TVs

smart-tv-os-owners-face-“constant-conflict”-between-privacy,-advertiser-demands

Smart TV OS owners face “constant conflict” between privacy, advertiser demands

ads, privacy, samsung, Software, streaming, Tech, TVs / /

DENVER—Most smart TV operating system (OS) owners are in the ad sales business now. Software providers for budget and premium TVs are honing their ad skills, which requires advancing their ability to collect user data. This is creating an “inherent conflict” within the industry, Takashi Nakano, VP of content and programming at Samsung TV Plus, said at the StreamTV Show in Denver last week.

During a panel at StreamTV Insider’s conference entitled “CTV OS Leader Roundtable: From Drivers to Engagement and Content Strategy,” Nakano acknowledged the opposing needs of advertisers and smart TV users, who are calling for a reasonable amount of data privacy.

“Do you want your data sold out there and everyone to know exactly what you’ve been watching … the answer is generally no,” the Samsung executive said. “Yet, advertisers want all of this data. They wanna know exactly what you ate for breakfast.”

Nakano also suggested that the owners of OSes targeting smart TVs and other streaming hardware, like streaming sticks, are inundated with user data that may not actually be that useful or imperative to collect:

I think that there’s inherent conflict in the ad ecosystem supplying so much data. … We’re fortunate to have all that data, but we’re also like, ‘Do we really want to give it all, and hand it all out?’ There’s a constant conflict around that, right? So how do we create an ecosystem where we can serve ads that are pretty good? Maybe it’s not perfect …

Today, connected TV (CTV) OSes are largely built around not just gathering user data, but also creating ways to collect new types of information about viewers in order to deliver more relevant, impactful ads. LG, for example, recently announced that its smart TV OS, webOS, will use a new AI model that informs ad placement based on viewers’ emotions and personal beliefs.

Smart TV OS owners face “constant conflict” between privacy, advertiser demands Read More »

breaking-down-why-apple-tvs-are-privacy-advocates’-go-to-streaming-device

Breaking down why Apple TVs are privacy advocates’ go-to streaming device

ads, Apple, Apple TV, Apple TV Plus, Features, privacy, streaming, Tech, TVs / /

Using the Apple TV app or an Apple account means giving Apple more data, though.

Credit: Aurich Lawson | Getty Images

Credit: Aurich Lawson | Getty Images

Every time I write an article about the escalating advertising and tracking on today’s TVs, someone brings up Apple TV boxes. Among smart TVs, streaming sticks, and other streaming devices, Apple TVs are largely viewed as a safe haven.

“Just disconnect your TV from the Internet and use an Apple TV box.”

That’s the common guidance you’ll hear from Ars readers for those seeking the joys of streaming without giving up too much privacy. Based on our research and the experts we’ve consulted, that advice is pretty solid, as Apple TVs offer significantly more privacy than other streaming hardware providers.

But how private are Apple TV boxes, really? Apple TVs don’t use automatic content recognition (ACR, a user-tracking technology leveraged by nearly all smart TVs and streaming devices), but could that change? And what about the software that Apple TV users do use—could those apps provide information about you to advertisers or Apple?

In this article, we’ll delve into what makes the Apple TV’s privacy stand out and examine whether users should expect the limited ads and enhanced privacy to last forever.

Apple TV boxes limit tracking out of the box

One of the simplest ways Apple TVs ensure better privacy is through their setup process, during which you can disable Siri, location tracking, and sending analytics data to Apple. During setup, users also receive several opportunities to review Apple’s data and privacy policies. Also off by default is the boxes’ ability to send voice input data to Apple.

Most other streaming devices require users to navigate through pages of settings to disable similar tracking capabilities, which most people are unlikely to do. Apple’s approach creates a line of defense against snooping, even for those unaware of how invasive smart devices can be.

Apple TVs running tvOS 14.5 and later also make third-party app tracking more difficult by requiring such apps to request permission before they can track users.

