8 ms·
Yes - I wish Apple would just make a TV. Call it a living room screen or a living room monitor or something. Make it OLED, dumb TV, instant on, Apple TV box pl
by fossuser 6y ago
Yes - I wish Apple would just make a TV. Call it a living room screen or a living room monitor or something.
Make it OLED, dumb TV, instant on, Apple TV box plugs in. Separate box with front facing ports that connects to screen with one cable. A remote designed by someone who thought about it for ten seconds (why do modern TVs have dozens of buttons no one ever uses?).
This entire market is in desperate need of someone to make something decent.
The best available option today is LG and it’s still laden with ads and takes a few seconds to boot up.
- randallsquared 6y ago> A remote designed by someone who thought about it for ten seconds I love that a sibling comment to yours calls out the remote as dealbreaker terrible, but I agree with the sentiment that I would love a remote that was really well-designed.
- SOLAR_FIELDS 6y agoYou can go too far in the other direction too, however. Apple TV remote infamously has no mute functionality. And if you do an internet search on how to mute the Apple TV using the remote (because of course there’s a way, right? No one would design a TV remote that has volume control without mute) you get either one of two answers: - it’s impossible/difficult to do with current tech (not true) - the classic Apple forum response of “why would you want to do that?” This turned into a bit of a rant but I’ll conclude the thought by saying that there’s certainly some sort of happy medium between a gajillion buttons on the remote and lack of absolutely critical functionality. In fact if you invest a bit of extra money into the Sideclick add-on to Apple TV remote you achieve exactly that.
- dexterdog 6y agoI never use the mute button. I just turn the volume down because I know where that button is without looking.
- olliej 6y agoPersonally I find the problem with the apple remote to be the symmetric design (I would have though the puck mouse would have taught that lesson)
- banana_giraffe 6y agoI put some gaffer tape on the bottom of my Apple TV remote to make it obvious which end is up. I'm personally not a fan of the touchpad. In principle, it's a decent solution to the problem, but Apple's implementation is somehow not sensitive enough and too sensitive at the same time.
- mensetmanusman 6y agoThis, it’s like the designers tested it only outdoors. Who would’ve thought it’s necessary to be able to grab the remote when it’s dark and know what orientation it is in.
- SOLAR_FIELDS 6y agoI bought some silicon sleeves that fix this issue (the bottom half of the remote face with no buttons is covered by silicon). It also resolve the issue that the remote is very slippery in your hands as well as the issue of being unable to tell which remote goes where if you have multiple Apple TV’s (you can get different color silicon for each TV).
- mensetmanusman 6y agoThis is a great suggestion, but it is also surprising that it is necessary.
- vetinari 6y agoThat's why I love the Nvidia Shield remote. It is triangle shaped, and it has accelerometer that lights up the buttons once you grab and move it.
- drewzero1 6y ago
- Zardoz84 6y agoI remember a universal remote that I had on the 90s to control my small bedroom CRT TV. it has only 7 buttons, and had mute button.
- fossuser 6y agoI’d probably do something that’s a large dial like an Apple Watch crown for volume that takes up most of a square remote and you push down for mute/unmute. The other buttons I’d have on it would be power, and input switch. I’d have an Apple HomePod sound bar which connects to the tv so you don’t have to configure any of that. Then you’d use the Apple TV remote like normal for everything else. The regular dial remote is just always sitting on the coffee table. Alternatively they could extend the existing Apple TV remote a bit to add a mute and volume knob or reconfigure to be the one remote for the dumb tv and the Apple TV.
- namdnay 6y agoMuch as their adware laden TVs drive me crazy, I have to admit that their remote is absolutely amazing. A nice piece of aluminum with a minimum number of buttons, and yet you can control Netflix, Prime, TV etc
- pbhjpbhj 6y agoAmazon FireTV remote is pretty good, latest gen added a volume control inc. mute button (so you don't need your TV remote). Source switching uses CEC over HDMI. You don't need to point the controller for most tasks as it's Bluetooth. If I had a TV that used CEC I wouldn't need the original remote at all.
- dwighttk 6y agoWhat do you think this device would cost? I’m guessing starting around $7999 for 45”
- afterburner 6y agoOLEDs are much cheaper than that. Or do you mean an Apple markup?
