Why do manufacturers put so many options on TVs that we dont need?

[NY Yankees 23 2]

I was just thinking after looking through new TVs that why do they put so many options on TVs that 90% of us will never use? I remember when flat screens first came out and you could buy just a 40 inch monitor, what happened to that? Now they come with all kinds of tuners and and crap that nobody uses cause we ALL have cable boxes and such. Cut out half of the options and decrease the price and they will sell more. Am i wrong or what? All i need out of a TV is picture settings and HDMI ports. After that, i could care less about anything else (i think..lol).

[Aquel]

Because they add perceived added value and a way to differentiate from both competitors and previous models. One year 24fps was a big thing, then 120 HZ came along, then 3D..

[Petra_Kalbrain]

I agree to a certain extent. As an HDTV it should not require anything other than component and HDMI connections. I like the tuners myself as I hate to pay the ridiculous cable prices and it's nice to get the free-to-air HD channels for big sporting events like the Superbowl when I can't have an extremely good "limited time" cable deal on the go.

I think there could be a lot of potential for getting rid of older tech in newer TVs though. I doubt it would effect cost much, but it would certainly lighten the overall hardware weight while cutting back on generated heat as well as potential power consumption. Newer tech, like 3D capability, should definitely stay though!

Oh well... we don't get to make those kinds of decisions.

[HAMP]

I'm trying to figure what option they put that's not needed. I believe just about everything they put in them, one group or another will need or want it.

[ZoetMB]

The manufacturing cost of those "extra" features is almost nil. All the cost is in design and in the initial chip fabrication. If you look at the guts of a TV (or almost any electronic appliance these days), there is so much integration on the chips that there are actually very few parts.

If they didn't supply tuners, then they'd have to make even more models - some for people who need them and some for people who don't. But one thing they could cut out (not that this would save them much money) for U.S. sets is that since there's no longer any over-the-air analog broadcasting, they don't need an NTSC analog tuner, with the possible exception of someone with an old game or VHS deck that outputs RF to channel 2 or 3 (although they could always switch to the composite input instead.)

I do think it would have been wise for the electronics manufacturers to decide where was the best place to provide web content: in the receiver, in the BD player or in the TV. Currently, it's largely in all three places, which is redundant, confusing and probably does add cost, due to the cost of licensing the content. Logically, it probably belonged in the receiver, but since not everyone buys a receiver, I could see why it had to be somewhere else. But it doesn't need to be in both BD players and TVs, IMO.

They could also save money if they'd adopt ethernet over HDMI which would remove the need for embedded WiFi in almost every device.

Other than that, TVs don't really have so many features. In fact, most of them have substantially reduced the number of inputs aside from HDMI. Now that most receivers support the audio return channel, I'm not even sure TVs need the optical audio outputs anymore. While it comes with the set, if you want analog audio/video input on my Sony, you have to add on this accessory device that hangs off of a cable and plugs into an accessory jack.

As far as receivers go, while many have eliminated S-video inputs (something I actually could have still used), it seems to me they still have way too many composite and component inputs. These days, does anyone really need more than one composite, one s-video and one component input? And only people still using either an old game machine, a laserdisc player or an old VHS deck even need those. For most models, those could all be eliminated to simplify and lower the cost of back panels. I also think that if they provide far better interfaces to internet radio, you could even give consideration to eliminating the AM/FM tuner, not that there's a lot of cost in that - those chips also cost next to nothing.

[un4gvn94538]

Originally Posted by chrishaney23

I was just thinking after looking through new TVs that why do they put so many options on TVs that 90% of us will never use? I remember when flat screens first came out and you could buy just a 40 inch monitor, what happened to that? Now they come with all kinds of tuners and and crap that nobody uses cause we ALL have cable boxes and such. Cut out half of the options and decrease the price and they will sell more. Am i wrong or what? All i need out of a TV is picture settings and HDMI ports. After that, i could care less about anything else (i think..lol).

yes, yes you are

[steve1971]

Originally Posted by chrishaney23

I was just thinking after looking through new TVs that why do they put so many options on TVs that 90% of us will never use? I remember when flat screens first came out and you could buy just a 40 inch monitor, what happened to that? Now they come with all kinds of tuners and and crap that nobody uses cause we ALL have cable boxes and such. Cut out half of the options and decrease the price and they will sell more. Am i wrong or what? All i need out of a TV is picture settings and HDMI ports. After that, i could care less about anything else (i think..lol).

I agree with you except on one thing. Tv's do need tuners for those who dont have cable boxes. As for streaming, widgets ect? Those they dont need.

[BohemianGraham]

Originally Posted by chrishaney23

I was just thinking after looking through new TVs that why do they put so many options on TVs that 90% of us will never use? I remember when flat screens first came out and you could buy just a 40 inch monitor, what happened to that? Now they come with all kinds of tuners and and crap that nobody uses cause we ALL have cable boxes and such. Cut out half of the options and decrease the price and they will sell more. Am i wrong or what? All i need out of a TV is picture settings and HDMI ports. After that, i could care less about anything else (i think..lol).

Not everyone has cable boxes. Also, there are a lot of "budget" models which have limited inputs on them. I paid more for my TV because I wanted more inputs:

4 HDMI - 3/4 gone
1 USB capable of video/audio/photo playback - gone
2 Composites - 2/2 gone
2 Component - 1/2 gone
Coaxial - gone
VGA - still free, but the option's there if I even need to hook up an older non-HDMI ready PC for some ungodly reason.

So yeah, there is a bunch of superfluous crap on a lot of TVs (I have a desktop hooked up to mine via HDMI, I don't need an ethernet port, but some TVs do have them. Mine doesn't), but I can see why people would want them.

My brother bought a "budget" model Toshiba ((it was 430 when he bought it, 30 bucks off back at the end of November) it crapped out last week, Future Shop is supposed to come to repair it this week), and had a hell of a time trying to find one with a VGA input on it, as he has an older PC that only has s-video and VGA out. Even some of the higher end models lack a VGA cable, which isn't good for people who have older computers that are more than capable of video/gaming on a larger display.

[SpaceDog]

I have never been shopping for a TV and thinking "this one just has too damned many features".