“If you choose Ask App Not to Track, the app developer can’t access the system advertising identifier (IDFA), which is often used to track,” Apple says. “The app is also not permitted to track your activity using other information that identifies you or your device, like your email address.”

Users can access the Apple TV settings and disable the ability of third-party apps to ask permission for tracking. However, Apple could further enhance privacy by enabling this setting by default.

The Apple TV also lets users control which apps can access the set-top box’s Bluetooth functionality, photos, music, and HomeKit data (if applicable), and the remote’s microphone.

“Apple’s primary business model isn’t dependent on selling targeted ads, so it has somewhat less incentive to harvest and monetize incredible amounts of your data,” said RJ Cross, director of the consumer privacy program at the Public Interest Research Group (PIRG). “I personally trust them more with my data than other tech companies.”

What if you share analytics data?

If you allow your Apple TV to share analytics data with Apple or app developers, that data won’t be personally identifiable, Apple says. Any collected personal data is “not logged at all, removed from reports before they’re sent to Apple, or protected by techniques, such as differential privacy,” Apple says.

Differential privacy, which injects noise into collected data, is one of the most common methods used for anonymizing data. In support documentation (PDF), Apple details its use of differential privacy:

The first step we take is to privatize the information using local differential privacy on the user’s device. The purpose of privatization is to assure that Apple’s servers don’t receive clear data. Device identifiers are removed from the data, and it is transmitted to Apple over an encrypted channel. The Apple analysis system ingests the differentially private contributions, dropping IP addresses and other metadata. The final stage is aggregation, where the privatized records are processed to compute the relevant statistics, and the aggregate statistics are then shared with relevant Apple teams. Both the ingestion and aggregation stages are performed in a restricted access environment so even the privatized data isn’t broadly accessible to Apple employees.

What if you use an Apple account with your Apple TV?

Another factor to consider is Apple’s privacy policy regarding Apple accounts, formerly Apple IDs.

Apple support documentation says you “need” an Apple account to use an Apple TV, but you can use the hardware without one. Still, it’s common for people to log into Apple accounts on their Apple TV boxes because it makes it easier to link with other Apple products. Another reason someone might link an Apple TV box with an Apple account is to use the Apple TV app, a common way to stream on Apple TV boxes.

So what type of data does Apple harvest from Apple accounts? According to its privacy policy, the company gathers usage data, such as “data about your activity on and use of” Apple offerings, including “app launches within our services…; browsing history; search history; [and] product interaction.”

Other types of data Apple may collect from Apple accounts include transaction information (Apple says this is “data about purchases of Apple products and services or transactions facilitated by Apple, including purchases on Apple platforms”), account information (“including email address, devices registered, account status, and age”), device information (including serial number and browser type), contact information (including physical address and phone number), and payment information (including bank details). None of that is surprising considering the type of data needed to make an Apple account work.

Many Apple TV users can expect Apple to gather more data from their Apple account usage on other devices, such as iPhones or Macs. However, if you use the same Apple account across multiple devices, Apple recognizes that all the data it has collected from, for example, your iPhone activity, also applies to you as an Apple TV user.

A potential workaround could be maintaining multiple Apple accounts. With an Apple account solely dedicated to your Apple TV box and Apple TV hardware and software tracking disabled as much as possible, Apple would have minimal data to ascribe to you as an Apple TV owner. You can also use your Apple TV box without an Apple account, but then you won’t be able to use the Apple TV app, one of the device’s key features.

Data collection via the Apple TV app

You can download third-party apps like Netflix and Hulu onto an Apple TV box, but most TV and movie watching on Apple TV boxes likely occurs via the Apple TV app. The app is necessary for watching content on the Apple TV+ streaming service, but it also drives usage by providing access to the libraries of many (but not all) popular streaming apps in one location. So understanding the Apple TV app’s privacy policy is critical to evaluating how private Apple TV activity truly is.

As expected, some of the data the app gathers is necessary for the software to work. That includes, according to the app’s privacy policy, “information about your purchases, downloads, activity in the Apple TV app, the content you watch, and where you watch it in the Apple TV app and in connected apps on any of your supported devices.” That all makes sense for ensuring that the app remembers things like which episode of Severance you’re on across devices.

