Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Ask HN: Are there any 4K “dumb” televisions?
436 points by luke2m on Nov 29, 2021 | hide | past | favorite | 497 comments
With news like [1][2], and problems I’ve had in the past, I would like a TV with a modern resolution, but just inputs and a tuner, no “smart” features. Does anything like this exist?

[1] https://hackaday.com/2021/11/29/samsung-bricks-smart-tvs/

[2] https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/10/22773073/vizio-acr-advertising-inscape-data-privacy-q3-2021




4K monitors. You need a soundbar though or some kind of audio setup + remote. Also no built-in tuner or such but I assume you get a set top box from your service provider or use a streaming device (Apple TV, Fire stick etc.)

4K OLED https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#r=384002160&P=7

4K IPS https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#r=384002160&P=2

4K VA https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#r=384002160&P=4

4K 55" or bigger monitors (there aren't many choices) https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#P=2,7,4&r=3840021...

The 4K 55" OLED Alienware has speaker but I doubt that it is any good https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/new-alienware-55-oled-gaming... (actually comes with remote too)

Linus made a video of it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3oqktdx2a8

Last but not least you can go even higher resolution than 4K but these are all IPS only and they are not bigger than 34" https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#r=768004320,57600...


Another approach is to look not for things advertised as "monitors" but instead look for "digital signage"[1]. Nowadays most of these contain some networking features but they'll be oriented at local control (i.e. by you via something on your LAN), not some third-party control center accessed via the internet.

Anecdotally this is the approach I took ~20 years ago when buying a (then slightly exotic) plasma flatscreen from Panasonic. It is still working flawlessly today, though I keep hoping it will die so I can guiltlessly replace it with something newer/bigger/higher-resolution.

[1] A random example https://www.usa.philips.com/p-p/86BDL3050Q_00/signage-soluti...


Digital signage is good but from my understanding (and I could be wrong) probably over-engineered for home usage. They're intended to be powered on 24x7, and last a long time. Probably more resistant to burn-in too. All of which is good, but if your use case isn't so intensive you could get by with something lower-end. (Especially if you want to eventually replace the device and are looking for an excuse ;) )


The model that I have js definitely over engineered. I have a 2k sign display which uses display port and its 8 years old.

It's It's bit ugly, but as long as you are okay with that.


My direct experience is somewhat out of date, but from an engineering perspective the unit I have is much simpler than any TV, since it lacks a tuner or any fancy video scaling capability, and has no audio capability of any kind (that was a feature to me, since I use an A/V Receiver for sound). I think in general screens meant for signage are probably brighter than most TVs/monitors, but depending on the room that could be a useful feature as well.


But does digital signage have good panels like "real" TVs? Eg. the high end oleds with deep blacks and stuff?


My experience is that not only are the panels generally worse, support for things like color calibration or Dolby Vision is almost impossible to find. Which is understandable because it's not obvious what advantage HDR would bring to digital signage.


While not HDR, I'd think colour calibration would be fairly important for signage.

If your company red is too washed out, or one section of a video-wall menu board is inconsistent brightness, it looks bad on your brand.


It depends. I have an Iiyama 44” and the display, while nominally 4K, is noticeably not as good as a good 32” 4K monitor. It’s not really visible when watching video, but using it as an external display looks horrible close up.

This is one of the ones with an android board in it, and if I did it again, I’d be getting someone sold as a computer monitor.


Of course a 44" panel doesn't look as good as a 32" one, it has lower pixel density. This has nothing to do with it having a bad panel.


The pixel density difference is about 30%. With careful close observation, you can easily see the pixels in each one. The monitor has smooth solid colors. The Iiyama looks more like it's a native 1920px wide with some 'interesting' pixel layouts for more dynamic range. It looks like complete crap with things like window titles, the MacOS blue highlight, and other gradients.


This is good advice but if you're looking for something fancy like HDR or DV you will be dissapointed as (in my experience) digital signage displays often lack those features.

I have a big 4k tv that was destined for a sports bar but it was slightly damaged, got it for a great price. Sadly it doesn't have HDR either, but it is an older model. Anyway, its great as in there's no WiFi. There is a network port but there's no streaming apps or anything installed on it. I use it paired with an nvidia shield and a nakamichi soundbar and have been enjoying the experience.

But I digress, look for business displays


Same thing I did 20 years ago. IIRC it was the only way to get a flatscreen at the time. Mine was a NEC. 40" plasma. 1366x768. Not even full HD. I think it would work out to about $7000. It pissed me off that it didn't even come with a wall bracket and I had to shell out another $600 for that. For the price of just my wall bracket you can now buy a pretty nice 65" 4K screen I'm sure.


Challenges are features like HDR and having four HDMI inputs.

Planar makes incredible and also expensive displays for the commercial market. They offer a "luxury living" solution but the smallest is 100".

https://www.planar.com/markets/luxury-living/


Lots of places call these "commercial monitors".

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Flat-Panel-Displays/ci/16...


With 4k monitors you usually pay a larger premium for latency, refresh rate, gsync/freesync, etc. All of which gamers care a lot about but are irrelevant for TVs.


Not really, just like TV's there's certainly a 'premium' range for those that are interested but there's a wide range or regular 'work' monitors. e.g. a few years ago I got a 43" 4K monitor with 10-bit colour-depth, 60Hz refresh, good local dimming etc. for $800.

In OP's link for IPS, a monitor of the same size and brand that seems to be the next version after the one I got is $550. It's hardly a premium over a comparable TV.


I got such a monitor earlier this year for around $600. It's amazing for work but could totally work as a television with an appropriate device connected, especially since it has decent, loud audio built in.


Console gamers care about TV latency too.


Why does (consumer) monitor tech always seem to lag TV tech by a few years?

It looks like the situation is still that in the 4k OLED space there are a few ~$4000+ monitors and dozens of ~$1000 TVs. Per the pcpartpicker link, maybe the Gigabyte FO48U will change that, but it's still out of stock. Besides, I feel like this has happened before with HDR and 4k and IPS. First it shows up in TVs, a year later it is cheap in TVs, a year later it is expensive in monitors, and finally it becomes cheap in monitors. But it takes years. Which seems odd, since surely they use the same panels? Is it an industry structure thing, where panel manufacturers integrate and co-develop with TV manufacturers but monitor manufacturers are separate, only get the panels after release, and need a year or three to turn things around?


>Why does (consumer) monitor tech always seem to lag TV tech by a few years?....

Monitor used to have "much" lower input latency, higher PPI, much higher refresh rate and generally higher reliability because they are expected to be constantly on. i.e Their panels have different specifications.

Although I am not sure if most of the above are true anymore especially with OLED. Given how TV manufactures have also had focus on gaming. But reliability is still a thing on monitor. That is the similar to reference TV that uses panel from one of two years prior.

Edit: I had to look up Panasonic TV set and panel and then I discovered they are pulling out of TV production and outsource to external partner. Sigh.

https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=...


Yeah, I use gaming mode for my TV-as-a-monitor and if I don't the lag is noticeable even on the desktop. It has the nice side effect of disabling the obnoxious sharpening filters, too.

My dedicated monitors have had dismal reliability: one died right after the warranty, one died inside the warranty and they flaked on the warranty anyway. My reliability expectations are rock bottom, my TV will have to work hard to undershoot them.


> Why does (consumer) monitor tech always seem to lag TV tech by a few years?

Well, “always” seems like an exaggeration; consumer monitors were far beyond 480i before consumer TVs were.

> It looks like the situation is still that in the 4k OLED space there are a few ~$4000+ monitors and dozens of ~$1000 TVs.

That’s not monitors being behind in tech, that’s TVs being cheaper because of economies of scale and opportunity for ad serving and data harvesting.

> Is it an industry structure thing, where panel manufacturers integrate and co-develop with TV manufacturers but monitor manufacturers are separate

AFAIK, LG, Sharp, Samung, and Sony are all four panel/TV/monitor manufacturers; I dont think that’s an issue.


Scale and ads are plausible explanations for why monitors are behind in tech, but they're still behind in tech.


I don't quite see how "TVs are cheaper because they earn money beyond the sale and have more economies in scale" translates to "monitors are behind in tech"? They have similar tech, but at different price points.


Everyone shops at a price point, and the existence of a $6000 professional monitor just isn't at all relevant for most people. Consumer monitors are years behind consumer TVs in tech.

EDIT: Actually, I did specify that I was talking about consumer TVs. You didn't read my post, and then you decided to nitpick anyway. Bravo.


What a weird nonsensical statement.

Monitors and TVs are manufactured with the same "tech", just to different specifications to fit their desired purpose/niche, and to capture the maximum possible value from that market.

You could maybe make an argument that Samsung panel tech is behind LG's or something, since companies have separate R&D labs and actually have different technology, but in order to do so you'd have to be an industry expert.


In what world is a comparison "nonsensical"? They both displays pixels. Each can be substituted for the other with a modest amount of non-panel-related effort. They compete. We can compare them.

> the same "tech", just to different specifications to fit their desired purpose/niche

Clearly not. I am using a TV as a monitor right now, because 4k + OLED + HDR + 120hz was just not available for $1100 in the monitor space six months ago (I think there was a $6000 offering, lol). Looks like it still isn't. This situation has been going on for years. Before OLED it was HDR, before HDR it was 4k, and so on. TVs are always far ahead, monitors are always far behind.

I'd rather not use a TV as a monitor because it's a PITA. I have to put up with substantial non-panel-related silliness to make this happen (turn the TV off/on with a remote, deactivate the laggy filters, tolerate the "smart" BS, etc). If monitors are so well tailored to their own niche, why are they losing so badly to a competitor who isn't even trying?

> to capture the maximum possible value from that market

That's the only explanation I can come up with: monitors are a backwater that the industry just doesn't care much about because volume is lower. Tech has to trickle down, and that takes years.


> TVs are always far ahead, monitors are always far behind.

Your own description isn't of TVs being ahead in tech, but offering the same tech at a lower price point. (There often is some actual tech lag, for many of the same reasons, but it's much shorter.)

> I'd rather not use a TV as a monitor because it's a PITA. I have to put up with substantial non-panel-related silliness to make this happen (turn the TV off/on with a remote, deactivate the laggy filters, tolerate the "smart" BS, etc).

Usually, all of those except for the filters are effectively bypassed when using an input that supports CEC.


> Your own description isn't of TVs being ahead in tech, but offering the same tech at a lower price point

I specified consumer TVs. You didn't read what I wrote, and then you decided to nitpick anyway.

> Usually, all of those except for the filters are effectively bypassed when using an input that supports CEC.

Yeah, I heard about that, but evidently it needs more work before it Just Works.


that looks like a price problem, not a tech problem. you said it yourself, the tech exist, just much pricier.

And like the other person said, one of the reason is just basic scale. TV is multitude much bigger market than monitor ever is.


TV's are such a big business that they overwhelm the rest of the display manufacturing world. That's why 16:10 monitors basically disappeared - 16:9 is 1080p is a TV.

On the other end of the spectrum is professional industry displays which are ahead of consumer facing devices, like are shown at NAB (vs CES) and there you'll find 8k monitors for tens of thousands of dollars.


Maybe in the high-end only?

Speaking of low to mid end tvs, the ones I saw on display in local shops, they were just overpriced junk..

Even though it's smaller, I installed my 7? year old 24" benq fhd e-ips monitor as a tv for my parents. $120 + $20 for the cheapest 2.1 sound (I think 2x10W + sub), cranked the bass much higher than advised, put the speakers behind the monitor and the sub on the floor + ISP tv box with remote. Speakers and monitor are always on, they got their own power saving stuff. My parents are ecstatic, guests are asking where they got the TV from... apparently it looks better that the ones you could buy for $500+...

Last time I checked, I remember finding somewhere most tvs don't actually operate at the advertised resolution, they got all kinds of "prettifying" algos. Not going to trust them ever.


The panels have the advertised resolution, but yes, for "smart" TVs you always have to figure out how to turn off the gross sharpening/compression filters that they use to win the Great Best Buy Screensaver Battle. It can be done, though, and certainly if the manufacturer wanted to omit them in a monitor offering it could.


Two of the most important settings:

Game mode. This turns off most/all the image processing, which greatly increases the lag.

Overscan. Also turn it off. This zooms in the picture a little to crop out artifacts around the edge.


^ This.


Monitors are built for being an arm's length away. TVs are built for being several yards away. The pixel density changes accordingly


There are monitors built specifically for digital signage, these have the same specs as large TVs but no tuner or adware.


And so does the ability to use IR or some other remote control mechanism.

A “dumb tv” would just be a monitor with a remote to control power and volume.


TV manufacturers can offset the lower price by selling ads to show you on your “smart” tv


That wouldn't explain the delay, and do they really expect to sell $3000 of ads per customer? I have doubts.


> That wouldn’t explain the delay

That and expected maximum market size (or, more precisely, expected shape of the demand curve) do, I thimk, explain the delay, and higher price even before considering subsidy from advertising/data revenue, because there are fewer units to amortize fixed per-design production line costs across.

4K OLED laptops are more available and at a much smaller premium, perhaps because people buy a lot more laptops than desktop and larger monitors.


They get money from the ads, they get money from selling your usage data, they get money by selling space on the remote for streaming apps, and probably through some other means as well.


Sure, but my intuition says they might get a few hundred dollars that way, tops. Is my intuition off by an entire order of magnitude?


Vizio, as a public company, now has to share their ad revenue data:

https://www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2021/11/10/22773073/vi...


> from $10.44 to $19.89.

Yeah, I thought $3000 sounded silly, and my only mistake was that I thought it was one order of magnitude silly when in fact it was two orders of magnitude silly.


No, that's completely wrong.

