"Don Y" wrote in message
...
On 9/3/2015 5:36 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 15:35:06 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

It depends on the functionality that you want to provide. E.g., if
you wanted your pool/solar controller to assume a higher degree of
utilization on *holidays* than on WORKdays, you'd be hard-pressed to
do this with discrete logic.

This all came about from work I did with a few IBM engineers way back
in the Jimmy Carter solar age. Guys were designing very complicated
controllers and in the end it was decided that this was a very simple
thing. You really only needed a photo cell to get about 90% efficiency
and a couple of temperature sensors (in and out) really bumped that
up.

In the case of the pool and my solars I just use a timer and assume
that in the winter in Florida the sun will be shining all day. I have
a garden variety Honeywell thermostat to decide when it gets too cool
to keep running them in the evening.

And how do you tell if its winter and if you're in florida? :


The population doubles.

In article ,
Don Y wrote:
Hi Ralph,


Yes. And, people don't understand that there is virtually nothing you
can do to remain anonymous in your web searching. Disable cookies?
Nope Super cookies? Nope Beacons? Nope.

Your actual *browser* can be "fingerprinted" to (practically) uniquely
identify you (it). What browser? What OS? What "options"? is Java
enabled? JScript? What range of IP addresses? What toolbar installed?
etc.

And, that assumes the browser isn't *deliberately* "tattling" on you!

And if you take measures to protect your privacy you will be the only
one and *that* will make you uniquely identiable.

m

On 9/3/2015 10:27 PM, Fake ID wrote:
In article ,
Don Y wrote:
Hi Ralph,


Yes. And, people don't understand that there is virtually nothing you
can do to remain anonymous in your web searching. Disable cookies?
Nope Super cookies? Nope Beacons? Nope.

Your actual *browser* can be "fingerprinted" to (practically) uniquely
identify you (it). What browser? What OS? What "options"? is Java
enabled? JScript? What range of IP addresses? What toolbar installed?
etc.

And, that assumes the browser isn't *deliberately* "tattling" on you!

And if you take measures to protect your privacy you will be the only
one and *that* will make you uniquely identiable.

https://amiunique.org/

On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 21:09:27 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 9/3/2015 5:36 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 15:35:06 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

It depends on the functionality that you want to provide. E.g., if
you wanted your pool/solar controller to assume a higher degree of
utilization on *holidays* than on WORKdays, you'd be hard-pressed to
do this with discrete logic.

This all came about from work I did with a few IBM engineers way back
in the Jimmy Carter solar age. Guys were designing very complicated
controllers and in the end it was decided that this was a very simple
thing. You really only needed a photo cell to get about 90% efficiency
and a couple of temperature sensors (in and out) really bumped that
up.

In the case of the pool and my solars I just use a timer and assume
that in the winter in Florida the sun will be shining all day. I have
a garden variety Honeywell thermostat to decide when it gets too cool
to keep running them in the evening.

And how do you tell if its winter and if you're in florida? :

There are a lot more Canadians here and we don't have an ass kicking
thunderstorm every afternoon.

On 9/3/2015 11:21 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 21:09:27 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 9/3/2015 5:36 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 15:35:06 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

It depends on the functionality that you want to provide. E.g., if
you wanted your pool/solar controller to assume a higher degree of
utilization on *holidays* than on WORKdays, you'd be hard-pressed to
do this with discrete logic.

This all came about from work I did with a few IBM engineers way back
in the Jimmy Carter solar age. Guys were designing very complicated
controllers and in the end it was decided that this was a very simple
thing. You really only needed a photo cell to get about 90% efficiency
and a couple of temperature sensors (in and out) really bumped that
up.

In the case of the pool and my solars I just use a timer and assume
that in the winter in Florida the sun will be shining all day. I have
a garden variety Honeywell thermostat to decide when it gets too cool
to keep running them in the evening.

And how do you tell if its winter and if you're in florida? :

There are a lot more Canadians here and we don't have an ass kicking
thunderstorm every afternoon.

My point being, *you* are part of the control loop. I can't take your solution
and transplant it to northern California, or expect it to perform optimally
in Summer, etc.

