8 ms·

I did this for years, but monitors are oddly more expensive than TVs. All my TVs now are actual TVs, but they are more or less permanently set to HDMI1 input a

• dragonwriter 12y ago
  > The exception being Netflix on the non-theater TVs, for that I usually use the on-TV Netflix client. And, if that fits what you want, great. OTOH, If someone is trying to avoid unwanted features of SMART TVs, some of which may not be separately opted-in and which generally rely on network access, providing network access to the SMART TV to allow the use of the on-TV Netflix client is self-defeating. (I'm personally not so concerned about those features, though I've seen plenty of people who seem to be, I just want to avoid relying on SMART TV features because they are additional potential sources of failure, and because the "SMART" parts become outdated much faster than the display parts.)
  • brk 12y ago
    But you can still get the TV cheaper. If you're using a monitor, that's implying all your sources are outside the TV anyway. You don't need to plug the TV into a network then. So, the TV effectively becomes a monitor, but cheaper.
• penprogg 12y ago
  It's not odd that they are more expensive, monitors typically have higher refresh rates and faster response times. Both of which imply more powerful hardware for the monitor's driver.
  • brk 12y ago
    Not these days (from what I've seen). I think it's mostly a supply/demand thing. Though some monitors do come with longer warranties, it's not worth the added cost.
  • sliverstorm 12y ago
    TV's typically also have dramatically lower pixel density.