Anyone know about TV’s?

[…..]

The cable box was just a quarter inch under the tv right under the spot and was surprisingly hot. I moved it.

 

[Raptorman]

The picture quality also looked like you were watching TV through wax paper, but hey, you could fix it yourself.

They were made to be fixed. Today's TV are not. They are made to be replaced every 5 years. Soon 8K TVs will be the norm. Funny thing, The human eye only sees in about 2.6k.

 

[Angry Ram]

They were made to be fixed. Today's TV are not. They are made to be replaced every 5 years. Soon 8K TVs will be the norm. Funny thing, The human eye only sees in about 2.6k.

Not true.

I have an old Samsung LCD bought in 2008, still going strong.

Another LG LED tv bought 2011, also going strong.

Meanwhile, my childhood tv, an old Zenith CRT, broke after a few years of use, would choose whether to turn on, and if it did another decision to stay on for more than 5 minutes. I didn't get my first flat screen until 2006, a heavy brick plasma, that also broke a couple years later (hence the 2008 Samsung).

Like with any electronic, there are bound to be faulty units and lemons. Most are good, though and can be long lasting.

 

[Mister Sin]

View attachment 31055

I find it impossible to believe something didn’t happen. It’s time to start grilling the wife! Lol

 

[EastRam]

Not true.

I have an old Samsung LCD bought in 2008, still going strong.

Another LG LED tv bought 2011, also going strong.

Meanwhile, my childhood tv, an old Zenith CRT, broke after a few years of use, would choose whether to turn on, and if it did another decision to stay on for more than 5 minutes. I didn't get my first flat screen until 2006, a heavy brick plasma, that also broke a couple years later (hence the 2008 Samsung).

Like with any electronic, there are bound to be faulty units and lemons. Most are good, though and can be long lasting.

It's is true today's TVs are not designed to last like the old Tube sets of the past.

Some last longer than others. Parts on today's tvs are not designed to be repaired.

With today's prices it's normally cheaper or more cost effective to replace than repair.

With the broken pixel as in the pic. Replace the TV is the normal route, unless you find a repair shop that has that screen they removed from another tv that had a different issue. Regardless as the saying goes.

They just don't make them like they used to.

 

[coconut]

They were made to be fixed. Today's TV are not. They are made to be replaced every 5 years. Soon 8K TVs will be the norm. Funny thing, The human eye only sees in about 2.6k.

The diminishing marginal utility of additional picture quality vs. the cost of the amount of data required for streaming 8K will prevent it from becoming the norm. No I don't know about this but my son does. Even today the data requirements of streaming 4K prevents many viewing options.

The amount of data in a two hour 4K show is the same amount of data in a 30 minute 8K show.

 

[1maGoh]

They were made to be fixed. Today's TV are not. They are made to be replaced every 5 years. Soon 8K TVs will be the norm. Funny thing, The human eye only sees in about 2.6k.

So if they were made to be fixed, then they were also made to break. And you can solder things back together in those new TVs. I know a guy who has a nice side racket doing that. He picks up TVs from people that are giving them away because they're broken. Then he either solders broken pets back together or he Frankenstein's them when he has spare parts. He said (in what I'm sure was a very unscientific study) 75% of the TVs just need a little solder.

So what you're really saying is, the TV manufacturing industry hasn't changed. You just don't know how to repair them anymore.

And like @Angry Ram I have a couple of old LED TVs that are still kicking after several moves. Well, I had a couple. I'm down to one. I have neither the motivation to fix it or pay for it to be fixed. It was low quality picture anyway. The one remaining TV I've had since about 2009. The other was a few years older and just died early this year.

The drive to buy new TVs isn't because they're breaking. It's because of improvements. Flat screen was better than CRT. HD was an improvement. They tried 3DTV for a bit (that was dumb). 4k, now 8k. Curved TV for better viewing angles. The whole thing is aimed at driving early adopters to get a TV that makes their neighbors jealous.