Putting smarts *in* a device (e.g., via an MPU/MCU) lets that device meet
a variety of needs without requiring a knowledgeable, involved user to
remain (forever) part of the solution.

On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 17:33:08 -0400, Nil wrote:

Normally you're given a user interface that will allow you access to the
features built into the smart TV, which will include apps to access
Internet content providers like Youtube, Hulu, Amazon, Netflix, and
others.

Is this correct yet?

1. You hook up this "smart TV" to the power but to no other wires.
2. The WiFi connects to your router, so the TV is "on the net".
3. The TV has built-in apps to get movies on Youtube, Hulu, Netflix.
4. Some TVs have a web browser - but they're so slow as to be useless.
5. Some have a DirectTV (coax wired?) input in the back of the TV?
6. Some TVs have built-in games.
7. You can't *add* anything; it's all built in to the TV OS.

Is that the sum total of the advantages of WiFi on a TV?

On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 7:56:22 AM UTC-4, Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 17:33:08 -0400, Nil wrote:

Normally you're given a user interface that will allow you access to the
features built into the smart TV, which will include apps to access
Internet content providers like Youtube, Hulu, Amazon, Netflix, and
others.

Is this correct yet?

1. You hook up this "smart TV" to the power but to no other wires.

Every Smart Tv that I've seen included normal inputs, eg HDMI,
composite video, antenna, etc. just like TV's before the
smart tvs became available. They work just like any other HD
TV, with wifi added in addition. I would think almost all smart Tvs
are hooked up to cable, sat, or antenna just like they were before,
with the wifi being an additional way of using them, if you choose.



2. The WiFi connects to your router, so the TV is "on the net".
3. The TV has built-in apps to get movies on Youtube, Hulu, Netflix.

Yes

4. Some TVs have a web browser - but they're so slow as to be useless.

IDK about the speed of the web browser. With fast processors available
today, at modest prices, I don't see why they can't make a web interface
that performs well.

5. Some have a DirectTV (coax wired?) input in the back of the TV?

Per previous they have all the normal TV inputs.

6. Some TVs have built-in games.
7. You can't *add* anything; it's all built in to the TV OS.

Is that the sum total of the advantages of WiFi on a TV?

I think that covers it.

On 9/3/2015 10:38 AM, Michael Black wrote:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2015, Ewald Böhm wrote:

On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 04:47:02 -0700, taxed and spent wrote:

so you can connect to the internet and watch Youtube, netflix, etc.

Maybe I don't understand. Actually, I don't understand.

To watch youtube, you need a browser, which is usually a program compiled
for a certain computer, which runs a certain operating system, and which
has a certain byte order and memory structure and a whole bunch of other
things associated with a "computer".

Is the TV acting as a "computer"?
If so, what operating system is the TV?

What browser does it use?
What architecture is that TV browser compiled for?


And a tv set has become a computer. They needed a CPU to handle the
data conversion, so they might as well allow it to be used as a more
general purpose computer.


Ya, so now you get to wait for it to boot up every time you turn it on.



Mikek

On 9/3/2015 7:01 PM, micky wrote:
In alt.home.repair, on Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:36:31 -0400, Nil
wrote:

On 03 Sep 2015, micky wrote in
alt.home.repair:

So what do you have that works poorl?. I was particularly
interested in having a browser (more than having Netflix.) so I
want to avoid what you have, if any other browser works better,
that is.

I don't know what it's called, it's just whatever was included with my
Samsung TV. It's deadly slow slow slow, and navigation with the TV

Okay, I can remember Samsung. Thanks.


I have a Sony, and it's slow too!


remote is painful. I tried hooking up a USB keyboard, but it didn't
work and I haven't bothered to try to troubleshoot it, since it's
nothing I'm interested in using. If I want to browse the web I'll just
use one of the several other computer devices in the house.

On 2015-09-04, Ewald Böhm wrote:
Is that the sum total of the advantages of WiFi on a TV?

A disadvantage to Smart TVs is that they quite literally spy on you. At
least one manufacturer has issued a warning about it:

https://www.thestar.com/business/tec...-smart-tv.html

I really don't understand why anyone would even consider the purchase
of such a device. I suppose for many that convenience and entertainment
trump all other considerations these days.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled.)

