# smart TV's



## ddawg16 (Aug 15, 2011)

We have one......

Basically, it's an easy way to access NetFlix and other streaming services. Some also give you internet access.....you can sit there and browse the internet.

Some also have a camera that allows you to skype with people

Mine is hardwired via Ethernet.

If you are getting a larger TV, then I would go that way. Saves having to need another 'box' to watch netflix or RedBox.

We have gotten to the point where we rarely watch a DVD. It's easier to just stream it. No worries of it being 'sold out'.


----------



## Wildbill7145 (Sep 26, 2014)

ddawg16 said:


> Some also have a camera that allows you to skype with people


Wasn't there an issue raised a short while ago about the camera on these TVs not shutting off and people accessing them via the wifi connection? Not sure if it was just one brand, can't remember all the details.

Personally, I'd consider how much more you're paying for a 'smart' TV opposed to an android box that you can use to access streaming services. The boxes are pretty inexpensive at this point.


----------



## rjniles (Feb 5, 2007)

Don't get a wireless modem/router from the cable co. You pay an extra $5-10 a month forever. Buy a standalone router for less than $100 and its paid for itself in less than a year. Belken is my brand of choice.


----------



## Colbyt (Jan 27, 2014)

I pulled wire for mine but am stilling using it wireless. It is only about 12 feet from the router in the basement.

I would not own one with a camera, too close to "1984" for me.

I agree you should buy your own modem and router and not use cable rentals. The payback is less than a year.

Are you sure 40" is enough? After a year with a 40 I upgraded to a 60. The viewing distance is the key, 40 is plenty in a smaller room.

That model only has 2 HDMI inputs. Everything is moving to using HDMI and that may not be enough. Cable box is one, Blu Ray is 2 and what are you going to use for the next piece of equipment. I don't see optical audio mentioned. Sound bars use those or RCA inputs (also not mentioned). Speakers on HD TVs are generally crap and a sound bar becomes important.


----------



## Ca Exterminator (Nov 29, 2015)

Go 4K smart TV instead of 1080 you won't be sorry. I bought this one two months ago and it continues to impress as to the picture and up-conversion. As Colbyt mentioned some HD TVs have crap for speakers this unit does not it sounds great. As for this paticular brand HISENSE do not cut them short. They sell lots of these at Wal-Mart in my area as I know the guy personally that works that department and he claims they fly off the shelf and no majors so far. NOW,...as to the brand they have a factory four year warranty with in your home parts and labor and service SO, no need to ship the TV out if repairs are needed and no need to buy an extended warranty for big bucks. For 550 bucks WITH A FACTORY WARRANTY LIKE THAT...SOLD... As to the picture even the old school Star Trek original series (now im showing my age LOL) from the mid 1960s looks AMAZING due to up conversion. Is there nicer TVs out there ? Of course there is. But for this price range bang for the buck it's hard to beat on a budget. Is 4K technology the new up and coming standard ? Yes it is check out http://4k.com/ and the first 4K blu ray player was just released. Either way, the picture quality of 4K over 1080 is impressive to say the least so when two months ago I was thinking of a new TV bang for the buck I went with this 50 inch 4K TV...here is the link from Wal-Mart....JUST MY 2 CENTS OF OPINION...
http://www.walmart.com/ip/46009858?...4a99-a05c-c87c374bda15&adpgm=hl&pltfm=desktop


----------



## ddawg16 (Aug 15, 2011)

Colbyt brings up good points about ports.

Make sure it has a digital audio out. You can run that to your AV unit for Surround sound. Otherwise, you would need an AV unit with HDMI inputs that then sends the selected HDMI to the TV....a PIA.


----------



## Ca Exterminator (Nov 29, 2015)

ddawg16 said:


> colbyt brings up good points about ports.
> 
> Make sure it has a digital audio out. You can run that to your av unit for surround sound. Otherwise, you would need an av unit with hdmi inputs that then sends the selected hdmi to the tv....a pia.


...agreed...


----------



## Fix'n it (Mar 12, 2012)

ddawg16 said:


> We have one......
> 
> Basically, it's an easy way to access NetFlix and other streaming services. Some also give you internet access.....you can sit there and browse the internet.


how do i tell the difference ? all she needs/wants is netflix for when there is nothing on regular tv. she is disabled and home nearly all the time. 



rjniles said:


> Don't get a wireless modem/router from the cable co. You pay an extra $5-10 a month forever. Buy a standalone router for less than $100 and its paid for itself in less than a year. Belken is my brand of choice.


i am pretty sure the new comcast modem was the wifi built in. but i don't "know". and its free.



