Most developing countries have cheap 1080p TVs right now, but others are still using CRTs, and still others are watching on their phones (like some of my poorer relatives who do get their entertainment fix through their phones while the big TVs in their living rooms rarely gets turned on).
this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2026
421 points (99.5% liked)
Technology
79762 readers
4972 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I think my TV is like 32" and 720p from 2012 or so. It's fine.
Before that I had a projector which was fun sometimes but mostly too big for the room. Cool to take psychedelics and run a visualizer while it was pointed along the floor at you. You could feel the fractals on your skin. I don't do that anymore, so a 32" TV is fine.
I want a dumb tv with the price and and specs of a smart tv. Less is more
What you’re looking for are commercial screens. They’re a bit more expensive for a comparable panel, as they are intended for 24/7 use- but are about as dumb as they get nowadays.
You would likely have to pay more since they aren't getting to sell your information.
*you would have to pay more because major companies know they can charge more. There isn’t a limited amount of profit a company wants to mae, and then they pick a price from that, they price it as high as the market will bear.
I second this.
The TV industry can crash and burn otherwise.
Maybe they should stop forcing this antiquated TV License scam. For those who don't know, the UK pushes for a TV License to watch Live TV though most people don't watch BBC anymore. Though I bet they will try to find a way to include Netflix and more in the TV License. EDIT: I agree the BBC should be funded though they are not a perfect entity and state controlled media is very bad especially for journalism. I think they are going about advertising the license in the wrong way and there is a lot of evidence of harassment from letters and visits to get a tv license even if you don't have a tv!
As an example of the system being reworked into a better one: Germany's equivalent not only finances public broadcast channels, but also youtubers through the program FUNK. Granted, a lion's share still goes into the old TV channels, but at least that includes the French/German channel Arte, which has some top notch content (though usually documentaries) that it regularly uploads onto YouTube.
That is interesting. I like that they used YouTube channels. I feel like TV is sadly a dying platform though I do hate the day that TV and Cinema die. Unfortunately it only happens cause TV License people dug their own grave. Also, there is not enough new stuff to watch on TV with every streaming service putting out so many platforms to watch on. Though maybe I am being too cynnical and I apolagize.
Government funded news programs are generally a good thing IF they're mostly their own entity and importantly as long as they don't block other sources. I think bbc being funded is good
BBC being funded is good but state controlled media is very bad. BBC is highly regulated and controlled by the crown and the British gov. How they push the TV License is very invasive and offputting to the point of harassment and threats. Surely there has to be a better way to do this. They should try to make people want a license not claiming that we HAVE to have it. That's all I am trying to say.
Real innovation:
What about Dairy Queen?
What about 12K?
Silly goose, after 8K is 16K!
Make a TV that can accurately reproduce really high contrast ratios and don't put any pointless software on it. Display the image from the source with as much fidelity as possible, supporting all modern display technology like VRR.
That's all I want from a display.
I have bad eye sight, but also 8k probably never need to be a thing on a tv, more impressive for stuff thats closer to our eyes like VR headsets probably.
Next big technological innovation will be good looking and fast working e- ink TVs.
I doubt this. I use an e-ink android tablet as an e-reader. I like that it's easy on the eyes. For using it to scroll Lemmy or even a web page, it's fine. But the refresh rate (even on the best settings) makes watching a video or gif on it painful.
I don't think anyone really wants an e-ink TV unless they want something that's a hybrid. The things you'd use a tv for are just not e-ink things.
This makes sense to me. A hybrid would be nice. Have a calendar or some art while it's "off". But then, that's probably pretty expensive. (Not that I've looked, I'm just assuming.)
I remember the horrendous response times of the original GameBoy’s LCD panel, and when I mentally compare it to modern COLOUR panels…
…all I can think is, never say never!
Hmm I have considered this, and I think it is ads beamed straight to the eyeball
- The TV industry... Probably
Theres a ton of other things I want my TV to do before more pixels.
Actual functional software would be nice, better tracking on high speed shots (in particular sweeping landscapes or reticles in video games) higher frame rates and variable frame rate content, make the actual using of the tv, things like changing inputs or channels faster, oh man so much more.
Anything but more pixels.
I still probably watch 90% 1080p and 720p stuff lol. As long as the bitrate is good it still looks really good.
Actual functional software would be nice
you do not want software on your TV.
I mean, yes and no. I like e-arc, and I like being able to adjust settings other than v-hold. But I don't want this slow crud fest that keeps telling me when my neighbour turns on Bluetooth on their iphone.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
I have a Samsung frame because I wanted a TV that didn't look so much like I had one, but the software is so goddam bad. The only way to switch sources quickly is to set them as a favorite which isn't always that straight forward if you didn't do it right away. Regardless you have to let the the home page fully render before you can even worry about that. Even the Samsung TV app which you would think would be perfectly optimized for the hardware since the same compare makes the software is barely functional and loads like a web page on AOL in 1998
I like my frame because it faces a set of windows and with all my other tvs ... I would have to close the blinds to see the tv in the day time.
However, the software is straight garbage. I didn't even know about the favourite thing ... every time I change source it would spend like a minute or two trying to figure out if it could connect to it for no reason.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Even if it was, the streamings everyone's using crush down the bitrate so bad it'd barely look better than 4k anyway.
They showed Skyfall on 70ft IMAX screens, and that film was shot 2880 x 1200. Its not all about the pixel count.
Working in entertainment and broadcasting, you learn barely half of Americans have a 4K tv and it’s under half worldwide. Marketing makes you think that “everyone is doing it”
Most enterprise places are 1080p default and reqi people to go above and beyond to justify 4k screens.
Then we get into laptop's still barely going about 720p so a lot of people have no idea what 4k would even bring them as even most streaming content still only in 1080 so not really noticeable for those who even have 4k screens
load more comments
(6 replies)
view more: next ›