Yeah, obviously this. WTF.
Don’t connect it to your network, you don’t have to pull anything.
1 Like
To some extent at least. However, I’m using a dumb TV as a monitor (one of Sharp’s forays into late-stage capitalism, since it’s really made by Hisense); it really isn’t all that good as a monitor, namely because of image retention. Not quite as bad as burn-in with plasma or OLED (ETA: it’s temporary), but annoying enough.
2 Likes
Last time I looked into this, no AV Recievers supported Ethernet over HDMI, nixing my plan to clean up the wires behind my stereo.
2 Likes
Are there really TVs that won’t display an HDMI signal without internet access? Who makes those?
2 Likes
I call this “Occam’s Kitchen Razor” (since it’s such a problem in kitchen appliances): “Logic boards should not be multiplied without necessity.”
Our dumb-ass washing machine with mechanical switches will never die as long as I can get cheap replacement parts for it. Which I can, because it uses the same motors and stuff as coin-op washers. Meawhile any washing machine with a control panel like a space shuttle is not worth the cost of repair as soon as the door seals fail.
7 Likes
Just to clear up this point, because it has been brought up in various forms in this thread:
There is a real reason TVs are cheaper than monitors- TVs are very low pixel density.
The cost of LCD (and LED, and OLED, and all the rest) panels is driven by yield. This is “how many panels do we have to throw away because they have too many bad pixels in them”. The “risk” of a bad pixel goes up exponentially with pixel density (manufacturing difficulty goes way up), and is compounded by the fact that there are a lot more pixels. A lot more chances for one to be bad.
It’s not a scam or a marketing trick or a loss-leader for data sales that makes TVs cheaper. They’re just a lot cheaper to make. I appreciate everyone’s scam-dar being hyper-sensitive because that’s usually a good instinct these days, but you can all holster it in this case.
16 Likes
On the smaller size, and merely 1080p.
Recently I upgraded from an iMac to the mini. I needed a monitor that supported hdmi (didn’t have the dongle, and since my plan was to get a 4K monitor) Only one that fit the bill was a 39" TV. Which was OK for games, but text was jagged.
While shopping around for 4K monitors, I noticed that the latest thing around was a smart monitor…
The model in my price range was associated with some pretty crappy reviews, so I opted for a more conventional model. Might be interesting if your streaming services of choice doesn’t have a webclient, or if you have a bunch of wireless devices.
1 Like
Can´t you use a chromecast or similar?
2 Likes
Don’t a 4k monitor and a 4k tv have the same pixel density (assuming same size)?
4 Likes
I once checked into a business-class hotel with my laptop and an HDMI cable. Plugging it into the TV achieved nothing. The front desk had to provide me with a “business remote control” to access controls unavailable from the standard control or the TV’s own buttons.
5 Likes
I don’t own a TV.
I switched to a projector many years ago and have never regreted it. You can get a much bigger screen size to cash ratio. You can ignore any “smart” crap you don’t need and stream content from whatever sources you like.
4 Likes
Yes, those do. Most TVs are not 4k, though, and most 4K TVs are not as small as a computer monitor. On monitors the resolution is targeted for a much closer viewing distance so you need way smaller pixels.
5 Likes
bought a “smart” LG tv a few weeks ago. skipped all the set up, wifi bullshit, app whining, grabbed my trusty Roku Premiere, plugged it in and away we go.
Was tempted a bit by the ability to use my phone as a remote, but it turns out, I only use the power button after turning off soap opera mode in settings.
4 Likes
You would have to be dumb to bring a smart tv into your home.
An unscientific survey of 4k TVs and monitors for sale still finds a pretty high price discrepancy - at common TV sizes like say 40"
I think this is probably more likely due to features that matter more to monitors than TV, such as input lag (the time between when the screen change on HDMI in and when the change is visible on screen), possibly contrast ratios and/or the time it takes pixels to change from bright to dark, etc.
2 Likes
You’re wasting 30 seconds every day loading it and cleaning it. And 3 minutes waiting for it to brew. When more modern coffee maker lets you lift a little plastic cup out and you’re ready for another cup of mediocre coffee. Sadly K-cups kind of suck if you want to make a huge pot of coffee for guests or for a recipe.
(I use the same Mr Coffee. it’s not even the “real” one from the 80’s that has a clock and timer. It’s the modern one that is a switch tied to a heating element and some carefully designed pipes)
1 Like
Attached my unscientific survey for reference.
A related question: would I be happy with a 4k tv as a giant monitor for casual use? Like say I wanted to have a big montor on wheels - I have a large shop upstairs and I usually am carting around laptops, having a big monitor on wheels to show documentation, CAD drawings, etc while I would would be amazing. For $200 that is very tempting.
1 Like
two reviews, unfortunately not from the same source
consider input lag, color gamut, and perhaps refresh rate.
1 Like
