4 ms·

Some of these comments have a real "old man yells at cloud" vibe. Modern, mid-range or better Smart TVs are great. They let me enjoy streaming content or gaming

Some of these comments have a real "old man yells at cloud" vibe. Modern, mid-range or better Smart TVs are great. They let me enjoy streaming content or gaming without wasting time trying to configure something, torrent something, fiddle with subtitles. The newest models offer unparalleled gaming experiences via HDMI 2.1 features. There's (justifiably) privacy and other concerns on HN, but no one else is aware of those concerns or cares too much. The market has spoken.

jeegsy 5y ago
> The newest models offer unparalleled gaming experiences via HDMI 2.1 features. As an aside, there is no need for us to talk like heads of the marketing department in casual conversation.
GoblinSlayer 5y ago
>no one else is aware of those concerns or cares too much. The market has spoken. It means the market spoke from ignorance, there isn't much value in that speech, the market was deceived.
Silhouette 5y ago
The market has spoken. Markets only speak when meaningful competition exists. Are you really suggesting that people actively prefer to buy TVs that, for example, suddenly start showing them ads months or years after purchase?
- kelnos 5y ago
  An ad-free experience would almost certainly cost more (consider Amazon's cheaper Kindle that shows ads when the screen goes to sleep). If we're talking about adding even $50 to a $1000 TV, I'd bet most consumers would rather endure the ads and keep the $50.
  - Silhouette 5y ago
    If I were a gambler I would probably take that bet, but the real problem here is that we currently have no way to tell who won because one of the options is not widely available to buyers.
  - TeMPOraL 5y ago
    This is why ad-subsidizing is anticompetitive and in my honest opinion, should be banned as a business practice. Take two competitors selling exact same stuff for the same price. If one adds ads to their product, they can lower the price. If they can ad data collection, the price drops further. You just can't ethically compete on such market.
    - Silhouette 5y ago
      You just can't ethically compete on such market. I'm not sure that is necessarily true but the buyer making a decision needs to understand the differences between products. IMHO one of the problems right now is that manufacturers using these user-hostile practices don't have to prominently disclose them. Many people probably buy these products completely unaware of aspects they might not like if they knew about them. If packaging and promotions had to carry prominent warnings about user-hostile practices, that would level the playing field a bit. Better would be if the products themselves had to indicate whenever any sort of monitoring or phone-home system was operating, because that way everyone else using or near them also gets a warning that they might be spied on.

jeegsy 5y ago

> The newest models offer unparalleled gaming experiences via HDMI 2.1 features. As an aside, there is no need for us to talk like heads of the marketing department in casual conversation.

GoblinSlayer 5y ago

>no one else is aware of those concerns or cares too much. The market has spoken. It means the market spoke from ignorance, there isn't much value in that speech, the market was deceived.

Silhouette 5y ago

The market has spoken. Markets only speak when meaningful competition exists. Are you really suggesting that people actively prefer to buy TVs that, for example, suddenly start showing them ads months or years after purchase?

kelnos 5y ago
An ad-free experience would almost certainly cost more (consider Amazon's cheaper Kindle that shows ads when the screen goes to sleep). If we're talking about adding even $50 to a $1000 TV, I'd bet most consumers would rather endure the ads and keep the $50.
- Silhouette 5y ago
  If I were a gambler I would probably take that bet, but the real problem here is that we currently have no way to tell who won because one of the options is not widely available to buyers.
- TeMPOraL 5y ago
  This is why ad-subsidizing is anticompetitive and in my honest opinion, should be banned as a business practice. Take two competitors selling exact same stuff for the same price. If one adds ads to their product, they can lower the price. If they can ad data collection, the price drops further. You just can't ethically compete on such market.
  - Silhouette 5y ago
    You just can't ethically compete on such market. I'm not sure that is necessarily true but the buyer making a decision needs to understand the differences between products. IMHO one of the problems right now is that manufacturers using these user-hostile practices don't have to prominently disclose them. Many people probably buy these products completely unaware of aspects they might not like if they knew about them. If packaging and promotions had to carry prominent warnings about user-hostile practices, that would level the playing field a bit. Better would be if the products themselves had to indicate whenever any sort of monitoring or phone-home system was operating, because that way everyone else using or near them also gets a warning that they might be spied on.