5 ms·

I've long since run with the notion that if you must have Smart TV features, do it with an external box. Last time I checked the Roku devices were decent for th

I've long since run with the notion that if you must have Smart TV features, do it with an external box. Last time I checked the Roku devices were decent for this, but there's a bunch of alternatives, and some lovely FOSS stuff (Kodi comes to mind) that is much more privacy focused. The TV itself is a black box of mystery, and does NOT get to go on my network. It doesn't need my wifi password, and I certainly don't want it sending screenshots of my desktop (with sensitive information) off to some advertising agency. No thank you! But far more importantly, the TV will last for years as a dumb monitor, and the external box is usually much cheaper, and can be upgraded and secured separately. This just feels like the correct model.

scrumbledober 7y ago
My last TV set I bought, I specifically looked for a non-smart TV. Got it for a bit cheaper than the smart models and there's no bloat. Everything else is handled by either PS4 or laptop via hdmi. I am not sure it's even possible to find non-smart TVs anymore.
- dvdgsng 7y ago
  impossible indeed. however a recent kickstarter is trying to change this: https://ironcast.tv/ https://ironcast.tv/ lets hope they can deliver.
  - bjelkeman-again 7y ago
    In Europe I buy dumb panels aimed at stores. https://www.swedx.se/#horizontalTab2 https://www.swedx.se/#horizontalTab2
    - dvdgsng 7y ago
      This is great, thanks.
twelvechairs 7y ago
Yeah I just link one of those Intel NUC boxes to my TV and do everything through a real OS
satyrnein 7y ago
I used to do this with an Nvidia Shield, but I've since switched to a Roku TV (meaning TV with Roku software built in). With this setup, I have a single remote that turns the TV on/off, can play Netflix or other apps, adjusts the volume of external speakers, switch inputs, but still come back from any input when you hit home. I could not figure out how to do this with any other combination, and this strikes me as fairly baseline usability.
gregmac 7y ago
I've gone through many incarnations of HTPC's, plus tried with SageTV, Roku[1], Chromecasts, and several others... and can absolutely recommend the Nvidia Shield. It has a good 10-foot interface via Android TV (as opposed to regular Android), is kept updated, is a Google Cast target, has official apps for all the major streaming platforms, can run Plex and Kodi (for local content), and it's also possible to sideload APKs. Most importantly, it "just works". I was never able to build a HTPC that worked with all the video sources I wanted (Plex, Netflix, Youtube) and was possible to control without ever having to touch a keyboard/mouse (or resort to a janky air mouse/remote thing). With the Shield + a Logitech Harmony Hub, a single dead-simple remote controls entire setup (Shield, TV, external amp, plus a BluRay player that I never use anymore). [1] Note: I only have a Roku 2nd Gen. The newer ones look a lot better and are probably a fine option now, but I still really like the Android TV "Home" experience a lot more.
- tempestn 7y ago
  That's awesome. I used to be a big fan of Sage, before they sold out / shut down. Even did the direct capture from cable boxes. I've been planning to get a Shield TV, so good to see these endorsements!
  - gregmac 7y ago
    Likewise. I still have some HD300's in my basement somewhere, along with a couple Hauppauge PCI capture cards, and a Silicondust HDHomerun. Shortly after Sage was shut down my cable company started encrypting all their channels, rendering most of my PVR setup pointless. After chasing issues with Youtube breaking API changes, I finally and begrudgingly pulled the plug on Sage. Several HTPC iterations later I feel like only now (with the Shield + Plex) do I have a comparable setup. I did briefly play with Plex PVR with my HDHomerun and an OTA antenna, but I don't get enough channels for it to be worthwhile, and never even bothered re-installing the antenna after my roof was re-shingled last year.
    - satyrnein 7y ago
      I actually had the HDHomeRun that supported a cablecard and got my Shield to show channels from it, but it was never great. I eventually abandoned the Shield when I needed to add another device, and I didn't want to return to the bad old days of having to use another remote to manage inputs.
prox 7y ago
A screen should be dumb, though I should be able to attach something smart. TVs are trying to be what they are not.
- UncleMeat 7y ago
  The problem is that there is nothing else to compete on. TVs are two centimeters thick and have crisp displays. I don’t give a crap about 5k or whatever. So what can they market on except price? Apps.
zzo38computer 7y ago
Yes, having an external box can be a good idea, but some things you may want to have in the TV itself such as the picture adjustment settings. There might also be multiple inputs, and IMIDI interface which can be used to select between them and switch TV on/off and adjust volume and so on, allowing you to program other devices to control it.
tzs 7y ago
> I've long since run with the notion that if you must have Smart TV features, do it with an external box I'd go farther. I want everything to be external boxes. Right now I'm looking at having to get a new A/V receiver because mine cannot handle 4K video. It does all the audio stuff I need just fine. If video switching and audio processing was handled by separate boxes, I'd just be looking at changing out the video switching box. Now suppose that later I decide I would like to be able to control my receiver with Alexa or Google Home. As it is now that will be another "replace the whole damn receiver" moment. If it were all separate boxes, the preamps, amps, surround sound processor, and radio receiver would all be separate components, controlled by a controller box. If I decide I want Alexa, I'd just buy a new Alexa compatible controller box. Or I decide I want to upgrade from 5 channels to 7 channels...buy a couple more amp boxes and speakers for the new channels (and might also need a new surround sound processor box). Basically, take a block diagram of a complete full featured home theater system, and make every block in that a separate box so I can (1) just buy the boxes I need for my system, and (2) upgrade a box at a time. That said, I doubt TV makers will ever stop primarily making Smart TVs. A Smart TV can function as the only component of a home theater system. Someone moving into their first apartment after school, say, wanting to start putting together their entertainment system can start with a Smart TV, stick it on their home internet, and then use the Netflix/Prime/Disney+/etc app on the TV to watch movies. That Smart TV probably has a few HDMI in ports, so they can also use it with the cable box if they have cable, and with their gaming consoles. With a dumb TV they'd need the TV, and they would need an A/V receiver, and speakers, and something to run the Netflix/etc. apps. Buying all that at once might be a budget buster for someone starting out. By making the TVs smart, the TV makers greatly increase the chances that a TV will be the first component bought for a new home theater setup, and probably also increases the chances that that first TV will be a big screen, high resolution, high quality display model.
- satyrnein 7y ago
  20 years ago, I was making the same argument about desktops vs laptops. I was also carefully selecting which stick of ram to buy. Now, the whole world buys laptops, except for gamers and linux users. I don't think non-enthusiasts want to think about that many boxes and arrows.
- 7y ago
martinald 7y ago
I've had no problems with LG webOS. Media playback off usb and DLNA is flawless and supports every codec and container I've thrown at it, all the apps work well. I've had it playing 100mbit/sec H265 off network for example with no issues. It's actually pretty hard to find a media player that supports Dolby Vision for example. No Android media box does, and as far as I know Windows support is very patchy. At least with webOS it supports all the video formats the TV supports.
catalogia 7y ago
I've tried Kodi and whatnot and found those sort of solutions to be confusing, slow, and not particularly confidence inspiring. I taken to just using mpv with --input-ipc-server==... --vo=gpu --gpu-context=drm. It can play anything from my NAS over NFS, or any URL that youtube-dl supports (which is most anything.) It works with youtube, twitch, vimeo, basically anything except netflix or amazon prime. And it doesn't need a new "app" or "plugin" for each, since youtube-dl is a nice piece of software.
scruple 7y ago
I've read of "Smart" TVs that will scan for and connect to open WiFi. That's fun. Even if you don't let the thing on your network it might still be able to ruin your television watching experience.

scrumbledober 7y ago

My last TV set I bought, I specifically looked for a non-smart TV. Got it for a bit cheaper than the smart models and there's no bloat. Everything else is handled by either PS4 or laptop via hdmi. I am not sure it's even possible to find non-smart TVs anymore.

dvdgsng 7y ago
impossible indeed. however a recent kickstarter is trying to change this: https://ironcast.tv/ https://ironcast.tv/ lets hope they can deliver.
- bjelkeman-again 7y ago
  In Europe I buy dumb panels aimed at stores. https://www.swedx.se/#horizontalTab2 https://www.swedx.se/#horizontalTab2
  - dvdgsng 7y ago
    This is great, thanks.

twelvechairs 7y ago

Yeah I just link one of those Intel NUC boxes to my TV and do everything through a real OS

satyrnein 7y ago

I used to do this with an Nvidia Shield, but I've since switched to a Roku TV (meaning TV with Roku software built in). With this setup, I have a single remote that turns the TV on/off, can play Netflix or other apps, adjusts the volume of external speakers, switch inputs, but still come back from any input when you hit home. I could not figure out how to do this with any other combination, and this strikes me as fairly baseline usability.

gregmac 7y ago

I've gone through many incarnations of HTPC's, plus tried with SageTV, Roku[1], Chromecasts, and several others... and can absolutely recommend the Nvidia Shield. It has a good 10-foot interface via Android TV (as opposed to regular Android), is kept updated, is a Google Cast target, has official apps for all the major streaming platforms, can run Plex and Kodi (for local content), and it's also possible to sideload APKs. Most importantly, it "just works". I was never able to build a HTPC that worked with all the video sources I wanted (Plex, Netflix, Youtube) and was possible to control without ever having to touch a keyboard/mouse (or resort to a janky air mouse/remote thing). With the Shield + a Logitech Harmony Hub, a single dead-simple remote controls entire setup (Shield, TV, external amp, plus a BluRay player that I never use anymore). [1] Note: I only have a Roku 2nd Gen. The newer ones look a lot better and are probably a fine option now, but I still really like the Android TV "Home" experience a lot more.

tempestn 7y ago
That's awesome. I used to be a big fan of Sage, before they sold out / shut down. Even did the direct capture from cable boxes. I've been planning to get a Shield TV, so good to see these endorsements!
- gregmac 7y ago
  Likewise. I still have some HD300's in my basement somewhere, along with a couple Hauppauge PCI capture cards, and a Silicondust HDHomerun. Shortly after Sage was shut down my cable company started encrypting all their channels, rendering most of my PVR setup pointless. After chasing issues with Youtube breaking API changes, I finally and begrudgingly pulled the plug on Sage. Several HTPC iterations later I feel like only now (with the Shield + Plex) do I have a comparable setup. I did briefly play with Plex PVR with my HDHomerun and an OTA antenna, but I don't get enough channels for it to be worthwhile, and never even bothered re-installing the antenna after my roof was re-shingled last year.
  - satyrnein 7y ago
    I actually had the HDHomeRun that supported a cablecard and got my Shield to show channels from it, but it was never great. I eventually abandoned the Shield when I needed to add another device, and I didn't want to return to the bad old days of having to use another remote to manage inputs.

prox 7y ago

A screen should be dumb, though I should be able to attach something smart. TVs are trying to be what they are not.

UncleMeat 7y ago
The problem is that there is nothing else to compete on. TVs are two centimeters thick and have crisp displays. I don’t give a crap about 5k or whatever. So what can they market on except price? Apps.

zzo38computer 7y ago

Yes, having an external box can be a good idea, but some things you may want to have in the TV itself such as the picture adjustment settings. There might also be multiple inputs, and IMIDI interface which can be used to select between them and switch TV on/off and adjust volume and so on, allowing you to program other devices to control it.

tzs 7y ago

> I've long since run with the notion that if you must have Smart TV features, do it with an external box I'd go farther. I want everything to be external boxes. Right now I'm looking at having to get a new A/V receiver because mine cannot handle 4K video. It does all the audio stuff I need just fine. If video switching and audio processing was handled by separate boxes, I'd just be looking at changing out the video switching box. Now suppose that later I decide I would like to be able to control my receiver with Alexa or Google Home. As it is now that will be another "replace the whole damn receiver" moment. If it were all separate boxes, the preamps, amps, surround sound processor, and radio receiver would all be separate components, controlled by a controller box. If I decide I want Alexa, I'd just buy a new Alexa compatible controller box. Or I decide I want to upgrade from 5 channels to 7 channels...buy a couple more amp boxes and speakers for the new channels (and might also need a new surround sound processor box). Basically, take a block diagram of a complete full featured home theater system, and make every block in that a separate box so I can (1) just buy the boxes I need for my system, and (2) upgrade a box at a time. That said, I doubt TV makers will ever stop primarily making Smart TVs. A Smart TV can function as the only component of a home theater system. Someone moving into their first apartment after school, say, wanting to start putting together their entertainment system can start with a Smart TV, stick it on their home internet, and then use the Netflix/Prime/Disney+/etc app on the TV to watch movies. That Smart TV probably has a few HDMI in ports, so they can also use it with the cable box if they have cable, and with their gaming consoles. With a dumb TV they'd need the TV, and they would need an A/V receiver, and speakers, and something to run the Netflix/etc. apps. Buying all that at once might be a budget buster for someone starting out. By making the TVs smart, the TV makers greatly increase the chances that a TV will be the first component bought for a new home theater setup, and probably also increases the chances that that first TV will be a big screen, high resolution, high quality display model.

satyrnein 7y ago
20 years ago, I was making the same argument about desktops vs laptops. I was also carefully selecting which stick of ram to buy. Now, the whole world buys laptops, except for gamers and linux users. I don't think non-enthusiasts want to think about that many boxes and arrows.
7y ago

martinald 7y ago

I've had no problems with LG webOS. Media playback off usb and DLNA is flawless and supports every codec and container I've thrown at it, all the apps work well. I've had it playing 100mbit/sec H265 off network for example with no issues. It's actually pretty hard to find a media player that supports Dolby Vision for example. No Android media box does, and as far as I know Windows support is very patchy. At least with webOS it supports all the video formats the TV supports.

catalogia 7y ago

I've tried Kodi and whatnot and found those sort of solutions to be confusing, slow, and not particularly confidence inspiring. I taken to just using mpv with --input-ipc-server==... --vo=gpu --gpu-context=drm. It can play anything from my NAS over NFS, or any URL that youtube-dl supports (which is most anything.) It works with youtube, twitch, vimeo, basically anything except netflix or amazon prime. And it doesn't need a new "app" or "plugin" for each, since youtube-dl is a nice piece of software.

scruple 7y ago

I've read of "Smart" TVs that will scan for and connect to open WiFi. That's fun. Even if you don't let the thing on your network it might still be able to ruin your television watching experience.