Smart TV or...?

[Slickone]

I'm looking to buy a ~40" TV (for bedroom) and was wondering whether to get a Smart TV, or get an mk808, Roku, Chromecast, etc instead. Or a BDP with WIFI. I've read you lose integration with a standalone unit(?), but is having integration handy? I'm looking at Samsung and LG.

Also it seems like with Samsung, you have to get a Smart TV to get a slim one. But some reviews say Samsung has some problems with flash.
And some LG's come with Google TV, which looks like it could be good.
But people have mentioned problems with both brand's Smart features/browsers (LG might have not been GTV model).

 

[HeXen]

I just got a couple of Smart TV's. Integration is a convenience but you could probably save some money buy getting chromecast but I think you have to use a Tablet for function. Samsung has a lot of apps, integrates with your digital cable provider using some kind of IR device and shows you tiles of different stuff goin on through various channels, tells you whats on TV, movies..etc. Chromecast probably does all those things too. No clue about the LG models but no problems with flash on mine but I updated the firmware

 

[Slickone]

Have you seen the LG's with built in Google TV? Search youtube for LG Google TV. You can get a motion sensitive remote too (with querty keyboard).

I would rather have a Samsung since it seems like they get fewer reports of failure than LG (not saying they get a lot), but the LG's do seem to come with more Smart features.

Something I didn't know until now about Chromecast (I hadn't researched) is it requires a phone/tablet/PC to control it. I'd rather not have to do so. Roku, and of course Smart TV's, have a remote.

 

[HeXen]

Well you could buy some optional extended warranty if it's failure rate is of concern.

 

[Slickone]

How is integration better?

 

[Midwayman]

For a bedroom tv where you might want to wall mount it and not have a audio stack I can see integration being a good thing. Less clutter. Then there is the whole universal remote to operate multiple devices issue. I wouldn't bother for a main TV, but a 2nd one in the bedroom.... Big downside is you'll never see updates.

 

[Slickone]

It won't be wall mounted. Possibly something like this.

Never see updates for which tech? People say the TV mfg's update Smart features through firmware updates.

 

[Midwayman]

It won't be wall mounted. Possibly something like this.

Never see updates for which tech? People say the TV mfg's update Smart features through firmware updates.

No updates for the smart TV. Sure you might get a year or two of firmware updates, but I bet getting new services on old TVs is a pretty low priority and the TV is going to last much longer than the update life. Of course you can always add a roku 5 in a few years.

I guess how I look at it is if you're looking at spending extra money to get smart features, don't. Buy a stand alone box. If you're looking at TVs in a range where smart features are the normal for good screen quality, I wouldn't avoid it.

 

[spacejamz]

For a bedroom tv where you might want to wall mount it and not have a audio stack I can see integration being a good thing. Less clutter. Then there is the whole universal remote to operate multiple devices issue. I wouldn't bother for a main TV, but a 2nd one in the bedroom.... Big downside is you'll never see updates.

I would assume that you would at least have cable or Sat STB connected to the TV...doubt very many people would be content with just OTA channels...

 

[Midwayman]

I would assume that you would at least have cable or Sat STB connected to the TV...doubt very many people would be content with just OTA channels...

Fair enough, but some TV's have cable card tuners or can get content distributed over coax without a local box. (My old direct TV setup was like that)