That number is specifically for their SmartCast subscriber service. It's not clear what the rate is, but they subsequently talk about Roku making $40/mo; so it's possible that's the monthly rate. Assuming it is monthly, a television lasts for five years, and that is their only other source of revenue from the televisions, that's ~$1200.

The telling part of the article:

> ...[Vizio's] Platform Plus segment that includes advertising and viewer data had a gross profit of $57.3 million. That’s more than twice the amount of profit it made selling devices like TVs, which was $25.6 million, despite those device sales pulling in considerably more revenue.


If those are actually monthly figures you might be right, but I'm still not convinced that they are. $40/mo sounds implausibly high to me. Even if Roku, in a non-monopolized space, managed to swing a hefty 30% cut, that would mean an average of $120 spent on streaming services per month.

Are sports channels really expensive? Is that what I'm missing?


Most of the ad money comes from WatchFree Plus app on the tv.

"Vizio execs said 77 percent of that money comes directly from advertising, like the kind that runs on its WatchFree Plus package of streaming channels, a group that recently expanded with content targeting. The next biggest contributor is the money it makes selling Inscape data about what people are watching."


>The next biggest contributor is the money it makes selling Inscape data about what people are watching

sigh.


your argument requires that advertising is cost effective for the advertiser. what if therre was a competing ecosystem, in which advertisers pushed up prices overall in a bid to out-compete each other? essentially, the cost of advertisments is added to the cost of consumer and all other goods. advertising increases cosumer costs, and decreases consumer choice.


> Why does (consumer) monitor tech always seem to lag TV tech by a few years?

because there's more money to be made selling TVs than monitors?

consequentely, it's TV manufacturers pushing the entire display maker industry ahead? and so they get the newer tech first??


That's what I suspect, yes, but if that's the case it feels like integrating a monitor manufacturer would be a quick and easy business win for the TV guys.


> it feels like integrating a monitor manufacturer would be a quick and easy business win for the TV guys.

What does this even mean? The same companies that make panels for monitors usually make panels for the TVs as well. They already have production facilities that can manufacture panel sizes ranging from cell-phone size to 200" commercial wall panels.


Most people don't buy the volume to get a special size panel. Want a panel, you can save a ton of money buying one we already make. My company has obsoleted perfectly good embedded systems and had to redesign a new UI just because the panel we used went out of production. (I knew all along doing pixel perfect UI instead of one that scaled was a stupid idea, but I got overruled, now we spend a ton of money making our UI scale)


Volume? Whether we're talking about TVs or monitors, the most competitive offerings are always the segments that sell in volume.

Just because OLED tech "exists" doesn't mean the equipment exists to make it economically at any particular size, format, etc. We have affordable TV-sized and phone-sized OLEDs because LG has invested in the equipment to make those particular panels in those particular sizes.


If I had to guess I’d say it’s just market size. I’d bet there’s a larger market if people who want a large, high definition TV for movies and shows than there is for people who want a high definition monitor.

Most business uses for monitors don’t require high definition, so you’re really looking at specific industries and gaming.


Excluding that Mac market, I don't think Apple sell anything new anymore that is under 200 PPI.


TV display quality is dogshit compared to monitors. Even cheap low-end monitors tend to have better displays. They aren't the same panels at all.


Nope. I'm using an OLED TV as a monitor on my main PC, and it kicks the pants off any monitor I've ever used before, including the 2021 MBP monitor I'm typing this on right now.


Which one are you using if you don't mind me asking?


LG C1. I have to turn it off and on with a remote, take the usual OLED precautions, and tolerate its "smart" nonsense, but the color is gorgeous and the contrast is magical.


Does autodimming work decently on C1? It's really bothering me when I try to use my CX as a monitor.


Agreed, auto-dimming is rough. I turned it off. 60% constant brightness for work, uncapped HDR mode for play.


How do you switch? Can you do it with just the keyboard?


I boot into Windows for gaming and when I launch a full screen game an "AutoHDR" badge pops up and the brightness limit is lifted. A similar thing happens when I launch a streaming app in the TV. I don't consume content through Linux because as far as I can tell linux doesn't support HDR yet.

Speaking of booting into Windows, I finally figured out how to make it painless: use a separate hard drive, not a separate partition. I wish I could go back in time 20 years and tell myself that. The number of hours I wasted debugging poorly written installers, bootloaders, and updaters exceeds the cost of hard drives by a factor too terrifying to calculate. Ah well. Now I know.


Any worries of “burn in”? I read the risk of using one as a monitor is that with a computer there is often static images like your task bar. Those can burn into the screen permanently where as if it is just tv the image often changes. Shows like news often have a bar at the bottom and was warned those too can cause burn in. Curious what your experience has been? Thanks


Yes, OLED care is a concern, and I take the usual precautions: no fixed menubars, no tiling WM, rotating desktop wallpapers, and reduced brightness (which isn't a compromise -- anything above 80% makes light-mode content uncomfortable, and auto HDR raises the limit for actual HDR content).

Even if I were not taking these steps and generally abusing the monitor, I wouldn't expect to see burn-in yet, so I can't really speak to how the situation will develop.


I used to have the Acer B326HK (32 inch 4k) which is marketed as a monitor and it still had really bad burn in


Isn't that IPS though?


same question


I'm using a Sony 43" X720E. IPS. I'm quite happy with it, can't complain. It's as good as any monitor I've seen except OLED, and the size is wonderful. I would like to have 120Hz though.

I will eventually go to OLED but 48" is the smallest size OLED TV available, and that's a bit bigger than I'd want on my desk.

Hopefully a reasonably-priced 43" OLED will come out.


You can get OTA tuners for incredibly cheap. Like $30 for a basic one. These come with the bonus of allowing you to plug in a USB HDD and record live TV. For a little more you can get a HDHomeRun or Tablo and have a network connected tuner so you can stream live TV to tablets or phones and streaming boxes like the FireTV.

Powered bookshelf speakers are also an alternative to soundbars.

I personally use a monitor as a TV. One con is that some devices like the Fire Stick don't send HDMI display off signals but instead a black screen in sleep mode which wakes the monitor and keeps it on. You need a smart switch to easily turn it off.


I would assume most setups leveraging a monitor as the display would also be going through an AVR and that should take care of this kind of thing?


Sound bars and powered speakers are also an option and don't require an AVR but also typically don't offer HDMI/AV pass-through at least on the cheaper side. Going the AVR route adds even more cost and more space as a decent sound bar or powered speaker set costs less then even a low-end AVR. I went the monitor route as I just don't have room for both a desktop PC setup and a TV. I do have an HDMI switch with audio extractor but that also picks up on the Fire TV stick and auto switches to it. TBH it's just a design flaw with the Fire TV and I really wish Amazon would fix it but I bet it saves them 7 cents or something to do it this way.


That's good to know. I've been through a few units (Denon, Pioneer, Onkyo) and they really feel like the weakest link in my setup, with fussy menus and strange failure modes involving cryptic error codes— the Denon in particular would go into a fault state that was probably a thermal problem but might also have been a voltage regulation issue.

It's definitely overkill given that I'm only driving stereo speakers anyway, so maybe next time I have issues I'll go this direction.


It's amazing how much more expensive those are than traditional TVs, non-starter even.


Economies of scale, and subsidies. TVs that ship with Netflix buttons on the remote, Prime Video app, and built-in crappy ads all over the place are being subsidized by those companies.

Meanwhile, no one is buying non-smart TVs, so lower quantities are more expensive.

(Or they know that non-smart TVs are a niche product that they can charge more for.)


Netflix is paying to have the button on the remote? I actually thought it would be the other way around.


Here's a nice NEC 220" display. Helpfully, BH offers monthly payments.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1533261-REG/nec_led_f...


$317,999.00 $13250/mo. suggested payments with 24 Mos. Promo Financing* Learn More Important Notice This item is noncancelable and nonreturnable.


Well… it is 18ft diagonally. Of course, you need a place capable of housing such a thing.


A stadium?


4K OLED monitors are insanely expensive. You can get an LG 65" OLED TV for $1,800. The OLED computer monitors I have seen start at $4,000.


AW5520QF (55" 120Hz) is on sale for $2500. That's getting down to about double the cost.


A Gigabyte FO48U (48" OLED, same LG panel as the C1) goes for around $1500


83% of the price for 54% of the area.


For use as a monitor, smaller panels may be more desirable, more pixels per unit area.

I don't want a 72-inch wall monster. I'm going to be viewing it from about a meter from my face.

But that's just my face. Other faces might work better.


The price spread seems so drastic, more than four times. There is obviously much that I'm missing.


>Apple TV, Fire stick etc.

That's just offloading the problem to a separate device.


I think they help by siloing the snooping.

Our smart TV seems to actively try to figure out what is attached to the HDMI. Its probably reporting that back. At least every time I plug my notebook into the tv it seems to wait at least 20 seconds before forcing me to select "PC" as the input device. The old tv the notebook shows up instantaneously.


All TV's are dumb tv's if you only use them as an external display/monitor and don't connect them to the net. I have a dedicated computer for a media center and just use HDMI1 input on the TV. Never enter menus. Never update the OS. Never agree to anything. Never let the TV "phone home." Never set up wifi. Never connect a CAT5 to it. Set the input using the remote and forget it. Treat it as a dumb monitor. Computer is connected to the net, TV is not and has no way to access it.


That's sadly not really true. I have an LG that I (thought) I was using this way until one day in the middle of watching some TV I get a prompt about a OnePlus phone trying to control my TV, do I want to accept? Needless to say and didn't, but I was baffled by what happened. Turns out that the stupid TV is controllable via an app over bluetooth, and there is no way to turn bluetooth off. I'm just stuck with my TV constantly advertising it's presence to everything around it.


My LG tv started having an annoying popup message every few seconds, "Unknown device is disconnected", which was caused by a faulty WiFi module, documented here: https://www.theraffon.net/spookcentral/tcp/2019/07/10/lg-sma...

Since I use a Roku stick for streaming, I have no need for the WiFi module in the TV. I was able to follow the instructions in that post, which involve removing the back of the TV and physically disconnecting the Wifi Module, and correct the issue.

I suppose that's one way to make sure the TV is not silently connecting to WiFi, although I'm not sure how difficult that operation would be on other manufacturers.


Be aware that Roku is one of the worst offenders in selling your watching habits.


What are some better alternatives?


Plex, if you have a spare machine to run it on. Free if the household share a username/password.


Plex also phones home, I thought. I could never understand why anyone uses it. What is wrong with mplayer running purely on a local client?


Local playback is fine, but greatly restricts your options for media boxes. The top end Apple TV 4K for example only has 64GB of storage, and the Nvidia Shield TV caps out at a paltry 16GB. The Apple TV would fit a few shows if you were willing to rotate them out, but wouldn’t be able to provide a “library” experience. The Shield supports external storage, but who wants an external HD or NAS taking up space on their TV stand?

So local playback implies something more like a mini-ITX PC or SBC running some flavor of Linux. That’s fine, but it’s not going to be terribly couch-friendly since it’s going to have a bog standard desktop UI.

So the most popular option is to put all your media on a server in the closet (usually an old laptop or raspi or something), with a client on your streaming box like Plex, Kodi, Infuse, etc connecting to your server.


> with a client on your streaming box like Plex, Kodi, Infuse, etc connecting to your server.

Never heard of Infuse but don't Plex and Kodi both contact the vendor's server? That is enough to make me not want to go anywhere near them. I do know there are home media center distros for the RPI and PC and they are supposedly nice. I'd be ok with using one in principle, but I haven't cared that much about media UI to bother. I just use command line mplayer on my laptop if I want to watch a video, and that's good enough for me. I can understand other people wanting a more TV-like experience, which is also fine.


Plex definitely connects to third party servers, primarily for verifying subscription status (some features are tied to a subscription) and to make connecting to your Plex box from outside of your local network easier (no IP addresses or something like dyndns).

Kodi I’m not sure about. It was originally XBMC (XBox Media Center) and is open source so even if there’s so phone home element, it can be built without that. Another open source option is Jellyfin, which is a fork of Emby from before that project was closed off.


Why does plex have subscriptions at all? I understand (at least theoretically) that not all software is free, but charging for it the normal way (you pay money and buy a copy that you then use without it phoning home) works perfectly well too. Anyway I had had the impression that Plex also sends at least the metadata of your video library to its home server.

I didn't realize Kodi was XBMC or that you could build it yourself. Thanks for that info.


Plex pulls the metadata for your library from public sources like thetvdb.com.

The server and clients use plex.com to authenticate users.

There are alternatives like Jelly Fin that should better alleviate your concerns.


Kodi doesn't phone home.


* Plex has clients for "smart" devices (Apple TV, Roku, smartphones, tablets), so you don't have to use a computer just to watch TV

* Plex tracks what you've watched so you don't have to remember what episode you left off on

* Plex serves up rich metadata when browsing your library


I use Jellyfin. It's great FOSS!


Plex isn't an alternative, its an app that plays content you host yourself, plus whatever sponsored crap Plex wants to shove into the UI. For people wanting to watch Netflix or Amazon Prime, this isn't a meaningful suggestion.

The Apple TV is a drop-in replacement for a Roku or Fire TV that lacks built-in advertising


I use an AppleTV 4K on every TV. Media is on a NAS (TrueNAS Mini). I use a Kodi port called MrMC (~7USD in App store) to mount the NAS shares and play all the media (supports NFS and SMB). Run a container (on the NAS) with MySQL that MrMC talks to that syncs status between all instances. Works great. Watch in one room, pause and pick up where I left off in the next room.

https://mrmc.tv/


Apple TV with Infuse. https://firecore.com/infuse

It can connect to Plex, Jellyfin, SMB, NFS and more. Bought a lifetime licence a while back before the price was increased and no regrets so far.


