5 ms·

the best non smart TVs are crap relative to the "smart" TVs. the top of the line TVs made by LG, Panasonic, Sony, Samsung (and vizio, tcl, hisense.....) are al

the best non smart TVs are crap relative to the "smart" TVs. the top of the line TVs made by LG, Panasonic, Sony, Samsung (and vizio, tcl, hisense.....) are all smart. If you insist on a TV without smart features, you will be sacrificing picture quality. the closest you can get is with a projector, and even projectors suffer when it comes to HDR content where you want both brightness and as inky blacks as you can get.

chrisco255 6y ago
Why not use one of the large computer monitors on the market?
- arsome 6y ago
  Find me an OLED computer monitor please.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - dvtrn 6y ago
    Too rich for my bank account, but: https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/new-alienware-55-oled-gaming-monitor-aw5520qf/apd/210-auds/monitors-monitor-accessories?gacd=9614064-1012-5761040-266794588-0&dgc=st&ds_rl=1291002&gclid=CjwKCAiA25v_BRBNEiwAZb4-ZbrP0WcfFr8-37h6iUz_BDLQQV1H_LOzyIj4rVdVGjlKMijp0t1PvhoCDawQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/new-alienware-55-oled-gaming...
    - gambiting 6y ago
      I mean, LG makes a 48" OLED TV that works great as a monitor, why not use that if size isn't an issue?
      - dvtrn 6y ago
        As another commenter in the thread mentioned, televisions and high end gaming displays are often optimized differently (I don’t know what this means for an OLED display, just speaking generally here-so take that as far as pleasant conversation will permit) Which admittedly isn’t something a lot of people care about, though I would reckon if one is about to drop three big ones on a video display source it probably matters more to them than it would to the rest of us. Just speculation on my part, though.
        willis936 6y ago
        Well, at least in the case of LG OLED, some thought has been put into the gaming application. They support game mode (very common), black frame insertion (less common), and adaptive sync (new and expensive) in their entry level OLED displays. It ticks every box I have for a gaming display, except for the “costs $0” box.
        k4rli 6y ago
        What's an entry level OLED by LG? CX?
        gambiting 6y ago
        Well - BX is the entry level model, but they don't make it in the 48" size(only 55 and 65"). Only one model up(CX) is made in the 48" size.
        gambiting 6y ago
        Right, so just so you know - the LG OLEDs are particularily well suited for it, because if you rename the input source as "PC" it is treated as a special source with absolutely no processing applied to it, full 4:4:4 bandwidth enabled, and many reviews have measured the response time in sub 10ms range - same as top-end PC monitors. It might not be the case for many other displays, but those OLEDs work brilliantly for that use case(having said that, I probably would still advise against it, unless you mostly play games/watch movies, since OLED burn-in is still very real)
    - iso1210 6y ago
      What a rubbish site. It correctly identified I'm not in the US (I'd be happy if it didn't), but then redirects me to the homepage of my local del site, rather than the page with AW5520QF on it.
      - 14 6y ago
        This is a famous tactic of Best Buy as well. Redirect you to their sight home page no clue how to find the product I was just looking at. I immediately leave their site and shop elsewhere.
        walshemj 6y ago
        Or maybe they did not want to or more correctly could not give a F about doing redirection properly
    - casefields 6y ago
      In the mid 90s we paid more for a smaller tv. Big screen TVs used to be something really special that impressed visitors. You just proved how tv manufacturers are catering to what the customers actually want.
- wmf 6y ago
  65"-75" computer monitors aren't really a thing (I guess there are BFGDs) and "business displays" are really expensive.
- pmontra 6y ago
  Maybe, but monitors and TVs optimize for different scenarios https://www.howtogeek.com/411413/why-can%E2%80%99t-you-use-a-tv-as-a-monitor/ https://www.howtogeek.com/411413/why-can%E2%80%99t-you-use-a...
- Bayart 6y ago
  Much worst panels than TVs. The best you can get is probably a nice VA panel. Anything better will be a TV.
mumblemumble 6y ago
> If you insist on a TV without smart features, you will be sacrificing picture quality. Sounds like a pretty good trade-off to me.
- fnordsensei 6y ago
  It might be acceptable for some people in some situations, but it's still lamentable that it has to be a trade-off at all.
  - mumblemumble 6y ago
    It's not a surprise, TBH. As someone who likes their technology simple, I find that feature bundling like this is the norm in just about every product space nowadays. My guess is that market research has found that "people who both want to pay for nicer image quality and don't want smart features" is not a large enough slice of the market to be worth going after. That, or they've found that people who do fall into that market will generally, when forced to choose, accept the smart features (upsell! ka-ching!) rather than choose a less expensive model in order to avoid the smart features.
    - treesknees 6y ago
      The value of the usage/tracking information they collect basically subsidizes the real cost of the TV. Similar to other "free" Internet services where you are the product. They basically don't need to bother with more expensive non-smart TVs. A cheap tv with good picture quality is a win-win.
      - compsciphd 6y ago
        you dont have to use the smart features. use your own boxes.
kitsunesoba 6y ago
I have to wonder if there isn't a market for "boutique" dumb TVs, which cost a little more (due to smaller scale) but have all the expected picture quality features (HDR, etc) and maybe have a nicer case/exterior than typically found on consumer TVs.
- erk__ 6y ago
  You can get a Beovision by Bang & Olufsen, but then you need to get the big card out as they are pretty expensive compared to a standard off the shelf smart-tv, as they are more a design item than anything else.
kazinator 6y ago
The picture quality of many inexpensive, off-brand TV's is amazing nowadays.