NSA sedition and treason -- http://www.DeathToNSAthugs.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 07:45:51 -0500, amdx wrote:



Ya, so now you get to wait for it to boot up every time you turn it on.


If I turn on my TV and computer at the same time, the TV barely beats
the computer at booting.
It takes 17.86 seconds for the picture/sound to show up for the TV.

On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 08:00:11 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 07:45:51 -0500, amdx wrote:



Ya, so now you get to wait for it to boot up every time you turn it on.


If I turn on my TV and computer at the same time, the TV barely beats
the computer at booting.
It takes 17.86 seconds for the picture/sound to show up for the TV.


BTW, that's a hard-wired HD TV attached to a basic cable box not
providing HD.

On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 23:29:29 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 9/3/2015 11:21 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 21:09:27 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 9/3/2015 5:36 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 15:35:06 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

It depends on the functionality that you want to provide. E.g., if
you wanted your pool/solar controller to assume a higher degree of
utilization on *holidays* than on WORKdays, you'd be hard-pressed to
do this with discrete logic.

This all came about from work I did with a few IBM engineers way back
in the Jimmy Carter solar age. Guys were designing very complicated
controllers and in the end it was decided that this was a very simple
thing. You really only needed a photo cell to get about 90% efficiency
and a couple of temperature sensors (in and out) really bumped that
up.

In the case of the pool and my solars I just use a timer and assume
that in the winter in Florida the sun will be shining all day. I have
a garden variety Honeywell thermostat to decide when it gets too cool
to keep running them in the evening.

And how do you tell if its winter and if you're in florida? :

There are a lot more Canadians here and we don't have an ass kicking
thunderstorm every afternoon.

My point being, *you* are part of the control loop. I can't take your solution
and transplant it to northern California, or expect it to perform optimally
in Summer, etc.

Putting smarts *in* a device (e.g., via an MPU/MCU) lets that device meet
a variety of needs without requiring a knowledgeable, involved user to
remain (forever) part of the solution.


At the time (70s) we were in the DC area. The photo cell still worked

On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 07:45:51 -0500, amdx wrote:

On 9/3/2015 10:38 AM, Michael Black wrote:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2015, Ewald Böhm wrote:

On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 04:47:02 -0700, taxed and spent wrote:

so you can connect to the internet and watch Youtube, netflix, etc.

Maybe I don't understand. Actually, I don't understand.

To watch youtube, you need a browser, which is usually a program compiled
for a certain computer, which runs a certain operating system, and which
has a certain byte order and memory structure and a whole bunch of other
things associated with a "computer".

Is the TV acting as a "computer"?
If so, what operating system is the TV?

What browser does it use?
What architecture is that TV browser compiled for?


And a tv set has become a computer. They needed a CPU to handle the
data conversion, so they might as well allow it to be used as a more
general purpose computer.


Ya, so now you get to wait for it to boot up every time you turn it on.



Mikek

It takes about as long as it used to take for a CRT to warm up.
My dumb Samsung takes almost as long as the smart one so there is a
processor in there too.

On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 12:55:42 +0000 (UTC), Roger Blake
wrote:

On 2015-09-04, Ewald Böhm wrote:
Is that the sum total of the advantages of WiFi on a TV?

A disadvantage to Smart TVs is that they quite literally spy on you. At
least one manufacturer has issued a warning about it:

https://www.thestar.com/business/tec...-smart-tv.html

I really don't understand why anyone would even consider the purchase
of such a device. I suppose for many that convenience and entertainment
trump all other considerations these days.

I got one that was just a little dumber than that (no voice control)

On 9/4/2015 5:55 AM, Roger Blake wrote:
On 2015-09-04, Ewald Böhm wrote:
Is that the sum total of the advantages of WiFi on a TV?

A disadvantage to Smart TVs is that they quite literally spy on you. At
least one manufacturer has issued a warning about it:

https://www.thestar.com/business/tec...-smart-tv.html

I really don't understand why anyone would even consider the purchase
of such a device. I suppose for many that convenience and entertainment
trump all other considerations these days.

