• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Dear TV manufacturers...

J

J-Will

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
1,728
By the nature of consumer trends, the thin, wall mountable LED, LCD, Plasma TVs are the 'in' thing to buy these days, when in need of a TV. Ok, fine... baseline set. HOWEVER, why in the F are TVs being bundled with crappy speakers (because they are made thin in order to fit into a thin bezel, which means very flat sound), and HD Tuners. Or even tuners at all. Cut out the junk. In fact, you can even lower the number of inputs too. I do not need 5+ HDMI slots, component, composite, Coax (to use with the tuner I already dont need).

Limit the inputs to a lesser number, cut out the tuner(s), the speakers, and the required hardware of chips, processors, IO boards, circuitry, amps and etc.

Basically, I want a TV class monitor that can do 1080p. I dont need super high res monitor that I can clearly read text on from a computer. I want a F'in TV that I can hook up to a decent reciever (that will provide the inputs I need as well as the sound processing and power to the mediocre speakers I have that still blow away anything a TV will give me). I also have FiOS, which makes me user their box for any TV content HD or SD.

Why? Why, do you ask? Because I do not want to pay for junk I will not be using. Because I do not want to have a bezel below my screen taking up space that houses POS speakers, or a thick TV in order to fit in all the junk. Because less components equals less power consumption, and less heat output. Because HD content providers make me use their damn cable box anyway. Because, ladies and gentlmen, less is more, and there is beauty in simplicity.

And yes, I do realize these are small comonents, and cheap. But they do take up space, and create heat, and cost money. I also do understand manufactureres are trying to appeal to the masses, and not everyone wants to use a reciever. Yes I get that. I do not get why there is no option as of yet for the folks that are thinking

And, I did not put this in rant tags, because I truely do want a legit, logical, response... as well as a 60+ inch TV that is an economical option.

The end, Thank you for reading
 
Most people will buy a TV that has that extra stuff over one that doesn't, ergo the manufacturer can sell more of them thereby leveraging economies of scale resulting in a cheaper product. In contrast, what you want would be a niche product resulting in a higher overall price, despite having fewer components and being cheaper to manufacture.
 
Necere said:
Most people will buy a TV that has that extra stuff over one that doesn't, ergo the manufacturer can sell more of them thereby leveraging economies of scale resulting in a cheaper product. In contrast, what you want would be a niche product resulting in a higher overall price, despite having fewer components and being cheaper to manufacture.
Click to expand...

What you describe sounds a lot like the Neighbor's Panasonic Pro Plasma. I am not sure if they still make that line, but it came without all of the fluff. He had to add the tuner and speakers.

Dave
 
I work in TV sales, so I feel I have some credibility when commenting on this matter. Your average consumer does not buy based on quality. They buy based on quantity. TV manufacturers realize this, and cater to ignorance (and further perpetuate it) by advertising false contrast ratios, virtual surround sound, etc. I like the idea of having a unit without speakers and tuners in the high end models to cater to high end tastes though. Makes perfect sense to me.

With respect to inputs... I get a lot of people that look for at least 4 HDMI ports. Frankly, I would want 4 myself since using a Receiver as a source selector usually increases input latency (bad). Losing tuners altogether means purchasing yet another tuner for OTA DTV broadcasts.

What's ruining things is the tyranny of the majority as usual. We need look no further than the energy hysteria in California and their nanny government regulations, which could potentially render plasma illegal for sale there by 2013. And if that happens, we can pretty much say goodbye to plasma altogether. Which would be really bad since OLED needs several years to become available, affordable and reliable for consumer use.

http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webap...oupId=14624&surfModel=TH-58PF20U&displayTab=F
looks nice, but pricey :(
 
Last edited:
J-Will said:
HOWEVER, why in the F are TVs being bundled with crappy speakers (because they are made thin in order to fit into a thin bezel, which means very flat sound)
Click to expand...

Because people don't care about sound quality and they demand their TV be able to play sound. Seriously, most TVs I see, including fairly nice, large, LCDs, do not have sound systems attached to them. They just play sound through the included speakers.

A TV that didn't have speakers would have a hard time selling on the mass market. Sure some people would be ok with it but many wouldn't and that's the problem. Also, since they are cheap, the cost it adds is very minimal.
 
I ran out of HDMI ports on my VT25. It has 4 and that is not enough.... PS3, Blu player, Computer, Xbox, man I need more.
 
J-Will said:
Or even tuners at all. Cut out the junk. In fact, you can even lower the number of inputs too. I do not need 5+ HDMI slots, component, composite, Coax (to use with the tuner I already dont need).
Click to expand...

100% disagree with you. The tuner/speakers likely only add about $50, so you would save next to nothing and reduce capability for many. That is if they could sell the same volume without tuners/speakers. They likely could not, so you pay even more money for the naked monitor version.

My TV is hooked up to my Denon receiver with a decent 5.1 speaker setup, but I I still use my built in speakers every day. Most shows I simply don't care about the turning on the receiver, which I use mainly when watching movies. The speakers are adequate for watching TV.

I also like having a tuner. I watch OTA HD channels, they are superb quality.
 
You have to ask yourself:
1) How much does a feature cost
2) How much space does a feature take up.
3) How would sales be impacted, and how would that affect economy of scale?

With regard to speakers, I think you have a point. But I have many friends, as well as my sister, that hang their TV like a picture frame above their fireplace and THAT is why they want a thin+light, and they have no room for a receiver nor interest in wall mounted speakers. On my Samsung, the speakers used aren't good, but take up no space, and I would wager were not particularly expensive.

