.

If I had to choose between a color TV that could only show live broadcasts or a B&W TV that could stream Netflix, etc., I would certainly choose B&W streaming. This obviously doesn’t require a smart TV—I personally use a Roku and rejected all of my Smart TV’s EULAs—but I consider streaming to be a much bigger objective improvement than color.

That would be a fun product actually.. kickstarter idea?

B&W TV w/ built-in roku-like/streaming capabilities.

I wonder how expensive it would be to manufacture a B&W TV these days

It would the exact same amount as a colour TV because the B&W would all be done in software.

If you mean a bw crt, the consensus on the crt gaming sub is that it's too expensive and there are a lot of undocumented secrets :(

I've found some Chinese factory which claims they can do it, but they seem to be using new-old-stock tubes.

I believe EU regulations regarding lead in consumer products prevent this too.

I watch Netflix on a CRT TV in 2021 lol. Hook up a ps3 via component and it's a great way to watch older 4:3 content like anime

Are there any conpanies which sell CRTs TV?

Not any more, and they can't now (regulations about lead, etc). You can only buy them on the second hand market or find them on the side of the road.

> Maybe I'm just cynical but I have a hard time believing that it was because everyone just _had_ to have a TV with a buggy UI (in many cases) and/or loaded with spyware.

As you indicated, dumb TVs did compete against smart TVs for many years. The options were more like:

1. Buy a smart TV that might contain spyware and bugs.

2. Buy a dumb TV, and also buy another device to play content which can just as easily contain spyware and bugs. Oh, and the dumb TV already costs the same as the smart TV, because the "smart" hardware is extremely cheap at scale even without any secondary revenue streams.

Being able to update the secondary device (with or without bugs) independent of the tv screen is a better upgrade path.

How long will tv manufacturers be supporting and providing updates to smart tv software? If the smart components in the tv bug out or get bricked, you need a whole new tv.

In addition to the spyware and telemetry, Samsung's smart TVs also show ads in their interface. Yes that $1000s TV you just bought. Sigh...

Yes. I bought two for my office wall recently and really regret it solely for this reason. I never really see the ads because I use them as dumb displays, but it pisses me off every time I do spot them.

It didn’t seem enough at the time to warrant sending the TVs back but perhaps I should have.

They’re segregated from the rest of my network at least. I may try to MITM them and strip out the ads.

99% of the market does not even know about telemetry and spyware. And then about 90% of the 1% who does does not actually care. Smart TVs are popular because they offer a far better user experience for the average person. It really is that simple.

This is why I got a smart TV. We watch Netflix, YouTube and Plex. We don't even have our TV connected to an antenna (and it reminds me that every time I turn it on). Compared to the alternative of getting a non-smart TV and plugging in some kind of dongle I think this was the better choice because:

- When I got the TV 4K was only just becoming mainstream and most dongles didn't support it. My TV natively supports 4K, HDR and Atmos on Netflix and Plex. (Does YouTube support HDR and Atmos?)

- My TV is 5 years old. The manufacturer (LG) hasn't introduced any new features that shove more ads down your throat [0], and all of the original features still work [1].

- Everything is controlled by 1 remote, so no need to explain to my wife you need to turn this on then this on (yes with HDMI CEC this should be possible, but the key word is "should").

- Using a dongle would have exactly the same privacy concerns - unless you run Netflix on a Linux laptop, but then you are stuck with 720p.

[0] https://www.consumerreports.org/streaming-media-devices/what...

[1] https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/roku-youtube...

> My TV is 5 years old. The manufacturer (LG) hasn't introduced any new features that shove more ads down your throat, and all of the original features still work.

And on the flip side your TV probably isn't receiving security updates anymore either.

Hope you have it segregated from the rest of your devices.