- culturestate 6y ago> The best available option today is LG and it’s still laden with ads and takes a few seconds to boot up. Sharp offers (most of) their range as dumb TVs[1]. They still take a few seconds to turn on, but not notably longer than a typical computer monitor. 1. https://sg.sharp/products/tv?filters%5B33%3A36%5D=33%3A36 https://sg.sharp/products/tv?filters%5B33%3A36%5D=33%3A36
- kccqzy 6y agoIn the U.S., Sharp TVs aren't actually made by Sharp. They are made by Hisense and then rebranded Sharp. The link you posted is the Singapore site. https://www.wsj.com/articles/sharp-to-americans-you-dont-want-to-buy-a-sharp-brand-tv-1497241004 https://www.wsj.com/articles/sharp-to-americans-you-dont-wan...
- nitrogen 6y ago> In 2015, Sharp signed a deal with Hisense giving the Chinese company the right to use the Sharp name on TVs sold in the U.S. through 2020. Hopefully that means there are better options this year?
- culturestate 6y agoI had no idea that was a thing, though it's not altogether surprising given where Sharp was back then. At any rate, according to Google it seems to be over[1] and Sharp took back control in 2019. 1. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sharp-hisense-idUSKCN1SE1HC https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sharp-hisense-idUSKCN1SE1...
- WalterBright 6y ago> A remote designed by someone who thought about it for ten seconds (why do modern TVs have dozens of buttons no one ever uses?). I'd prefer the remote as an app on my phone. My desk is covered with remotes. Remotes are so 1980s :-/
- ramraj07 6y agoYou'd prefer it until you try using it. When you want to reduce the volume the last thing you need to do is go looking for the app. Now a watch app, that's something.
- nanidin 6y agoOn iPhone, there is a built in remote app in control center, then you use the volume buttons on the phone to adjust the TV volume. It’s part of the OS, not the remote app from the App Store, and I’ve found it to be a good fit for those emergency volume adjustments. Sharing so others can benefit from what took me a while to discover :)
- scatters 6y agoFor that situation, wouldn't you use voice control? I can say "OK Google mute" in less time than it takes to reach for a remote.
- hnlmorg 6y agoSure. Assuming your voice assistant works first time. Otherwise the dialog would go a little more like this: Me OK Google mute Me> OK...Google....mute Me> OKGOOGLE mute G> Sorry, I don't understand Me> mute... Me> MUTE MUTE MUTE MUTE MUTE Me> OKGOOGLE MUTE G> What would you like to mute? Me> The TV Me> Mute the fucking TV Google Me> OKGOOGLE MUTE THE FUCKING TV G> Sorry, I don't understand Me> Fuck it. I should have just looked for the controller to begin with.
- BrandoElFollito 6y agoThis comedy piece usually sends my family into laughter when I try to ask Google Auto to play a song or to call someone. I end up with some vulgarities and ask my children to do it the old fashioned way (that is to tap the name on their phones, not to use smoke signals)
- wlesieutre 6y agoGoogle is adding a “dumb TV mode,” but I’m skeptical. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/02/the-best-feature-of-google-tv-you-can-turn-it-off-for-a-dumb-tv-mode/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/02/the-best-feature-of-... Presumably will still boot slowly and only the topmost UI layer loads differently, and until they confirm otherwise I’m guessing that even with a simplified UI it still includes all the creepy tracking of everything you watch.
- m463 6y agoI would imagine people would conflate "dumb tv" with privacy (sort of like "incognito"), when google doesn't actually say that.
- cactus2093 6y agoHow will they track you though, some sort of real time content id of everything you watch? Is there any evidence that they do this? If it’s in dumb tv mode and the display stream is coming from a separate device like an Apple TV then it seems much less trivial to track you than if you’re using the builtin smart features.
- wlesieutre 6y agoYes, they’re basically all doing this. “Automatic Content Recognition,” called various things by the different brands, lets them know what you’re watching even if it’s coming from another device over HDMI instead of using the TV’s apps. https://www.consumerreports.org/privacy/how-to-turn-off-smart-tv-snooping-features/ https://www.consumerreports.org/privacy/how-to-turn-off-smar... Android TV might not build it in, but much like android phones, you get extra “features” from pretty much every OEM.