Apple collects other data, though, that isn’t necessary for functionality. It says it gathers data on things like the “features you use (for example, Continue Watching or Library),” content pages you view, how you interact with notifications, and approximate location information (that Apple says doesn’t identify users) to help improve the app.

Additionally, Apple tracks the terms you search for within the app, per its policy:

We use Apple TV search data to improve models that power Apple TV. For example, aggregate Apple TV search queries are used to fine-tune the Apple TV search model.

This data usage is less intrusive than that of other streaming devices, which might track your activity and then sell that data to third-party advertisers. But some people may be hesitant about having any of their activities tracked to benefit a multi-trillion-dollar conglomerate.

Data collected from the Apple TV app used for ads

By default, the Apple TV app also tracks “what you watch, your purchases, subscriptions, downloads, browsing, and other activities in the Apple TV app” to make personalized content recommendations. Content recommendations aren’t ads in the traditional sense but instead provide a way for Apple to push you toward products by analyzing data it has on you.

You can disable the Apple TV app’s personalized recommendations, but it’s a little harder than you might expect since you can’t do it through the app. Instead, you need to go to the Apple TV settings and then select Apps > TV > Use Play History > Off.

The most privacy-conscious users may wish that personalized recommendations were off by default. Darío Maestro, senior legal fellow at the nonprofit Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (STOP), noted to Ars that even though Apple TV users can opt out of personalized content recommendations, “many will not realize they can.”

Apple can also use data it gathers on you from the Apple TV app to serve traditional ads. If you allow your Apple TV box to track your location, the Apple TV app can also track your location. That data can “be used to serve geographically relevant ads,” according to the Apple TV app privacy policy. Location tracking, however, is off by default on Apple TV boxes.

Apple’s tvOS doesn’t have integrated ads. For comparison, some TV OSes, like Roku OS and LG’s webOS, show ads on the OS’s home screen and/or when showing screensavers.

But data gathered from the Apple TV app can still help Apple’s advertising efforts. This can happen if you allow personalized ads in other Apple apps serving targeted apps, such as Apple News, the App Store, or Stocks. In such cases, Apple may apply data gathered from the Apple TV app, “including information about the movies and TV shows you purchase from Apple, to serve ads in those apps that are more relevant to you,” the Apple TV app privacy policy says.

Apple also provides third-party advertisers and strategic partners with “non-personal data” gathered from the Apple TV app:

We provide some non-personal data to our advertisers and strategic partners that work with Apple to provide our products and services, help Apple market to customers, and sell ads on Apple’s behalf to display on the App Store and Apple News and Stocks.

Apple also shares non-personal data from the Apple TV with third parties, such as content owners, so they can pay royalties, gauge how much people are watching their shows or movies, “and improve their associated products and services,” Apple says.

Apple’s policy notes:

For example, we may share non-personal data about your transactions, viewing activity, and region, as well as aggregated user demographics[,] such as age group and gender (which may be inferred from information such as your name and salutation in your Apple Account), to Apple TV strategic partners, such as content owners, so that they can measure the performance of their creative work [and] meet royalty and accounting requirements.

When reached for comment, an Apple spokesperson told Ars that Apple TV users can clear their play history from the app.

All that said, the Apple TV app still shares far less data with third parties than other streaming apps. Netflix, for example, says it discloses some personal information to advertising companies “in order to select Advertisements shown on Netflix, to facilitate interaction with Advertisements, and to measure and improve effectiveness of Advertisements.”

Warner Bros. Discovery says it discloses information about Max viewers “with advertisers, ad agencies, ad networks and platforms, and other companies to provide advertising to you based on your interests.” And Disney+ users have Nielsen tracking on by default.

What if you use Siri?

You can easily deactivate Siri when setting up an Apple TV. But those who opt to keep the voice assistant and the ability to control Apple TV with their voice take somewhat of a privacy hit.