Yes, there benefits to the consumer in the form of convenience but it's not a paradigm shift like the switch from color to b & w

Not having to procure or mess around with external devices and cables is a huge plus for most people. People who buy new TVs want great image quality, and are mostly concerned with where it will fit and whether they want 8k or are happy with 4k.

Why does it stretch credulity? It's exactly the reason smart printer cartridges are popular.

> the lack of non-smart TVs on the market causes the popularity of smart TVs.

Consumers buying TVs are driven by prices. Prices of smart TVs are artificially low...to the tune of either slim margins (<5%), no margins, or negative margins. The only reason 90% of the TV manufacturers can make money is by making them "smart", because they make up for margin on collecting/selling data. In other cases, big box retailers use them as loss leaders (see -> monster cable margins).

In other words - it's not that simple - the demand for smartTVs is driven partially by an artificially set price point.

source - my dad was a sales rep that sold TVs for 15 years late 90's-early 2000's.

Would I care do compare apples to 15th century Venetian artwork? No, so I won't do it here either.

The reason that companies were so hellbent on getting "smart tvs" into our households is because of the ad revenue that come with them.

They aren't simply TVs, they're paid marketing platforms with captive audiences.

Do we have a way to measure popularity that isn't what people are buying? If not, then no, there's no way to tease the two concepts apart.

What else are people going to buy then?

there are no dumb TVs available because Joe and Jane consumer want a Smart TV, because why the hell wouldn't they? The price of a dumb TV and anything to plug into it to give the same functionality is more than the cost of the equivalent Smart TV alone, AND THEY GET THE SAME STREAMING SERVICES. That was the case when Smart TVs were introduced, anyway. it is an easy choice when you don't know the minutia.

Television manufacturers are always looking for a new thing that will prematurely render existing sets obsolete, triggering a new television purchase. Smarts embedded into the TV are one of those things that is very inexpensive to add at scale, but convinces many consumers that their existing devices are no longer "good", which starts that itching that can only be scratched by purchasing a larger TV with the hot new feature du jour.

it was only after Smart TVs gained wide adoption that the abuse of network connectivity was capitalized upon by manufacturers, and dumb TVs were virtually made extinct.

It's more than that. Ultimately at a certain point TVs are blank slates, and become identical. At that point it's a race to the bottom on price, as opposed to features. TVs might have multiple inputs and outputs - but if they don't, honestly that's a $10 problem so there's a lack of reasonable differentiation.

Enter "Smart TVs". Consumers can theoretically choose one based on built-in applications, versions of Android (in theory). At the very least there is differentiation. The frustrating part is that at least here, it seems like these TVs are starting to lose features like optical outputs and multiple inputs.

I literally just want a dumb slate with >2 HDMI inputs and an optical output. That's no longer an option in Israel. In calls to 16 different stores based on what's available in the country (zap.co.il) your order is always "out of stock" and the call devolves to upgrade to a newer TV that yay has Android XXX on it. Inter-connectivity is becoming difficult to purchase.

You have to search for Digital Signage monitors, these usually don't have smart crap, a wider selection of inputs, and are built to higher quality standards.

Like death and taxes are popular.

And now with embedded ads.

There are, they are called monitors

Monitors generally don't have remote controls or speakers. The latter solved with soundbar but former is important use case.

Well depends how do you use it. My DVR set top box has one and I control that to change channels, record etc

Monitors usually don't support HDMI-CEC either.

Some monitors do have speakers, and not having enough functionality for a remote to be needed is exactly why someone would get a monitor. A remote for a non-smart tv these days would basically be an input control and volume. Everything else would be controlled by some other piece of equipment that would need its own remote/app on your phone.

I used to have a Nintendo WiiU connected up to an old computer monitor with integrated speakers. The WiiU has no volume control of its own, so the only way to change the volume was by going through a series of menus using the crappy unreliable light-sensitive (yes) buttons on the bottom of the display. It was a pain in the neck, and a remote control would have solved that problem nicely.