- funcDropShadow 6y ago> Is there any evidence that they do this? Evidence is a high bar. But I can tell you my f...ing smart tv asks me on behalf of tv stations to accept cookies when I switch to some german tv stations. Yes, I'd say they are tracking what I am watching. That is with TV over satellite in Germany.
- ksec 6y agoAs much as I want this to happen. And I have been advocating for it [1] for many years. The more I read into the whole TV, display panel and electronic industry the grimmer it is for such Apple TV set to exist. An Apple branded TV, even if it is without the TV part or just a monitor would have to be at least 2-3x the price of today's similar TV sets. And if anything OP were only willing to paid an extra $100 is probably why Apple didn't make one. Some of the TV in the industry isn't just on Low Margin. They are entering negative margin territory if you are discounting Data Selling and software / partner sponsorship. Unless the cost electronic part continue to raise to the point where Apple has an advantage with their SoC. I think one of their original purpose or intention for ProXDR was the use the Dual Layer LCD technology to create something like a true Reference Display Monitor. But the technology and cost never got to that point. At least I hope they could continue their investment in that area even if they do not intend it to be in consumer usage. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10710734 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10710734
- TylerE 6y agoThe thing is, Apple could charge 2-3x, because the prices have gotten so cheap. People would absolutely pay $1000-1200 for a 55" Apple TV with nice software, and maybe a nice brushed aluminum frame that looks nice on the wall. (For comparison, the cheapest 55" I could quickly find from a major retail is around $300, with a "name brand" starting around $400).
- 411111111111111 6y agothey were talking about OLEDs, so 3000-5000 would be a more realistic estimate with that markup.
- cm2187 6y ago...and that would only play Apple content.
- leadingthenet 6y agoThe Apple TV plays content from other providers just fine.
- atoav 6y agoThe best option that I know of today (in terms of resulting usabilty and long term reliability) is using a dumb computer monitor and roll the rest yourself with a Raspi. While this option is certainly not available to all, it is the only thing that will really fit your needs. I completely gave up on finding anything decent in that market.
- blkhp19 6y agoThe best for who? This is a ridiculous take, nobody wants to roll their own TV UX except HN users looking for a weekend project. What usability / long-term reliability perk does your own software running on a RPI have over an Apple TV plugged into a dumb TV / monitor?
- m463 6y agoI know plenty of folks who run kodi. I would say not "hn user" level folks, more like "i have a gaming pc".
- smaudet 6y agoThis comment is a part of why TV sucks so hard - ridiculous users. Everyone's idea of 'simple' is rather asinine, unimaginative. The latest Pis come practically preinstalled with everything, just have to load Kodi. But someone who has found 'their' solution i.e. some crap by Apple e.g. assumes this is how everything should be... And we all get stuck with crappy 'smart' TVs (or don't own one - I have survived 10+ years without a TV - absolutely nothing about TVs today makes me want one. So much hot garbage)
- tfehring 6y agoIn my experience getting Kodi set up is a massive time sink, to the point that the programmer time needed to set it up would easily double the total cost of a typical home theater setup. Admittedly my experience with it is a few years out of date, but a quick search for incredibly basic functionality like running the big streaming services makes it clear that this hasn’t really changed. On top of most of them being limited to 720p, it looks like the canonical solution nowadays is to run them in Chrome from Kodi, which (1) phones home to Google, unlike an Apple TV and (2) necessitates a mouse or other pointing device since you can’t rely on “keyboard” navigation with a remote - this alone would be a dealbreaker for me.
- Freak_NL 6y agoThey can't. They already used up the name 'Apple TV' for another of their products (which oddly enough doesn't actually seem to be a TV at all).
- kalleboo 6y agoApple TV Pro Max
- oarsinsync 6y ago“For another” sounds singular. Was that intentional? It’s already got a plurality of meanings https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21438152 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21438152
- amelius 6y ago> I wish Apple would just make a TV. But that would be a TV which you can't use to watch adult content. And Netflix and HBO would be 30% more expensive.