3 ms·

Leaving aside interoperability fun and the user experience that /u/smacktoward refers to, TVs don't always switch on very quickly. My TV takes a good 10 second

by rkangel 10y ago

Leaving aside interoperability fun and the user experience that /u/smacktoward refers to, TVs don't always switch on very quickly. My TV takes a good 10 seconds to start producing audio after the google chromecast 'on' command. Putting the screen in themselves gives them control of that experience.

cptskippy 10y ago
Netflix is taking care of that for you. > When you see the Netflix Recommended TV logo, you’ll know the TV has passed a rigorous evaluation process. > TV Instant On > Your TV starts up instantly and apps are ready to use right away, just like your smartphone. https://devices.netflix.com/en/recommendedtv/2017/ https://devices.netflix.com/en/recommendedtv/2017/
- Declanomous 10y ago
  The instant on feature is generally just a standby mode, which can consume a fairly substantial amount of power. I've also found that disabling the 'instant on' feature of my TV makes it perform much better. When I used the standby mode, apps would occasionally crash or stop responding after a few hours. The only way to get them to work again was to unplug the TV. I never have to unplug the TV now that I've disabled instant on. That being said, I own a Samsung TV, which has the worst software of any TV I've used, except for Philips, which was worse only because the TV I owned didn't support SSH keys longer than 48-bits or something really stupid like that. Ideally I'd be able to purchase a non-smart TV that turned on instantly, but I don't see that happening any time soon.
  - cptskippy 10y ago
    TV manufacturers seem to be really averse to just making an awesome display. They have to value add features that open security holes and are so poorly maintained that in a couple years you'll need to buy a new TV.
    - Declanomous 10y ago
      Not to mention they add all those useless post-processing effects that increase latency to the point where it's almost impossible to play games on them. I don't understand why a signal coming in through HDMI signal has 9 milliseconds of lag on my cheap monitor, and 46 seconds on my fairly nice tv. In gaming mode the tv has something like 35 ms of lag. I've seen TVs that have enough input lag that you get noticeable audio sync issues if you use an external audio system. That's ridiculous.
      - btym 10y ago
        AFAIK most TVs have a "Game" picture mode that will disable post-processing.
        cptskippy 10y ago
        Some post-processing but not all. Most TVs are ill suited for Gaming which is ironic since the gaming industry thrives in front of the TV.
    - ghaff 10y ago
      >so poorly maintained that in a couple years you'll need to buy a new TV. I think they consider that a feature. For the record, I absolutely agree as a consumer that TVs just need to be awesome display panels with a recent remote and sufficient inputs. But I understand why the manufacturers may not want to buy into that.
      - narrowrail 10y ago
        When money is no object, you have to get a commercial display (like this [0], w/ 55" class (54.6" diagonal) Edge-Lit LED IPS Digital - $1350MSRP). Otherwise, something like a Vizio P series (which has an embedded chromecast) is good if you turn-off the wifi radio and/or never give it your AP's credentials. I grew up with a TV that would immediately turn-on when you pressed the button (you could even hear an audible sound from the TV set), and the cable TV remote (it was separate in the 80s too) could change channels at 4-5 per second (this is when channels surfing was born because they would render so fast). Vizio has a line of OTA-free displays, but they still have a Linux kernel. This is a good start, but going back to whatever RTOS they use to have would be better. [0]http://www.lg.com/us/business/commercial-display/displays-tvs/digital-signage/lg-55SE3KB http://www.lg.com/us/business/commercial-display/displays-tv...

by rkangel 10y ago

cptskippy 10y ago

Netflix is taking care of that for you. > When you see the Netflix Recommended TV logo, you’ll know the TV has passed a rigorous evaluation process. > TV Instant On > Your TV starts up instantly and apps are ready to use right away, just like your smartphone. https://devices.netflix.com/en/recommendedtv/2017/ https://devices.netflix.com/en/recommendedtv/2017/

Declanomous 10y ago
The instant on feature is generally just a standby mode, which can consume a fairly substantial amount of power. I've also found that disabling the 'instant on' feature of my TV makes it perform much better. When I used the standby mode, apps would occasionally crash or stop responding after a few hours. The only way to get them to work again was to unplug the TV. I never have to unplug the TV now that I've disabled instant on. That being said, I own a Samsung TV, which has the worst software of any TV I've used, except for Philips, which was worse only because the TV I owned didn't support SSH keys longer than 48-bits or something really stupid like that. Ideally I'd be able to purchase a non-smart TV that turned on instantly, but I don't see that happening any time soon.
- cptskippy 10y ago
  TV manufacturers seem to be really averse to just making an awesome display. They have to value add features that open security holes and are so poorly maintained that in a couple years you'll need to buy a new TV.
  - Declanomous 10y ago
    Not to mention they add all those useless post-processing effects that increase latency to the point where it's almost impossible to play games on them. I don't understand why a signal coming in through HDMI signal has 9 milliseconds of lag on my cheap monitor, and 46 seconds on my fairly nice tv. In gaming mode the tv has something like 35 ms of lag. I've seen TVs that have enough input lag that you get noticeable audio sync issues if you use an external audio system. That's ridiculous.
    - btym 10y ago
      AFAIK most TVs have a "Game" picture mode that will disable post-processing.
      - cptskippy 10y ago
        Some post-processing but not all. Most TVs are ill suited for Gaming which is ironic since the gaming industry thrives in front of the TV.
  - ghaff 10y ago
    >so poorly maintained that in a couple years you'll need to buy a new TV. I think they consider that a feature. For the record, I absolutely agree as a consumer that TVs just need to be awesome display panels with a recent remote and sufficient inputs. But I understand why the manufacturers may not want to buy into that.
    - narrowrail 10y ago
      When money is no object, you have to get a commercial display (like this [0], w/ 55" class (54.6" diagonal) Edge-Lit LED IPS Digital - $1350MSRP). Otherwise, something like a Vizio P series (which has an embedded chromecast) is good if you turn-off the wifi radio and/or never give it your AP's credentials. I grew up with a TV that would immediately turn-on when you pressed the button (you could even hear an audible sound from the TV set), and the cable TV remote (it was separate in the 80s too) could change channels at 4-5 per second (this is when channels surfing was born because they would render so fast). Vizio has a line of OTA-free displays, but they still have a Linux kernel. This is a good start, but going back to whatever RTOS they use to have would be better. [0]http://www.lg.com/us/business/commercial-display/displays-tvs/digital-signage/lg-55SE3KB http://www.lg.com/us/business/commercial-display/displays-tv...