XBMC/Kodi, or AppleTV if you want a managed ecosystem.


AppleTV is not analogous to a Roku stick however, unless I'm misunderstanding. It is an app that already requires a connection to Wifi from the TV; Roku stick is what provides this connection. Additionally, AppleTV does not support Netflix or Disney+ among others. [1]

[1] https://9to5mac.com/2021/06/29/apple-tv-channels-services/


Pedantic Post Alert, but there's a few different products called "Apple TV". There's the hardware box called Apple TV that comes with a remote and plugs into the HDMI on your TV. That IS an alternative to Roku.

Then there's the Apple TV app, which runs on the Apple TV box. This can integrate with some other streaming services and show you their content in the app. Not Netflix or HBO (or some others) though.

And finally (that's all?) there's the Apple TV+ service that's 4.99 a month and lets you watch shows that Apple produces in the Apple TV app on the Apple TV box (or your iPhone, iPad, etc.)

It's all named very well and clear.


> It's all named very well and clear.

I really enjoyed this.

Apple’s handling of the Apple TV product names are baffling to me, given their once brilliant marketing department.


Ok, I've been set straight. I wasn't able to get the full picture searching online.


Confusingly Apple actually has a few ‘Apple TV’ product. There’s the app that you’re describing then there’s the physical device, as well as the subscription service.

The physical device is the Roku competitor, and supports Netflix/Disney+ etc.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_TV_(disambiguation)


The app is different. You can certainly use Netflix on a recent Apple TV [1].

[1] https://help.netflix.com/en/node/23887


AppleTV is a device like a Roku box or stick. AppleTV is also an app on iOS devices, roku boxes, etc. AppleTV the device has Netflix and Disney+ available, among many other apps.


I'm wondering if there is a wiki somewhere detailing the different ways to easily disable wireless connections inside consumer TVs...

From the link: > I taped the loose ribbon cable to the inside of the TV with a note saying, "Wifi Module disconnected, so as to disable 'Unknown Device is Disconnected' message." That way if anyone ever looks in there in the future, it will be known what was done :-)

excellent :)


Also, HDMI cables support ethernet connections.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI#HEC


Sadly - there's basically no hardware support for this. Dead in the water.


That's what large TV manufacturers want you to believe ;)


The same TV manufacturers that are still shipping 10/100 Ethernet ports on TVs in 2021?


You got any evidence to back this up? Hardware that supports this feature is basically nonexistent.


For anyone with LG TVs, iirc there’s a project called OpenLGTV which is working to reverse engineer LG software. Maybe it could help disable some of these “smart” features?


https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29338658


I imagine they'll happily let your neighbor accept the terms and conditions you have yet to accept too =P That's a failure mode I hadn't thought about, I didn't realize people tried to control a TV with bluetooth.

Why would you do this? Initial configuration but then never again? I can't think of a technical reason it meaningfully helps when you can already type in a wifi password with the remote, so I'm inclined to assume that the feature isn't for the customer but rather because they want you to use their app on your phone because the data on your phone is more valuable than the data on your TV.


I used to quite like BT control of the TV back when my kids were babies. Advance warning though, these are going to be pretty niche use cases…

I would feed them and they’d fall asleep in my arms but sometimes I would be terrified to move them in case they woke (and sometimes I’d just enjoy cuddling them as they slept). However the TV remote might have been too far to reach, whereas my phone was always in my pocket.

BT became useful again when they became older and started playing with the TV remote. It was always getting lost. Whereas my phone wasn’t.


So that does make sense, for sure, though my thinking was about how once it's connected to your home WiFi surely your phone is too and is less range limited.

But in terms of involving installing an app on your phone to emulate a remote, both are the same so it's no different. At least it's for more than just to configure it, mandating a connection to a phone you may or may not have seems like a stretch. At least by making it possible to use your BT for a remote you're expanding the features rather than breaking them.


I was given a nice TV with no remote. Used Bluetooth remote app to control TV.


Well, that was mostly a neighbor who accidentally clicked on your TV's bluetooth broadcast signal. But still if you leave it at that and not let your TV connect via bluetooth, it still remains a dumb TV


We have a pretty bad relationship with one of my neighbors. Not gonna get into specifics, but they're quite immature and petty and vindictive, and just generally not pleasant people.

Anyhow, late one night we saw something popup in the list when I was pairing my headphones. "$crappyneighbor's TV". And we saw an opportunity to be a little petty back for once. We connected my phone, and apparently their TV model features no confirmation because it went right through, and started blasting Rick Astleys "Never Gonna Give You Up" until my phone disconnected a couple minutes later. Bit of good harmless fun at their expense.


> and there is no way to turn bluetooth off

Challenge accepted! <grabs pliers and soldering iron>


Warranty voided?


A warranty is never voided if nobody knows what you did.

The profit margins are quite thin on consumer equipment; they can't afford to investigate into the chassis, having someone look at every chip that might have been tampered with.


Return it to Amazon, you could fill the box with rocks and they will happily ship it on to the next customer.


Most electronics warranties on stuff I've bought have been a year, max. Out of that period? Antenna snipping time!

...if there is one to snip, of course.


You can disable bluetooth with some effort - find the BT antenna (inside) and replace it with a load terminator - the radio thinks there's an antenna still but there is nothing that can be broadcast or received.


Which model have you got? I have a few LG TVs and there’s various options across the different firmwares that might disable that.

Eg LG Connect Apps

I’ve also often wondered if “store mode” disabled all of the radios because that’s the kind of thing you wouldn’t want enabled in a store.


It's an LG OLED55C9PUA. FWIW I went though all the menus, as well as searching the internet, and couldn't find any way to turn it off, nor as far as I could tell could anyone else who discovered this "feature".


Bluetooth on a phone can be disabled.

I only turn on bluetooth when it is needed.

Wired headsets and wired keyboards will work with some of today's phones.


That doesn't sound like a great user experience. "I have this TV that I want to use as a monitor, but I have to turn of a feature on my unrelated device which I want to use with a headset, keyboard, etc". I would rather buy a dumb TV that didn't require me to lose phone features.


It wasn't my phone trying to connect to the TV.


If this is an argument that all TVs are smart TVs, then all TVs with an IR control input device are smart TVs (because universal remotes).


No of course not. The moment you - possibly accidentally - grant the fucker an internet connection over BT, it starts to rat on you. However briefly.

Aything with an IR remote does not betrays it's users like that (through the remote)


> grant the fucker an internet connection over BT, it starts to rat on you

Or it does that by itself, with a mesh network that your neighbours have setup by accident with their Alexa or Ring - Amazon Sidewalk is an amazing end-run around your own firewall rules.


Thanks for giving me another invention to be angry about, haha.

Makes you wonder about the opportunities for poisoning of Sidewalk networks, just to get some petty revenge.


that's not petty, that's downright patriotic. we have an inalienable right to privacy, security, and liberty, and absolutely no obligation to let companies (or governments) invade or curtail those rights.


> we have an inalienable right to privacy, security, and liberty

I assume you’re referring to the US constitution. The rights you’re referring to constrain the government, not companies. You do not have a legal right to privacy w.r.t. your TV spying on you.


no, not just the constitution, it's inalienable because it's intrinsic to being civilized people, not because some piece of paper says so. on the contrary, companies have no right to spy on us.


Yet they seem to be able to keep on doing it just fine.


so people still kicking dogs makes it ok?

note that a right isn't a passive trait, but an active assertion. every time we give in to what's easy, we lose a little bit of our rights. you maintain rights by speaking out and living by them. we wouldn't need a second amendment were that not the case (n.b., i don't personally own nor desire a gun).


I wonder when home security setups will start including a Faraday cage, at least for certain rooms or areas.


If you build it into all of the exterior facing walls, you can use a cell range extender to tunnel a data connection inside your house, and also similarly with a Wi-Fi AP connected via Ethernet, in the event that you want Wi-Fi signal outside your home as well.

Actually, when I build my next house in 5-10 years I think I might do exactly this


Not gunna lie, i'm looking at building/remodelling a home in the next few years, and i'm seriously considering foiling the walls of some rooms just to build a faraday cage.


It seems way simpler to short the wifi antenna or something than to redo the walls? Bluetooth is probably harder to fix though, if the TV has that.


IR is line-of-sight, and the receiver can be blocked with a small piece of electrical tape.


Same for bluetooth, just build a faraday cage around your TV and you're good!

/s


Only if it's grounded, so that's a step up from the tape.


Bluetooth can be turned off in the settings.


It can't. Which is sort of the point of my comment. If it could I'd have no problem with this feature.


I mean sure, it's (probably) not an internet connection, but Bluetooth and an IR remote aren't really comparable. Bluetooth exchanges information in both directions, IR does not. Bluetooth works from hundreds of feet away (or more) with no line of site, an IR remote does not. Bluetooth allows for broadcasting arbitrary content to my TV, an IR remote can only change the channel. Given the relative complexities I'm also far more concerned about a security vulnerability existing in the never updated random Bluetooth module/drivers in the TV than an IR receiver that emulates button presses.


My Vizio TV's settings can only be changed with a phone app. It comes with a regular remote, but there's no button for entering the settings menu. For the app to work, it requires to be in the same WiFi. I dodged the bullet by setting up a restricted WiFi (no internet), but that shows how TV manufacturers try to force you in connecting your TV to the Internet.


How old is your Vizio? All modern Vizio tvs in the past 6 years have a remote with a Menu button. And they ask for accepting Privacy Policy before you can connect to wifi. You can very easily avoid connecting a Vizio to a network and just use it as a dumb tv.


I just got a new Vizio, I only connected it long enough for it download the latest firmware, and then neutered it by removing the Ethernet cable.

You can bypass the acceptance of the privacy policy entirely and it just disables all the smart features (can't use any of the apps or cast to it with Airplay or Google Cast), but will still download firmware updates and install them.

From the network capture I did on it, if you don't accept the policies it only reaches out to the update servers for the firmware, and that's it. Nothing else.


Has Vizios software gotten any better? I had a 2019 model and the software (had mine offline/neutered too) was too shitty to even use it as a dumb TV. For example it would randomly reboot while we were watching something via the HDMI input or it almost always took multiple restarts to properly recognize the Vizio sound bar...


I got the new TV three days ago... I'll let you know once I've spent more time with it?

As of right now I have an Apple TV hooked up with my Vizio sounder and it all works really well. Have had no issues.


I have a 2016 model Vizio that came with a very simple remote without a menu button, expecting you to use a mobile app for all settings. They made a more complete remote available 18 months later as a separate purchase. If you didn't buy the remote you could get softlocked not being able to navigate away from the Smartcast channel.

While the remote does have a menu button, many settings continue to be available only via the mobile app.


Oh wow. That is a new low.


I have seen stories of smart TVs doing active scans for any unsecured wifi network in range, then connecting and phoning home without ever informing the user or showing anything in the menus. Is that a real thing?


Not only this, but how long until they start including a cheap modem and paying for their own cellular connectivity?


Or they buy access to things like this: https://www.amazon.com/Amazon-Sidewalk/b?node=21328123011

No need to include a modem when your customer's neighbor has an internet-connected toaster within bluetooth range of the TV.


My god damn CPAP machine does this. Insurance required the modem in order for them to pay for it.


There a number of guides on disabling this. That being said you still need to bring the SD card to doctor every 6 months for review. This is a good thing. The doctor is trying to help you. I know someone that died because they went on a trip and forgot their CPAP and just stopped breathing in the middle of the night and did not wake up. It happens. When you get a CPAP there is a reason. Take it seriously.

If you are having issues because of physically fixable issues there are surgeries that can help (I had 2 things fixed). Most of the time however its just being fat and physical. Loosing the weight helps and the effect can be tracked in the data the CPAP collects. The doctor can then use the data to adjust then pressure down.

I am speaking from experience. My pressure setting has dropped as I took off the beer gut. This time next year I will likely be able to be done with it.


Ugh this is way worse and actually seems far more likely and easy to accomplish than the public wifi thing...


It's going to be time to crack the sucker open and burn out the traces to/from the modem, isn't it.

E: And in the ongoing arms war, then manufacturer's ship remotes that no longer use tried and true IR but instead go over the same bluetooth or 2.4ghz chip. Some probably already do, I would expect.


My new Panasonic TV has dual-mode remote control - IR+Bluetooth. Bluetooth means that you don't need to point the remote as accurately. Plus you can use a phone as remote control.


That's part of the push for 5G - the idea that it becomes much easier to have many more devices, hence you can drop a modem anywhere.


Jesus Christ, at that point I'd just go in the TV and snip a trace in it.


It won’t be long until we start taking a ddwrt approach and jtagging our tvs and replacing them with custom ROMs.

We’ll be okay for another 5-10 years before they securely start locking that down too.


I'm optimistic within 5-10 years we'll start to see the rise of open source tvs that'll save us. I have no sources to back this up but seeing the release of several open source laptops gives me hope.


See also Amazon Sidewalk.


Some also:

1. Scan the HDMI content and send information back to the mothership to help vendors know what you're watching.

2. Scan the local network for shares and look at media on them, again to send back to the mothership.


Do you have a reference for this? I’ve heard this too but have never actually seen a first hand account


This sounds crazily like science fiction. The TV wants to live so will do anything to stay alive. Isn't this what HAL did to the guy Dave in the end?


I’ve heard of this rumour and hope it’s true and that someone has evidence of a tv manufactor is doing this in the US. https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/wi-fi-connect...


I doubt these stories. The number of people who get a smart TV and don’t connect it to the Internet are a minority. It’s just not worth the cost for any company to develop advanced features to spy on that limited subset.


How would the TV phone home if it's not connected to the internet?


Amazon had (perhaps still has) whispernet - a global coverage of cellular networks. It was used to download books to your kindle, essentially anywhere in the world, without having to have a local plan or WiFi.

