• foodvacuum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Damn. Too expensive for me. My TV has a dark spot after 8 years. I’m going to be on the market for a new one in the next year or two and displayport would be sweet. Hopefully this starts a trend. This is Hisence and am excited to see reviews for the latest TCL models to drop

  • db2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    It’s not going to be cheap, though — in the US, the 65-inch model is officially priced at $3,499.

    • Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      That’s a fuckin steal for the tech, if it wasn’t a smart tv.

      Maybe I’m showing my age but I remember 3k+ for a 60+” DLP TV with shit viewing angles and a bulb that needed replacing eventually.

    • lyralycan@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Lol, such bs. When HDTVs were made ‘smart’, and then 3D, the only ones sold were 40"+ and £3,000+. Took about three years for that price to drop 90%. But this is garbage news, who still wants a television in this century? Pubs, community spaces and that’s about it. Monitors are significantly cheaper, with less bloat and software lock.

      • thejml@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Well, I might not want a TV… all I really want is a 60"+ high quality, high refresh rate, 4k+ panel to game, work and watch media on…

        On wait; thats literally an HDTV minus the tuner.

        The only thing that makes it a TV IS the tuner… and honestly it’s not bad to have in an emergency or for local OTA stuff anyway. If I never use it then having it doesn’t matter.

      • accideath@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        People who watch movies or tv series a lot and who care about image quality? Couch gamers? I couldn’t get a decent 65“ monitor. But my TV has a very good image, supports 2160p with 144Hz, VRR, HDR, etc.
        And at no point did my TV force me to go online. I can 100% just ignore the software. What more could I want?

        • lyralycan@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Bruh 65" is only good if you’re like 6m away - almost no homes are like that. <=42" is the only normal size for a normal home, and sacrificing no quality. I get preferences, but that size has nothing to do with practicality

          • accideath@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            The optimal viewing distance of a 65“ TV is somewhere between 1.98m and 2.69m for it to fill out 30-40° of our field of vision, as recommended by the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE), for an immersive „cinematic“ watching experience.

            My TV is about 2.5m away from my couch and I’m quite happy with the size, although, if price didn’t play a role, I‘d have gone with another size up (77“). Although I admit, it’s not the most practical size and it’s not for everyone. It does take up a lot of space.

            However with 42“ you’re definitely sacrificing quality. Or at least I would be at the 2.5m distance I sit from my TV. The vast majority of people (me included) could not discern any difference between a FullHD and a UHD image there. Our eyes simply do not have that resolution (measured at up to 94 pixels per degree). Even my 65“ at the aforementioned 2.5m distance has a higher resolution than my eyes.

            So >=65“ is the only normal size for a normal home, if one actually wants a home cinema and actually not sacrifice on quality, detail and immersion.

      • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        who still wants a television in this century?

        This is so out-of-touch it’s unreal.

        —Someone who doesn’t still want a television in this century

    • prettybunnys@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I’d happily pay that for a pc-gaming quality dumb panel the size of a traditional tv.

      But ima need 3 or 4 display port inputs.

      I also probably want full sized display port inputs over usb-c form

      • Eggyhead@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        I’ve heard that the “smart” feature services actually help subsidize the overall cost of the TV, but if that’s true, I doubt any of those savings are being passed to the consumer.

      • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        There are relatively few, but there are a couple. The Sceptre U515CV-UMC is probably the most well known one. It’s easy to find a dumb TV in the sub 24" category, too, but that’s probably not what most people are looking for and at that rate most nerds would probably just use a computer monitor instead anyway.

        No DisplayPort on that Sceptre, obviously.

      • Jhex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        not a permanent solution… some are experimenting with making a network connection mandatory to work at all

          • Jhex@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            Again, that’s the issue… look how hard it is to get a dumb TV today…

            I could choose today to skip the TV that requires network to work but soon they will all join the trend and it would be impossible to avoid

            • thermal_shock@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              So if your input is HDMI from a small desktop computer, it still makes you connect to a network? If this is true, it sucks, I’ve never seen it. I always use a 3rd party media player like an Nvidia shield. My tv has never been on a network.

    • FiskFisk33@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’m pretty happy with my samsung. No really, hear me out, if power cuts out, when it resumes, the tv auto starts on the same input.

      I have it connected to a pc, and use a smart plug for turning on and off. Haven’t seen a trace of the smarts for years :D

    • FG_3479@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      All smart TVs which let you go through the setup wizard without connecting to Wi-Fi can be.

  • Gerudo@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    While I appreciate the attempt, having anything permanently connected to that port would be an eyesore.

    • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I appreciate the intent of having a port readily accessible for e.g. grandma to find without groveling behind the dusty TV, but that does not excuse not having another one in a more sensible location.

  • lol_idk@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Nobody:

    Nosense: Let’s put it on the side so you have to look at the cable all the time

  • Alpha71@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    I like TV’s. I was using 3 1080p 60hz TV’s as monitors. I recently upgraded to a Philips Google TV. 43" 4K, 144Hz, with HDR10 & Dolby Atmos. The difference is amazing. and I love the larger size.

    • SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Couple of years ago I bought an LG 50” TV as a monitor. Since it was cheaper then buying a large monitor. I also like the large size, since my eyesight has gone to shit. Also I have a deep desk so I can just push the TV to the edge of my desk and have all the desk space available and still have a screen that fills my view. I only wish it was curved since 50” is just a bit too large.

      • Grostleton@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        I once got a 42" tv from some Korean brand Seiki for like $400 back in like 2008. The best thing about it was you could update the firmware to that of one of their other models and get true 1080p 120hz without any of the post processing junk ruining response times.

        Lasted me a little over a decade before something burnt out, best gaming monitor ever though.

  • Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Actual mini LED (3.5 to 5k nits!!) and display port?
    (And a price to match it, but it’s “only” at the upper end of normal consumer TVs.)

    Ok, where it the enshitification catch?

    • Manjushri@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s Hisense and they will likely be forcing ads on you at every opportunity.

      Hardware and software laden with ads have, unfortunately, become part and parcel of modern life, but there are occasions when the hunt for revenue goes too far. One of those cases comes from Hisense, known across Western markets as a budget electronics brand. The firm’s TV sets have repeatedly come under fire for forcing non-skippable ads when switching inputs, turning the TV on, navigating to the home screen, and even when switching channels — all changes that took effect unilaterally after purchase, reportedly even for users who had all ad-related options disabled.

  • LaggyKar@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    over 100% of the BT.2020 pro color space

    What does this mean? BT.2020 already requires pure monochromatic subpixels (which you’re not gonna get with LCD), so you can’t go beyond that unless you use 4+ subpixels (in which case the extra colors will just go unused, since HDR video is delivered as BT.2020). Or is BT.2020 Pro a smaller gamut than BT.2020?

    This article is the only thing I can find on Google which mentions “BT.2020 Pro”, at least in English.

    • ripcord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Didn’t read it. Not going to.

      You’re asking if someone else will do it for you, or…?

      • Professorozone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yes that’s exactly what I’m asking. We’ll done.

        Also I’m my defense, no one is forcing anyone to actually do it.

      • iegod@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        They’re honest at least. I respect that. Likely doesn’t care enough but if someone presents the info that would be filed under ‘neat’.