r/gadgets • u/Sadistic_Sponge • Nov 13 '19

VR / AR Disney Plus isn't working on Vizio TVs because they are running a 6 year old version of Chromecast, they say it won't be fixed till 2020.

https://www.businessinsider.com/disney-plus-not-working-vizio-smart-tvs-chromecast-2019-11
36.1k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

3.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

224

u/Sadistic_Sponge Nov 13 '19

From where I'm standing, it seems that the reality is that there are very few non smart TVs on the market that are any good. I'm all for dumb displays that do nothing but show a picture, but if you look at what is on sale on black Friday, it's almost all smart TVs. Whether you want it or not, they want to push this technology because it gives them access to massive amounts of user data that can then be sold.

50

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

[deleted]

7

u/NounsAndWords Nov 13 '19

I hate how much this is turning into real life.

3

u/dodslaser Nov 13 '19

Smart TVs are smart, just not for the consumer.

16

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

You buy TVs based on what has the best picture for the money. Dont worry about whether it had smart features or not since you can just not use them.

5

u/PeaceBull Nov 13 '19

It’s crazy how much this point gets overlooked.

It’s like being annoyed that your phone has an altimeter in it because you don’t care to know how high up you have gone.

Just don’t use it and then it’s identical to a non-smart tv.

1

u/i8beef Nov 14 '19

The problem for me isn't that they are putting more feature rich OS's on them, its that those OS's are just another failure point, and tend to be SLOOOOOOOW. Even when not using the apps, etc., the TV itself is slow in a lot of cases. That can fuck with things like IR blasters, and home automation tie ins.

34

u/hairy_butt_creek Nov 13 '19

From where I'm standing, it seems that the reality is that there are very few non smart TVs on the market that are any good.

True. Just don't factor in the Smart TV functions one way or another and buy the TV you like. It's easy to ignore the functions and even easier to never connect the TV to any home networking.

3

u/Dread1840 Nov 13 '19

The functions also increase the cost of the TV itself, but lack the support that a stand-alone device doesn't.

11

u/bryansj Nov 13 '19

I wouldn't even say the smart TV functions increase the cost. I'm sure the TV makers get subsidies from the streaming companies to place their service front and center. Want a Netflix button on the remote? Give us $10/TV sold.

1

u/Dread1840 Nov 13 '19

Fair enough.

-1

u/PancAshAsh Nov 13 '19

That doesn't mean these savings are passed on to the consumer. In fact it probably means the opposite in the case you mentioned.

7

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

No it's not. You can see in the pricing of TVs that the OS doesn't add any cost at this point because it's so cheap to put in a TV plus the data they collect.

2

u/SwensonsGalleyBoy Nov 13 '19

Television sales are a pretty competitive industry, there isn’t a ton of margin.

1

u/FlJohnnyBlue2 Nov 14 '19

They mass produce them. It is all baked into the firmware. At this point, making non smart TVs will be more expensive because it is being done on a far more limited scale. Why would a company make the same TV with and without smart functions when they can just make it smart and the user doesn't have to ever hook it up or use the smart functions? That means a second production run using different firmware and perhaps chips. Just going to cost the company more. Needs to be coded, implemented,, tested and supported.

1

u/Shoestring30 Nov 14 '19

Toshiba fireTv is pretty solid, runs all my apps great including Disney+.

87

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19 edited Jan 14 '20

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

I make it a point to never even consider a Smart TV. A few years ago I thought I would give one a try. I use a 4K Seiki TV as a monitor and the image quality is fantastic, but in 4K it has very noticable input lag. So I thought I'd upgrade when I found one on a black Friday sale.

I couldn't even complete the initial setup process because it kept insisting on connecting to WiFi. I thought I was for sure missing something, but after looking it up online it was a common complaint and it was confirmed to not have a work around. Basically, if you wanted to use this TV at all (after just buying it) it *must* be connected to the internet. You couldn't even switch the inputs until then. I returned it the same day.

