What use is WiFi on a Costco Viso TV?

Page 4 of 5  
On 9/5/2015 12:12 PM, Ewald Böhm wrote:

Build a home theater PC and wire it to a "large monitor"/TV of your choosing. You'll browse at the same "speed" that you do on your PC (assuming you use a PC of comparable performance in the HTPC), will be able to access your local media tank/UPnP devices, view photos, listen to music, balance your checkbook, play games, etc.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 17:33:08 -0400, Nil wrote:

Is this correct yet?
1. You hook up this "smart TV" to the power but to no other wires. 2. The WiFi connects to your router, so the TV is "on the net". 3. The TV has built-in apps to get movies on Youtube, Hulu, Netflix. 4. Some TVs have a web browser - but they're so slow as to be useless. 5. Some have a DirectTV (coax wired?) input in the back of the TV? 6. Some TVs have built-in games. 7. You can't *add* anything; it's all built in to the TV OS.
Is that the sum total of the advantages of WiFi on a TV?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 7:56:22 AM UTC-4, Ewald Böhm wrote:

Every Smart Tv that I've seen included normal inputs, eg HDMI, composite video, antenna, etc. just like TV's before the smart tvs became available. They work just like any other HD TV, with wifi added in addition. I would think almost all smart Tvs are hooked up to cable, sat, or antenna just like they were before, with the wifi being an additional way of using them, if you choose.

Yes

IDK about the speed of the web browser. With fast processors available today, at modest prices, I don't see why they can't make a web interface that performs well.

Per previous they have all the normal TV inputs.

I think that covers it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

A disadvantage to Smart TVs is that they quite literally spy on you. At least one manufacturer has issued a warning about it:
https://www.thestar.com/business/tech_news/2015/02/09/samsung-gives-warning-about-talking-in-front-of-the-smart-tv.html
I really don't understand why anyone would even consider the purchase of such a device. I suppose for many that convenience and entertainment trump all other considerations these days.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled.)
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 12:55:42 +0000 (UTC), Roger Blake

I got one that was just a little dumber than that (no voice control)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/4/2015 5:55 AM, Roger Blake wrote:

From the manufacturer's standpoint, this approach (to the imagined problem!) makes sense: why incur the added cost of putting enough processing power in the TV to be able to decode INFREQUENTLY spoken commands? It makes more sense (assuming transit times are short) to ship the "data" ("sound") off to a server (located at some firm that you CONTRACT WITH -- not even *your* server!) and have it do the heavy lifting.
And, the TV needn't deliberately be "spying" on you to still allow them to harvest other information from it. I.e., if you are *talking*, then, chances are, you are still sitting in front of the TV! Your eyes are more likely to be viewing <whatever> than looking through the refrigerator for a snack! That's worth something to the content distributor pushing that "movie" to you; or, the vendor who has purchased the ad time!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
alt.home.repair:

Not necessarily. If you have a TV feed from an antenna or cable service, you hook that up, too. The "Smart" features are internet only, so you need an internet connection to use them. You could hook that part of the TV to your home router with a cable or wirelessly.

Yes.

Yes.

Well, mine is. It displays content slowly (I think that there isn't much memory or storage in the TV for buffering, plus the browser itself may be a Java app, which is inherently slow to start up) but the worst thing about it is that you have to navigate using your TV remote. You may be able to hook up a computer keyboard, which would help.

There's a coax input on mine, but I don't know anything about DirectTV.

Yes. There are "apps" included with the Smart TV software, analogous to the apps on your smart phone. The apps on my Samsung TV can be updated from them. You can purchase others, I think.

The OS and apps may be updateable from the manufacturer.

There may be others. Actually, if I knew then what I know now, I'd get a dumb TV and add one of those add-on boxes like Chromecast or whatever to get the content I use. Most of the apps on my Samsung suck royally. I only use a couple of them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 14:44:21 -0400, Nil wrote:

Can't you just connect any old bluetooth keyboard to solve that problem?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 5 Sep 2015 04:44:36 +0000 (UTC), Ewald Böhm

Samsung supports USB keyboard and mouse
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

Still using Panasonic Plasma set. So far never had any issues. Superb picture quality compared to LCD panels.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/5/2015 12:07 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:

Where did you see the repair records or brand comparisons? I have four TVs and three computer monitors. Lack of repairs and good picture quality is why I've stuck with them.
I was looking at the demo TV in a store with the UHD and curved screen. Wow, what a great picture!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 11:28:38 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I agree, I've bought Sammy's for work and relatives...my own is nearly 6 yo. People I know love them too...I guess one experience will prejudice some. Panasonic IS the best for cordless landline/bluetooth phones!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/5/2015 10:36 AM, bob_villa wrote:

We're not even *considering* Samsung products in our future purchase decision. We bought a Samsung Washer/Dryer and had the washer fail after ~18 months of *light* use (there's just two of us here; not hordes of rug rats constantly demanding clean clothes).
When I mentioned this to the friend who had "recommended" the Samsungs, her reply was: "Oh, we've already replaced the washer *and* dryer!" (failures -- same vintage as the units *we* purchased!!).
[If you want to have a broad set of product offerings, you risk your reputation in one line tainting perceptions of your other lines!]
I have *9* Samsung LCD monitors that were "rescues" (i.e., all had failed). By contrast, just 3 Viewsonics (which aren't known as "top shelf").
OTOH, our *Gateway* plasma TV is now just over 12 years old (August 2003) and still has a delightful picture. So much so that I've not spent any serious time trying to repair the two (considerably newer) Vizio sets I've been given.
[And Gateway had a *terrible* track record with plasmas!]
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/5/2015 2:33 PM, Don Y wrote:

Funny, in spite of the good TVs, I'd not consider their major appliances. Bought a Maytag washer and dryer, Kitchen Aid DW. We have two Samsung phones too.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Hi Ed,
On 9/5/2015 11:52 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

There is, of course, no way to correlate the quality of products in one product line with those in another. This is implicitly acknowledged in my comment:
[If you want to have a broad set of product offerings, you risk your reputation in one line tainting perceptions of your other lines!]
OTOH, having experienced a "loss" in a product from a manufacturer, there is a strong disincentive to throw MORE money on OTHER products from the same manufacturer -- "Fool me one, shame on you; fool me twice..."
In the case of the washing machine, the nature of the failure wasn't something "odd" or "unusual" that would have been difficult for the designing engineer to FORESEE: the mechanical latch that LOCKS the door was fabricated entirely out of flimsy plastic -- despite the fact that it probably sees the *most* "wear" in daily use AND is always under considerable stresses (due to the internal design of the mechanism).
This should have been something EASY to test in the lab. And, something that you would intuitively *know* should be tested and verified before the design was committed to manufacturing. So, it obviously was overlooked in design, inadequately tested in manufacturing or a deliberate "gamble" on their part (with the manufacturer the intended beneficiary of that gamble).
I had a summer job at a hand-tool manufacturer when I was in school. A tool is a tool, right? A hammer from manufacturer A is just as good as a hammer from manufacturer B, right? (think of Harbor Freight :> ).
A hammer (e.g.) is *designed*, not just cut out of a block of steel. The hardness of the steel is defined. The strength of the handle and its fastening means to the head. The weight and balance, etc. E.g., notice that the edge of a claw/carpenter's hammer tends to be *beveled*. This is to reduce the risk of chipping and having metal chips fly off into the eyes of the user. Additionally, the edge of the hammer is *softened* (a separate manufacturing step) so it deforms instead of splinters.
All that looks good on paper. But, how do you *verify* that it actually PERFORMS as designed? E.g., we would routinely sample lots off the production floor and test for hardness, etc. We had a machine that would "hold" a hammer and repeatedly, continuously STRIKE a metal block every few seconds with a given force to see how long it took for the handle to fail. And, examine the head to verify the absence of any "chips", etc.
Is it too hard for a multibillion dollar company to design a jig that "opens and closes" a simulated (or actual!) washing machine door every 3 seconds and see how long it takes to *fail*? This would be REALLY easy to correlate with actual usage: assume the door is opened/closed at least twice for each load of laundry; assume X loads of laundry per day; etc.
Far easier to determine an expected lifetime of the mechanism than it would be, for example, to say a hammer failed after "driving 237,000 nails with a force of..."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 1:33:53 PM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:

I have had and have a few Samsung monitors (and a couple Dell/Samsung). No problems with them. And I have heard of problems with Samsung's appliances (and LG's), but they know how to make an HD TV IMO. I have a 22" Gateway mo nitor, but I wasn't aware they ever made TV's?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/5/2015 2:05 PM, bob_villa wrote:

I used to volunteer at an organization that recycled electronic products. So, took note of the stuff that came in (broken). Of course, if you see a lot of something, it could mean it's a crappy design *or* it could be that they have 98% of the market!

We were very disapppointed with these pieces. In fact, we found a refrigerator that we fell in love with -- until we saw Samsung's name (and walked away).

Long time ago. Apparently had some "support" problems (no doubt someone else made the TV for them; so, if their relationship with that supplier soured, they would be unable to support their customers!)
OTOH, this one has been just fine for a LONG time (but predates HDMI, ATSC, etc.).
I'd had excellent luck with JVC video products in the past (VCR's, TV's). When we started looking for a TV as a replacement for this one, I naturally thought of them. But, JVC seems to have "leased" its name (reputation?) to some chinese (?) firm. I'm not keen on rolling those dice!
Thankfully, we're not couch potatoes and don't need a room dedicated to mushrooming our butts :> So, the TV issue is relatively unimportant (I can watch on a 24" monitor in a pinch; on a widescreen laptop for DVD's; etc.)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That's about it. I think my Sharp TV is Android. Slow, clunky. Even the apps that work are inferior to what you would have on a phone/tablet/PC.
I use the "MiraCast" option to cast my Android tablet to the scrren quite often, so I can see my cat videos from YouTube in better quality.
--
Clarence A Dold - Santa Rosa, CA, USA GPS: 38.47,-122.65

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@20.usenet.us.com wrote:

tablet to use as primary display and big creen TV set as a duplicate display.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 6:16:40 AM UTC-5, Ewald Böhm wrote:

I recently got a smart TV then got a message from my provider (DIRECTV) tha t I need to connect to the internet. The second "box" is a wireless connect ion kit for $99. However, since I have been a customer beyond the contract period I can upgrade to a new receiver at no cost--if I sign on for another two year contract. Since I don't care about Netflix and the other features , I'm electing to skip the "smart" features for now.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.