 

[coconut]

When there were tube testers available anyone with a screw driver could take the back off a TV and take all the tubes to a tube tester to see which one was bad. Anyone remember Heathkit TVs? They were very high quality (from what I've heard) and were certainly able to be worked on. Too bad for TVs that they aren't made modular for the repair minded buyer.

I must have had good luck with all my CRT TVs since I never had a CRT go bad. Still have a Zenith B&W from the early '60s that fires up fine. Same with a '75 Zenith Color 19 in. Had a '89 Zenith 19in. for 15 years before upgrading to a '04 Sony 27in. for 11 years. First true flat screen for me is a '15 Sony 50in. 1080p backlit LED/LCD that I enjoy watching games on. Bought it for my wife.

 

[EastRam]

So if they were made to be fixed, then they were also made to break. And you can solder things back together in those new TVs. I know a guy who has a nice side racket doing that. He picks up TVs from people that are giving them away because they're broken. Then he either solders broken pets back together or he Frankenstein's them when he has spare parts. He said (in what I'm sure was a very unscientific study) 75% of the TVs just need a little solder.

So what you're really saying is, the TV manufacturing industry hasn't changed. You just don't know how to repair them anymore.

And like @Angry Ram I have a couple of old LED TVs that are still kicking after several moves. Well, I had a couple. I'm down to one. I have neither the motivation to fix it or pay for it to be fixed. It was low quality picture anyway. The one remaining TV I've had since about 2009. The other was a few years older and just died early this year.

The drive to buy new TVs isn't because they're breaking. It's because of improvements. Flat screen was better than CRT. HD was an improvement. They tried 3DTV for a bit (that was dumb). 4k, now 8k. Curved TV for better viewing angles. The whole thing is aimed at driving early adopters to get a TV that makes their neighbors jealous.

He would be correct in that some of the solder joints become weak, but not all that common. A large portion of failure is the power supplies and or the capacitors as related to the power supply.

Sure you can replace the power supply and capacitors, but compare that repair costs vs a new TV. Same goes for the replacement costs of the screen

Now your buddy is smart about what he's doing. But your average repair shop is gonna charge you 2-3 hundred for a power supply. And we know we can get a 40" for 2 bills.

So when your Flat screen doesn't turn on = power supply related 90% of the time.

 

[1maGoh]

He would be correct in that some of the solder joints become weak, but not all that common. A large portion of failure is the power supplies and or the capacitors as related to the power supply.

Sure you can replace the power supply and capacitors, but compare that repair costs vs a new TV. Same goes for the replacement costs of the screen

Now your buddy is smart about what he's doing. But your average repair shop is gonna charge you 2-3 hundred for a power supply. And we know we can get a 40" for 2 bills.

So when your Flat screen doesn't turn on = power supply related 90% of the time.

The point still stands. Broken TVs are broken TVs if you don't know how to fix them. If you do, then it's all good. The industry isn't different, the technology is.

Saying the old TVs are better because a subset of the population knew how to repair them and had the tools to do, makes as much (or less) sense as saying that typewriters are better because you didn't have to use a printer and new printers confuse you. Portions of it may be accurate, but it's also a personal problem and not a systemic failure of the industry or product.

 

[IowaRam]

I got to thinking

I don't know where the ON button for mine is

if I loose the remote , I'm probably screwed

 

[EastRam]

The point still stands. Broken TVs are broken TVs if you don't know how to fix them. If you do, then it's all good. The industry isn't different, the technology is.

Saying the old TVs are better because a subset of the population knew how to repair them and had the tools to do, makes as much (or less) sense as saying that typewriters are better because you didn't have to use a printer and new printers confuse you. Portions of it may be accurate, but it's also a personal problem and not a systemic failure of the industry or product.

It is actually a change in the industry. Parts for old Crts were more readily available and listed at reasonable prices.

Components for today's tvs are more intergrated on power boards and such, therefore making it more expensive to replace as compared to replacing the TV.

As an example we have been repairing our own LCds for awhile now. But it's gotten to the point where we can't find the components needed for the brand we are repairing and when we do find the components it's more cost effective to replace the TV.

40" tv = 200 bucks. Power supply + repair cost or time close to or above 200 bucks.