According to the privacy policy accessible in Apple TV boxes’ settings, Apple boxes automatically send all Siri requests to Apple’s servers. If you opt into using Siri data to “Improve Siri and Dictation,” Apple will store your audio data. If you opt out, audio data won’t be stored, but per the policy:

In all cases, transcripts of your interactions will be sent to Apple to process your requests and may be stored by Apple.

Apple TV boxes also send audio and transcriptions of dictation input to Apple servers for processing. Apple says it doesn’t store the audio but may store transcriptions of the audio.

If you opt to “Improve Siri and Dictation,” Apple says your history of voice requests isn’t tied to your Apple account or email. But Apple is vague about how long it may store data related to voice input performed with the Apple TV if you choose this option.

The policy states:

Your request history, which includes transcripts and any related request data, is associated with a random identifier for up to six months and is not tied to your Apple Account or email address. After six months, you request history is disassociated from the random identifier and may be retained for up to two years. Apple may use this data to develop and improve Siri, Dictation, Search, and limited other language processing functionality in Apple products …

Apple may also review a subset of the transcripts of your interactions and this … may be kept beyond two years for the ongoing improvements of products and services.

Apple promises not to use Siri and voice data to build marketing profiles or sell them to third parties, but it hasn’t always adhered to that commitment. In January, Apple agreed to pay $95 million to settle a class-action lawsuit accusing Siri of recording private conversations and sharing them with third parties for targeted ads. In 2019, contractors reported hearing private conversations and recorded sex via Siri-gathered audio.

Outside of Apple, we’ve seen voice request data used questionably, including in criminal trials and by corporate employees. Siri and dictation data also represent additional ways a person’s Apple TV usage might be unexpectedly analyzed to fuel Apple’s business.

Automatic content recognition

Apple TVs aren’t preloaded with automatic content recognition (ACR), an Apple spokesperson confirmed to Ars, another plus for privacy advocates. But ACR is software, so Apple could technically add it to Apple TV boxes via a software update at some point.

Sherman Li, the founder of Enswers, the company that first put ACR in Samsung TVs, confirmed to Ars that it’s technically possible for Apple to add ACR to already-purchased Apple boxes. Years ago, Enswers retroactively added ACR to other types of streaming hardware, including Samsung and LG smart TVs. (Enswers was acquired by Gracenote, which Nielsen now owns.)

In general, though, there are challenges to adding ACR to hardware that people already own, Li explained:

Everyone believes, in theory, you can add ACR anywhere you want at any time because it’s software, but because of the way [hardware is] architected… the interplay between the chipsets, like the SoCs, and the firmware is different in a lot of situations.

Li pointed to numerous variables that could prevent ACR from being retroactively added to any type of streaming hardware, “including access to video frame buffers, audio streams, networking connectivity, security protocols, OSes, and app interface communication layers, especially at different levels of the stack in these devices, depending on the implementation.”

Due to the complexity of Apple TV boxes, Li suspects it would be difficult to add ACR to already-purchased Apple TVs. It would likely be simpler for Apple to release a new box with ACR if it ever decided to go down that route.

If Apple were to add ACR to old or new Apple TV boxes, the devices would be far less private, and the move would be highly unpopular and eliminate one of the Apple TV’s biggest draws.

However, Apple reportedly has a growing interest in advertising to streaming subscribers. The Apple TV+ streaming service doesn’t currently show commercials, but the company is rumored to be exploring a potential ad tier. The suspicions stem from a reported meeting between Apple and the United Kingdom’s ratings body, Barb, to discuss how it might track ads on Apple TV+, according to a July report from The Telegraph.

Since 2023, Apple has also hired several prominent names in advertising, including a former head of advertising at NBCUniversal and a new head of video ad sales. Further, Apple TV+ is one of the few streaming services to remain ad-free, and it’s reported to be losing Apple $1 billion per year since its launch.

One day soon, Apple may have much more reason to care about advertising in streaming and being able to track the activities of people who use its streaming offerings. That has implications for Apple TV box users.