From the manufacturer's standpoint, this approach (to the imagined problem!)
makes sense: why incur the added cost of putting enough processing
power in the TV to be able to decode INFREQUENTLY spoken commands?
It makes more sense (assuming transit times are short) to ship the
"data" ("sound") off to a server (located at some firm that you
CONTRACT WITH -- not even *your* server!) and have it do the heavy
lifting.

And, the TV needn't deliberately be "spying" on you to still allow
them to harvest other information from it. I.e., if you are
*talking*, then, chances are, you are still sitting in front of the
TV! Your eyes are more likely to be viewing whatever than looking
through the refrigerator for a snack! That's worth something to the
content distributor pushing that "movie" to you; or, the vendor who
has purchased the ad time!

On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 20:10:30 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

From what I understand, windows 10 is going to do that.



You can schedule the restart, but I see no way to turn off updated
entirely on the home edition. I think you can on the pro version but
I've not seen it.

Couple of links to look at.

http://www.ghacks.net/2015/07/27/microsoft-releases-tool-to-block-windows-10-updates/

"...The tool, available as an optional download, lets you hide or
block any update for Windows or a hardware driver."

(Ed Bott writes for ZDNet:

When Windows 10 arrives this week, Windows Update won’t include
that option, but Microsoft does have a well-hidden troubleshooter
package, KB3073930, which allows you to hide or block Windows Updates
and, crucially, driver updates.

The package was digitally signed on June 15, and the accompanying
Knowledge Base article is dated July 7, just a few weeks ago. The
package is labeled for use with the Windows 10 Insider Preview, but
based on its performance on the final (10240) preview build, it looks
like it should work with the final release beginning July 29.)

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3073930

I've not done this, no Win10 yet YMMV

On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 22:46:46 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

And, that assumes the browser isn't *deliberately* "tattling" on you!

And if you take measures to protect your privacy you will be the only
one and *that* will make you uniquely identiable.

https://amiunique.org/

chuckle No scripts turned on and that site just logged an error

On 9/4/2015 9:39 AM, Oren wrote:
On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 22:46:46 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

And, that assumes the browser isn't *deliberately* "tattling" on you!

And if you take measures to protect your privacy you will be the only
one and *that* will make you uniquely identiable.

https://amiunique.org/

chuckle No scripts turned on and that site just logged an error

There are different sites that approach the problem in different ways. E.g.,
https://panopticlick.eff.org/
doesn't require JScript. Note that the fact that script is off is also
part of the fingerprint.

On 04 Sep 2015, Ewald Böhm wrote in
alt.home.repair:

Is this correct yet?

1. You hook up this "smart TV" to the power but to no other wires.

Not necessarily. If you have a TV feed from an antenna or cable
service, you hook that up, too. The "Smart" features are internet only,
so you need an internet connection to use them. You could hook that
part of the TV to your home router with a cable or wirelessly.

2. The WiFi connects to your router, so the TV is "on the net".

Yes.

3. The TV has built-in apps to get movies on Youtube, Hulu,
Netflix.

Yes.

4. Some TVs have a web browser - but they're so slow as
to be useless.

Well, mine is. It displays content slowly (I think that there isn't
much memory or storage in the TV for buffering, plus the browser itself
may be a Java app, which is inherently slow to start up) but the worst
thing about it is that you have to navigate using your TV remote. You
may be able to hook up a computer keyboard, which would help.

5. Some have a DirectTV (coax wired?) input in the back of the TV?

There's a coax input on mine, but I don't know anything about DirectTV.

6. Some TVs have built-in games.

Yes. There are "apps" included with the Smart TV software, analogous to
the apps on your smart phone. The apps on my Samsung TV can be updated
from them. You can purchase others, I think.

7. You can't *add* anything; it's all built in to the TV OS.

The OS and apps may be updateable from the manufacturer.

Is that the sum total of the advantages of WiFi on a TV?

There may be others. Actually, if I knew then what I know now, I'd get
a dumb TV and add one of those add-on boxes like Chromecast or whatever
to get the content I use. Most of the apps on my Samsung suck royally.
I only use a couple of them.

In alt.internet.wireless Ewald BC6hm wrote:
Is that the sum total of the advantages of WiFi on a TV?

That's about it. I think my Sharp TV is Android.
Slow, clunky. Even the apps that work are inferior to what you would have
on a phone/tablet/PC.