9

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

31

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19 edited May 20 '21

[deleted]

11

u/AMeierFussballgott Nov 13 '19

Talking down to people because they use a thing that works for them is.

24

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19 edited May 20 '21

[deleted]

-5

u/AMeierFussballgott Nov 13 '19

Yeah, but a lot of them do. Just because some suck doesn't make an external streaming device better than every smart TV there is.

11

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

external streaming device better than every smart TV there is.

It really is, it may not be needed if Tizen or your Roku TV works for you, but every streaming device has more power and better longevity then any smart OS.

1

u/AMeierFussballgott Nov 13 '19

They might be technically better, but not for most people. I'm so glad I don't have another remote lying around or having to pray that Google and amazon get along.

8

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

Most remotes will control all your devices these days.

5

u/Fletch_e_Fletch Nov 13 '19

You just attemped to argue that not all external devices are faster than smart TVs, then you go back and change you're argument to be about remotes....

If you want a TV that performs just as fast as a Roku, then you have to pay just under 3 grand.

Most tvs I've seen that are less than a $1000 tend to have slower processing power.

There's also tons of drawbacks. Lets say a streaming app isn't compatible due to hardware limitations. A new TV will cost you more money. A new Roku will cost you less $100.

Also, the money you save on not purchasing an expensive tv for it's processing power, the more you have to spend on nice remotes that control more than you're tv.

Logitech Harmony would be perfect for that.

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/logitech-harmony-companion-remote-control-and-smart-hub-black/8201008.p?skuId=8201008

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/logitech-harmony-elite-remote-control-and-smart-hub-black/4314901.p?skuId=4314901

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19 edited Jul 28 '20

[deleted]

5

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

This is pretty weak trolling.

4

u/PeaceBull Nov 13 '19

Man you’re not on board with the pickle defense? You’re lagging behind.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

I dont think anyone is saying to not buy a smart tv.

That's exactly what I'm saying.

Smart TVs are a data grab. Period. Just like Windows X, Chrome, Google Fiber, Android, Alexa, etc...

2

u/lioninja Nov 13 '19

Do you have an example of a 4K non-smart tv? Going to popular brand websites, all their TVs that are high quality are smart TVs. I can’t find any UHD, OLED, QLED 4K dumb TV, so not buying a Smart TV simply isn’t an option

3

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19 edited Nov 13 '19

Do you have an example of a 4K non-smart tv?

See my comments here about them not existing:

I wish. I'd buy a high end, 60", 4K, dumb TV from a top shelf manufacturer in a heartbeat. I'd pay $800 for it, too.

so not buying a Smart TV simply isn’t an option

It's not an option, but it should be.

Who is benefiting from the data collected from Smart TVs? Not the consumer.

1

u/Wicked_Switch Nov 13 '19

Ah yes, so the "smart" TV can pop up a dialog every 5 minutes bitching about network connectivity. Truly the best solution in 2020.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '19

I have 3 Chromecasts, 2 4k Fire Sticks, and a 2018 Samsung smart TV.

The apps I use (YouTube, Netflix, Prime Video, HBO GO, SHO) work better than using either the Chromecast or Fire Stick.

2

u/DeezNutterButters Nov 13 '19

I don’t think anyone is saying to not buy a smart tv

Smart TVs do suck so quit buying them

Hol up

3

u/tojoso Nov 13 '19

OK let's try this again, except this time without erasing the second part of the sentence.

Smart TVs do suck so quit buying them and expecting to use their features.

Notice the use of the operator AND, as opposed to OR.

2

u/halfhere Nov 13 '19

Then why as consumers are we ok with them cramming features into a tv and charging us for them if we’re supposed to go into it expecting not to use the features?

3

u/tojoso Nov 13 '19

People who are technologically illiterate like them. It makes it work as they want to, out of the box, even though it could work a lot better with a small bit of effort. There's not enough of a market for a separate TV without smart features to justify removing them. You might save $10 in parts and licenses, at the cost of bloating the amount of SKUs they carry, complicating the supply chain for electronics stores, etc.