“The more Apple creeps into the targeted ads space, the less I’ll trust them to uphold their privacy promises. You can imagine Apple TV being a natural progression for selling ads,” PIRG’s Cross said.

Somewhat ironically, Apple has marketed its approach to privacy as a positive for advertisers.

“Apple’s commitment to privacy and personal relevancy builds trust amongst readers, driving a willingness to engage with content and ads alike,” Apple’s advertising guide for buying ads on Apple News and Stocks reads.

The most private streaming gadget

It remains technologically possible for Apple to introduce intrusive tracking or ads to Apple TV boxes, but for now, the streaming devices are more private than the vast majority of alternatives, save for dumb TVs (which are incredibly hard to find these days). And if Apple follows its own policies, much of the data it gathers should be kept in-house.

However, those with strong privacy concerns should be aware that Apple does track certain tvOS activities, especially those that happen through Apple accounts, voice interaction, or the Apple TV app. And while most of Apple’s streaming hardware and software settings prioritize privacy by default, some advocates believe there’s room for improvement.

For example, STOP’s Maestro said:

Unlike in the [European Union], where the upcoming Data Act will set clearer rules on transfers of data generated by smart devices, the US has no real legislation governing what happens with your data once it reaches Apple’s servers. Users are left with little way to verify those privacy promises.

Maestro suggested that Apple could address these concerns by making it easier for people to conduct security research on smart device software. “Allowing the development of alternative or modified software that can evaluate privacy settings could also increase user trust and better uphold Apple’s public commitment to privacy,” Maestro said.

There are ways to limit the amount of data that advertisers can get from your Apple TV. But if you use the Apple TV app, Apple can use your activity to help make business decisions—and therefore money.

As you might expect from a device that connects to the Internet and lets you stream shows and movies, Apple TV boxes aren’t totally incapable of tracking you. But they’re still the best recommendation for streaming users seeking hardware with more privacy and fewer ads.

Photo of Scharon Harding

Scharon is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica writing news, reviews, and analysis on consumer gadgets and services. She’s been reporting on technology for over 10 years, with bylines at Tom’s Hardware, Channelnomics, and CRN UK.

Breaking down why Apple TVs are privacy advocates’ go-to streaming device Read More »

software-update-makes-hdr-content-“unwatchable”-on-roku-tvs

Software update makes HDR content “unwatchable” on Roku TVs

Roku, Software, Tech, TVs / /

An update to Roku OS has resulted in colors looking washed out in HDR content viewed on Roku apps, like Disney+.

Complaints started surfacing on Roku’s community forum a week ago. On May 1, a company representative posted that Roku was “investigating the Disney Plus HDR content that was washed out after the recent update.” However, based on user feedback, it seems that HDR on additional Roku apps, including Apple TV+ and Netflix, are also affected. Roku’s representative has been asking users to share their experiences so that Roku can dig deeper into the problem.

One user, going by “Squinky” on the forum, reported having a TCL TV with the problem and shared the following photo comparison:

Users have reported that both shows and movies viewed in HDR via a Roku OS app are affected.

Roku hasn’t provided a list of affected devices, but users have named multiple TCL TV models, at least one Hisense, and one Sharp TV as being impacted.

We haven’t seen any reports of Roku streaming sticks being affected. One forum user claimed that plugging a Roku streaming stick into a Roku TV circumvented the problem.

Forum user Squinky said the washed-out colors were only on Disney+. However, other users have reported seeing the problem across other apps, including Max and Fandango.

“I’m surprised more people aren’t complaining because it makes a ton of shows simply unwatchable. Was looking forward to Andor, and Tuesday [was] night ruined,” posted forum user noob99999, who said the problem was happening on “multiple apps,” including Amazon Prime Video. “I hope the post about imminent app updates are correct because in the past, Roku has taken forever to correct issues.”