Monitors also generally don't come in 60"+ sizes, or if they do, they don't have HDR or other modern video display technologies.

Possibly some hospitality TVs still come as dumb variants but that seems to be changing too.

My company has monitors for video conferencing and they all have remotes and speakers.

I think they are LG's... like this one:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1526262-REG/lg_55ut64...

> LG UT640S 55" Class HDR 4K UHD Commercial Smart IPS LED TV ;)

(Although the key here really is the commercial - different standards of what customers are expected to tolerate there)

I have a 4k 43 inch 144hz hdr “gaming” monitor (ROG Strix) and it has a remote. It’s becoming more common now.

And they will eventually have a network connection in a few years...

Samsung seems to be ahead on that one

https://www.samsung.com/ie/monitors/flat/smart-m7-43-inch-sm...

Anecdotal, the last "unsmart" TV I found was hobbled to the point of not even having a power indicator LED.

It wasn't used much until putting a "good smart" device behind it...in this case a Roku.

Orwellian prophecy in real life, the Roku sends data back to the company about anything you watch using that device.

The only difference between this setup and a "plus good smart" TV is that anything else displayed on the TV(pc, pirated movies, photos, playstation/xbox/nintendo consoles, etc) will be fingerprinted and sent back to the company analytical department.

My opinion is it is none of their business.

This is all acceptable because manipulation via marketing/advertising is considered a necessary evil, and, the device is easy to use.

>Anecdotal, the last "unsmart" TV I found was hobbled to the point of not even having a power indicator LED.

Please, tell me which model was that! I hate it when shiny LEDs ruin my movie experience.

My solution to get a new dumb TV is simple. I don't want and would never own a smart TV so I use a standard monitor with a PVR/STB (Set Top Box). It works perfectly - I've used that solution for years.

The real problem is that governments have allowed the free-to-air (dumb) TV service to be bastardized, there's no regulation to protect it.

A very simple solution that would end the practice immediately would be for governments to put say 20% tax/duty on all smart TVs made by manufacturers who don't ALSO market dumb TVs.

Blame your governments for the lack of dumb TVs!

I usually just connect the "smart tv" to the internet once a year and update the firmware (after checking the change log for useful fixes). Then I disconnect it again and use my chromecast to stream.

Good idea, but before I'd update I'd doubly check the net to see there are no new/hidden gotchas as some have reported (like the way some manufacturers have coded around Pi-hole, etc.).

The choice is shrinking, but there are still some available.

Example: https://www.sceptre.com/TV/4K-UHD-TV/U750CV-UMRD-75-4K-UHD-T...

Sadly unobtanium in the EU.

I just got this one myself (the 50-inch model, really), and am completely satisfied with the purchase.

If you have time, please could you check somewhere if there are traces of any manufacturer other than Sceptre? Although possible, I don't think they're made exclusively by or for Sceptre as the cost should be much higher due to the smaller market, so I believe there are chances they could exist somewhere else under a different brand, which hopefully would distribute in the EU. Thanks!

Anecdotally, I heard a German TV brand called Telefunken sells some non-smart TVs, e.g:

https://www.amazon.de/-/en/Telefunken-XH32G101N-ready-triple...

Thinking next time I need a big panel I'll shop in the digital signage area, and take care of inputs and sound externally.

Philips got the BDL line, NEC also a big supplier.

the next logical question is why are they the only tv's available? the reason is the same reason that phones are getting bigger and laptops are getting thinner. (hint it's not some grand conspiracy to ruin your life or to fuck the consumer) the answer is because that's what people buy.

Wait a minute now. TV manufacturers are mining the frames from video played on them in order to detect which shows people are watching. They then sell that data to 3rd parties (typically advertisers and data brokers). It's maybe not some "grand conspiracy", but there is a definite profit motive to push smart TVs and only smart TVs. It is far more profitable than a one time sale since you can sell data over and over. I only personally learned this after meeting some engineers working on such a data mining project, but its fairly well documented:

https://www.businessinsider.com/smart-tv-data-collection-adv...