Colbyt said:


> Are you sure 40" is enough? After a year with a 40 I upgraded to a 60. The viewing distance is the key, 40 is plenty in a smaller room.
> 
> That model only has 2 HDMI inputs. Everything is moving to using HDMI and that may not be enough. Cable box is one, Blu Ray is 2 and what are you going to use for the next piece of equipment. I don't see optical audio mentioned. Sound bars use those or RCA inputs (also not mentioned). Speakers on HD TVs are generally crap and a sound bar becomes important.


she has a 32 now. was the first HD set in our home. a 40" would be a nice upgrade, and is about all that can fit the space in the stand.




ddawg16 said:


> Colbyt brings up good points about ports.
> 
> Make sure it has a digital audio out. You can run that to your AV unit for Surround sound. Otherwise, you would need an AV unit with HDMI inputs that then sends the selected HDMI to the TV....a PIA.



this is a basic daily viewing set. so no need for many ports.
for serious veiwing, we watch my HT system = pioneer eliete reciever, emotive xpa3, high power projector. dalite high power 2.8 119" screen. and 2 subs = monsters to most people( i want to built 2 18" subs)


----------



## rjniles (Feb 5, 2007)

Fix'n it said:


> i am pretty sure the new comcast modem was the wifi built in. but i don't "know". and its free.



Its may be built in but its not free. They turn it off if you don't want to pay.

Check this link out before you commit to Comcast.


http://blog.chron.com/techblog/2014/06/want-to-use-your-own-modemrouter-with-comcast-heres-how/


----------



## ddawg16 (Aug 15, 2011)

Most cable companies now 'rent' the modem. TW was charging $6/month. Wireless modem is even more.

I bought my own cable modem and use a combination of Gigbyte Ethernet switches and a wireless modem. Modem was paid for in less than a year. 

My TV is also capable of wireless, but I do hardwired to it. I have a really fast WiFi, but if you get too many devices using it, throughput will suffer.


----------



## Fix'n it (Mar 12, 2012)

again, while i don't "know", i thought the new(to me, modems) with wifi were always on wifi. as part of comcasts wifi network plan. 

but, this smart tv thing is starting to sound costly.


----------



## ktkelly (Apr 7, 2007)

Okay,

*I'm sure I'll get flamed once again. But:*

1. You do NOT need a "smart" TV.

2. You do NOT need a 4K TV.

3. You do NOT want WIFI provided by Comcast.

I do hope I made that very clear.


* What you need:*

1. You DO need a cable modem.

2. You DO need a WIFI router.

3. You DO need either a Roku, or Apple TV.


The bottom line is that with a 42" TV, unless you're sitting less than 2 feet from the screen, you cannot tell the difference between 720P, 1080P, or 4K. It is physically impossible, but people are convinced by the media and manufacturers, so they think they can tell the difference.

No issue setting up your own router. All you do is call ComCast, and they will handle that move.

Yes, setting up the router can be a PIA, but if you use something like a Buffalo Ac1750 and you use the "easy" set up, it's not really so hard.


*Bottom line:*

The basics are that your ComCast bill will go down, since you ARE being charged a lease fee for the modem.

While your TV pick is probably okay, I can say without a doubt, that I will not sell Samsung to my clients.

The Roku or Apple TV will be simple to set up, be easier to use that the "smart TV", and will serve you well.


----------



## ddawg16 (Aug 15, 2011)

ktkelly said:


> Okay,
> 
> *I'm sure I'll get flamed once again. But:*
> 
> ...


Yep....your going to get flamed.

If you want Roku....most smart TV's have it built in....no need for an extra box. Same for Netflix....Or Hulu.....or free content from major networks. 

A smart TV will let you browse to say NBC and stream all this seasons episodes of "The Black List"

You don't need a WiFi router is you do direct Ethernet connection to your TV

4K? 42" TV? Not worth it. You don't need 4K unless you push 55" and larger.


----------



## ktkelly (Apr 7, 2007)

ddawg16 said:


> Yep....your going to get flamed.
> 
> If you want Roku....most smart TV's have it built in....no need for an extra box. Same for Netflix....Or Hulu.....or free content from major networks.


Yes they do. But the ROKU box, or ATV is much more user friendly and reliable. 





> You don't need a WiFi router is you do direct Ethernet connection to your TV


That's great IF the modem is nearby, or you have access AND the capability to run the wiring. 



> 4K? 42" TV? Not worth it. You don't need 4K unless you push 55" and larger.


At least on this one we're in agreement.


Way too many here buy into the hype, without knowing the truth.


----------



## Deja-vue (Mar 24, 2013)

Just make sure you stay away from the suggested Hisense TV.
I wouldn't buy it if it was 8K.


----------



## jimn (Nov 13, 2010)

Agreed on you don't need the 4K. Not sure you need it any size seeing has we have very little of any 4K content and I question upsizing in any event. You only have some many bits of info and you are extrapolating and either creating additional information form where there is none . Some of the new TVs look artificial to me. Kind of like some ohm the new LED Christmas lights. They just don't look right. Personal preference there. 