I use the "MiraCast" option to cast my Android tablet to the scrren quite
often, so I can see my cat videos from YouTube in better quality.

--
Clarence A Dold - Santa Rosa, CA, USA GPS: 38.47,-122.65

On Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 9:55:14 PM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:
On 9/3/2015 7:40 PM, Ameri-...atsbcglobal.net wrote:
I recently got a smart TV then got a message from my provider (DIRECTV) that
I need to connect to the internet. The second "box" is a wireless connection
kit for $99. However, since I have been a customer beyond the contract
period I can upgrade to a new receiver at no cost--if I sign on for another
two year contract. Since I don't care about Netflix and the other features,
I'm electing to skip the "smart" features for now.

How did DIRECTV know that you had a new TV? Or, is this just a coincidence?

Don Y: Good Question as we didn't have a smart TV before--just a 30 year old tube type. So apparently the new TV sent a signal "home" reporting that it couldn't spy on us. Not a coincidence.

In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 4 Sep 2015 07:47:23 -0500, amdx
wrote:

On 9/3/2015 7:01 PM, micky wrote:
In alt.home.repair, on Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:36:31 -0400, Nil
wrote:

On 03 Sep 2015, micky wrote in
alt.home.repair:

So what do you have that works poorl?. I was particularly
interested in having a browser (more than having Netflix.) so I
want to avoid what you have, if any other browser works better,
that is.

I don't know what it's called, it's just whatever was included with my
Samsung TV. It's deadly slow slow slow, and navigation with the TV

Okay, I can remember Samsung. Thanks.


I have a Sony, and it's slow too!

Okay. I can remember that too. But I'm getting discouraged.

I think I should follow Mark Lloyd's advice in next thread about using
wires when one can.

So I think I'll just get a USB active extension cord and a
keyboard/mouse to plug into it;, and an AV balun with cat6 to connect
the computer to the DVDR



remote is painful. I tried hooking up a USB keyboard, but it didn't
work and I haven't bothered to try to troubleshoot it, since it's
nothing I'm interested in using. If I want to browse the web I'll just
use one of the several other computer devices in the house.




--

Stumpy Strumpet
the bimbus
for dogcatcher

On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 18:03:13 -0400, micky wrote:

So I think I'll just get a USB active extension cord and a
keyboard/mouse to plug into it

Do I understand the situation correctly that the WiFi enabled TVs are dog
slow, for example, at browsing, because of two fundamental flaws?

1. The CPUs are slow, and,
2. Using a remote to type URLs is slow.

You can't fix the CPU processing power.
But, can you simply add a standard bluetooth keyboard?

On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 14:44:21 -0400, Nil wrote:

Well, mine is. It displays content slowly (I think that there isn't much
memory or storage in the TV for buffering, plus the browser itself may
be a Java app, which is inherently slow to start up) but the worst thing
about it is that you have to navigate using your TV remote. You may be
able to hook up a computer keyboard, which would help.

Can't you just connect any old bluetooth keyboard to solve that problem?

Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 18:03:13 -0400, micky wrote:

So I think I'll just get a USB active extension cord and a
keyboard/mouse to plug into it

Do I understand the situation correctly that the WiFi enabled TVs are dog
slow, for example, at browsing, because of two fundamental flaws?

1. The CPUs are slow, and,
2. Using a remote to type URLs is slow.

You can't fix the CPU processing power.
But, can you simply add a standard bluetooth keyboard?

Don't think blue tooth is not on the TV. I have an AMD A10 laptop
dedicated as HTPC. Laptop connects to AC2600 router on 5GHz. My down
load speed is 50mbps solid. No problem even real time streaming 1080P,4K
UHD, 3D videos. Native 4K material is rare but A/V receiver upscale to
4K on 4K 60" set. Our HT is 7.1 set up. Biggest I could afford for the
family room space. For storage I have small 4 bay Synology NAS with
4x2TB WD Red drives.(not powerful enough for some codec)

In sci.electronics.repair, on Sat, 5 Sep 2015 04:43:38 +0000 (UTC),
Ewald Böhm wrote:

On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 18:03:13 -0400, micky wrote:

So I think I'll just get a USB active extension cord and a
keyboard/mouse to plug into it

Do I understand the situation correctly that the WiFi enabled TVs are dog

I don't have a new tv.

slow, for example, at browsing, because of two fundamental flaws?