Back yard knowledge and repair ability = priceless.

But that's not the industry.

 

[coconut]

The point still stands. Broken TVs are broken TVs if you don't know how to fix them. If you do, then it's all good. The industry isn't different, the technology is.

Saying the old TVs are better because a subset of the population knew how to repair them and had the tools to do,

Not a "subset of the population" just anyone with a screwdriver to take the back off the TV, unplug the vacuum tubes and take them to the tube tester machine at the hardware store or gas station. If the problem was one of those tubes then it was super easy and inexpensive. Sure the technology today is different but that isn't the issue. The issue is the industry adopting planned obsolescence where the product isn't expected to last long and isn't designed to be repaired. To say the cost is cheaper to buy a new TV than repair your old one is playing right into their hands. That logic over a lifetime will be unnecessarily very expensive IMHO. If you want newer technology in your TV then fine. But that TV should be able to be reasonably repaired if you're satisfied with it.

Case in point: My push mower crapped out and I couldn't find a decent used one so had to buy new. Needed a side discharge so ended up buying one of the least expensive ones for $240. I'm hoping I can get more than 5 years out of it. While the technology and some of the design is impressive other things are just designed to fail. And fail fast. It has a Briggs engine but no oil drain plug since they claim it never needs the oil changed. It also has a steel deck but no wash port to help prevent the deck from rusting out fast. Plastic gas tank, air filter housing and deck height adjustment etc. So much stupid stuff I'm going to try to pick up a blown one for parts. I'd be glad to pay $20 more for a new one that had those things designed to last.

 

[1maGoh]

Not a "subset of the population" just anyone with a screwdriver to take the back off the TV, unplug the vacuum tubes and take them to the tube tester machine at the hardware store or gas station. If the problem was one of those tubes then it was super easy and inexpensive. Sure the technology today is different but that isn't the issue. The issue is the industry adopting planned obsolescence where the product isn't expected to last long and isn't designed to be repaired. To say the cost is cheaper to buy a new TV than repair your old one is playing right into their hands. That logic over a lifetime will be unnecessarily very expensive IMHO. If you want newer technology in your TV then fine. But that TV should be able to be reasonably repaired if you're satisfied with it.

Case in point: My push mower crapped out and I couldn't find a decent used one so had to buy new. Needed a side discharge so ended up buying one of the least expensive ones for $240. I'm hoping I can get more than 5 years out of it. While the technology and some of the design is impressive other things are just designed to fail. And fail fast. It has a Briggs engine but no oil drain plug since they claim it never needs the oil changed. It also has a steel deck but no wash port to help prevent the deck from rusting out fast. Plastic gas tank, air filter housing and deck height adjustment etc. So much stupid stuff I'm going to try to pick up a blown one for parts. I'd be glad to pay $20 more for a new one that had those things designed to last.

I'll give you some (most) of the stuff in your "Case in point" section. Car manufacturers have been doing the same thing. They increase the mileage between services knowing that it will die sooner, but probably about the time you're ready to replace it anyway.

However, I will take issue with saying "the product isn't expected to last long and isn't designed to be repaired." If the other TVs were also breaking, were they really expected to last longer? How long was it, generally, between breaks? And finally, were they designed to be repaired or did the design they had available lend itself to repair? Was the CRT the best option they had at the time and it happened to be easy to repair or did the entire industry really say, "You know what would be great? If customers didn't buy more of our products because they repaired the old ones they already bought! That way we don't make more money!! Make all the products easy to fix."

I can see it now. The CFO gets excited and shouts, "Brilliant! That will reduce profits by at least 25%. We'll all miss our bonuses and by next year this time we can be out of jobs."

And the CEO replied, "It's pure fucking genius. Make it happen."

So, designed for repair or coincidentally were easy to repair?

 

[coconut]

I'll give you some (most) of the stuff in your "Case in point" section. Car manufacturers have been doing the same thing. They increase the mileage between services knowing that it will die sooner, but probably about the time you're ready to replace it anyway.

