For over the last 30 some years I have made TV’s invisible in my home by not having any of the goddam things in my possession. I have always had issue with paying for some stupid plastic box that lies to me about anything and everything…that’s the job for politicians. And now the damn things potentially spy on you??? Sorry, books, imagination and frequent trips to the jungle keep me amused.
2 Likes
Had some thoughts and went a googling…
Samsung says ambient display mode will cost $1 for three hours (depending on brightness level, so double or tripple actual over manufacterer marketing) Comparatively a year’s worth of a smartphone, laptop, and tablet charging will cost $10.
Samsung’s marketing research “proves” that everyone hates the way tvs look in their living space and then they gush about they have solved the issue. I have a suspicion this whole thing is more about morphing the TV into an always on device (if its not already).
4 Likes
It adjusts to lighting conditions, that’s the smart bit I think.
Even worse, the wall where I would put something like this has a mirror. OTOH, it might be fun trying to convince visitors that they cast no reflection.
5 Likes
Books can lie to you as well.
True but they are easier to throw, rip apart and cleaner burning.
If he read more books (like, say Don Quixote, or the works of Plato), he’d probably realize that his “this new media is toxic and bad, not like the trusty old media I grew up with!” kids-these-days shtick has been crusty and wrong for literally millennia.
Also, unless he somehow posted his comment from a book, he clearly owns a screened device, which means, functionally-speaking, he owns a TV, and is therefore either self-deluded or a lying hypocrite.
1 Like
Back in the day (late 90s, using macromedia director), there was a purely digital version of this trick that we used to exploit.
When you were starting up an application, you could take a screenshot of the desktop before your application started running. Then, if you run in fullscreen and show that image as your background, you could make it appear as though your application was partly transparent, or had transcended the limitations of rectangular borders. When I first found out how the trick was done, it kind of blew my mind
Heck, we just used to take screenshots of the desktop, set it as the background, and then hide all of the actual icons so you couldn’t click on any of them. Drove people bonkers.
8 Likes
No TV, huh? Now I understand why the lady from Latam Airlines is so interested in your typical day.
She’s jealous.
1 Like
Of course all the YouTube videos recorded in portrait would still be letterboxed. Bleak future indeed.
not if you get off your lazy ass and move the tv once in a while, like a normal person!
1 Like
In electricity? That seems high.
Unless they are metering the ambient display mode itself?? That is nuts if so.
One cent would be closer, I think. But seeing as most walls are plain off-white, the picture is going to be pretty boring.
You know those blue stripes on toothbrush bristles that are designed to fade, so that you don’t inadvertently compromise your oral health by using a worn brush?
Blue subpixels are like that; but for your immersive entertainment experience.
1 Like
Yahoo answers, luckily, has us covered on the mirror case.
(Though, given the increasing odds that the telescreen comes with a camera; some of them probably could do a mediocre (limited resolution, slight input lag); but better-enough-to-be-surprising imitation of a mirror on part of the ‘wall’. Any such models would, one suspects, also include the option to make it either a ‘snapchat’ or a ‘whatsapp’(depending on vendor relationships at the time) mirror that applies a filter to all ‘reflections’ before displaying them.)
i saw an ad for this the other day and couldn’t believe that such a pointless and stupid gimmick actually make it to market. If there was a large blank wall in my house then i would hang a picture on it, so a traditional wallpaper image is a far better option than just a photo of an empty wall. I also get the impression that the kind of person who would spend a massive amount of money on a QLED tv would want to show it off, not make it virtually invisible
No kidding. That’s $8/day with the set off, $2920 per year. There are much better ways to contribute to global warming.
I haven’t been able to find the place where Samsung says it, but apparently they mean electricity consumption.
https://www.the-ambient.com/features/samsung-2018-tvs-qled-style-smart-things-474
Keeping my gaming PC on all the time, and using it for light work 6 days a week (I RDP into my work laptop for work), it costs me 60 a month. That’s less than a buck per three hours. Now that’s the suburban electricity rates for my area; I’m not sure what they’re basing this off of, but it seems really high for electricity usage.
The link you provided said less than 1£ per 3 hours. Quick look said that the UK pays 12.5-ish cents per KWh; so 1£ would get you 8 of those; divide by 3 hours to get KW, ~2.6 KW draw to consume 8KW within 3 hours.
Either they mean “considerably less”; I inadvertently grabbed a lowball price; or that’s not just ‘trifle high, don’t they have standards for that?’ that’s “how many CFM did the vendor specify to prevent thermal excursion?” level power consumption.
2 Likes