1. The CPUs are slow, and,
2. Using a remote to type URLs is slow.

You can't fix the CPU processing power.
But, can you simply add a standard bluetooth keyboard?

Thanks but won't work for me. You've come in in the middle of the
story, Not worth repeating it.

On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 12:43:43 AM UTC-4, Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 18:03:13 -0400, micky wrote:

So I think I'll just get a USB active extension cord and a
keyboard/mouse to plug into it

Do I understand the situation correctly that the WiFi enabled TVs are dog
slow, for example, at browsing, because of two fundamental flaws?

1. The CPUs are slow, and,
2. Using a remote to type URLs is slow.

You can't fix the CPU processing power.
But, can you simply add a standard bluetooth keyboard?

A video is worth a 1000 posts:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXcl5bVUAwY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b87EJTM5ydY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_4E9DtMNI0

You can determine if you think they are really dog slow or not.

On Sat, 5 Sep 2015 04:44:36 +0000 (UTC), Ewald Böhm
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 14:44:21 -0400, Nil wrote:

Well, mine is. It displays content slowly (I think that there isn't much
memory or storage in the TV for buffering, plus the browser itself may
be a Java app, which is inherently slow to start up) but the worst thing
about it is that you have to navigate using your TV remote. You may be
able to hook up a computer keyboard, which would help.

Can't you just connect any old bluetooth keyboard to solve that problem?

Samsung supports USB keyboard and mouse

wrote:
On Sat, 5 Sep 2015 04:44:36 +0000 (UTC), Ewald Böhm
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 14:44:21 -0400, Nil wrote:

Well, mine is. It displays content slowly (I think that there isn't much
memory or storage in the TV for buffering, plus the browser itself may
be a Java app, which is inherently slow to start up) but the worst thing
about it is that you have to navigate using your TV remote. You may be
able to hook up a computer keyboard, which would help.

Can't you just connect any old bluetooth keyboard to solve that problem?

Samsung supports USB keyboard and mouse

I avoid Samsung TVs. Repair track record is not good.
Still using Panasonic Plasma set. So far never had any issues.
Superb picture quality compared to LCD panels.

wrote:
In alt.internet.wireless Ewald BC6hm wrote:
Is that the sum total of the advantages of WiFi on a TV?

That's about it. I think my Sharp TV is Android.
Slow, clunky. Even the apps that work are inferior to what you would have
on a phone/tablet/PC.

I use the "MiraCast" option to cast my Android tablet to the scrren quite
often, so I can see my cat videos from YouTube in better quality.

THat probably is a very good and simple idea. Connecting laptop or
tablet to use as primary display and big creen TV set as a duplicate
display.

micky wrote:
In sci.electronics.repair, on Sat, 5 Sep 2015 04:43:38 +0000 (UTC),
Ewald Böhm wrote:

On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 18:03:13 -0400, micky wrote:

So I think I'll just get a USB active extension cord and a
keyboard/mouse to plug into it

Do I understand the situation correctly that the WiFi enabled TVs are dog

I don't have a new tv.

slow, for example, at browsing, because of two fundamental flaws?

1. The CPUs are slow, and,
2. Using a remote to type URLs is slow.

You can't fix the CPU processing power.
But, can you simply add a standard bluetooth keyboard?

Thanks but won't work for me. You've come in in the middle of the
story, Not worth repeating it.

Micky, B4 asking whole bunch of questions, you ought to search for your
answers on the 'net. Specially Youtube gives lots of visual demos. Be
specific when you have questions. Like telling us what you have and what
you are trying to do and what problem you are running into or something
you don't understand. As far as TV set goes, we're in HDTV era and HDMI
cable takes care of a/v hook ups. When you mention WiFi, then do you at
least have a router for your home network in your home?

On 9/5/2015 12:07 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:


I avoid Samsung TVs. Repair track record is not good.
Still using Panasonic Plasma set. So far never had any issues.
Superb picture quality compared to LCD panels.

Where did you see the repair records or brand comparisons?
I have four TVs and three computer monitors. Lack of repairs and good
picture quality is why I've stuck with them.

I was looking at the demo TV in a store with the UHD and curved screen.
Wow, what a great picture!

On 9/4/2015 5:03 PM, micky wrote:
In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 4 Sep 2015 07:47:23 -0500, amdx
wrote:

On 9/3/2015 7:01 PM, micky wrote:
In alt.home.repair, on Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:36:31 -0400, Nil
wrote:

On 03 Sep 2015, micky wrote in
alt.home.repair:

So what do you have that works poorl?. I was particularly
interested in having a browser (more than having Netflix.) so I
want to avoid what you have, if any other browser works better,
that is.

I don't know what it's called, it's just whatever was included with my
Samsung TV. It's deadly slow slow slow, and navigation with the TV

Okay, I can remember Samsung. Thanks.


I have a Sony, and it's slow too!

Okay. I can remember that too. But I'm getting discouraged.

I think I should follow Mark Lloyd's advice in next thread about using
wires when one can.


Nothing to do with wires, just turning on the tv to watch, it takes to
to boot,
and you must wait in order to change the channel.
Mikek
before

On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 11:28:38 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Where did you see the repair records or brand comparisons?
I have four TVs and three computer monitors. Lack of repairs and good
picture quality is why I've stuck with them.

I agree, I've bought Sammy's for work and relatives...my own is nearly 6 yo. People I know love them too...I guess one experience will prejudice some. Panasonic IS the best for cordless landline/bluetooth phones!

On 9/5/2015 10:36 AM, bob_villa wrote:
On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 11:28:38 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Where did you see the repair records or brand comparisons? I have four TVs
and three computer monitors. Lack of repairs and good picture quality is
why I've stuck with them.

I agree, I've bought Sammy's for work and relatives...my own is nearly 6 yo.
People I know love them too...I guess one experience will prejudice some.
Panasonic IS the best for cordless landline/bluetooth phones!

We're not even *considering* Samsung products in our future purchase
decision. We bought a Samsung Washer/Dryer and had the washer fail
after ~18 months of *light* use (there's just two of us here; not
hordes of rug rats constantly demanding clean clothes).

When I mentioned this to the friend who had "recommended" the Samsungs,
her reply was: "Oh, we've already replaced the washer *and* dryer!"
(failures -- same vintage as the units *we* purchased!!).

[If you want to have a broad set of product offerings, you risk your
reputation in one line tainting perceptions of your other lines!]

I have *9* Samsung LCD monitors that were "rescues" (i.e., all had
failed). By contrast, just 3 Viewsonics (which aren't known as
"top shelf").

OTOH, our *Gateway* plasma TV is now just over 12 years old (August 2003)
and still has a delightful picture. So much so that I've not spent any
serious time trying to repair the two (considerably newer) Vizio sets I've
been given.

[And Gateway had a *terrible* track record with plasmas!]

On 9/5/2015 2:33 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 9/5/2015 10:36 AM, bob_villa wrote:
On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 11:28:38 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Where did you see the repair records or brand comparisons? I have
four TVs
and three computer monitors. Lack of repairs and good picture
quality is
why I've stuck with them.

I agree, I've bought Sammy's for work and relatives...my own is nearly
6 yo.
People I know love them too...I guess one experience will prejudice some.
Panasonic IS the best for cordless landline/bluetooth phones!

We're not even *considering* Samsung products in our future purchase
decision. We bought a Samsung Washer/Dryer and had the washer fail
after ~18 months of *light* use (there's just two of us here; not
hordes of rug rats constantly demanding clean clothes).

When I mentioned this to the friend who had "recommended" the Samsungs,
her reply was: "Oh, we've already replaced the washer *and* dryer!"
(failures -- same vintage as the units *we* purchased!!).


Funny, in spite of the good TVs, I'd not consider their major
appliances. Bought a Maytag washer and dryer, Kitchen Aid DW. We have
two Samsung phones too.

On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 10:21:58 -0400, Ralph Mowery wrote:

if you have say Direct TV you can get movies and other shows on demand
bystreaming off the internet.

I don't have direct tv.
My router does not have a coax input.