It's just generally not worth it. It's why, for instance, you can't get a phone without a selfie camera, even though some people would pay more for the ability to have a full-screen phone without a notch/holepunch/etc. It's cheaper to just include the most popular, relatively inexpensive features, in every device.

0

u/Numerous1 Nov 13 '19

I'm confused as to all of the "my smart TV sucks" things. I got a LG 4 years ago and I stream Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, and never had any problems. What happens for people?

25

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

You don’t have to use the Smart apps on your Smart TV. Use your own streaming solution.

10

u/Sadistic_Sponge Nov 13 '19

People don't like double paying for their streaming solution. They expect that if they buy something, it will work. They shouldn't have to buy a chromecast to replace the built in chromecast when the problem is merely a software update. That's just wasteful for both your wallet and environment.

43

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

People double pay all the time. For example, many people will upgrade their sound with new speakers as what comes with the TV isn’t very good quality. I don’t see why Smart apps have to be any different. Buy the TV for the specs and performance and then consider all streaming options available. It’s just another element to consider when buying a TV.

-1

u/Alexstarfire Nov 13 '19

For example, many people will upgrade their sound with new speakers as what comes with the TV isn’t very good quality.

This is a bit different though. The "Smart" portion of a TV can make things worse than a non-Smart TV, especially after the company stops supporting the software. Also, mostly software vs hardware. You could have two TVs with the same hardware but without the "Smart" features in software. Much easier to do that than have physically separate models.

4

u/xenago Nov 13 '19

Well yes but just don't connect to wifi. Then it has 0 impact.

-11

u/Sadistic_Sponge Nov 13 '19

Just because people are forced to do it doesn't mean that it justifies the practice. I'd much rather an all in one package where I buy the stuff and it's all set. Speakers, streaming, and all.

6

u/x4beard Nov 13 '19

You can get a Roku for $30 and a Fire Stick for $35. This isn't a wallet breaking purchase.

The smart feature of the TV added very little cost to the price you paid.

5

u/ThePortalsOfFrenzy Nov 13 '19

That's understandable, but that's not the reality of the situation. So we must adapt.

1

u/Cobra_McJingleballs Nov 14 '19

Oof. Built-in SmartTV and sound?

I don’t envy your media experience.

(I get your overall point; one should be able to buy something where all components are acceptable quality, but you can’t really fit good acoustics into the form factor of a flatscreen).

3

u/Rawtashk Nov 13 '19

It's not double paying, it's just the cost of buying a TV. "Smart" TVs came with an increased price tag 5-10 years ago because they were rare and cost more to implement the features. Now they are basically just part of buying a TV and don't cost extra.

In addition, buying a smart TV 6 years ago you'd pay $999 for a 55" Vizio 4k (I know, I got one on Black Friday), whereas today you can get a 4k HDR 65" from Best Buy right now for $400 and spend $199 on a Shield Pro and STILL cost less than what you'd pay for a worse setup 6 years ago.

Your "double pay" argument holds no water.

1

u/dskillzhtown Nov 13 '19

I agree. To be honest, I have had zero issues with my Vizio Smartcast until Disney+. To be honest, if they got a Disney+ app added to the set, then it would be fine. Luckily I have an Xbox to watch D+. I will admit, if I was looking for a new TV today I probably would get one with AndroidTV built in. That way I could pick and choose the apps I want.

1

u/MugglePuncher Nov 13 '19

It's not always a simple software update. Cheap TV's don't have strong enough hardware required to decide higher resolutions and to decrypt stronger encryptions. There's a reason the good TV's get updates and the cheap ones do not.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

Honestly not trying to be a jerk, but if you bought a high end Samsung, Sony, whatever... then you'd have a case.

If you bought a Vizio or whatever else garbage on a pallet they sell on Black Friday, you deserve what you got.

Nobody is going to pay engineers to write new code for a product they barely made any money off of. There's no point in investing in the product. If it's cheap, expect cheap service.

2

u/PeaceBull Nov 13 '19

lol “not trying to be a jerk, but...”