Software update makes HDR content “unwatchable” on Roku TVs Read More »

roku-tech,-patents-prove-its-potential-for-delivering-“interruptive”-ads

Roku tech, patents prove its potential for delivering “interruptive” ads

ads, Roku, streaming, Tech, TVs / /

Roku, owner of one of the most popular connected TV operating systems in the country, walks a fine line when it comes to advertising. Roku’s OS lives on low-priced smart TVs, streaming sticks, and projectors. To make up the losses from cheaply priced hardware, Roku is dependent on selling advertisements throughout its OS, including screensavers and its home screen.

That business model has pushed Roku to experiment with new ways of showing ads that test users’ tolerance. The company claims that it doesn’t want ads on its platform to be considered intrusive, but there are reasons to be skeptical about Roku’s pledge.

Non-“interruptive” ads

In an interview with The Verge this week, Jordan Rost, Roku’s head of ad marketing, emphasized that Roku tries to only deliver ads that don’t interrupt viewers.

“Advertisers want to be part of a good experience. They don’t want to be interruptive,” he told The Verge.

Rost noted that Roku is always testing new ad formats. Those tests include doing “all of our own A/B testing on the platform” and listening to customer feedback, he added.

“We’re constantly tweaking and trying to figure out what’s going to be helpful for the user experience,” Rost said.

For many streamers, however, ads and a better user experience are contradictory. In fact, for many, the simplest way to improve streaming is fewer ads and a more streamlined access to content. That’s why Apple TV boxes, which doesn’t have integrated ads and is good at combining content from multiple streaming subscriptions, is popular among Ars Technica staff and readers. An aversion to ads is also why millions pay extra for ad-free streaming subscriptions.

Roku tech, patents prove its potential for delivering “interruptive” ads Read More »

lg-tvs’-integrated-ads-get-more-personal-with-tech-that-analyzes-viewer-emotions

LG TVs’ integrated ads get more personal with tech that analyzes viewer emotions

ads, lg, Tech, TVs / /

With all this information, ZenVision will group LG TV viewers into highly specified market segments, such as “goal-driven achievers,” “social connectors,” or “emotionally engaged planners,” an LG spokesperson told StreamTV Insider. Zenapse’s website for ZenVision points to other potential market segments, including “digital adopters,” “wellness seekers,” “positive impact & environment,” and “money matters.”

Companies paying to advertise on LG TVs can then target viewers based on the ZenVision-specified market segments and deliver an “emotionally intelligent ad,” as Zenapse’s website puts it.

This type of targeted advertising aims to bring advertisers more in-depth information about TV viewers than demographic data or even contextual advertising (which shows ads based on what the viewer is watching) via psychographic data. Demographic data gives advertisers viewer information, like location, age, gender, ethnicity, marital status, and income. Psychographic data is supposed to go deeper and allow advertisers to target people based on so-called psychological factors, like personal beliefs, values, and attitudes. As Salesforce explains, “psychographic segmentation delves deeper into their psyche” than relying on demographic data.

“As viewers engage with content, ZenVision’s understanding of a consumer grows deeper, and our… segmentation continually evolves to optimize predictions,” the ZenVision website says.

Getting emotional

LG’s partnership comes as advertisers struggle to appeal to TV viewers’ emotions. Google, for example, attempted to tug at parents’ heartstrings with the now-infamous Dear Sydney ad aired during the 2024 Summer Olympics. Looking to push Gemini, Google hit all the wrong chords with parents, and, after much backlash, pulled the ad.

The partnership also comes as TV OS operators seek new ways to use smart TVs to grow their own advertising businesses and to get people to use TVs to buy stuff.

LG TVs’ integrated ads get more personal with tech that analyzes viewer emotions Read More »

overblown-quantum-dot-conspiracy-theories-make-important-points-about-qled-tvs

Overblown quantum dot conspiracy theories make important points about QLED TVs

Features, Hisense, oled, samsung, tcl, Tech, TVs / /

Lawsuits and allegations are creating doubt around quantum dot TVs’ use of QDs.

QLED TV manufacturers have dug themselves into a hole.

After years of companies promising that their quantum dot light-emitting diode TVs use quantum dots (QDs) to boost color, some industry watchers and consumers have recently started questioning whether QLED TVs use QDs at all. Lawsuits have been filed, accusing companies like TCL of using misleading language about whether their QLED TVs actually use QDs.

