3 ms·

How much is "technically the best" worth compared to "convenient, secure, and good"?

stackskipton 11mo ago
To most, all they care about is picture quality and being able to watch the content they want. Also, I assume you can still do what I did for my current LG TV, skip the wifi setup, plug in AppleTV and use it purely as dumb TV.
- lotsofpulp 11mo ago
  I imagine it won't be long before the TVs come with eSIMs to connect directly to Tmobile/Verizon/ATT, and maybe add some cameras in the borders to track eye movement. Then the advertisers could buy more accurate information to improve product placement in movies/tv shows. The sci-fi version could be a TV that can recognize what kind of things are in the room or clues for the viewer's socioeconomic status and emotional state to bring up content (or even change it in real time) to maximize resonance with the viewer.
  - ls612 11mo ago
    People on HN have been saying this for years and TVs still aren’t shipping sims.
  - 15155 11mo ago
    The cheaper play (which could be implemented today, likely with few HW changes) would be to just use BLE or another 2.4GHz proprietary protocol to broadcast your usage data (maybe encrypted with a vendor key - let's be generous) to another TV or refrigerator in your area that is already internet-connected.
    - graemep 11mo ago
      Is that not pretty similar to what Amazon already do with Ring devices?
  - stackskipton 11mo ago
    The cost is probably still too do prohibitive to do so. I worked with IoT devices, generally the cost per GB of data is around dollar per GB. I doubt you would make that back in advertisements. Also, there is cost per SIM so you wouldn't want situation where SIM is active if you don't need it which is why alot of IoT devices have you setup with a phone because they turn SIM on when you sign up for their plan. If consumer never puts TV on Wi-Fi network or cooperates with the phone, then you would have keep each SIM active and turn it off when it checks in via Wi-Fi. My guess is cost is not worth it if you get 98% cooperation. Write off 2% and call it a day.
- delusional 11mo ago
  > all they care about is picture quality I get that, but at some point you're installing it in your house with non-color corrected lighting and viewing it during the daytime with your terrible human eyes. I get why 200-300 lumens of peak brightness can make a difference, but does 2-3% of color correctness really matter to people as they watch their low bitrate netflix stream? Maybe we'd all be better off if we calmed down a bit on chasing the specs, and focused on something else for a while.
  - JoshTriplett 11mo ago
    Are there any streaming services that offer video quality on par with a high-end blu-ray?
    - dublinben 11mo ago
      Sony Pictures Core and Kaleidescape are as close as it gets, and both require expensive proprietary hardware.
      - JoshTriplett 11mo ago
        That's really disappointing; I have zero interest in allowing a device like that on my network, or in spending that much on hardware for a single proprietary service that could go away or change its terms, or in having a service that only works with one device rather than many services that all work on the same device (e.g. Android TV). Sigh. Where's the video equivalent of music stores for "just let me buy a high-quality DRM-free download I actually own" already?

To most, all they care about is picture quality and being able to watch the content they want. Also, I assume you can still do what I did for my current LG TV, skip the wifi setup, plug in AppleTV and use it purely as dumb TV.

lotsofpulp 11mo ago
I imagine it won't be long before the TVs come with eSIMs to connect directly to Tmobile/Verizon/ATT, and maybe add some cameras in the borders to track eye movement. Then the advertisers could buy more accurate information to improve product placement in movies/tv shows. The sci-fi version could be a TV that can recognize what kind of things are in the room or clues for the viewer's socioeconomic status and emotional state to bring up content (or even change it in real time) to maximize resonance with the viewer.
- ls612 11mo ago
  People on HN have been saying this for years and TVs still aren’t shipping sims.
- 15155 11mo ago
  The cheaper play (which could be implemented today, likely with few HW changes) would be to just use BLE or another 2.4GHz proprietary protocol to broadcast your usage data (maybe encrypted with a vendor key - let's be generous) to another TV or refrigerator in your area that is already internet-connected.
  - graemep 11mo ago
    Is that not pretty similar to what Amazon already do with Ring devices?
- stackskipton 11mo ago
  The cost is probably still too do prohibitive to do so. I worked with IoT devices, generally the cost per GB of data is around dollar per GB. I doubt you would make that back in advertisements. Also, there is cost per SIM so you wouldn't want situation where SIM is active if you don't need it which is why alot of IoT devices have you setup with a phone because they turn SIM on when you sign up for their plan. If consumer never puts TV on Wi-Fi network or cooperates with the phone, then you would have keep each SIM active and turn it off when it checks in via Wi-Fi. My guess is cost is not worth it if you get 98% cooperation. Write off 2% and call it a day.
delusional 11mo ago
> all they care about is picture quality I get that, but at some point you're installing it in your house with non-color corrected lighting and viewing it during the daytime with your terrible human eyes. I get why 200-300 lumens of peak brightness can make a difference, but does 2-3% of color correctness really matter to people as they watch their low bitrate netflix stream? Maybe we'd all be better off if we calmed down a bit on chasing the specs, and focused on something else for a while.
- JoshTriplett 11mo ago
  Are there any streaming services that offer video quality on par with a high-end blu-ray?
  - dublinben 11mo ago
    Sony Pictures Core and Kaleidescape are as close as it gets, and both require expensive proprietary hardware.
    - JoshTriplett 11mo ago
      That's really disappointing; I have zero interest in allowing a device like that on my network, or in spending that much on hardware for a single proprietary service that could go away or change its terms, or in having a service that only works with one device rather than many services that all work on the same device (e.g. Android TV). Sigh. Where's the video equivalent of music stores for "just let me buy a high-quality DRM-free download I actually own" already?