On to my real point. How technically savvy is your mother? Make sure the system you choose is ultra simple to use. What looks simple to so,e of use, it's not so si olé for another generation. Took ages to teach my Mom how to,watch HD instead of SD ( she stills look up TV programming in the newspaper which of course only has the SD channels. ) . While a I love keeping things separate (aka Apple TV) so I can upgrade wireless speeds, new features etc by replacing a relatively in expense device instead having to be a 1000 TV ever couple of years to,keep up, in this case I believe the self contained smart TV would be the way to go.


----------



## Fix'n it (Mar 12, 2012)

i ended up getting her a non-smart samsung 40". seems like a nice (enough) tv for the price. picture is pretty good, as long as you watch "straight on". if you are not straight on, the picture gets pretty washed out. she is plenty happy with it.


----------



## AllanJ (Nov 24, 2007)

I would hold off on 4K for now. There are still a few details and standards and kinks that have yet to be worked out, and today's 4K TV sets, although they are expected to be fully compatible, may miss out on some of the future stuff.

There is no 4K content currently from sources other than the internet, and even on the internet, 4K content is only short clips, music videos, etc. and no full length movies.

The current color standard is "8 bit" which allows so many color shade gradation. The final standard goes to at least "10 bit" or maybe even "12 bit" allowing more color shade degradations and deeper colors.

The final standard will use "HDMI 2.0". Many current sets use "HDMI 1.1" and it is not certain what incompatibilities may show up when 4K reaches its full capabilities.

Ultra high definition TV and 4K are not exactly the same but the differences are not relevant to the paragraphs immediately preceding.


----------



## Fix'n it (Mar 12, 2012)

4k may well end up like 3D = didn't really take off. though eventually we will be forced to.


----------



## GrayHair (Apr 9, 2015)

I consider Smart TV to be hype to stimulate a stagnating market. 4K is a bandwagon and bandwagons usually travel rough roads, bounce a rider out, leaving them in the dust. Experience taught me this.

ATSC has yet to define 4K; what's in the marketplace today could end up being orphaned. In _ATSC 3.0: Where We Stand, Next-gen standard may leapfrog ATSC 2.0_, Rich Chernock, Chairman of the ATSC 3.0 Technology Standards Group (TG3), said, "Because ATSC 3.0 is likely to be incompatible with current broadcast systems, it must provide improvements in performance, functionality, and efficiency significant enough to warrant implementation of a non-backwards-compatible system." *http://atsc.org/newsletter/atsc-3-0-where-we-stand/*

Will broadcasters once again have to scrap equipment they now have to go to ATSC 3? Will they be able to afford it?


----------



## Colbyt (Jan 27, 2014)

> "Because ATSC 3.0 is likely to be incompatible with current broadcast systems, it must provide improvements in performance, functionality, and efficiency significant enough to warrant implementation of a non-backwards-compatible system." *http://atsc.org/newsletter/atsc-3-0-where-we-stand/*



I don't see it happening anytime soon and most of the cable services don't have the bandwidth to push even a compressed format of it. Our local Time Warner one can barely manage a compressed HD signal.
*http://atsc.org/newsletter/atsc-3-0-where-we-stand/*


----------



## GrayHair (Apr 9, 2015)

Colbyt said:


> I don't see it happening anytime soon and most of the cable services don't have the bandwidth to push even a compressed format of it. Our local Time Warner one can barely manage a compressed HD signal.


Bandwidth could be limited by an aging outside plant (or a poorly maintained one). Cable doesn't have the noise issues of broadcast and doesn't use 8VSB modulation; instead they use 64QAM or 256QAM for digital. I read somewhere that cable should be able to push twice the bit-rate of a OTA broadcast (subject to proper equipment and engineering).

I agree that it won't happen anytime soon. Even after 3.0 is voted on and published, there will still be issues including those in the last paragraph of Post #21.


----------



## Deja-vue (Mar 24, 2013)

jimn01 said:


> Agreed on you don't need the 4K.


 I never said not to get a 4K TV.
I said stay away from Hisense.
:smile:


----------



## Deja-vue (Mar 24, 2013)

AllanJ said:


> I would hold off on 4K for now.
> 
> There is no 4K content currently from sources other than the internet, and even on the internet, 4K content is only short clips, music videos, etc. and no full length movies.


 Hmm, I just watched an "Orphan Black" Episode in 4K on Amazon Prime, free streaming with my amazon Prime Account.
Amazon is adding new Titles daily... Netflix has even more.
DirecTV is working on it, Verizon Fios is working on it.
4K Youtube has tons of Stuff to watch.
So please don't miss-inform Folks here about what is available without doing some research.


----------



## bradleyshome (Mar 16, 2016)

It's still better to just get a separate ROKU box to access everything. As smart tvs are usually so under powered and coded terribly. I have a 1 year old LG smart tv and the apps crash when trying to launch. They are terrible


----------