It was 2G iirc, enough for book download. Uploading a perceptive hash of what you are watching - e.g. a frame every few seconds - also fits on 2G speeds.


Ok, so...

TV phones home a lot, with info about stuff, some info big lots of bandwidth.

could there be an attack with buying some tvs and putting them on public WiFi - and could one find a way to increase the amount the tv was sending so it amounted to an attack - but still have plausible deniability.

If tvs were put on public wifi, which I guess there is no reason why you shouldn't put your tv on public wifi, and the tv is using lots of bandwidth, and your tv is popular in a country with lots of free wifi, is that tv manufacturer guilty of an attack on the free wifi infrastructure of that country?

I'm asking for a short story or several I might write some day.


Also maybe I'm mistaken, but don't most modern cars have a built in modem for sending telemetry to the manufacturer as well?


Yes. Toyota seems to like putting the transceiver behind the glove box, forcing you to introduce a bundle of rattles to your newly purchased vehicle to remove. Also, I'm pretty sure removing it disables some of the front speakers, requiring manual wire connecting to get them back. You could maybe leave the device in there but encase it in a Faraday cage, but still rattles are introduced.

Ford, iirc, places it on the floor under or behind some seats making it much easier to deal with.

I think MA just passed a law about not allowing vehicles sold there to sell your telemetry data or something.


> I think MA just passed a law about not allowing vehicles sold there to sell your telemetry data or something.

i believe they just have to share the data with others, which they don't want to do.


Whispernet is dead from what I understand. As countries began shutting down 3G networks, Amazon was no long able to get connectivity at a price point where it was economically feasible.


Not dead, just replaced.

https://www.amazon.com/Amazon-Sidewalk/b?ie=UTF8&node=213281...


Why not use helium network?


"doing active scans for any unsecured wifi network in range"


This doesn’t seem like a practical thing for manufacturers to implement. How common are such networks in actuality? Literally the only time I ever encountered unsecured Wi-Fi networks in the past several years were guest networks, and all of those were gated by a capture portal that would have blocked any sort of attempt at telemetry or ad serving.


A deal with comcast and their ubiquitous pseudo public hotspots would simplify that.


xfinitywifi, the comparable similar functionality from CenturyLink, etc, or if you happen to live just a bit too close to a McDonalds or other business that has open WiFi. And of course the possibility of one of your neighbors screwing up his WiFi setup.

There are a lot of ways this can (and has) gone horribly wrong for privacy.


I doubt any TV does this but if I needed to implement it I would just do it the same way that I use wifi in hotels that have captive portals without paying for it: tunnel IP over DNS.


Pretty common.

https://finder.wifi.xfinity.com/


Xfinity requires login. It is not open.


> doesn’t seem like a practical thing for manufacturers to implement.

In terms of what, lines of code? Engineer days?


Like the parent comment says: scan for some open Wi-Fi in range and connect. If that provides Internet access, it's good to go.


Might have 4g or 5g chips in them. I'm sure they could get a good deal on data if they put it in millions of TVs.


To second this advice, I have a 4 year old 75" Sony Bravia that I did not connect to the internet in any way, despite being an Android device. I have updated the firmware using the instructions on the Sony website, downloaded a package, extracted on a USB stick and let the TV boot on that. Figured it's best to have an up to date operating system for bug fixes, security updates, file format support etc.

Never intend to use the "smart" features on the TV, internet browsing, Netflix etc., I handle that perfectly with my "broken lid" laptop, which is a well maintained machine, typing these very words on it.

So I can vouch that at least for Sony TVs in the KD or KDL series XD, XE, XF, XG (most of them launched a few years ago), you can use them just fine without internet, and you can even update them. You can also turn off Bluetooth and prevent the TV from advertising its presence.

Don't know about the newer OLED and QLED devices, you should try them on in the store.


What do you need security updates for if you don’t connect it to the Internet?


Updates include more than just security fixes.


Yes but to nitpick he already mentioned bugfixes and file format support alongside security fixes (which he wouldn't/shouldn't need). :)


I disagree. You can have security bugs in non-connected devices, for example crafted file formats or metadata that can carry executable payload, worms that force their way in though some insecure Bluetooth receiver, or even by infecting the myriad data channels embedded in modern broadcasting; access to such a broadcast stream might be very lucrative since it will give you access to tens of thousands to tens of millions of devices.

I agree that the target is low value and that the attacker will most likely not bother infecting Android TVs; he would need to force them to connect to WiFi to exfiltrate any data, a very complex and unlikely attack if your TV is not used to monitor uranium centrifuge data.


>Never enter menus. Never update the OS. Never agree to anything. Never let the TV "phone home." Never set up wifi. Never connect a CAT5 to it. Set the input using the remote and forget it. Treat it as a dumb monitor. Computer is connected to the net, TV is not and has no way to access it.

so, are there any TVs where this is not possible? For example as part of turning on there is a setup procedure that makes it phone home and connect to wifi? If so (I wouldn't know but I would expect because natural cynicism) then the question naturally becomes what TVs is what you suggest actually possible on.

on edit: I see jiveturkey just posted that in fact what I suspect would be the case of difficulty to keep it from connecting is often the case https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29383963


> Never update the OS.

Unless there are new features or fixes you want. My TV needed updates to support Dolby Vision and to fix ARC/CEC bugs. More recent TVs have required updates to support HDMI 2.1 features.

At least you can download the firmware separately and update through USB instead of a network update.


We have the dumbest modern TV I could find, it routinely decides to ask us to agree to the T&Cs again, and complains about not being connected to the internet.

The problem isn't just that they want to be connected tot he internet, it's that that they're terribly written buggy bloatware devices that glitch continuously when not connected to the internet.

Of course from what others have said it seems like they're also glitchy and terrible when connected to the internet?


If nothing else, it's one more thing in the TV that can break down, and probably add a little bit to the energy consumption of the TV. And if the trend continues, how long until your TV doesn't work at all unless it is connected to the internet?


What’s stopping the TV from taking OTA updates through data sub-channels on TV channels?

Satellite receivers have had this type of capability for a few decades.


That's something that seems like would be feasible in a more monolithic world of broadcasting, and smaller firmwares. They could probably simply broadcast various firmwares at different times; then if the TV detected "hey, that is for me", it could capture the packets.

It's hard to imagine streaming services like YouTube, NetFlix and whoever agreeing to do anything of that sort.

Indeed, my guess is right about this seems to be in the right ballpark:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_and_object_carousel


If you're still relying on DRM functionality, a DRMed source could suddenly demand you upgrade the firmware and refuse to work until you do.


not all. some require a network connection at least to get started. some find an open network and connect "for you"


And some bombard you with "helpful reminders" to set up networking.


I think Gmail.com has asked me about 500 times to try their app and I’ve said “I am not interested” 500 times in a row.

But they seem to have a good feeling about tomorrow.


Same as YouTube Premium, I thought if I did their free trial they're stop bugging me, nope, now I get the same prompts straight up asking me to pay now.


One day you will misclick and then they have you


I need to convince the next generation of judges that 1/500th consent is not full and complete consent!


Anything that requires a network connection should be returned, period.


I guess if the TV really want to exfiltrate data, it can speak via HDMI-CEC to all peripherals connected to it. For example if you have an TV-Box or a game-station, it probably can send it remote control commands to the TV-Box, so it can have the same user interface than you have on your TV-Box (which quite often even when it's connected in Ethernet, can display on the screen the wifi password, or surf the web).

There are also quite often free public wifi in the neighborhoods. Bluetooth may also be an option. Or they can just add a cellular network to get your data. Or maybe they can create a wifi mesh network between nearby TVs and share the internet if one has access to it.


Yes, the key being never let it connect to the internet


I would check what TV you have and what patches are available. I have a smart Sony TV, but I've only connected it to a network twice to get patches. I did so once because it fixed an audio issue that was very annoying.


You can often download patches to a USB stick and install them from that.


How about the remote control?

My dumb TV's remote is so simple, it has room for a dedicated button for each HDMI input. I don't have to go through any on-screen widget to pick an input: just hit a physical button on the remote dedicated to going to that HDMI input.

Cycling through picture modes is just a button also.

Never enter menus? What if you'd like to adjust something related to the display; sharpness or something.


How can you access "Press the Red button" content on a dumb TV though? Is there a software client that can access the content over http?

edit: I believe it's called HbbTV


Smart TVs boot slower, display stupid elaborate graphics and menus when doing simple things, and have slow clunky UIs.


Exactly! No need to have anything but HDMI and power connected.


Kinda? You still have to wait for the TV to boot.


well, until your neighbours set up an open wifi network, or a house member / guest sets up a temporary wifi hotspot with no password.

Most TV's will lock on any open wifi network given the chance - and that's all it takes to upload saved data and pull down updates and ads etc


Summing up the main options and linking to some comments that mentioned them:

* extra-large gaming monitors, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29383077

* Sceptre brand TVs (they can be purchased from Walmart) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29383298

* Projectors maybe, but 4k projectors are very expensive. (On the other hand, 1080p projectors look great in my opinion.)

* Most big brands such as LG, Samsung, etc. have "commercial displays" or "digital signage" that are dumb or at least have fewer problematic features. One kind you'll see is marketed for putting in hotel or hospital rooms. Another kind is marketed for displaying at e.g. a bar/restaurant, building lobby, etc.


Projectors require dark rooms; the less dark it is, the less contrast you'll see. I've got a 1080p projector on a wall at 100" and it looks fantastic. But it's in my bedroom and I use it only at night. I imagine for most people's living rooms, especially for daytime viewing, a projector won't work.


I'd like to see a side-by-side comparison. A projector will have problem with direct sunlight on the screen, but so will a TV. I've found projectors okay in a reasonably bright room, depending what's on screen.


A laser short throw projector with an Ambient light reflecting screen can be used in a well lit room. There seems to be a lil boom happening in projection screen tech.


Most consumer projectors are built for home-cinema settings and don't fair well in normal light. Projectors for commercial applications like meetings or trade shows can put out much more light, at much greater cost.


Came here to suggest projectors. I personally prefer my 1080p projector on a 100" fixed screen over a 50" 4k. When looking at projectors pay attention to the warranty period, and think about throw distance/placement.


You can DIY a 4k Projector if you don't want to pay nearly as much:

https://youtu.be/YfvTjQ9MCwY


Only works in pitch black though.


Sceptre is fantastic for this.

e.g. https://www.walmart.com/ip/Sceptre-55-Class-4K-UHD-LED-TV-HD...

Zero smart features, and all modern capabilities. It's also a TV, as opposed to a computer monitor, so it has the expected TV speakers and ports.


It's been many years, so this is old data, but I purchased a half dozen or so Sceptre flat panel monitors for an office. Every one of them stopped working after about two years. I don't remember for sure, but they may have been LCDs with fluorescent backlights, so the fluorescents could have simply failed.

I've always had a poor opinion of Sceptre from this, but again, it could just be an out of date prejudice.


As a counter-anecdote, I purchased a Sceptre monitor in the 20"-30" range in 2010 and used it through 2015 when I gave it away. It's still in daily use and working fine for what it is.


I recently purchased one of the Sceptre TVs and overall am happy with it. The only drawback I found was the sound is not great: it is tinny and muddled (possibly because it's wall-mounted). I'm planning to buy some external speakers.


Yes, I have a 4K Sceptre purchased for a song, and the sound isn't great (and HDMI-CEC doesn't work as reliably as I'd like to bring up the soundbar on HDMI-ARC, etc.)...

...but it doesn't have any of the smart TV BS. Still takes too long to power on, IMO.


This is a very real annoyance for me too.

It takes wayyyyy too long to power/boot up.

That being said, I just hook up my own speakers.


I assume the tradeoff is probably panel quality, right? I doubt they have OLEDs on the level of an LG or Samsung TV.


I think the trade off is a subsidized price point, and associated specs, and an unsubsidized one.

I’d guess the panels are all pretty common.


No they are not. Even the bigger players like Samsung and Sony have dozens of quality levels of panels. The highest quality ones e.g. have a ton of local dimming zones and smart backlighting, and achieve much higher contrast ratios than cheaper models. They also will represent moving objects with high contrast better. Plus, there's usually different levels of color calibration applied.

That means usually in order to get the best imagine quality you also have to buy the model with the most smart features at a higher price point - even if you don't intend to use them.


Very helpful info. Thanks for this.

I often forget to consider stuff like consistent/quality back lighting, but it really does make a difference.


I could not find a product description. Stopped scrolling when I reached the related products and could not find a hyperlink in the sidebar. Is this just me stuck in old ways?


This will provide more significant detail: https://www.sceptre.com/TV/4K-UHD-TV-category1category73.htm...

(e.g. https://www.sceptre.com/TV/4K-UHD-TV/U557CV-UMRB-55-4K-UHD-T...)


It's below the related and recommended products.


One thing people haven't mentioned is that there are some non-smart televisions available that are marketed as extra large gaming monitors.

For example, there's the Alienware 55" OLED Gaming Monitor and the ASUS ROG Swift PG65UQ that's 65".


That's interesting, but it doesn't look like you have many choices at the 55" size unless you're willing to pay double what I paid 4 years ago for my Sony.


That's exactly the reason why non smart TVs don't sell.

The smart one's are subsidized by their ads and spyware; so you'll always pay a massive premium to get a dumb one.


That may be a small part but a much bigger factor is price differentiation and market segmentation. A 55" monitor is pretty extreme - any gamer who wants that is going to be willing to pay for it. A 55" TV is perfectly normal though and bought by normal people.

Same reason nVidia's AI cards are so expensive even though they're very similar to their graphics cards. Or "audiophile" speaker cables are expensive even though they're identical to cheap ones.