Luckily, you can block them: https://lazyadmin.nl/home-network/how-to-block-ads-on-your-s...

One should not have to, nor should they have to explain to the less technically literate ow to. The practice is disgusting and needs to be handled by regulation with teeth.

Sure, but I think the point is that it's more likely that the idea of an internet-connected TV originally came from the perceived usefulness of having a TV that could come preloaded with various apps (Netflix, etc.). Certainly I think that's a valuable feature to have.

But of course now that the TVs have an always-on internet connection, the manufacturers have realized they can extract more revenue (recurring revenue, at that) by spying on their customers and selling the data. So of course, they do it, and most people don't even know they're doing it, so there's little outrage from the mainstream.

> there is a definite profit motive to push smart TVs and only smart TVs

I would imagine that most customers would prefer a TV with Netflix (or whatever) than a TV without Netflix. At that point it becomes a decision of whether it's worth it to incur the cost of having a separate SKU without the "smart" bits, and it may not be.

Yes, the "smartness" benefits the manufacturer (to the detriment of customer privacy), but I would bet that even if all the sketchy bits were banned tomorrow, manufacturers would still make and sell about the same number of smart TVs.

Actually, it's because they show you ads. For example:

https://www.sony.com/electronics/support/articles/00225587

https://www.theverge.com/tldr/2021/3/10/22323790/lg-oled-tv-...

https://digiday.com/future-of-tv/samsung-pitches-advertisers...

Remember 3DTV’s? For like 5 years, all TV’s being sold had 3D support. Not because consumers wanted it — it was because the industry believed consumers would want it. Industries don’t turn on a dime..

Market forces don’t correct small issues in short timeframes — and smart TV’s are not problematic enough to meet their immediate demise (but sufficiently awful that they eventually will — alongside car infotainment systems)

> alongside car infotainment systems

I don't know if market has corrected those or Apple did.

I couldn't care less about my car's infotainment system as long as the screen is 7+ inches and capable of Apple CarPlay.

> capable of Apple CarPlay.

E.g. you care plenty.

I wouldn't call a glorified screen mirroring an "infotainment system".

I've got a pre-CarPlay OEM infotainment and can confirm, they are pretty shit.

The screen is hard to get it to register a tap, the corners are dead, and the UI is very 2013 (It's a 2013 toyota, so I guess more like 2009 UI).

Supply side is the first side in what exists

Sure but they're also juicy extra revenue streams for the manufacturers from ads and behavior/watch data even without the neigh conspiratorial spying people speculate about.

Well of course. It's the only thing you sell.

The last TV I purchased I had to spend a $10-$20 premium over the smart model with similar specs (from a slightly more reputable manufacturer at that) just to get a non-smart model.

The data mining definitely plays a huge part.

Care to share which model? Last time I checked, the few dumb TVs I could find were at least 30% more expensive than a similar smart one.

I've had the TV for about 5 years now so no information I could share would be too helpful. It's got a 1920x1080 resolution and seems to work well with the living room PC, that's good enough for me.

If you don't give it your wifi password it will not be smart? Its not like they come with a sim card...

I would however love a smart tv with an open stack where I can control the software.

Personally I didn't want passive collection phoning home if, at any point, anyone connected it to anything, and there is also the possibility of connecting to open access points.

And, well, saw no reason for leaving around untrusted unreliable crud I couldn't remove. It was worth a modest markup to get rid of it.

> because that's what people buy.

Not quite. In a world where consumers don't care at all, smart TVs will take over because they're more profitable.

It would take a notable consumer preference against smart TVs just for manufacturers to be neutral.

There are. It's just you can't get the good stuff for anywhere near smart TV prices

I can recommend Sceptre if you want a decent dumb TV.

Any Smart TV that you don't bring online is essentially a dumb TV.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com