However, I will take issue with saying "the product isn't expected to last long and isn't designed to be repaired." If the other TVs were also breaking, were they really expected to last longer? How long was it, generally, between breaks? And finally, were they designed to be repaired or did the design they had available lend itself to repair? Was the CRT the best option they had at the time and it happened to be easy to repair or did the entire industry really say, "You know what would be great? If customers didn't buy more of our products because they repaired the old ones they already bought! That way we don't make more money!! Make all the products easy to fix."

I can see it now. The CFO gets excited and shouts, "Brilliant! That will reduce profits by at least 25%. We'll all miss our bonuses and by next year this time we can be out of jobs."

And the CEO replied, "It's pure fucking genius. Make it happen."

So, designed for repair or coincidentally were easy to repair?

Well believe it or not that is exactly how things were designed before the 1930s. Companies took pride in their product and wanted to build their business by earning brand loyalty. The ability to repair was paramount since people thought it foolish to keep buying the same thing every few years. Many of those that did trade their cars in every few years stayed with the brand. Planned obsolescence started during the Great Depression in order to drum up more business. Even today the businesses that do the best are those that make a quality product that at a minimum they support and the product lasts. Think Apple. Think Technivorm. Many others.

 

[1maGoh]

Well believe it or not that is exactly how things were designed before the 1930s. Companies took pride in their product and wanted to build their business by earning brand loyalty. The ability to repair was paramount since people thought it foolish to keep buying the same thing every few years. Many of those that did trade their cars in every few years stayed with the brand. Planned obsolescence started during the Great Depression in order to drum up more business. Even today the businesses that do the best are those that make a quality product that at a minimum they support and the product lasts. Think Apple. Think Technivorm. Many others.

That's all probably true. I don't think you were there during the 1930's for firsthand knowledge of this, but it's reasonable and hold up to logic. That being said, every CRT was designed and built before 1939. So if there was a way to force people into new TV's by making them less repairable after that, I'm sure that all these people who grew up in the 50's, 60's, and 70's wouldn't have the same experience repairing their TV.

Apple is successful because of cultism, brainwashing, and I'm pretty sure they sacrifice children to fuel magic rituals aimed at brand loyalty. However, they also count on people replacing phones and laptops every few years, even though they work. They're trying to drive people to new features, which is what I said a few posts ago.

I've never even heard of Technivorm.

More advanced technology is harder to work on. It requires specialization. That's what all of human society is based on. I can know the ins and outs of networking and security because I don't have to grow my own food or build my own house or maintain a horse. The person at the gas station doesn't have to know how anything with a power cord works because they specialize in running a gas station. All of that also means, that neither of us know how to repair an OLED TV because the person who designed specialized in doing that so that they don't have to worry about either of our jobs. Symbiotic working relationships amongst skilled workers is the core of human and technological advancement. The side effect is that you can't repair your TV. Maybe it's evil business. Maybe it's because many of the things you rely on every day require a skill set to create and maintain that you don't have because you chose to specialize something else.

Take your pick.

 

[CGI_Ram]

 

[coconut]

That's all probably true. I don't think you were there during the 1930's for firsthand knowledge of this, but it's reasonable and hold up to logic. That being said, every CRT was designed and built before 1939. So if there was a way to force people into new TV's by making them less repairable after that, I'm sure that all these people who grew up in the 50's, 60's, and 70's wouldn't have the same experience repairing their TV.

Apple is successful because of cultism, brainwashing, and I'm pretty sure they sacrifice children to fuel magic rituals aimed at brand loyalty. However, they also count on people replacing phones and laptops every few years, even though they work. They're trying to drive people to new features, which is what I said a few posts ago.

I've never even heard of Technivorm.

More advanced technology is harder to work on. It requires specialization. That's what all of human society is based on. I can know the ins and outs of networking and security because I don't have to grow my own food or build my own house or maintain a horse. The person at the gas station doesn't have to know how anything with a power cord works because they specialize in running a gas station. All of that also means, that neither of us know how to repair an OLED TV because the person who designed specialized in doing that so that they don't have to worry about either of our jobs. Symbiotic working relationships amongst skilled workers is the core of human and technological advancement. The side effect is that you can't repair your TV. Maybe it's evil business. Maybe it's because many of the things you rely on every day require a skill set to create and maintain that you don't have because you chose to specialize something else.

