Why do I need a smart tv?

usignuolo

We are redoing our living room and decided to go for a new flat screen tv larger than existing one. We have a comprehensive Virgin Media/internet package which has all the tv channels we want to watch (and iplayer, 4OD, catch up tv etc). It has a Tivo box and we have a dual function dvd/vhs player for DVD etc. We also have a low end flat screen tv in the bedroom which we use chiefly for streaming internet and playing dvds. We don't watch movies much or play games on our tv.

So I have been round the shops looking at what is available to replace our current tv and it seems I have to buy a smart tv whether I like it or not, as nothing else is available. However the definition of a smart tv varies from manufacturer to manufacturer. Everyone keeps emphasising Neflicks, which I don't want, and Youtube which I can watch on line on my pc and downloading apps which I don't want to do on my tv as between my Virgin package and pc I am pretty well supplied.

Why do I need a smart tv? And what can I get with the minimum of bells and whistles but a first class picture?

Inner_Zone

If you don't want a Smart TV don't buy one there are loads of non Smart TV's out there. Take a look a JL or RS for best guarantees, free or low priced.

Without knowing what screen size you require and what budget you have it difficult to suggest anything.

[Deleted User]

While I agree there are basic models still around, most TVs worth buying (and quite a few which aren't!) now come with SMART features as standard.

OP seems to think the SMART element is a major part of the expense involved, but it really isn't.

"usignuolo" shouldn't worry, therefore, if the extra features are duplicated by the Cable decoder.
Personally, I have a SMART TV, Blu-Ray Player and Sky+HD which all offer access to internet etc. It's no big deal and made no extra difference to the price I paid for the quality I got.

usignuolo

Since I wrote my original post, I have come across this article which pretty well sums up why I think a smart tv would be redundant in our house. http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/opinion/2285184/the-smart-tv-is-dead-on-arrival

The writer makes two points which struck me, 1) hardly anyone uses their range of smart tv apps on the tv they just use it as a tv (this is certainly true in my experience, I have asked everyone I know who has one what they use it for, and apart from those movie fans who like to stream Netflicks, they all say they only use it as a tv.)

The second and key point I think the article makes is this " Possessing the same features as a smartphone, which are usually due an upgrade after a year or two of use, Smart TVs also raise the question of the price to life ratio: How long it will last before it "goes out of date", so to speak? Since it has a much higher price than an average smartphone, you'd expect to hold on to your TV for at least five or even 10 years, so surely its in-built features, that resemble a smartphone, suggest that the Smart TV will be out of date before you're ready to invest in another."

Nada666

The trouble is those tricksy manufacturers sometimes only include the best panels and decoders to TVs with (unnecessary) bells and whistles.

Bounderby

I have a Smart TV. It's not tuned in to any channels, and its use is solely for its Smart functions, and for playing the Xbox.
I watch Netflix and all the catch-up tv channels at the push of a button. I could do it through the Xbox, but why turn on another system when I don't need to.

Also, re: lifespan, mine does software updates on-line and new apps are always being added or updated. It's not a case of it comes how you bought it and that's it.

GlynD

Your don't have to use the SMART facilities. Just use it as a TV. Buy what you want.

[Deleted User]

GlynD wrote: »

Your don't have to use the SMART facilities.

I think the point is that the OP wants to know why she has to pay for SMART features duplicated by her Cable service.

Unfortunately, SMART TVs aren't going away and it's inevitable that all TVs (even budget ones) will eventually come fitted with this functionality as standard.

Nada666 wrote: »

The trouble is those tricksy manufacturers sometimes only include the best panels and decoders to TVs with (unnecessary) bells and whistles.

They are only "unnecessary" if you don't use them! They also come with an analogue tuner and you won't need that either!

usignuolo

Just to reiterate, not interested in Netflicks or playing games on tv. Have all the apps I need on my cable sub from Virgin media. Just want a high quality picture.

Everyone says that the cost of smart tv add on features does not affect price of tv.....is that really true? I have a sneaky feeling nada66 is right that the tvs with best quality pictures also have the most bells and whistles which I don't want.

Can Ireally be sure what I am paying for is the just picture quality and not the range of additional apps? Why shouldn't I be able to buy a high quality plain vanilla tv set without all the apps? I wonder what it would cost, if it was available? It seems very difficult to buy a non smart tv now.

There is another element that worries me a bit about smart tvs. I really do not want anything that involves a good deal of fancy set up and screen navigation to use. Is that likely to be the case? I generally avoid anything by Panasonic because although the technical quality may very good, operating the thing requires a doctors in rocket science, just to read the user guide (been there got the t shirt).

I want something around 40inches and have a budget of around £600. I wondered about renting so I could assess if I wanted to buy?

Elsewhere I read that you can get most of the basic internet features you might want on a tv, via blu ray player. But I still need to know what tv has best picture quality in terms of value for money, if you discount the apps?

GlynD

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

I think the point is that the OP wants to know why she has to pay for SMART features duplicated by her Cable service.

Unfortunately, SMART TVs aren't going away and it's inevitable that all TVs (even budget ones) will eventually come fitted with this functionality as standard.


They are only "unnecessary" if you don't use them! They also come with an analogue tuner and you won't need that either!

I think that was obvious. It was also obvious, to me anyway, that you could buy a SMART TV and not use the features.

[Deleted User]

usignuolo wrote: »

I wondered about renting so I could assess if I wanted to buy?

I think the days of renting a TV are long gone. Televisions are far more reliable than they were during the Sixties and Seventies when renting was still in vogue.
If you want to "try before you buy" I suggest you go to John Lewis or Richer Sounds where they have well trained staff ready and willing to help and large showrooms to view in.

usignuolo wrote: »

I really do not want anything that involves a good deal of fancy set up and screen navigation to use. Is that likely to be the case? I generally avoid anything by Panasonic because although the technical quality may very good, operating the thing requires a doctors in rocket science, just to read the user guide (been there got the t shirt).

Again, John Lewis and Richer Sounds will come and install your TV if you don't feel confident yourself. Do note that there will be an extra charge for this service.