A tuner and extra inputs don't even account for a single percentage point of the average TV's MSRP and there is economy in scale, so if such a feature were useful to even a small fraction of consumers, it'd be dumb NOT to include it. My Samsung edge lit is paper thin, but fits a plethora of HDMI slots, each likely costing 50 cents or less to include.

In fact, once quadHD television sets ramp up in production and become less expensive, the smaller versions (32-40") will likely be used by many as great wall mounted computer displays.
 
I agree with others that the extensive features are necessary for consumer TVs. Digital Signage displays are what you are after. Unfortunately for your aims these displays are built for a purpose and have a price tag to match.

I definitely want to see an NEC P401 eyefinity setup though. Someone do this.
 
I understand that individually, speakers and required hardware is cheap. The tuner is cheap, and the added inputs are cheap. But combined it adds up, the components take up space, and produce heat.

I see it among friends and family, more people are adding recievers in order to get surround sound speakers. But with that comes more inputs. Furthermore, cable companies are making us get their particular box in order to decode HD signals... great, but why am I buying a tuner with my TV then?

I see what you guys are saying about the manufacturers seeing it as risk of entering in to a niche market, but I dont see it being niche. If the TV is clearly branded as an 'economical choice' for your home then I think it will do well. If the market was really niche, then how come there are so many companies selling recievers? If those are selling, then there is a customer base to go after. Couple that with folks that live in areas where Cox, Comcast, or Verizon (hello Northern VA folks with three choices) offer HD packages... but oh you must rent our box, and the manufacturers could be entering a valid market.

The TV could be sexier (thinner, lighter, less bezel), consume less power, and produce less heat energy. And they could brand it that way. Remove legacy ports, and provide fewer built in ones (fewer just means less, it doesnt mean 1 HDMI input and thats it).
 
I also want to note that I am not whining about the price tag of current main stream model TVs. That is not the point of this thread. I am just suggesting the idea of having options for the customer. And a customer base that I believe is growing, and that will take advantage of such a model TV.

Take a current model TV, omit the items listed, change the front and rear bezel, brand the box as "a better choice for home theater folks" and call it a day. Then have it go on sale bundled with a HTIB system that your company makes and all it an intro into home theater for the people that would not buy the TV normally since speakers were omitted.
 
J-Will said:
I also want to note that I am not whining about the price tag of current main stream model TVs. That is not the point of this thread. I am just suggesting the idea of having options for the customer. And a customer base that I believe is growing, and that will take advantage of such a model TV.

Take a current model TV, omit the items listed, change the front and rear bezel, brand the box as "a better choice for home theater folks" and call it a day. Then have it go on sale bundled with a HTIB system that your company makes and all it an intro into home theater for the people that would not buy the TV normally since speakers were omitted.
Click to expand...
You now have to produce (another product line), market, ship, distribute, and warranty two different devices. That incurs cost.

And the majority would expect the device with less features to cost less, so where is the incentive?

My brother works in new vehicle design for Mercedes, and they have to factor in the cost of making a feature an option over standard equipment, and for inexpensive items that have to be included during the manufacturing phase, its better just to include it.

One of the reasons that fleet vehicle sales are so heavily discounted for example is that they make things easy for the manufacturer being able to produce a line all in the exact same color with the exact same options. Similar logic applies to TVs is all. :)
 
J-Will said:
I also want to note that I am not whining about the price tag of current main stream model TVs. That is not the point of this thread. I am just suggesting the idea of having options for the customer. And a customer base that I believe is growing, and that will take advantage of such a model TV.

Take a current model TV, omit the items listed, change the front and rear bezel, brand the box as "a better choice for home theater folks" and call it a day. Then have it go on sale bundled with a HTIB system that your company makes and all it an intro into home theater for the people that would not buy the TV normally since speakers were omitted.
Click to expand...

Projector maybe.
 
Isnt the best manufacturing process a modular one? Granted I have not seen a new TV opened up in a while (last time was about 5 years ago), but then it was clear that different components were on different boards. Audio processsing was clearly done on a board separate board, connected to the main board. Inputs were soldered directly on the main board. Very much like a computer. So in the assembly line, have the same model TV skip the audio board. Have it skip the tuner install. So on and so on, and when it gets to the end, have a different bezel that is smaller and thinner and has the correct holes for the inputs that that were left one the main board.

In the end, if it does not save the customer money, it will save energy. It will look sexier, and it will be lighter and easier to move/ mount. I do not see this as something that costs more, unless everything is now integrated on one single board (which is just bad practice IMO).
 
Ducman69 said:
And the majority would expect the device with less features to cost less, so where is the incentive?
Click to expand...

To sell more panels in a larger size, to gain market share, to create a sale of a product you may not have had.

I think the bottom line is options. And you brought up a nice point about cars, and I liked your insight. Same thing applies. A model is created, and option packages are then created that include certain features. but there is still a lower end base without most of the frills. Give me my base model TV and let me decide if I need to upgrate to some speakers and so on.
 
-Speakers suck

Yeah, I can agree with this.

-HD Tuner isn't needed

Sort of pushing it..

-I dont need that many inputs

Some people do? I'm currently using 3 of my 4 available... And thats just with PC/360/Ps3 plugged into it. Some people DO have blueray players and other items that use HDMI..

Oh, and the sound? I use both the optical input and output.
 
Skillzero said:
Some people do? I'm currently using 3 of my 4 available... And thats just with PC/360/Ps3 plugged into it. Some people DO have blueray players and other items that use HDMI..
Click to expand...

Maybe of the HDMI slots. Thats fine. But do we really need some component, composite, HDMI, coax (If HD tuner is removed... no), optical in, DVI/ Computer.

I fully understand that this will not be the option for the general user. But there should be the option to not have the crap, with the benefit of less power usage and a thinner device.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top