Product prices are partly a function of the price people are willing to pay (demand).


What value would additional choices serve, if it’s just a pane of glass of a fixed size and resolution?


There can still be differences in color gamut, refresh rates, input lag, viewing angle, black uniformity, local dimming, image retention, supported resolutions, SDR/HDR brightness to name a few.


Thanks, that makes sense.


Downward cost pressure, one presumes.


Thanks for the tip! This is a great search keyword to keep in mind.


Depends a lot on country. I think the US has more options than EU (but I might be wrong...). Framework had a blog post (https://frame.work/blog/in-defense-of-dumb-tvs) about this exact thing and NEC digital signage displays are an option or Iiyama (https://iiyama.com/) makes 55,60 inch 4K displays that are non smart.

I was looking for something similar and it's frustrating to see you can pick up a 65inch Samsung Q90A for about $2500-$3000 but a similarly sized comercial display will cost significantly more and use significantly more power (at least as far as I've seen, I might be wrong on this one). Comercial displays are rated for 16/24 or 24/24 usage, so they should, in theory, last significantly longer.

As far as my search went, I ended up going with a Dell U4320Q (43inch monitor) instead. It cost a bit more than the equivalent Samsung Q90A display, but it does have a USB C port with power delivery support, I can keep my desktop and laptop plugged in and it works/looks great. It also doesn't have Smart features, it's just a display. Depending on country you might be able to get some cashback on it and make it even more competitive price wise and the stand + warranty are pretty solid.

Hope this helps!


Hadn't seen that Framework post; maybe if they manage to be successful in the laptop world long term they can grace us with a TV with the same ideas as the laptops. One can hope, at least...


When I last complained about not being able to buy a dumb TV someone linked me a Romanian electronics site. There where so many option, but non of them are available in Denmark.


Seems like this would be a good use case for a "TV Honeypot" that would intercept phone-homes, recognize the model, imitate whatever jank rpc is needed to keep the unit happy, and dump all telemetry to /dev/null.


PiHole[1], with the default adlist/gravity configuration, actually works pretty well for removing ads from my LG smart tv from about 3 years ago. Doesn't keep it from updating, but you can easily configure pihole to block whatever domains you want

[1] https://pi-hole.net/


Some TVs have gotten wise to this, and are using IP addresses or serving ads from domains that are also needed for things like installing the various apps like YouTube/Netflix.


Imagine if it could replace the ads with pictures of your family, news, inspirational quotes…


Imagine if (when ?) the AI chip in each TV in the near future could smartmix© ads with pictures of your family, news, inspirational quotes...


Even better, product placement.

Your 5 year old is now magically holding BrandNewKoolAid™ instead of the original Coke. You grandpa has a fishing rod from BobsFishingEquipment®.


Oh god - there's the recent posts I've seen about people losing their social media accounts and then having deepfakes of themselves posting about BTC.

But what happens when the platforms get into it themselves?

Today using a loved one's image in a deepfake advertisement might seem invasive and wrong. But I wonder in the future if this would be seen as something acceptable. I'm sure somewhere there's a social media site that is carefully constructing their T&C's to allow them to do this if they so wish.


On the other hand, I think one protection against this particular scenario are the people who make their money using their likeness. Like, what if in that particular situation, Taylor Swift's dad (pick any celebrity) was the one browsing the internet. He just got served an advertisement with not just his daughter's face on it, but an ad with Taylor Swift's unlicensed likeness, where that likeness in most other situations is worth many millions of dollars.

For some tiny group that's below-board anyway with hacking people's social media accounts, I guess maybe there's not much you could do. But for any social media site or other platform, I imagine that IP lawyers trying to protect their client's likeness would descend in packs, which is a probably a genuine deterrent to a group considering implementing something like this.


You are definitely going to be proven right.


You don't need AI, just social media and reviews. It's been tried. Crazy effective but also feels creepy despite it just being a way to surface reviews and ratings from people you know on FB or Google+.


With pihole you could. Have the ad domains pointed to your own webserver that served you such things.


Get one into your neighborhood switch; and show your own ads to everyone. Local advertisers desperately want someone to hand their money to.


I don't know who you are, I can't prove to you I am real, but I love you. Have a nice day, and please, down vote this, I was doing so good being invisible until Someone upvoted me to a 1 again...


Just don't connect your TV to wifi? That's what I did when I finally had to get one when I was replacing the ancient energy hungry plasma I'd been using. I already have other devices for watching Netflix/YouTube/ChromeCast.


That isn’t going to work for long, your neighbor’s Alexa is now automatically sharing his internet with you, it’s just a matter of your TV manufacturer striking a deal with amazon for access to their mesh network.


Thanks, I really hate this.

But seriously, what can we do here? How to I inform people like my parents of this kind of thing without being an alarmist? Should I even care?


The damages are largely theoretical at this point. Most of the time the compromised devices just join a botnet and don't directly steal much from the owners because they don't have access to much. For the privacy concerns it's also largely theoretical at the moment because to our knowledge (at least mine) the government hasn't used SmertTVs to do spying (yet).


Also make sure there are no open access points anywhere nearby. Some models automatically connect to them.


Just don't connect it to the network or agree to any of the license clickthroughs, it can't do things behind your back then. HDMI and the RF tuner can still work fine.


You know that some devices essentially "require" network connectivity for initial setup? E.g. https://eu.community.samsung.com/t5/tv/smart-tv-set-up-witho...


Not just that. Broadband connection for things will become so cheap in the future that it could become essentially free one day so it can be subsidized by the businesses depending on it. 5G aside, It is believable that in a few years most home broadband routers, even tightly closed ones, could open a channel anyway using a fraction of the bandwidth for exclusive use by devices so that only closed source drivers will be able to instruct WiFi chips to see and use it. The catch being that there won't be any means of preventing the TV or other devices from going online, short of opening them and removing physically the network hardware. I believe we badly need alternative (Open Source, auditable, trustworthy) operating systems for smart TVs too. Next will be cars, fridges, etc. Pretty much everything.


Yeah...mine shows a nag about not accepting the online agreements, connecting the TV to the network, etc. Hasn't stopped me from using it as a display for the inputs I was using on my previous non-smart TV.


Ew.


The statement, "just don't connect it to the network" still stands. If something requires a connection, return it. It's clearly anti-consumer and will do nefarious things (which we already know Samsung does).


And then you won't have a TV, and Samsung will keep making these abusive TVs without giving one single fuck about your return.


So give it a network connection for initial setup then take it away?


So you'll still have all the adverts, they just don't update?


I had to do that. My Samsung couldn’t leave “demo mode” or whatever without going online first and would restart itself every hour. I just let it register and blocked it from coming out my router. It stays quiet like that. I believe removing the wifi showed some nag when booting that I had to deal with. Real scummy stuff.


Buy it from a place with free returns. Then if it insists on showing cached ads after the network is pulled (or any other undesirable behavior), just return it. This won't help you find a better model, but it will save you from needing to research these obscure details in too much depth.

. o O ( I wonder if some hostile antifeatures go away if you buy a TV in the US but then activate it from an EU IP address ).


> they just don't update?

That's a cursed scenario...


Run it through pihole to block the ad networks? Or just whitelist hostnames/addresses one by one until the setup works.

Not exactly a user-friendly option, but an option nonetheless.


Annoying, but at least it isn't feeding your information in to the weird ad-driven panopticon (we'll leave that to the content providers!)


dns block it at the router


Yeah I was afraid my new TV would do that. I was planning to return it if it did because I had bad experience with Vizio and TCL smart TVs breaking updates before (I'm an Apple TV user).

I can confirm that Roku firmware works great without the internet and doesn't nag. I just turn it on and switch to my Apple TV.


I cant find a source, but I remember a discussion here on a brand of smart tvs that still phone home by connecting to other nearby smart tvs that are connected to a network, even if you don't connect yours to the network.


It was Samsung TVs that will automatically connect to any open Wifi nearby to get their ads updated, even if you tell it not to.


Really? Source? Which models?

I just bought a Samsung 4K TV a month ago. I didn't connect it to wi-fi or do any setup. I just plugged my computer in.

I have not seen any ads. It seems to work fine offline in all respects.

If it actually did this I would definitely return the TV.

In case it matters it was this Q60A "QLED" 43 inch 4K TV: https://www.bestbuy.com/site/samsung-43-class-q60a-series-ql...


Can't find a better source since the subreddit where I got the info is now private for some reason: https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/bpr6xs/if_you_choo...

Basically Samsung TVs at least used to grab any open Wifi to connect to if you don't provide them with credentials to your own. Also there is no way to fully disable the wifi.

The solution was to set the connection to manual configuration and set all addresses to 0.0.0.0.

Of course this is not an issue if the only network your TV can see is your own, more of a problem in apartments where there might be 20 wireless networks available at any time.


I got this exact same model today. Never gonna connect it to wifi anyway, seemed perfect.


HDMI cables now come with 10/100 Ethernet built in. So it could connect via your devices connection.

So pay attention to the hdmi cable you use.


There are no receivers on the market that act as HDMI Ethernet network switches.


Are there any examples of TVs doing this, or is this just a hypothetical?

There are some TVs that will try to connect to the internet via non-obvious means (Samsung TVs were mentioned elsewhere in this thread). TV manufacturers aren't spy agencies though. They're not going to put in that much effort to sneak an internet connection, when most users willingly connect their TVs to WiFi anyway. If I can't find an article about a given TV sneaking in an internet connection, I would be pretty confident that it doesn't.


> They're not going to put in that much effort to sneak an internet connection,

The profit from collecting data on you and displaying ads on the TV is greater than the profit from the sale of the TV.

They absolutely will go to whatever lengths they can.

https://www.cnet.com/news/as-smart-tvs-become-the-only-optio...

https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/10/22773073/vizio-acr-adver...


I've been looking for years and I have yet to find any systems (TV, receiver, or injector) which actually take advantage of this feature.


They have been for a while. But are these actually used for IP connectivity? If that was the case, a laptop’s HDMI port should show up as network interface, which it doesn’t, at least not on my machine.


I have a Roku that I block from the internet. It blinks an obnoxious red led to complain it can’t phone home. I need some gaffer’s tape to cover it up I guess.


This is what I did for my TCL Roku TV: just taped over the annoying blinking light.

If enough people do this, I anticipate that in the next model, they'll replace that blinking light with an forced on-screen overlay.


I have a TCL Roku 6-series. If you do a factory reset, and from the start don't let it connect, then you won't get the blinking light.

You only get the blinking light if you take away access after having given it.


I was curious about this -- I've been digging and I can't find a solution, is it possible to tell these things to jump straight to HDMI once you turn them on? Or are you always stuck with at least that one homescreen jump. Trying to make this thing as "dumb" as possible.


If you use any device that correctly uses HDMI CEC, then yes. I only have an Apple TV remote with some cheap Element Amazon TV, and I keep the TV remote taped to the back of the TV. Apple TV and Chromescasts will turn it on, off, and swap source to itself when used. I'd imagine Roku/Firesticks do as well.


Yes, there's an option in Settings to automatically open a specific input on startup.


What is your usecase? Trying to understand the point of having apps without the wifi.

I have noticed a marked increase in youtube ads in the roku app. Prob due to roku has updated itself without permission.

Now i dread having to deal with pihole hacks + routers to fence it out of our home network :/


They said internet, not wifi. Perhaps some Roku apps can play media from your local network? Plex, or a built-in media player?


https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28583761

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28045189


... "don't connect it to the network", means don't connect it to the network, via a Roku-router or wlan or whatever.

Don't buy one with other networks either, if they exist...


I don't buy TVs anymore, I buy monitors.

There's no reason to own a television with a shitty computer built-in, when I can just buy a screen and plug it into my actually good computer.

Right now I have a 27" ThinkVision display and a pair of studio monitors, with both laptop and Switch connected to it. Media comes over the computer (who even buys cable in 2021 anyway?), audio patches into the display over USB-C/HDMI and out to the speakers.

I'm moving soon and I'll probably spring for a 30+" 4K for the living room at some point, and look into a receiver and theatre speakers but honestly I don't see the point.

You do pay a bit more for the display-per-inch, but the reason those "4K smart TVs" are so cheap is all the adware money, so they're only "cheap" in the way that Facebook is "free".


Digital Signage.

https://www.sharpnecdisplays.us/products/displays#1

https://www.samsung.com/us/business/displays/

https://www.lg.com/us/business/digital-signage


Even digital signage is becoming increasingly "smart", although perhaps not in a way that HN would object to. Most of them these days have the ability to display videos and stills from attached storage devices, or stream content from a network address.


In last week's "Ask HN: What’s the best TV to buy?" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29343338 one recommendation was to look for commercial televisions which usually lack the smart features and are build for reliability.


Commercial TV's are coming more and more with smart capabilities. I know LG commercial displays can be equipped with WebOS and Samsung displays come with Tizen, though I don't know how wide spread they are through their commercial product line ups.


> I know LG commercial displays can be equipped with WebOS

It's a real shame to have a TV that runs Linux and can't be used as an X Terminal...


I was asking myself the same question seeing all the recent TV deals. I came to the conclusion it was best to ignore the deals and look at TVs when I can afford to do some in depth research as to which ones have the least intrusive "smart" functionality (eg quick startup to same hdmi input source, rarely needing to interact with the useless menus, and behaves when given a zero-access wifi network or even better with the wifi module removed).

If you're looking for something smaller I'm using a 43 inch 4K monitor, LG 43UD79 / 43MU79, that was around $450. I'm using it as a monitor, but my backup plan was to use it as a TV if I didn't like it as a monitor. It even comes with a simple remote that is better than common TV remotes because it leaves out all the superfluous buttons (its primary up/downs are volume/brightness). They've since discontinued it and the new model is up at $700 though.