In this article, we’ll break down why new conspiracy theories about QLED TVs are probably overblown. We’ll also explore why misleading marketing from TV brands is responsible for customer doubt and how it all sets a bad precedent for the future of high-end displays, including OLED TVs and monitors.

What QLED TVs are supposed to do

TVs that use QDs are supposed to offer wider color gamuts and improved brightness over their QD-less LCD-LED counterparts. Just ask Samsung, which says that QLED displays deliver “a wider range of colors,” “better color coverage,” and “a brighter picture.” TCL will tell you that its QLED TVs use “billions of Quantum Dot nanocrystals” and deliver “industry-leading color palette and brightness.”

To be clear, properly manufactured QD TVs that use a sufficient quantity of QDs are legit. Excellent examples, which command higher prices than QD-free rivals, successfully deliver bright pictures with wide color gamuts and impressive color volume (the number of colors a TV displays at various levels of brightness). A TV with strong color volume can depict many light and dark shades of green, for example.

Technology reviews site RTINGS, which is known for its in-depth display testing, explains that a TV with good color volume makes “content look more realistic,” while “TVs with poor color volume don’t show as many details.” This is QLED’s big selling point. A proper QLED TV can be brighter than an OLED TV and have markedly better color volume than some high-end, non-QD LCD-LED displays.

Let’s take a look at some quality QLED TVs for an idea of where the color performance bar should be.

The 2024 Sony Bravia 9, for example, is a $2,500 Mini LED TV with QDs. That’s expensive for a non-OLED TV, but the Bravia 9 covers an impressive 92.35 percent of the DCI-P3 color space, per RTINGS’ testing. RTINGS tests color volume by comparing a screen’s Rec. 2020 coverage to a TV with a peak brightness of 10,000 nits. A “good value,” the publication says, is over 30 percent. The Bravia 9 scored 54.4 percent.

Another well-performing QLED TV is the 2024 Hisense U8. The Mini LED TV has 96.27 percent DCI-P3 coverage and 51.9 percent color volume, according to RTINGS.

Even older QLED TVs can impress. The Vizio M Series Quantum from 2020, for example, has 99.18 percent DCI-P3 coverage and 34 percent color volume, per RTINGS’ standards.

These days, TV marketing most frequently mentions QDs to suggest enhanced color, but it’s becoming increasingly apparent that some TVs marketed as using QDs aren’t as colorful as their QLED labels might suggest.

“QLED generally implies superior colors, but some QLED models have been reported to cover less than 90 percent of the DCI-P3 gamut,” Guillaume Chansin, associate director of displays and XR at Counterpoint Research, told Ars Technica.

QD TVs accused of not having QDs

Recently, Samsung shared with Ars testing results from three TVs that TCL markets as QLEDs in the US: the 65Q651G, 65Q681G, and 75Q651G. The TVs have respective MSRPs of $370, $480, and $550 as of this writing.

Again, TCL defines QLED TVs as a “type of LED/LCD that uses quantum dots to create its display.”

“These quantum dots are nano-sized molecules that emit a distinct colored light of their own when exposed to a light source,” TCL says. But the test results shared by Samsung suggest that the TVs in question don’t use cadmium or indium, two types of chemicals employed in QD TVs. (You don’t need both cadmium and indium for a set to be considered a QD TV, and some QD TVs use a combination of cadmium and indium.)

However, per the testing provided by Samsung and conducted by Intertek, a London-headquartered testing and certification company, none of the tested TVs had enough cadmium to be detected at a minimum detection standard of 0.5 mg/kg. They also reportedly lacked sufficient indium for detection at a minimum standard of 2 mg/kg. Intertek is said to have tested each TV set’s optical sheet, diffuser plate, and LED modules, with testing occurring in the US.

