7 ms·

Yes! I’ve bought many for my old work as we don’t allow smart tvs. I bought the Panasonics and never had any issues. https://na.panasonic.com/us/audio-video-s

Yes! I’ve bought many for my old work as we don’t allow smart tvs. I bought the Panasonics and never had any issues. https://na.panasonic.com/us/audio-video-solutions/professional-displays https://na.panasonic.com/us/audio-video-solutions/profession... Im sure there are other companies. Im on my phone so can’t research. Look for “digital displays” instead of tv. Good luck!

julianwachholz 4y ago
I know them as 'digital signage' or 'hospitality tvs' and they do work for their intended use. But they're usually a lot more expensive than their consumer counterparts? My guess is they are either heavily subsidized and/or built to be powered ON 24/7?
- langsoul-com 4y ago
  Perhaps the use case, companies are willing to shell out more than a price concious individual.
- downrightmike 4y ago
  The MFG make more money on selling ads to you than you pay for the TV.
  - michaelmrose 4y ago
    This wasn't a business model that was a factor in the launch of 1080p high def TVs or the subsequent fall in prices. I don't even recall it being much of a factor in the launch of 4K TVs which launched at typically very high prices and begun falling in price without ads becoming a big thing. I think this is just unacceptable greed.
  - dehrmann 4y ago
    This seems high to me. I'd love to see actual numbers on revenue from this type of TV ads.
    - madeofpalk 4y ago
      At least, it's subsidised. Sell a larger TV for less upfront, make it back in ads.
    - car_analogy 4y ago
      They'll never share the numbers. But they will swear up and down that they're huge and that nobody would pay for a TV without ads, trust us.
  - sib 4y ago
    It's not that they make more on selling ads than the end user pays for the TV. It's that the manufacturer makes more on the ads than their tiny share of the price that the user pays. A mfr might only make single digit $$ of margin on a TV sold at retail in the US (I'm talking about low-end and mid-tier TVs, not > $1,000 units.)
- adamredwoods 4y ago
  Samsung 4k UHD business display (only an example, YMMV): https://www.samsung.com/us/business/displays/pro-tv/be-series/43-bet-h-series-crystal-uhd-4k-pro-tv-lh43bethlgfxgo/ https://www.samsung.com/us/business/displays/pro-tv/be-serie...
  - vineyardmike 4y ago
    ... this is a smart tv
- mschuster91 4y ago
  DS displays are built better, yes (usually, they get the top yield of panels with the target resolution and in outdoor cases also stronger background lighting). The real difference however is the explicit guarantee that there will be support and spare parts available for anything from 5-10 years or that there will be at least a mounting-compatible successor model. Since noise is usually not a factor to be considered, they are also usually built with much bigger temperature profiles in mind than your consumer indoor TV (e.g. by using cooling fans or heating elements) so they can work just as well in -20 °C in the winter or at 80 °C in the summer heat. Also, some of these offer features that consumer displays do not offer: - YUV or SDI inputs - RS232 remote control / status monitoring - especially in zero-bezel modules: support for grid processing. Basically you have a HDMI/DVI/SDI input and a loop output, and you daisy-chain the whole bunch of displays. Then you tell each of them to slice and upscale just a specific part of the picture.
- heleninboodler 4y ago
  My concern with these is that for commercial use, they're generally designed to be brighter and more eye-catching, so it's hard to get that "picture frame" look like the Samsung Frame has when it's in standby mode (I still honestly don't know how they do it because I've experimented with all the backlight/contrast/other settings on other displays and it doesn't look anywhere near as good, whereas with the Frame, people are often legitimately surprised that it's a TV). I'd also assume that commercial applications also aren't interested in low power consumption. Some of the "digital signage" displays I look at are like 200W where the Frame claims a 0.5W standby.
  - 0des 4y ago
    dot pitch, not brightness.

julianwachholz 4y ago

I know them as 'digital signage' or 'hospitality tvs' and they do work for their intended use. But they're usually a lot more expensive than their consumer counterparts? My guess is they are either heavily subsidized and/or built to be powered ON 24/7?

langsoul-com 4y ago
Perhaps the use case, companies are willing to shell out more than a price concious individual.
downrightmike 4y ago
The MFG make more money on selling ads to you than you pay for the TV.
- michaelmrose 4y ago
  This wasn't a business model that was a factor in the launch of 1080p high def TVs or the subsequent fall in prices. I don't even recall it being much of a factor in the launch of 4K TVs which launched at typically very high prices and begun falling in price without ads becoming a big thing. I think this is just unacceptable greed.
- dehrmann 4y ago
  This seems high to me. I'd love to see actual numbers on revenue from this type of TV ads.
  - madeofpalk 4y ago
    At least, it's subsidised. Sell a larger TV for less upfront, make it back in ads.
  - car_analogy 4y ago
    They'll never share the numbers. But they will swear up and down that they're huge and that nobody would pay for a TV without ads, trust us.
- sib 4y ago
  It's not that they make more on selling ads than the end user pays for the TV. It's that the manufacturer makes more on the ads than their tiny share of the price that the user pays. A mfr might only make single digit $$ of margin on a TV sold at retail in the US (I'm talking about low-end and mid-tier TVs, not > $1,000 units.)
adamredwoods 4y ago
Samsung 4k UHD business display (only an example, YMMV): https://www.samsung.com/us/business/displays/pro-tv/be-series/43-bet-h-series-crystal-uhd-4k-pro-tv-lh43bethlgfxgo/ https://www.samsung.com/us/business/displays/pro-tv/be-serie...
- vineyardmike 4y ago
  ... this is a smart tv
mschuster91 4y ago
DS displays are built better, yes (usually, they get the top yield of panels with the target resolution and in outdoor cases also stronger background lighting). The real difference however is the explicit guarantee that there will be support and spare parts available for anything from 5-10 years or that there will be at least a mounting-compatible successor model. Since noise is usually not a factor to be considered, they are also usually built with much bigger temperature profiles in mind than your consumer indoor TV (e.g. by using cooling fans or heating elements) so they can work just as well in -20 °C in the winter or at 80 °C in the summer heat. Also, some of these offer features that consumer displays do not offer: - YUV or SDI inputs - RS232 remote control / status monitoring - especially in zero-bezel modules: support for grid processing. Basically you have a HDMI/DVI/SDI input and a loop output, and you daisy-chain the whole bunch of displays. Then you tell each of them to slice and upscale just a specific part of the picture.
heleninboodler 4y ago
My concern with these is that for commercial use, they're generally designed to be brighter and more eye-catching, so it's hard to get that "picture frame" look like the Samsung Frame has when it's in standby mode (I still honestly don't know how they do it because I've experimented with all the backlight/contrast/other settings on other displays and it doesn't look anywhere near as good, whereas with the Frame, people are often legitimately surprised that it's a TV). I'd also assume that commercial applications also aren't interested in low power consumption. Some of the "digital signage" displays I look at are like 200W where the Frame claims a 0.5W standby.
- 0des 4y ago
  dot pitch, not brightness.