Take your pick.

It's all true. No I wasn't around in the '30s but I grew up listening and interacting with people who were adults in the '30s and I was that kid who listened and asked questions. CRTs being designed before 1939 doesn't mean thats where the innovation stopped. Look at the development of the wheel compared to the automobile tire of today or even those of the 1930s. I well remember the shadow mask CRT and the far superior picture of the Sony Trinitron with its aperture grille CRT since my dad bought a 19in. Sony Trinitron in '75. There were later improvements to CRTs into the '90s.

I do not understand your last sentence about CRTs. If you mean that the improvement in technology from vacuum tubes to solid state reduced the ability of most people to potentially repair their TVs then I would agree. However that tradeoff I would say was a good one for the consumer that bought quality as I wrote earlier about my personal experience with the longevity of those solid state TVs. Replacing your TV that still works because you want the newer technology puts the power with the consumer which is the best way to build a business. It's the long view and it still works. Unless I'm forced into it and preferably with someone else's money I never purchase new technology when it comes out. I always wait at least a couple years for the manufacturer to fix the bugs that surface and for the price to drop. Thus greater reliability and lower cost to me.

You describe the Apple Inc. of today. However its brand was built on innovation and quality. With computers I was always an IBM platform (think every computer company other than Apple) user. As a scientist it allowed me to use and transmit data with far more program options. This was commonplace across the sciences and engineering into the 2000s. Hence it was pretty rare to see a colleague using an Apple computer. In fact at that time it was a pain in the ass for everyone involved. But the MacIntosh (Apple's early desktop) was great for someone wanting to word process without the need to learn DOS. It was a simple point and click navigation that a monkey could do. Eventually more programs were made for the MacIntosh and it began to make inroads to the sciences and when the consumer internet began to take off in the mid '90s the point and click was crucial to the widespread adoption of the home computer. Microsoft had to respond and brought its point and click program called Windows to the market to maintain its use in the IBM platform machines. Apple Inc. charged more for their computers since they were easy to use. IBM platform machines (think Windows) were a huge share of the market and thus were targeted by viruses. As a result Apple computers for many years were practically virus free. It is why I switched to this Mac laptop over 10 years ago. I've dropped it too many times to remember and who knows how many times my kids dropped it but it still works fine. Again innovation and quality built the Apple brand. That has resulted in "cultism". Why wouldn't it?

Technivorm makes the best coffee and is the last coffee maker you will ever buy. Simple, flawless technology essentially unchanged in over 50 years. In fact they made a conscious decision to make it reliable with quality materials and the ability to be repaired if necessary. I own four but I don't drink coffee, my family does. It is pricey at +$300 but the coffee is outstanding and the cost of replacing other coffee makers every few years will over time cost much more.

For many consumer electronics I would agree that the technology to make them as small as possible is essential. Certainly true for the cellphone. However a big screen TV is a different animal. It sits in a single location. Size isn't an issue since it is already large. Over 50% of my TV screen is only 0.6 in. thick with the rest at 2 in. thick. As long as the weight of the TV isn't greatly increased there isn't any reason it can't be built with a modular set up in mind to facilitate repairs. Instead of 2 in. thick it could be 4 in. to give room to work. Other products do this to this day, desk top computers being one. It has to start with design. Designed to last. Preferably designed to be easily upgraded as well.

 

[…..]

View attachment 31146

I can always depend on you D to come up with an illustration of wisdom and common sensibility,

The bitch has got some splainin to do!

 

[Angry Ram]

It's is true today's TVs are not designed to last like the old Tube sets of the past.

We're gonna have to agree to disagree on this one. My old Zenith, and another CRT I used in college would be on my side.

Some last longer than others. Parts on today's tvs are not designed to be repaired.

I fail to see how that's a negative.

With today's prices it's normally cheaper or more cost effective to replace than repair.

Exactly, and you get a better quality set each time.

They just don't make them like they used to.

Nope, they make em better.