Yes, my TV is an LG 55" 4k dumb tv, and I love it. [1]

As I posted in another thread [2] a few days ago:

In Canada, LG's Business site has tvs branded as "Commercial Lite" that are all dumb, and work great. I have a 55" 4k and I enjoy its simple features and minimal remote-control. The only downsides IMO are that it only has two HDMI inputs and it doesn't do HDR. But for $1000 CAD four years ago, I'm still happy with it! I bought mine from CanadaComputers in-store. I don't know if it's as easy to get one nowadays, and I don't know if/how they sell them in the US.

[1] https://www.lg.com/ca_en/business/commercial-lite

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29343338


It's a kind of hackey way of handling this, but what I do is open up the TVs and removing whatever components are required for the WiFi to work.

Sometimes you can just remove the network card easily, but usually the easiest thing to do is find and break the antenna. It's inelegant, and of course the smart features are still there, but it at least reduces or eliminates the tracking crap.


I removed the WiFi card from my LG TV before I first turned it on, it's been great since.

Apparently some TVs are bad at nagging about missing the hardware, so another suggestion would be to add a load or something to the antenna. I forgot what that's called, and at the time, couldn't really find any details online.


It's literally called a dummy load - to the 'lectrics, it acts like an antenna, but it doesn't radiate or receive.


"dummy load", specifically "50 ohm dummy load", because that's the standard impedance of most antennae. (Oddly enough, the TV antenna is engineered for a 75-ohm impedance, but that's beside the point.)

However, even dummy loads radiate a little bit. It's common to test handheld radios a few feet from each other with dummy loads screwed onto the antenna ports, because when you've got 115dB of link margin and your dummy loads are only eating 50dB on each end, that's still plenty!


I seem to recall hearing that certain Google TV’s could be set to dumb mode?

Ah, here it is: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/02/the-best-feature-of-...

> The new Google TV is a fine smart TV interface, but when it gets integrated into some TV sets later this year, its best feature might be that you can turn it off. A report from 9to5Google details an upcoming "Basic TV" mode that will be built into Google TV, which turns off just about all the smart TV features. Right now, Google TV is only available in the new Chromecast, but Google TV will be built into upcoming TVs from Sony and TCL. Basic mode means we'll get smart TVs with a "dumb TV" mode.

> ...

> When the new feature rolls out, you'll be asked to choose between "Basic TV" or "Google TV" at setup. 9to5Google says that with basic mode, "almost everything is stripped, leaving users with just HDMI inputs and Live TV if they have an antenna plugged directly into the TV. Casting support, too, is dropped." The UI notes that you'll be turning off all apps, the Google Assistant, and personalized recommendations.


I wouldn't expect that to stop tracking or inserting ads. Those are the key features for Google products


How would they do these things if you never give the device wifi access?


Built-in cell modem that can only call home?

Also, Amazon and other companies are building out networks of their wifi devices. I assume at some point they will start selling access to other companies. So, even if you decline to set up wifi, the appliance might be able to get online through your neighbor's doorbell.


> Built-in cell modem that can only call home?

Doing that to get around a feature they put in themselves just seems like conspiracy theorizing at that point.


That's now how they will sell it. It will be about ease and convenience. Plug in the TV and it's ready to go! You don't have to go find your wifi password and type it in with the remote. Nobody likes to do that. It would be sold as something they do to make things easier for their customers.


The last time this topic was posted someone posted this link about advertising displays that are 4K with inputs and tuner and no "smart" features: https://www.sharpnecdisplays.us/products/displays#1 .


Only $10K for a 55" display. Hmm


Sceptre has been my favorite. They're not the most-premium brand, but I've been buying them for years for home TVs and they're decent. They do make Android TV models, but they also continue to make non-smart models with 4K and other basic AV bells and whistles: https://www.sceptre.com/TV/4K-UHD-TV-category1category73.htm...


They are not without their drawbacks but you can get an excellent picture quality 4K home theater projector that has none of the ‘smart’ tv features.


+1 for projectors.

Some will laugh at getting 4K resolution and then projecting it on a regular white wall, but honestly, you'll get used to it as you project a much larger image than you'd otherwise get with an lcd. Also, there are special paints you can get - or a retractable screen if you feel the need after testing out the projector.

Note: if it is a room with windows make sure to have decent curtains. It's not as FC v bright as a LCD screen.


The best part is that since they're expensive, niche, and bought mostly by businesses, they will never reach consumer market adoption to the level where adding telemetry and ads makes financial sense.


Do you object to smartness, or to ads in your TV?

RTings maintains a list of smart TVs that are completely ad-free:

https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/ads-in-smart-tv


Thank you for this. It doesn't make much sense to say I don't want a smart TV and then buy a separate device that's just going to show ads anyway.


I've got one, but it's not very good build or panel quality, just a random Chinese brand. It was in the first batch of 4k models, before all the bonus money from spyware pushed dumb displays out of the consumer tv segment.

Your best bet now is to get an industrial display or find a generic driver board that is compatible with the panel from a smart TV and then DIY a smart TV into a dumb one.

On the DIY perks youtube channel, the host builds a water cooled backlight for a 4k panel in order to make an outdoor-capable TV, and he uses one of those generic driver boards for it.


As many people said already in the comments, search for digital signage instead of TV. E.g. https://www.lg.com/us/business/digital-signage


These do not necessarily have the same video processors as actual TVs from the same manufacturers, so you might end up being disappointed in the picture quality, depending on your application.


Right. They are also designed for very different applications. Higher end TVs for consuming movies in a dark room, so black levels are important. On signage peak brightness might be much more important, and black levels or color accuracy might be less so.


Here's a list of LG 4K OLED TV models that professionals use for color grading, 10 bit HDR movie work, etc.: https://www.richardlackey.com/low-budget-davinci-resolve-mon...

You can put those into a special HDMI dumb screen mode using the service remote.


My Sony Bravia is just a couple years old and I just turned off the wifi and watch broadcast and drive it with a mac mini.

I suppose newer systems would use the LAN to update drivers and take over smart functions. If in the US, go by Best Buy and ask them for the remote for the display tv you like and see that it lets you kill internet function. Also that there aren't any always-on apps (or if there are, the menus let you disable them).


I didn't see this mentioned so apologies if it has, but the latest version of Google TV has a 'dumb' mode that has no external services as an option on first setup. There are TVs releasing with Google TV (Android 12) soon.


4K dumb projectors are easy to find. They're not for every room but can give you a great home cinema result while still working for normal TV and games.


Projectors are still a fairly poor substitute for a TV in the same price range, though. Every time I look at them, I'm not happy with the trade offs even if they've been getting better. Most recently it was a combination of price, brightness (HDR) and framerate (VFR, 120Hz).


It depends on what you value. For us it was image size, low noise and good color to get a great cinema experience at night. We couldn't get the same at any reasonable TV price and we also hid it really well so that when it's not on it's just an empty white wall and the room doesn't seem to have a TV at all. It's definitely a tradeoff and not for everyone.


Swedx [1] has really nice, affordable products. I've bought about 5 of them over the last few years.

All of their screens come in a "TV version" with a tuner, and a "monitor version" without one, but are otherwise identical.

The speakers are pretty crappy, but that's to be expected.

(European company, so not sure where they ship to outside the EU)

[1] https://www.swedx.com


Second this.

I have a SwedX FHD or UHD or something screen, not 4K. The remote is simple. The menus are simple. Turning it on could be quicker, but is not horrible. The sound is not great, but functional. It has digital audio out, so I use an external amp and speakers.

The price is quite nice. The lack of any "smart" features even nicer.


Consider Sceptre: https://www.sceptre.com/TV/4K-UHD-TV-category1category73.htm...


Modern Sony Bravia TV’s ask whether you want a “Basic TV” or a “Google TV” when you first set them up.


It's Google TV either way. The setting is for whether you want to neuter any sort of functionality involving the network or not.

That doesn't mean the TV isn't still reporting your viewing habits back to them; it's still running Android, still has a network connection.

Hilariously, they allow you to go back to "smart" Google TV with a click of a button, but going to 'basic' mode requires a full reset.

Oh, and they're petulant about you disabling "smart" functions; you lose chromecast, even though there's no technical reason for it. Probably because it's the only actually useful feature people want if they have an external streaming box.


Chromecast has to be negotiated through the Google cloud service, since Google designed this from day one to lock Chromecast down. Chromecast is largely an anti-feature given how Google designed it to be lock-in.

What's stupid is Android TV means I can run any app I want, and they can't stop me, so Chromecast ends up being a kind of idiotic solution that never quite finished its search of a problem.

As in, I can use Steam Link or Moonlight to become a thin client of a real computer, I can Plex my entire (legal) library, or use any cloud service natively from the device.

All the things I ever really wanted to Chromecast felt like it was a third class citizen compared to the Android TV experience; and I just mean the purely playback part of it, not the client UI part (which Chromecast doesn't, and isn't meant to, have).


Hitachi makes some, I have one and it has been great. Before I found their dumb model I was looking at broadcast monitors which were much more expensive and didn't have TV tuning ability or speakers but checked all of the boxes that I wanted with a screen.


I have a few years old Sony XBR model. I had to factory reset it a few months ago due to it randomly restarting itself after a system update. I just never connected it to the Internet and use an AppleTV and Xbox for streaming and gaming.


Is anyone just opting for a projector instead? How does that work

It is a bit ridiculous that TVs have to be a computer with internet access to sell nowadays, but that’s coming to just about every household appliance.


I have a older projector which I bought used some years ago. It was much bigger than expected (you can't tell the size from the image of it..)

https://www.projectorcentral.com/Mitsubishi-UD8350U.htm

Its 6500 lumens DLP and has 2 bulbs. DLP tech is kinda neat (Its literally a chip with flippable mirrors). but modern projectors are usually laser or led based. New ones have gotten brighter for less money too.

I've used it day to day initially and now mainly to project movies. It does draw a lot of power and it does get warm. They're really best at night or in a dark room and with a proper screen. Basically went back to an flat panel tv for TV watching.

I also ended up getting a HDMI/ audio breakout box, because sometimes we used an appleTV or Roku with it and those don't have audio out and my projector lacks it.

The projector central site I found as a decent source of information, you can even enter a model and see how big it will project. https://www.projectorcentral.com


We got an EPSON 1060 projector, and throw it up on a large blank wall about 20 feet diagonal. 4x4 times bigger than our old TV, bright enough to move it down from the default setting. Has two HDMI ports so might want to get a box to add some more; need to get a good soundbar (built-in projector speakers are abysmal).

Not sure I would buy it again, but sure can't live without it.


Projector + HDHomeRun. Amazing. It’s like having a 96” TV for under 800$ Cad.


Not that I know of, there are however 4K 'digital signage' displays which are an industrial product. They are the monitors you see in kiosks etc. Be prepared to pay a pretty penny for them however. The last time I checked a 65" digital signage display was roughly 5x the cost of a similarly sized television.

Also note they may have an HDMI implementation that is 'cheap' and doesn't implement the CLEC protocols or HDCP so you may have to jump through hoops to drive them from a PC with commercial content.


>The last time I checked a 65" digital signage display was roughly 5x the cost of a similarly sized television.

The question then is why would any company pay 5x for a device without smart functionality? Does that mean there's now a market for buying smart TVs, stripping out the "smart" tech, and reselling at, say, a 4x markup?


Perhaps, the signage market is generally targeted to equipment that needs to be rather durable and live in a wider temperature range. So typically they have better power supplies, steel rather than aluminum frames, and in the case of LED back lights a longer lasting LED (typically by under driving it IIRC).

That said, I think there is solid market for "monitors" which are just the display and an industry standard interface.

Sometimes you can get a "tunerless" TV which has fewer smarts.


One thing that I end up relying on fairly often as part of my day job is Hotel Mode - https://factory-reset.com/wiki/Category:Hotel_Mode - most likely it will be of use to a lot of you who just want to lock the set to one particular input and have it function as a dumb monitor.

Give me a shout if anyone needs a hand accessing it - or wants to know what some of the set specific features are.


For those who don't require 4K, I was able to find a 1080p "dumb" TV from the Insignia brand at Best Buy. All their 4K models are smart though, unfortunately.


Stuff is scary. I feel like at some point we'll ask same question but for HDMI etc cables..


You should be asking that about the cables already.


No, they no longer exist. TV manufacturers have correctly determined that data mining is actually far more profitable than just selling panels. It's gone from smart TVs being a value added feature to being something that subsidizes the cost of the display itself to the consumer through advertising. There's a huge race now to win the smart TV OS market that is driving companies like Roku to massive valuations based on that.


I like using an ultra-short throw projector onto a nice big projector screen. You can get whatever resolution you'd like with a super big screen size. They're pretty expensive though [1].

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Theatre-Projector-Lumens-Soundbar-Ins...


Telefunken as brand is a safe bet if you can find in stores close to you.

They are mostly built in Turkey now, but they are pretty decent and don't include bloatware


This question comes up again and again and the sad answer is still:

Buy the best TV for the money (which will be smart), then don’t connect it to the internet. It will be better and so much cheaper than trying to get a dumb TV that you could get a new one if - against all odds - its dormant smart features become an issue. And you’ll likely have money to spare.

Sure, if you are paranoid you can’t be sure it doesn’t connect to open Wi-Fi or even contains it’s own radio hardware - but let’s face it, so could a “dumb” screen. If you are extremely cautious you can likely disable radio hardware via hidden service menus or worst case physically.

Computer screens or commercial screens sadly don’t offer the processing you want for broadcast TV (Which these days is a lot a about upscaling and smoothing poor video). If you watch high quality streaming you’ll want the latest HDR standards.