chrisco255 6y ago

Why not use one of the large computer monitors on the market?

arsome 6y ago
Find me an OLED computer monitor please.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- dvtrn 6y ago
  Too rich for my bank account, but: https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/new-alienware-55-oled-gaming-monitor-aw5520qf/apd/210-auds/monitors-monitor-accessories?gacd=9614064-1012-5761040-266794588-0&dgc=st&ds_rl=1291002&gclid=CjwKCAiA25v_BRBNEiwAZb4-ZbrP0WcfFr8-37h6iUz_BDLQQV1H_LOzyIj4rVdVGjlKMijp0t1PvhoCDawQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/new-alienware-55-oled-gaming...
  - gambiting 6y ago
    I mean, LG makes a 48" OLED TV that works great as a monitor, why not use that if size isn't an issue?
    - dvtrn 6y ago
      As another commenter in the thread mentioned, televisions and high end gaming displays are often optimized differently (I don’t know what this means for an OLED display, just speaking generally here-so take that as far as pleasant conversation will permit) Which admittedly isn’t something a lot of people care about, though I would reckon if one is about to drop three big ones on a video display source it probably matters more to them than it would to the rest of us. Just speculation on my part, though.
      - willis936 6y ago
        Well, at least in the case of LG OLED, some thought has been put into the gaming application. They support game mode (very common), black frame insertion (less common), and adaptive sync (new and expensive) in their entry level OLED displays. It ticks every box I have for a gaming display, except for the “costs $0” box.
        k4rli 6y ago
        What's an entry level OLED by LG? CX?
        gambiting 6y ago
        Well - BX is the entry level model, but they don't make it in the 48" size(only 55 and 65"). Only one model up(CX) is made in the 48" size.
      - gambiting 6y ago
        Right, so just so you know - the LG OLEDs are particularily well suited for it, because if you rename the input source as "PC" it is treated as a special source with absolutely no processing applied to it, full 4:4:4 bandwidth enabled, and many reviews have measured the response time in sub 10ms range - same as top-end PC monitors. It might not be the case for many other displays, but those OLEDs work brilliantly for that use case(having said that, I probably would still advise against it, unless you mostly play games/watch movies, since OLED burn-in is still very real)
  - iso1210 6y ago
    What a rubbish site. It correctly identified I'm not in the US (I'd be happy if it didn't), but then redirects me to the homepage of my local del site, rather than the page with AW5520QF on it.
    - 14 6y ago
      This is a famous tactic of Best Buy as well. Redirect you to their sight home page no clue how to find the product I was just looking at. I immediately leave their site and shop elsewhere.
      - walshemj 6y ago
        Or maybe they did not want to or more correctly could not give a F about doing redirection properly
  - casefields 6y ago
    In the mid 90s we paid more for a smaller tv. Big screen TVs used to be something really special that impressed visitors. You just proved how tv manufacturers are catering to what the customers actually want.
wmf 6y ago
65"-75" computer monitors aren't really a thing (I guess there are BFGDs) and "business displays" are really expensive.
pmontra 6y ago
Maybe, but monitors and TVs optimize for different scenarios https://www.howtogeek.com/411413/why-can%E2%80%99t-you-use-a-tv-as-a-monitor/ https://www.howtogeek.com/411413/why-can%E2%80%99t-you-use-a...
Bayart 6y ago
Much worst panels than TVs. The best you can get is probably a nice VA panel. Anything better will be a TV.

mumblemumble 6y ago

> If you insist on a TV without smart features, you will be sacrificing picture quality. Sounds like a pretty good trade-off to me.

fnordsensei 6y ago
It might be acceptable for some people in some situations, but it's still lamentable that it has to be a trade-off at all.
- mumblemumble 6y ago
  It's not a surprise, TBH. As someone who likes their technology simple, I find that feature bundling like this is the norm in just about every product space nowadays. My guess is that market research has found that "people who both want to pay for nicer image quality and don't want smart features" is not a large enough slice of the market to be worth going after. That, or they've found that people who do fall into that market will generally, when forced to choose, accept the smart features (upsell! ka-ching!) rather than choose a less expensive model in order to avoid the smart features.
  - treesknees 6y ago
    The value of the usage/tracking information they collect basically subsidizes the real cost of the TV. Similar to other "free" Internet services where you are the product. They basically don't need to bother with more expensive non-smart TVs. A cheap tv with good picture quality is a win-win.
    - compsciphd 6y ago
      you dont have to use the smart features. use your own boxes.

kitsunesoba 6y ago

I have to wonder if there isn't a market for "boutique" dumb TVs, which cost a little more (due to smaller scale) but have all the expected picture quality features (HDR, etc) and maybe have a nicer case/exterior than typically found on consumer TVs.

erk__ 6y ago
You can get a Beovision by Bang & Olufsen, but then you need to get the big card out as they are pretty expensive compared to a standard off the shelf smart-tv, as they are more a design item than anything else.

kazinator 6y ago

The picture quality of many inexpensive, off-brand TV's is amazing nowadays.