Comment by kmfrk | Hacker News Reader

Comment by kmfrk | Hacker News Reader

Some people seem gleeful about this, but Firefox OS is actually an excellent Smart TV OS, especially at a time where a lot of manufacturers feel comfortable inserting ads into people's TVs without their consent.

It's obviously ridiculous that this is something we need to deal with in the first place, but I'm definitely happy that I got one of the few TVs without a scummy OS.

The smartphone OS was always a vague idea that never materialized into anything. Part of that was probably a result of the frustration that we never really got that Nokia OS for lower-end devices. Instead we're left with Android.

I plan on making the TV OS a big parameter for the TVs I buy in the future. (Which feels about just as dumb as doing the same with future microwave ovens, but this is the world we live in.)

Fortunately I won't be buying a new TV within the next three years. I've genuinely been wondering whether I need to set up an intermediary Raspberry Pi ad-blocker to safeguard my Internet of nonsense at home.

I just buy plain old dumb TVs, no need to worry about anything.

As for FirefoxOS I never understood the point of it.

OpenMoko tried to be an open smartphone platform and failed.

Nokia did it for Symbian OS with web widgets and it failed.

Palm did it with WebOS, with the plus side of allowing C++ bindings for games, and it failed.

Android and iOS allow for web widgets and cordova like apps and there usually have bad feedback from users vs native apps.

Windows Phone allows for first class development with web based tech and few bother to use it, rather CoreCLR and WinRT.

OEM and network providers always have the final word, they learned not to let others follow Apple's footsteps.

That was a very far hard attempt from the begging.

I rather see Mozilla spending their efforts in Firefox, Thunderbird and Rust.

> I just buy plain old dumb TVs, no need to worry about anything.

This is a bit short sighted. In the near future, we will only have 'smart' TVs to chose from.

There's also the choice not to buy a TV. A large high quality monitor hooked up with a chromecast is far better, imo.

And where do you get those in sizes of 50"+ with proper remotes, color reproduction (HDMI color range!) and other functionality expected from a TV?

A trip down to any consumer store here in Germany?

Given most of us aren't in Germany, what's obvious to you presumably isn't obvious to the people downvoting you. If that's the case, providing links might help.

Why should I provide the links anyway?

The haters will downvote, regardless of what I write.

The others will think that instead of Germany I could have written any European country name, because you just need to get into a regular store to find such dumb TVs.

They have 50 inch computer monitors for $450 with built in TV tuners and speakers at any store in Germany?

Oh wait, if it has a built in TV tuner and speakers, it's just called a television. And we have those at Wal Mart in the US.

That was my point. A modern dumb flat TV is no different than a monitor.

But the original point was that dumb TVs are getting more and more rare.

One can choose from the older models, then, or use a monitor. I don't want the crappy smarts in my devices.

Again, where do we find one of those? Pretty much all stores carry only smart TVs in decent sizes.

Come to Europe, lots of models to choose from.

TVs are monitors with a variety of extra features -- at a minimum, a tuner, but lots of others are normal now.

But you can get commercial displays which are just TV-likr monitors without the extra features. It doesn't take much online searching to find them; consumer retail outlets, however, don't carry them because they aren't what the industry thinks most consumers want.

Online. Why would you buy a TV from a physical store unless it's really the cheapest place to get it?

If you don't allow it access to your network, it's a dumb TV again.

Unless it shows "you need to connect me to internet to finish the setup wizard" like bunch of other smart devices do.

You could turn it on initially and turn it off subsequently I guess.

I guess you could also set up some smart devices with some log-in credentials on a guest network you activate once a month to allow everything to update without it being too invasive or something.

Honestly, I'd just return it and get a computer monitor. I'm not putting that much work into my TV

Or you can just buy a smart tv and not use any of it's features. I will never use built in functionality and always opt for my RasPlex (RPi 2), AppleTV, or Chromecast.

It does not necessarily help. I accidentally bought a Smart TV about one year ago, an LG model with WebOS. I never dared connect it to the internet, but it was horrible nonetheless because the software was so abysmally slow.

For example, to change a channel:

1. Grab the remote, press "5", press "OK". 2. Put down the remote. 3. Wait five seconds. 4. Overlay with "5" appears. 5. Wait five seconds. 6. Channel switches.

I sold this shit a few months ago, and am now using my five-year-old dumb TV again.

Ugh, channel switching is such a goddamn pain, even on modern TVs. It blows my mind that this is still a bloody thing with fancypants TVs.

My audio receiver (Onkyo) changes channels instantly. The only thing my "smart" tv is connected to is the receiver and the wall. I have a computer a thousand times smarter than any tv.

> we will only have 'smart' TVs to chose from.

Maybe but right now, I just paid almost a $200 premium for 'smart' Samsung TV. Everyone in my family, hates the UI and complained about missing channels compared to our Roku and Chromecast. $35 later and everyone is happy again.

That seems doubtful. If nothing else price competition should keep barebone TVs available. But also consumer demand for non-smart TVs will exist.

The next one in line : Ubuntu Mobile.

Such a shame they didn't focus on desktop, the timing was great with Windows 8 being a shit show.

It wasn't going to function well as a TV OS though.

The UI descriptions and mockups were overly complex and seemed like something designed for a computer rather than a smart TV.

I like how open Mozilla was about it. I just disliked the actual OS, and how it was made.

I don't know whether we'll ever have the privilege of a great TV OS, though. The iTV was supposed to deliver us (from) that, but looks like we're stuck with just the Apple TV for now.

I'm not impressed with any interfaces, but at least my Panasonic's FxOS is better than my old Panasonic's.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com