So your best bet for a dumb tv is a smart one without internet and just ignore that it connects to the neighbors phone via BT, shows an ad (that it shipped with), or pesters you about letting it connect to the internet.


anyone remember the XMBC project from twenty years ago? Rooting Xboxes and replacing the OS with a slick custom media player OS?

I find it a little remarkable that there isn't a similar "scene" built around lobotomizing smart TVs. The desire is obviously there, and surely rooting Android isn't terribly hard. The OS's for smart TVs are barely maintained.


Bought 55" Sceptre about 2 years ago, still works extremely well. Sceptre was the only "dumb" tv maker that I could find https://www.sceptre.com/TV/4K-UHD-TV-category1category73.htm.... Some outdoor tv makers provide some but not a decent indoor viewing experience. Downside with Sceptre is their stock on the website is out at the moment. I've seen Walmart's occasionally carry them dependent on size your looking for in stores just depends on what part of country your in just keep your eyes out. Buyer beware though, you will want to pickup a sound bar/ set of speakers as their built in ones are tinny , but is usable. Not going to mention the other options as appears comments have covered them, good luck


How about the shitty Sceptre specials from Walmart?

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Sceptre-50-Class-4K-UHD-LED-TV-U5...

> Let's you view your pictures as a slideshow or listen to your favorite music via the USB port. Just insert your flash drive into the USB port for the ultimate entertainment.

I'm pretty sure this is the one I have. But even if it's not, the fact they're advertising playing music via USB flash as the "ultimate entertainment" tells me this is not a smart tv.

Enjoy.

Edit: Oops, looks like it's out of stock. But you can probably find others if you just look for the shittiest 4k you can find. (You'll probably need to wait a bit as black friday probably annihilated the stock in this class of dumb tv.)


https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/gigabyte/aorus-fo48u-... - Looking out for tv panels attached to "gaming" monitors might be a route.


Last year I bought a Proscan 55" 4k dumb TV. Maybe you can find one of them? My review: it's fine.


What is the "startup time" like? Meaning how long it takes to go from poweroff/standby to displaying the signal.


A couple second I guess? There's a blue PROSCAN screen that turns on first. Is that something people worry about? I guess if I was going to watch 30 seconds of TV, waiting 10 seconds would be something I'd consider important.


I use a TCL 6 series and never connected it to the internet. It's pretty dumb. I don't think it can do anything beyond whats possible with the inbuilt Roku software. And it can't dial back home or receive commands because no internet access.


Just don't connect it! LG OLED screens, at least, don't /require/ network connection and aren't yet proactively connecting to any open wifi or have an built-in 4G connection.

Far easier to just not use the smart features than try to find a dumb tv.


I bought a 55" Sceptre 4k "dumb" TV about 2 years ago still works great, bought it directly from manufacturer website. Only manufacturer I could find making them other than some outdoor tvs (not recommended for indoor viewing use). Monitors could be viable but pricing goes up steeply with size of course. Downside with Sceptre is their website is out of stock at moment, I've heard that Walmart in some areas carries them occasionally on their website / in stores dependent on what part of country your in, just gotta keep looking. Buyer beware though if you get one, you will want to pickup a set of speakers or sound system as speakers are usable but tinny.


There are, and they are more expensive. I gave in a while back and started buying "Toshiba Fire TV" because it costs about half as much as a comparable model that does not advertise to me. It's a tradeoff I'm only moderately OK with.


There's a lot of info already in here but I just wanted to mention that TVs specifically for "Commercial" or "Signage" tend to not screw around with all that nonsense.

You will absolutely pay a premium for that though.


I recently opted for Sony Google TV because at least I can trace where my stuff is going with Google. Also it’s hard to find a capable 4K120Hz devices so you’re pretty much stuck with in-device apps to get the best quality.


Recent thread (~300 comments) on open-source firmware for smart TVs: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29338658


More important than resolution would be the type of panel the tv had. A good panel will change the way the picture looks dramatically. High quality panels the image will look like it floats off the screen.


You can disable Smart TV telemetry though something like pihole/nextdns


If they phone home using a dedicated IP, then no, that won't disable telemetry.


If there's a hardcoded IP addy you just blackhole it through the firewall on said pihole?


For users in the US, Sceptre.com has a good catalog of "dumb" TVs; unfortunately it seems we don't have anything similar in the EU.

Look also for used signage monitors; they're built for heavy work, from 18/7 to 24/7, and used ones would last more than new consumer TVs anyway. Be aware however that some of them have already been plagued by Android and other "smart" features. Samsung has however some smart models using the Tizen OS, which is Linux based and potentially more open to hacking if compared to Android.


The best Smart TV alternative I've seen so far is probably this 55" gaming monitor from Philips [1]. The previous model (558M1RY) could be also an option if you don't care about HDMI 2.1. At least on paper it ticks a lot of boxes, but there are not many reviews online and it might not be easy to get your hands on one.

[1] https://www.usa.philips.com/c-p/559M1RYV_27/momentum-4k-hdr-...


Worth considering a projector, most of them are still "dumb". A model with decent brightness and a good fixed screen you can have a true theater at home for similar price to a higher end TV.


I bought this commercial LED TV from Samsung that I thought was dumb, https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1573435-REG/samsung_l... but it seems it has the same OS as other TV's. However it starts up real fast and is not connected to the internet at all. A menu across the bottom appears for a few seconds at startup but then goes away.


Walmart sells 4K RCA dumb TVs. The UI is slow and clunky but I rarely have reason to use the UI for anything. It has no apps and doesn't connect to anything other than video and audio sources. The picture quality looks fine to me but I'm not all that particular about such things. The audio is passable but you'll probably want a receiver or a sound bar. There is a USB port but it doesn't appear to do anything. You can't play videos or anything from USB. It's about as dumb as you can get these days.


Never buy Samsung products.


If you use a regular (smart) TV just as a HDMI-out and watch everything through a connected streaming player e.g Apple TV, Chromecast, Roku...how many of these problems could one avoid?


So if you just use the HDMI port, does the smarttv know what is going through the HDMI port?

A smart tv with no internet connection that only uses its HDMI ports is a dumb tv, isn't it?


Yeah, that works for several models. I do it with my slightly older Samsung to make it dumb.

Unfortunately, many manufacturers are now forcing you to stay connected to WiFi to use the TV. “TV phone home!”


Dumb TVs would cost more because availability of smart functionality earns manufacturer subsidizes from various streaming services while the cost of extra hardware is really low (you can get streaming sticks for under $50). Just don't connect to network and enjoy getting a nicer TV for your money. Also on Android-based TVs you can disable any unwanted apps through ADB or install a privacy-enhancing firewall, so that's one middle option.


I have an LG NanoCell. It has "smart" features, but you don't have to set any of it up and it doesn't nag you to do so. It runs WebOS because that's how it runs the UI for the remote, which you need to change inputs. Yeah, it has a bunch of other whiz-bang features but like I said, I don't have any of that setup. I'm happy that it's content to let me use it as a dumb TV and stay out of my way.


A monitor + external TV tuner (and perhaps a HDMI switch)


Just don't let it connect to the internet. I have a lot of firewall rules to block my TV off, but you can also just literally turn off the features.


My experience with an LG panel was it slowing down to wait for network requests that would never complete and asking for wifi every time it was turned back on. I just use a projector now; it's a dumber, bigger screen (and as a plus it encourages me to limit screen time to after dark for better picture quality)


I was getting sick of my TV nagging about a firmware update that I didn't want to do, so I used Access Restrictions on my router to block it from accessing anything outside my LAN.

That was a good solution for me because I can still use the inbuilt apps for playing local media from my NAS, but no possibility of firmware "upgrades", ads or firmware "upgrades" that include ads.


Look in to the hospitality line of NEC, LG & Samsung which costs a little more but are universally dumb. Lots of input options, but none of the smart features or network connectivity unless you actively plug an ethernet cable in to the ethernet port that some of the models have which permit you to control the TV or send video over TCP.

I have a 4K Dell 55" which is really a Samsung panel.


Given the number of people in this thread who care about this stuff: does anyone have firsthand experience with the LG C1 when it comes to privacy, ads, dark patterns, forcing a WiFi connection, etc?

Been eyeing it as one of the better displays available right now

Fwiw I don't mind on-screen menus for even basic functions like some people seem to; I just don't want it doing anything nefarious


For the USAnians, make very sure to buy a TV with a "NextGen TV" (ATSC 3.0) tuner. Actual 4K over-the-air broadcasts are rolling out across the U.S. now, and this industry website lists current and future markets: https://www.watchnextgentv.com/


Iron cast TV aims at exactly this market.

In my recollection HN wasn’t impressed when they hit the front page

https://displayy.studio/ironcast.tv/

https://displayy.studio/ironcast.tv/


Doesn't look like you can actually purchase anything from them yet.


I keep mine disconnected from WiFi, and I connect it to Ethernet maybe once a year just to see if there's a firmware update, then I disconnect it.

I have an Ethernet to WiFi bridge that is already configured on my wireless network, so I don't need to pull an Ethernet cable all the way, and the TV never knows the network passphrase.


Try Sceptre 65" 4K UHD LED TV, or Samsung QB65R.

I have started to see first industrial then consumer devices with embedded SIM cards towards the end of 2000. They were soldered in, now mostly socketed. To access them, the device had to be disassembled, and connect SPI header.

No average consumer will think to or able to disable or avoid using that.


You can buy a hospitality/healthcare TVs. They are quite a bit expensive and harder to find. I buy directly from LG.

New latest one comes with an Ethernet port. If you connect to internet will communicate with the mothership. I had extra that I hooked up to the internet and can see pining lg.com everyday after midnight.


You can simply connect them to the internet then disconnect them. Change the WiFi SSID or password id necessary.


Why connect them in the first place?


Firmware updates, changes to post processing, motion processing, fald backlighting software, enhanced gaming features.


USB does that too


The question was "why connect?" and I gave a reason why you might connect despite not using the smarts.


I have the Hisense 65U8G, it's not a dumb TV, but you don't have to hook it up to the internet and it has a physical switch to turn off the microphone. Otherwise according to my research it's about the best TV you can get for around $1000, or at least it was this summer.


Smart TV's are pretty silly; why would I install all my apps and logins on something attached to wall in one place? Smack in the middle of the age of mobile computing?

You can put your streaming box into your pocket and take it anywhere where there is a HDMI panel. For instance, when there is no pandemic, you can take it to a hotel room in another country. Depending on geographic restrictions, you can view all your regular content.

One thing that is very important to me is that my livingroom streaming box has its own audio out. Bluetooth would be okay; in my case, I use a 1/8" jack: even better. That goes straight to a stereo amp.

What this lets me do is turn off the TV while listening to audio-only material, like music. The streaming box doesn't care that the TV is off; it keeps streaming audio to the speakers. Once I introduced this practice, my wife takes advantage of it all the time, to play music for the kids without the distracting screen.

Can smart TV's do this at all? Completely power down everything related to the screen, but keep audio going?


Ironcast TV is probably the closest thing https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/iron-cast-tv/your-next-...


There's a German manufacturer called Medion [0] who offers some "dumb" TVs without any smart features. Not sure if you can buy their products in the US though

[0]: https://www.medion.com


I seem to remember that one drawback of trying for a monitor plus soundbar setup (which has tempted me from time to time) was splitting modern HDMI inputs. Can anyone speak to these issues as they stand today (to the extent that I’ve not misremembered)?


Most TVs have an ARC (audio return channel) labeled HDMI input which sends the sound back. I connected my smart TV to my receiver via the ARC HDMI port, and it sends sound back to the receiver; and I can select inputs from the receiver from my TV's remote.


For literally trying to make a dumb TV out of a monitor and sound bar https://www.amazon.com/OREI-HDA-912-Audio-Converter-Extracto...

If you want actual OTA TV on your dumb TV https://www.amazon.com/ViewTV-ATSC-Digital-Converter-Clear/d...

If you have many sources consider https://www.amazon.com/Output-Switch-Switcher-Support-Contro... or getting a receiver instead of all the above (more costly).

If you want to make your own smart TV look at the Shield TV with a USB TV Tuner, the extractor is probably still best for the sound bar in that case.


These all look good, thanks! I basically just want Chromecast/Apple TV or equivalent in an HDMI port, as high quality as possible with no weird latency issues between video and audio. I don’t mind paying for a good panel, I just don’t like the software and the slow boot times.


I'd definitely go the Nvidia Shield TV (2019) route, I use one for exactly that. It is a tiny box that runs Android TV (which includes Chromecast functionality plus the ability to run apps local) and even the original 2015 model is still getting updates. For control it comes with a hardware remote or you can use your phone or you can cast to it. Supports 4K HDR10, Dolby Vision, and Dolby Atmos as well as full DRM support for Netflix/Amazon/Hulu/etc allowing it to actually receive the 4k versions (or you can just use the Plex app if that's your thing or VLC for local files).

That extractor will passthrough whatever the output is and break out the audio to SPDIF for your soundbar.

Overall it's on the more powerful side and has full hardware acceleration so weird latency issues but you'll want to match the audio offset in the Android TV settings to whatever the display latency of your monitor of choice is to get the audio/video timing to perfectly match (supports both positive and negative offsets in case your soundbar has its own latency problems).


Not many, but this might help if you want to search for solutions like Sceptre: https://helpatmyhome.com/best-non-smart-tv/


https://www.samsung.com/us/business/displays/4k-uhd/


my bravia is so dumb it's got a 100Mbps ethernet port, and the USB port is USB 2.0 so the best wifi is bounded by USB2.0! yay.

I think they just don't want people stream high bitrate stuff directly


I looked and couldn't find any. If anybody feels like making a trip to Shenzen, I think there's a huge (well, Framework-big) market for high-quality dumb TVs and other devices.