I thought that was a coax cable coming out of all those direct tv
antennas I see on houses.

If the output of Direct TV is coax, how does that coax get "into" your
network?

It can't go through the router.
How does it get into your router without a coax connector on the router?

On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 10:49:10 -0400, gfretwell wrote:

My Samsung will take a USB mouse/keyboard but it is pretty clunky
searching the web.

I guess a USB wired mouse and keyboard would be useful.

Do most of these WiFi TVs have the ability to accept a typical USB mouse
and keyboard?

Hi Ed,

On 9/5/2015 11:52 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 9/5/2015 2:33 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 9/5/2015 10:36 AM, bob_villa wrote:
On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 11:28:38 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Where did you see the repair records or brand comparisons? I have
four TVs
and three computer monitors. Lack of repairs and good picture
quality is
why I've stuck with them.

I agree, I've bought Sammy's for work and relatives...my own is nearly
6 yo.
People I know love them too...I guess one experience will prejudice some.
Panasonic IS the best for cordless landline/bluetooth phones!

We're not even *considering* Samsung products in our future purchase
decision. We bought a Samsung Washer/Dryer and had the washer fail
after ~18 months of *light* use (there's just two of us here; not
hordes of rug rats constantly demanding clean clothes).

When I mentioned this to the friend who had "recommended" the Samsungs,
her reply was: "Oh, we've already replaced the washer *and* dryer!"
(failures -- same vintage as the units *we* purchased!!).

Funny, in spite of the good TVs, I'd not consider their major appliances.
Bought a Maytag washer and dryer, Kitchen Aid DW. We have two Samsung phones
too.

There is, of course, no way to correlate the quality of products in
one product line with those in another. This is implicitly acknowledged
in my comment:

[If you want to have a broad set of product offerings, you risk your
reputation in one line tainting perceptions of your other lines!]

OTOH, having experienced a "loss" in a product from a manufacturer,
there is a strong disincentive to throw MORE money on OTHER products from
the same manufacturer -- "Fool me one, shame on you; fool me twice..."

In the case of the washing machine, the nature of the failure wasn't
something "odd" or "unusual" that would have been difficult for the
designing engineer to FORESEE: the mechanical latch that LOCKS the
door was fabricated entirely out of flimsy plastic -- despite the
fact that it probably sees the *most* "wear" in daily use AND is
always under considerable stresses (due to the internal design of
the mechanism).

This should have been something EASY to test in the lab. And, something
that you would intuitively *know* should be tested and verified before
the design was committed to manufacturing. So, it obviously was overlooked
in design, inadequately tested in manufacturing or a deliberate "gamble"
on their part (with the manufacturer the intended beneficiary of that
gamble).

I had a summer job at a hand-tool manufacturer when I was in school.
A tool is a tool, right? A hammer from manufacturer A is just as
good as a hammer from manufacturer B, right? (think of Harbor
Freight : ).

A hammer (e.g.) is *designed*, not just cut out of a block of steel.
The hardness of the steel is defined. The strength of the handle
and its fastening means to the head. The weight and balance, etc.
E.g., notice that the edge of a claw/carpenter's hammer tends to
be *beveled*. This is to reduce the risk of chipping and having metal
chips fly off into the eyes of the user. Additionally, the edge
of the hammer is *softened* (a separate manufacturing step) so
it deforms instead of splinters.

All that looks good on paper. But, how do you *verify* that it
actually PERFORMS as designed? E.g., we would routinely sample
lots off the production floor and test for hardness, etc. We
had a machine that would "hold" a hammer and repeatedly, continuously
STRIKE a metal block every few seconds with a given force to see how
long it took for the handle to fail. And, examine the head to verify
the absence of any "chips", etc.

Is it too hard for a multibillion dollar company to design a
jig that "opens and closes" a simulated (or actual!) washing machine
door every 3 seconds and see how long it takes to *fail*? This
would be REALLY easy to correlate with actual usage: assume
the door is opened/closed at least twice for each load of laundry;
assume X loads of laundry per day; etc.

Far easier to determine an expected lifetime of the mechanism than
it would be, for example, to say a hammer failed after "driving
237,000 nails with a force of..."