Actually, this thing has some pretty decent specs... my initial reaction was that it was overpriced, but now I'm thinking this is a decent deal for what you get.
Looking at the product page, quite prominently this is displayed:
> WARNING: This product can expose you to chemicals including Styrene and Formaldehyde (gas), which are known to the State of California to cause cancer, and Lead
I'm not sure the risks are worth the price, I've never seen such warning on any product, but I don't live in the US. Is that a common warning to see? How likely is that to happen? Is it a thing that happens in case the TV breaks in half, or is something that slowly slips out in the air around the TV?
The linked website says "Exposure to these chemicals may take place when products are acquired or used", am I supposed to believe that just buying this TV and bringing it home can make those chemicals to leak out into the air in my home?
The statement brings so many questions but so few answers...
Yeah, styrene and formaldehyde are very common everywhere, usually due to styrofoam packaging. Wood and textiles are often treated with formaldehyde, even in Europe. Lead based solder is less common these days, and pretty much banned in the EU due to the RoHS directive, but there are weird exceptions, like how its OK in servers or networking equipment.
California mandated these sort of warnings a while ago so manufacturers just started slapping them on all of their products, just in case. Great example of alarm fatigue [1].
I'd be willing to pay that much if image quality was similar to (or slightly worse) consumer TVs of the same price.
I'm sure smart TVs make some money off data tracking, I know it's a part of Roku's business model. But I feel like most of the additional cost in this went to the "commercial grade" features. It can be left on at full brightness for months on end. It can probably withstand a kick from a teenager at the mall. The 3 year commercial warranty also probably has some actual urgency behind the support.
Do any non smart models exist that aren't targeting commercial usage? It's probably not practical, thr market for that is probably 0.01% of the total TV market.
This looks really great. I know it's expensive for the image quality, but this TV will probably outlive most consumer TVs since it's made for 24/7 operation.
The cost to image quality ratio would probably scare most consumers away, but I might have found my next TV. Thanks for sharing.
> Without that revenue stream, Baxter said, consumers would be paying more up front. "We'd collect a little bit more margin at retail to offset it," he said.
A little bit.
The value of that tracking is worth a lot to a company making near-zero margins, but it's not a very big impact on the full price.
But still somewhere in the single digit percent, I think.
The march of technology is responsible for almost all of the cheapness of TVs, and niche commercial targeting is responsible for the non-cheapness of other TVs.
Hisense has a $430 TV comparable to that $2200 model but with better color. Tracking, I dunno, might be $50.
For that price you can get a 77in OLED tv from LG and a raspberry which you can use for Bigscreen. Might be better if your main use isn't prone to burn-in (e.g. by displaying the same UI elements over months).
https://www.sharpnecdisplays.us/products/displays/ma551-mpi4...