Internet Access: Through HDTV or Blu-ray Player? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 10 Old 08-03-2010, 02:01 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
videoviper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 68
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Is it better to access streaming content (NetFlix, YouTube, etc.) via an HDTV or via a Blu-ray disc player...or does it matter?

Most HDTVs and most Blu-ray players can access streaming content, which seems redundant, unless there's a reason for both to have this feature?

Thanks for your help.
videoviper is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 10 Old 08-03-2010, 04:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rdclark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Philadelphia Vicinity
Posts: 4,161
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by videoviper View Post

Is it better to access streaming content (NetFlix, YouTube, etc.) via an HDTV or via a Blu-ray disc player...or does it matter?

Most HDTVs and most Blu-ray players can access streaming content, which seems redundant, unless there's a reason for both to have this feature?

Thanks for your help.

I wouldn't say "most," but it's a competitive feature these days.

If two devices both stream the content you want, the main differences are (a) if one of them has much better video processing than the other, so that upscaled SD content would look better, and (b) if you want to feed more than one display simultaneously, in which case an external device would be a better choice. But the more common a feature is, the less cost it adds to the device. It's pretty common for people to have multiple devices that can stream; you use the one that has the best interface, or that has the content you want, or that performs best.

Wide Awake

on the Edge

of the World

 

rdclark is online now  
post #3 of 10 Old 08-04-2010, 02:05 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
videoviper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 68
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Thank you.

I actually observe plenty of feature duplication on HDTVs and Blu-ray players: Both often have DLNA clients, WiFi, etc.

I can understand the value of this if, for example, an 'early adopter' bought a TV or a Blu-ray player without one of these features; or if, as you explained, one device performs a particular function better.

Nonetheless, for the many who, like myself, are shopping for their first ever digital television and Blu-ray player, all that duplication seems like an excuse to run up the cost. This is particularly true when considering a TV and Blu-ray player from the same manufacturer. You don't find among the major manufacturers a Blu-ray player that merely plays discs competently.

Thanks again to you and to these forums.
videoviper is offline  
post #4 of 10 Old 08-04-2010, 06:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mproper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Palmyra, PA
Posts: 7,043
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
You pretty much nailed it with the "Older TV" thing. I know my TV (about 3 years old) won't stream anything, but my XBOX and PS3 do (and there's redundancy there as well with Netflix and some other things).

Of course, even in those scenarios, my XBOX will stream Zune marketplace stuff, and my PS3 will stream PSN stuff....and my DirecTV box has it's on-demand stuff.

Lots of sources for content now, but as you said, not everyone has a TV and Blu-Ray player that are both capable of streaming so by building it into multiple devices, it introduces redundancy for some, while just introducing new functionality for others (who only have one device)
mproper is offline  
post #5 of 10 Old 08-04-2010, 10:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
rdclark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Philadelphia Vicinity
Posts: 4,161
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 188
This always happens with electronics. And it's not worth worrying about. Electronic devices always have features you'll never need or use, but that are cheaper for the manufacturer to include in all models than it is to make separate versions, one with the feature and one without.

Most TVs have OTA tuners too, which people with satellite or cable will probably never use. Do we complain about paying for them? Not usually; it's a standard and expected feature, like AM tuners on AVRs.

I have Netflix streaming on my TiVo, my PS3, and my computer. I use the one that's most convenient (usually the TiVo).

I don't have it on my Oppo Blu-ray player, or my 3-year old Sharp Aquos TV. But my next TV probably will have it, whether I want it to or not. And it will probably go unused, just like the tuner does, along with the speakers, 3 of the 4 HDMI inputs, all of the analog inputs, and several other features I never use. It's not worth caring about, IMO.

Wide Awake

on the Edge

of the World

 

rdclark is online now  
post #6 of 10 Old 08-04-2010, 11:02 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
videoviper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 68
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdclark View Post

This always happens with electronics. And it's not worth worrying about. Electronic devices always have features you'll never need or use, but that are cheaper for the manufacturer to include in all models than it is to make separate versions, one with the feature and one without.

Yes, you are quite correct.
videoviper is offline  
post #7 of 10 Old 08-04-2010, 11:02 AM
Advanced Member
 
Shrike645's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Cambridge, Ont
Posts: 761
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I would imagine that sound and your hookups might be a small issue. If you have a home theatre you are likely to have the blu-ray player through the sound system but may not have return audio channel hdmi or the cables running the sound back from the TV to the HT. I know I don't.
Shrike645 is offline  
post #8 of 10 Old 08-04-2010, 04:36 PM
Advanced Member
 
DeeKaye07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 690
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Guess it depends on your situation...in my case I got a Blu-ray player with streaming for the downstairs TV because the one I bought last Nov. doesn't have that feature (though that seems to be the one thing it's missing). For upstairs though when I do get a new TV it will have streaming because the DVD player up there does not have it. It's nice though to have more of a choice of TVs and blu-ray players that do have streaming, if one so wants that feature.

DGK
DeeKaye07 is offline  
post #9 of 10 Old 08-05-2010, 08:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rdclark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Philadelphia Vicinity
Posts: 4,161
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrike645 View Post

I would imagine that sound and your hookups might be a small issue. If you have a home theatre you are likely to have the blu-ray player through the sound system but may not have return audio channel hdmi or the cables running the sound back from the TV to the HT. I know I don't.

But it's easy enough to do (just one optical cable needed for 5.1 with most setups).

Wide Awake

on the Edge

of the World

 

rdclark is online now  
post #10 of 10 Old 08-10-2010, 12:07 PM
Senior Member
 
jsirbak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 257
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
My first big-screen HDTV was marketed as a "monitor" - they couldn't call it a "TV" since it didn't have a built-in tuner, which in 2001 cost in the range of $500 and up. Today, digital tuners are cheap and are built into pretty much any TV designed for the living room. Although I've had to part with my first HDTV, I have not parted with the "monitor" mentality.

The TV displays a signal, plain and simple. The source of the signal and the computing power required to process it is something that changes. I prefer to have a relatively media-feature-poor TV, which I am not going to be replacing regularly, and spend the money on external signal-receiving-and-processing boxes (roku, bluray, xbox, ASTC tuner, WD media box, etc.) that can be easily swapped out and upgraded. Also note that the premiums you pay for these media features correlate to the value of the item. If you're asked to pay a $150 premium for a TV with built-in memory for DLNA streaming and only a $50 premium for a blu-ray player with this functionality, as is often the case, the decision is a no-brainer. My point is that, even if you're paying the same premium on both devices, it makes sense to have it built into the blu-ray player, which is cheaper and easily upgradable in a year or two when the media feature are so much more advanced, vs. being stuck with 2010 technology built into your TV for the life of the TV.
jsirbak is offline  
Reply Video Download Services & Hardware

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off