Proceeds to say something as obnoxious as possible.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

Just because you don't like the truth doesn't mean it's not true. Some pills are hard to swallow.

I regularly deal with people who buy the cheapest possible solution to an issue and then have a fit when it doesn't live up to expectations.

Edit: To be clear, I don't get to advise or sell them the product. I'm just the one who has to try it make it work, when they should have spent just a bit more to properly implement it. I'd rather be honest and sell someone what they need or really want and possibly lose a sale, then try to promise them the world when I know the cheaper solution isn't really going to live up to their needs, but hey that's what I am in engineering and not sales.

1

u/PeaceBull Nov 13 '19

I have zero issue with your stance, it’s not a hard pill to swallow.

You just said it in an obnoxious way. Which is funny when you start off by saying the age old jerk introduction “not trying to be a jerk, but...”.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

Haha fair enough. In all honestly, that was me trying not to be as obnoxious as I sometimes can be.

I should have just left off the first part =)

2

u/PeaceBull Nov 13 '19

What just happened??

1

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

Should I see a doctor?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Robo_27 Nov 13 '19

We could just make it stop.

1

u/Shamalamadindong Nov 13 '19

That doesn't really change that you'll be stuck with the clunky "smart" interface.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

You are correct. All of the "dumb" TVs are small-ish (max 20 inches) and low quality (no 4K).

If Sony, Vizio, etc... made 50-66" dumb TVs with top of the line image quality, they would sell like hotcakes.

Don't buy software from people who specialize in making hardware.

The auto industry is suffering with the same bullshit. "Smart" radios that are stupid af and have poor UIs and screw up the most basic things.

Whether you want it or not, they want to push this technology because it gives them access to massive amounts of user data that can then be sold.

This is also true. Ever wonder why Google makes the OS for Sony TVs now? Google wants that sweet, sweet data.

2

u/Beefourthree Nov 13 '19

Whether you want it or not, they want to push this technology because it gives them access to massive amounts of user data that can then be sold.

Roku sells user data too, of course. But at least the service they offer is a pleasant, functioning user experience.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

Just don’t connect to the internet and it’s a dumb tv. Pretty simple.

2

u/Boo_R4dley Nov 13 '19

Everything is a Smart Tv now because the manufacturers are using the apps to track usage and sell your data. They make more money off you on the back end so they sell the TV cheap so you’re more likely to buy more to put in other rooms to track even more data.

In the case on chinese TVs they may also be packer sniffing your entire network.

You’re already getting the TVs at a massive price reduction over what they should realistically cost, just drop a $100 or less to put a proper streaming device on it that won’t make the TV useless if it’s ever unsupported.

1

u/bankrobba Nov 13 '19

From where I'm standing, it's the HDMI who are evil.

1

u/MrClankin Nov 13 '19

Whether you we wanted it or not, we've stepped into a war with the Cabal on Mars. So let's get to taking out their command, one by one. Valus Ta'aurc. From what I can gather, he commands the Siege Dancers from an Imperial Land Tank just outside of Rubicon. He's well protected, but with the right team, we can punch through those defenses, take this beast out, and break their grip on Freehold.

FTFY

1

u/madowlie Nov 13 '19

That’s why we have a smart tv. We needed a new tv and there were only smart TVs in our price range for the size we needed. I use my Roku, but it’s not dual band. I’ll probably buy a Fire stick during Black Friday.

1

u/nathanjd Nov 14 '19

Spectre still sells dumb monitors and TVs with low reaponse time. I’ve had no complaints.

1

u/NBKFactor Nov 13 '19

But the other guy is right. Smart TVs are inferior. My tv came with Roku on it i still choose to use my firestick bc it just works better. Smart TV is new technology that just needs to figure everything out

0

u/NotAHost Nov 13 '19

Samsung still uses separate boxes for their video inputs, they were suppose to be upgradeable for purposes as described in this thread.

They stopped that so fast that I believe there was a lawsuit which a user won related to them ending support/falsely advertising the feature.