I have a NEC(now Sharp-NEC) C651Q. Other than not letting me stick the newest of Raspberry Pi Compute Module inside it and not supporting HDMI ARC it's a wonderful display.


Look for TVs using the keywords “signage” and “commercial” and you’ll have better luck. They are notably more expensive than smart TVs since they can’t sell your data.


Alternatively, are there any secret menu options that can make a smart TV dumb? My TV has advanced service menus that I never explored fully.


Your best choice is a PC monitor. It'll cost ALOT more, but it'll also be higher spec, and perform better.

Another option is a projector.


Dell's new 32" 8K monitor looks really nice, if I had an extra $3,750 lying around.


I just never use any of the smart features...


One approach is to buy a smart TV and remove the controller board. Get a new control board (sometimes called a scaler, since that's its main function) with only the functions you need. These are available mostly on aliexpress, if you punch in the display panel part number and the word "board". Expect to pay about $90-150 for a 4k board.

This isn't the best option, and it's a giant pain in the ass, but it's very effective.


You may have to consider a projector.


I'm considering buying a projector for this reason, and because I don't want a tuner.


https://nogis.at/


I have a dirt-cheap TCL 43S425 and have never plugged it into the internet. Works great.


What parts can you modify/remove to make a Smart TV dumb? i.e. WiFi card


I posted above - if you have an LG tv it's pretty straightforward to disconnect the Wifi Module - instructions are here:

https://www.theraffon.net/spookcentral/tcp/2019/07/10/lg-sma...

I'm not the most technical guy in the world and I was able to do it pretty easily, took about 30 minutes.


Yes, I got one but it’s a commercial grade weather proof TV sunbritetv.com


Yes, Signage.

I for one will stay on Smart screens, but never another Samsung again.


Yes, expensive but indeed dumb commercial displays for offices.


Cant you just get a smart TV and never connect it to wifi?


Can you trust it?


You may be able to disable non-GDPR TVs by telling whoever is in the support phone line that you are a citizen of an EU country (lying may work) and that you don't agree with any such abuse of your private information.

I also strongly suggest voiding the warranty and disconnecting the wi-fi antenna. That's usually easy.

Dell has a 43" 4K monitor that, with a soundbar, can probably be a reasonable TV, but it lacks a tuner. It's, however, 3x as expensive as an average Smart TV from a rent-a-brand like JVC. Mine (5 yo, FHD) has an ethernet jack but all it ever did was getting an IP address from the DHCP server and nothing else, ever. There hasn't been any traffic for a month or so, before I just disconnected it and reused the cable for a small cluster.


can't you just not connect the tv to wifi when you set it up? It'll still have the useless UI but at least it won't be able to spy on you


What’s the difference between a “TV” and a “monitor”?


Just don't connect the TV to the internet


I've had this same thought.

Dumb thought...DD-WRT for TVs?


why not just leave the tv off the network?


search for "hospitality displays"


Samsung QB65R 65 inch 4K UHD LED Commercial Signage Display

https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B07V9ZYV7Q?psc=1&th=1&linkCode=gs2&...

Here are a couple of past threads on the topic.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29343338

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24666968


One workaround is to just never set up wifi on the tv, then they really can't do anything. That is what I've done at home.


Why don't people like their Smart TVs? I've had a 4k smart TV for years and love it. Being able to stream without needing my phone is great.

It seems ironic that people are complaining about smart TV ads while the [2] link in the OP has an absolutely MASSIVE video ad that takes up 2/3s of the screen.

And it's not like you're not being tracked when you stream from a Roku stick / Chromecast.

Edit: I have a 4k Samsung that isn't laggy and in general is a very good experience.


Soo..

[1] Having an ad on a web page about concerns with Smart TVs is not the same as the TV manufacturer selling ads on your TV. For one, it's just one more opportunity for the TV to fail. My smart TV won't load its' UI enough for me to select an HDMI input if it can't connect to the internet.

[2] Again, there are levels of tracking. I don't know about Roku, but I imagine when you use one, you have tracking from Netflix while watching Netflix, Hulu while watching Hulu, etc.. At least, this is my expectation of my Apple TV. If you're streaming to a Chromecast, you can limit what it sends to Google.

[2] None of this has to do with the fact that a manufacturer can apparently brick your TV remotely, and while this is meant as an anti-theft measure, it's pretty easy for them to accidentally include your valid serial # in a CSV or whatever. I'd imagine un-bricking it is very difficult, if even practically possible.

All in all, over several years of having Smart TVs, I've still not ditched my Apple TV or Chromecast, and I find that both tend to give me higher quality, though I expected the inverse by avoiding dependence on an HDMI cable.

Smart TVs are also amongst the most notoriously poorly updated smart devices, and over time this becomes a risk to your entire home network.


Many/most of the built-in interfaces of smart TVs are slow, buggy, and ad/tracker-ridden and have a limited upgrade path, if any.

Since there are effectively no dumb TVs on the market anymore, I bought a fancy Sony TV with AndroidTV built-in, hoping that'd it'd be decent enough to use out of the box. Nope. Slow, laggy, and some of the big name streaming apps from the app store just plain don't work.

Also when the TV updated itself it broke HDMI-CEC for a good couple months before another update fixed it. Screw that.

Bought an AppleTV and it's been great. Unplugged the SmartTV from the network and treat it as a dumb TV now.

Yes I know AppleTV is tracking me, too, but at least the user experience is great with no ads.


> Many/most of the built-in interfaces of smart TVs are slow, buggy, and ad/tracker-ridden and have a limited upgrade path, if any.

And many of the cheap dumb TVs have shitty audio and often break or burn in after short enough periods of time.

If you buy a cheap smart TV I don't expect it to be a great experience, just like I don't expect a cheap dumb TV to provide a good experience.

With smart or dumb TVs, you get what you pay for like anything else. I've had a mid-range Samsung for years without issue.


I recently bought the latest Sony OLED and find that AndroidTV works just fine for netflix/hulu/hbo/apple/etc...


Always-on spyware that can brick your TV at any moment due to discontinued services you didn't consent. None of this hardware is useful for 90+% of TV purchasers, they're plugging it into an existing device and never using any self-hosted features, so it is just an added cost that only benefits advertisers and state sponsored actors.


Because it's cheap to replace a roku/chromecast as technology evolves, but TVs tend to be longer-term investments. Hating smart TVs is akin to hating cars that have built-in factory navigation systems. Content streaming devices/services (and mapping/navigation/music for cars) regularly evolve/change with the fast pace of technology and the Internet, while TVs and Cars are hardware you hang onto for a long period of years. You don't want outdated tech baked into your hardware forever, especially tech built in by companies that don't specialize in that stuff to begin with.


If you want to buy a Google or Roku anyway, why wouldnt you buy the appropriate tv with it built in, and THEN upgrade in 3-5 years when the smarts arent as bright anymore? Are people really expecting a 4 year end of life software upgrade to disable the hdmi ports? You might be able to find a one off freak occurrence, but thats not regular practice.

Everyone buying a Spectre/Insignia to avoid smarts is getting a considerably worse picture quality (which I would think is almost number one TV criteria after size) in exchange for nothing.

People could look at TV OS as a differentiating factor, not a burden. Make picking your OS your first choice, and find the best panel at budget within that category.


One thing you're forgetting is that smart TVs are much cheaper because the cost is subsidized by the apps, software, and ads. This is why many of these "dumb TVs" aren't hundreds of dollars cheaper than their smart cousins.

In my opinion it doesn't matter if outdated software is "baked into your hardware forever" because all I have to do is disable the Internet settings, and plug in a roku/chromecast just like you would on your dumb TV. Difference is my subsidized TV cost way less. In terms of value over time (which is what I assume you meant by calling it an investment) a smart TV makes way more sense even if you don't use the smart features.


Ideally your right, but major stream platforms aren’t available on many smart TVs. Apps aren’t updated. The TV is slow, like really slow. Press the Netflix button on my two year old Philips TV and prepare to wait. Other than being slow, the apps are just worse.

The AppleTV is the minimum I accept, and non of the TV make are able to produce anything that comes close.

We hate Smart TVs because the manufactures make shitty software.


> Ideally your right, but major stream platforms aren’t available on many smart TVs. The TV is slow, like really slow. Press the Netflix button on my two year old Philips TV and prepare to wait. Other than being slow, the apps are just worse.

Besides ads and tracking, there seems to be a trend: People on here are buying shitty TVs and complaining that they're shitty.

If you buy a cheap TV, you can't expect it to be good. Dumb or smart.


> And it's not like you're not being tracked when you stream from a Roku stick / Chromecast.

Believe it or not, there are ways to deliver content to a display that don't involve Roku, Chromecast, or any other instrumented "platform".

From the baseline of a society already saturated with ads, I don't think there's anything unusually evil about giving people the choice to share analytics/see ads in exchange for lower hardware prices. But when that choice is obfuscated or taken away entirely, and it becomes difficult or impossible to buy hardware that doesn't spy on you and/or hijack your attention, I see that as a big problem. It's one more step along the road to a world where consumers simply don't have access to general-purpose computer technology.


I mean, I think the why is answered in [1]. I think a lot of people like being in control of what goes on their network. For those who care about personal network security I imagine there's a big desire to not have a blob of closed source code sitting on (or anywhere near) their home network, or for that matter, their corporate network.

Also smart features on most TVs feel like they are fairly slow and seem to get in the way of using the TV as a device driven by a media stick etc. If I've decided that I only want to use an Apple TV (or Roku, or FireTV or my L33z plex client running on a Raspberry Pi), then I don't want to have to wait for my TV to load and boot its own network stack and pile of applications.


> Why don't people like their Smart TVs?

The reason why people don't like smart TV's is in literally every other comment on this post: we don't like ads and other data collection activities TV manufacturers are pushing on us. Is that not obvious?

> It seems ironic that people are complaining about smart TV ads while the [2] link in the OP has an absolutely MASSIVE video ad that takes up 2/3s of the screen.

For the life of me I can't understand why I should dismiss my TV automatically downloading uninstallable apps and unmovable icons in prime UI real estate, serving ads and generally being a menace because there are ads in one dudes link on the internet.


Even running the site's proprietary software (javascript) on that [2] link, I still don't see this "MASSIVE video ad that takes up 2/3s of the screen". Likely because everything else in my computing environment is Free software, which fosters user-representing extensions such as ad blocking that do their best to remove such hostile garbage. If I'm spending ~thousand dollars on a TV display, the last thing I want is it being locked to some proprietary environment where user-representing functionality has been discouraged or even outright prohibited.


Sure, but the hypothetical effortful version of myself that actually puts his money where his mouth is would play content he owns from a Linux machine. If that guy ever shows up, it'd be cool to have a TV he could use.


Who says I'm using a Roku? My defanged smart TV has a computer (and a Shield that only runs Kodi) attached to it.

Many of us still have large personal media libraries. Samrt TVs do nothing for that.


> Many of us still have large personal media libraries.

You are a massively small minority if you're mostly using personal media libraries as your entertainment on your TV.


Most anyone in their mid-thirties or older who were computer literate 10-15 years ago cultivated some kind of media library. To say nothing of (ongoing) iTunes/Amazon/Beatport/Junodownload/Bandcamp/etc purchases delivered as mp3 or losslessly, or all the random bootlegs on Soundcloud or blogs, or piracy.

Minority, sure. But "massively"? Like, who is your demographic? Gen Z?


Look, I think it’s a legitimate question, and I’m not thrilled about most “smart” TV operating systems. But why pigeonhole your search like this? You will almost certainly end up with a worse actual display, which is what you’re spending the money on in the first place. Just buy a nice panel and disable as much of the smarts as you can—-it’ll be fine. Android TV is the best option out there, in my opinion; and it’s what Sony’s run (the best panels out there).

If you buy something marketed as a monitor, it will have no (or terrible) audio, and you will struggle to find something in the >=65” class. I think it’s a fine option for a spare TV, but it doesn’t cut it for the living room.

I get why HN hates smart TV’s, but unfortunately the ship has sailed. I’d rather have a nice TV than be an activist, gotta choose your battles.


If you would spend $20 more on a dumb device, spend that on a wifi router just for the TV - plug an ethernet cable into the TV's port, feed the credentials of a new network to the TV, whatever -- and don't connect that to the Internet. Put a label on it.

Now you have a smart TV which can whine all it wants, but can't phone home.


Is it a battle? Or is it 45 minutes of google searching and reading an HN thread.

Vote with your dollars every time you can.


If you’d buy any TV after searching for only 45 minutes, we’re just different types of consumers. Which is fine! But I really like A/V, and I care primarily about the audio and visuals, not so much the politics of the thing.


For some people, a TV that doesn't actively view its owner as an adversary is a "nicer TV" than one that does.


My Bravia runs Android TV, which I legitimately have not seen even one frame of in over 2 years. There is a spectrum of the kind of thing you’re describing. I wouldn’t buy a Samsung for that reason. But it’s not like all smart TV’s are dystopian.


I put a premium on my time to find and disable all the features I don't want, (especially with reports of things like the Samsung TVs connecting to any open wifi without being configured to do so), so I don't mind spending extra to avoid this.

If I don't vote with my wallet how can I hope to be able to buy what I want in the future?


It's not even an issue of "picking your battles" or "voting with your wallet".

Whatever your position, OP is justified in not wanting (and looking for an alternative to) a potential surveillance device in their home.


As I said, I think it’s a fair question. But having shopped for a TV in the last 18 months, you get a worse TV if “dumb” is your goal. I mean the giant colorful thing showing your content is worse, in the products without smarts. It is what it is.


Smart TVs also take a lot longer to start up than dumb ones.


I’ve seen what you’re describing, but it’s far from universal. Most TV’s (like monitors) primarily exist in a standby mode and light up within a second or two, especially at the upper end of the market.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: