The No Stupid Questions Thread

[847badgerfan]

Agree Samsung TVs are excellent.  Their native streaming interface is not that great (although better than LG).

I got so fed up with our Samsung interface that I just bought a Roku device and plugged it into the HDMI input.

I've never used those. Always had cable or a stick (and an antenna for hurricanes).

[NorthernOhioBuckeye]

We have 2 Samsung TVs (One QLED and a newer OLED). I loved the interface on the older one, but the newer one is a bit annoying. We also have an LG tv that is maybe 5 or 6 yrs old. That interface is horrible. 

However, we were at a friends house Saturday and they have a new LG tv with an interface similar to the older one that we have. They wanted to watch the Buckeyes and needed to install the Peacock app. They are very technically challenged and asked if I could help them. On my Samsung TV's, it is very simple to install an app. On that LG, it took me 20 mins of going through menu options until I found where I could select the Peacock app and install. That interface is crap. 

[utee94]

I've never used those. Always had cable or a stick (and an antenna for hurricanes).

Yup I've still got an antenna from our tailgating days.  We'd sometimes bring 3 TVs and our Dish network setup could only drive 2 independently so we'd put the 3rd on straight OTA.  Haven't had a reason to use it lately but you should always Be Prepared.

[847badgerfan]

I just purchased a new TV today for use in hurricane season, actually.

24" Vizio. Nothing fancy needed. $85 on Amazon.

I suppose I could use it on Saturdays to show a secondary game on the lanai.

[847badgerfan]

These are not stupid questions.

Other Newsworthy stuff.

[betarhoalphadelta]

OLED TV burn-in: Why you no longer need to worry - Reviewed (usatoday.com)

Maybe.

Yeah I read that before I posted.  Like I said, they're not testing all the right conditions.  We're seeing it on our 1st article displays, that are using the exact same glass and technology as the major TV manufacturers.

But it doesn't occur if you're truly watching mixed media all the time.

Even tech writers often aren't that knowledgeable about what they write about.

Our corporate PR team passed along a product review of one of our products to some of us today just for informational purposes. It belied a complete misunderstanding of what some product ratings mean and how they should be used/interpreted. That misunderstanding being common amongst tech writers, and having shown up in another review two years ago, I wrote a white paper about it to explain what these things ACTUALLY mean. It's one of the pieces I've put together that I'm most proud of; I took the time to write it because while industry insiders understand this stuff, literally NOBODY that I'd ever seen had tackled the subject publicly. (As an aside, another white paper that I'm really proud of will drop in the next week or so...)

But why would a tech writer read a document and learn something rather than just spout off when they clearly think they know it all already?

We've got a lot of folks here on this message board who are experts in various fields. But we need to avoid running into the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect believing some random journalist is more of an expert than the guy actually involved with the real field:

"Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.

In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know."
– Michael Crichton (1942-2008)

I trust @utee94 's expert opinion as someone actually involved in doing the testing/work much more than anyone writing for USA Today.

[betarhoalphadelta]

Don't underrate the operating system cpu, especially if you go through a lot of apps. Most of our TV's were TCL Roku's that we got from Costco. They are getting kind of old and slow, may have to upgrade. I did buy an LG relatively recently, and found their OS very cluttered and annoying.

This is critical. A couple years back I bought some bargain-basement Black Friday TVs for the kids rooms. Holy crap they're terrible. It's not the screen quality or the sound quality; it's the system interface electronics. Don't know if it's just too weak of a processor, or not enough RAM, shoddily-written firmware, or whatever. I wish I'd bought something better and just spent up for it. 

I loathe the LG native streaming interface.  Samsung is slightly better.  My favorite by far is the Roku interface, but admittedly I don't have any experience with Amazon firestick. 

So far no issues with the Roku interfaces on TVs that are 4-5 years old.

Oh and the AppleTV interface was complete dog crap.

I also like Roku and use them. One piece of advice is that the higher-end Roku (currently called Ultra? at ~$100) is a better option to spend up and buy than the cheaper Express or Stick. 

Again it comes down to processor and RAM IMHO. If you're going to be using it often, sluggish electronics will be a significant drag on the user experience over time. Better to spend more for less aggravation. 

And agree re: AppleTV. The interface sucks and I HATE HATE HATE their remote. Too fancy with that touchpad. Can't we just have some damn buttons, Apple? We have one on one TV, but that TV almost never gets turned on so I just live with it instead of replacing. 

[MrNubbz]

I trust @utee94 's expert opinion as someone actually involved in doing the testing/work much more than anyone writing for USA Today.

Already then lay off those West Coast IPAs for starters

[Riffraft]

$999 is my limit for New TVs

nothin wrong with my 65" either and I worry the 85" won't sit on the cabinet.
Don't really want to mount it on the wall

I have a 75" that is about 8-9 years old.  Problem is the operating system is no longer supported by a number of the apps, so I know have a FireTV stick attached to it to watch TV.  I keep thinking I should get a new larger tv, but still kind of waiting for the tv to just die. 

[Brutus Buckeye]

What bowl is Florida going to?

Ooo, four more wins with that schedule? 

[FearlessF]

I really like Roku,  bought them for both daughters years ago and they both still use them

I have a firestick and it works fine

using the TV interface seems like it could be an issue more often than not

fire sticks and rokus are in expensive, even for a tight wad like me

[MrNubbz]

Why is "bra" singular and "panties" plural?

[Cincydawg]

My TV is a 65 LG 1 K unit about ten years old.  It seems to work fine, for me.  The prices on new ones has really come down, I glance at them in Costco (as they intend me to).  My wife even offered to get one for me for Christmas, and cheap me thinks "Nah, the old one works OK, and I'd have to spent time mounting the new larger one.".

I don't use Roku, or Apple, or NF.  We had NF for a time and that was OK but then they tightened up the family sharing gig.  I get Amazon on it, I rarely find anything there to watch.  I spend some time with youtube, just the regular videos, some of which are quite good.  I'm interested in tanks and the Tank Museum has some nice ones on WW 2 and later tanks.

The French term for "tank" is "char" and the German term is "Panzer".  The English term has a funny origin most of you know.

[betarhoalphadelta]

Why is "bra" singular and "panties" plural?

Well "panties" refer to an article of clothing that would be related to the term "pants" or "pantaloons", which generally is referred to as a "pair" because it covers both legs. Even panties or briefs, which are underwear and don't extend down the legs, are referred to in the plural because of this history.

That said, it's not universal. My wife get's mailers from Victoria's Secret and it often refers to free panty promotions. 

"Bra" is short for "brassiere", which is referring to a singular article of clothing that doesn't have the same history--despite the fact that it's supporting a pair... I personally prefer the German word, stoppemfromfloppen, myself.