When reached for comment about these results, a TCL spokesperson said TCL “cannot comment on specifics due to current litigation” but that it “stands behind [its] high-performance lineup, which provides uncompromised color accuracy.” TCL is facing a class-action complaint about its QLED TVs’ performance and use of QDs.

TCL’s spokesperson added:

TCL has definitive substantiation for the claims made regarding its QLED televisions and will respond to the litigation in due course. We remain committed to our customers and believe in the premium quality and superior value of our products. In the context of the ongoing litigation, TCL will validate that our industry-leading technologies meet or exceed the high bar that TV viewers have come to expect from us.

“This is not good for the industry”

A manufacturer not telling the truth about QDs in its TVs could be ruinous to its reputation. But a scheme requiring the creation of fake, QD-less films would be expensive—almost as costly as making real QD films, Eric Virey, principal displays analyst at Yole Intelligence, previously told Ars.

What’s most likely happening is that the TVs in question do use QDs for color—but they employ cheaper phosphors to do a lot of the heavy lifting, too. However, even that explanation raises questions around the ethics of classifying these TVs as QLED.

Counterpoint’s Chansin said that the TCL TV test results that Samsung shared with Ars point to the three TVs using phosphors for color conversion “instead of quantum dots.”

He added:

While products that have trace amounts could be said to “contain” quantum dots, it would be misleading to state that these TVs are enhanced by quantum dot technology. The use of the term “QLED” is somewhat more flexible, as it is a marketing term with no clear definition. In fact, it is not uncommon for a QLED TV to use a combination of quantum dots and phosphors.

Analysts that I spoke with agreed that QD TVs that combine QDs and phosphors are more common among lower-priced TVs with low margins.

“Manufacturers have been trying to lower the concentration of quantum dots to cut costs, but we have now reached undetectable levels of quantum dots,” Chansin said. “This is not good for the industry as a whole, and it will undermine consumers’ confidence in the products.”

Phosphors fostering confusion

TCL TVs’ use of phosphors in conjunction with QDs has been documented before. In a 2024 video, Pete Palomaki, owner and chief scientist at QD consultant Palomaki Consulting, pried open TCL’s 55S555, a budget QLED TV from 2022. Palomaki concluded that the TV had QDs incorporated within the diffuser rather than in the standalone optical film. He also determined that a red phosphor called KSF and a green phosphor known as beta sialon contributed to the TV’s color.

In his video, Palomaki said, “In the green spectrum, I get about less than 10 percent from the QD and the remaining 90-plus percent from the phosphor.” Palomaki said that about 75 percent of the TV’s red reproduction capabilities came from KSF, with the rest attributed to QDs. Palomaki emphasized, though, that his breakdowns don’t account for light recycling in the backlight unit, which would probably “boost up the contribution from the quantum dot.”

Palomaki didn’t clarify how much more QD contribution could be expected and declined to comment on this story.

Another video shows an example of a TCL QLED TV that Palomaki said has phosphors around its LEDs but still uses QDs for the majority of color conversion.

TCL isn’t the only TV brand that relies on phosphors to boost the color capabilities of its QLED TVs— and likely reduce manufacturing costs.

“There is an almost full continuum of TV designs, ranging from using only phosphors to using only QDs, with any type of mix in between,” Virey told Ars.

Even Samsung, the company crying foul over TCL’s lack of detectable QDs, has reportedly used phosphors to handle some of the color work handled entirely by QDs in full QD TVs. In 2023, Palomaki pulled apart a 2019 Samsung QN75Q7DRAF. He reported that the TV’s color conversion leverages a “very cheap” phosphor known as yttrium aluminum garnet (YAG), which is “not very good for color gamut.”

A TV using QDs for color conversion should produce an optical spectrogram with narrow peak widths. As QD supplier Avantama explains, “narrower bandwidths translate to purer colors with higher levels of efficiency and vice versa.” In the QN75Q7DRAF’s optical spectrogram that Palomaki provided, you can see that the peaks are sharper and more narrow when measuring the full film stack with the phosphors versus the QD film alone. This helps illustrate the TV’s reliance on phosphors to boost color.

Samsung TV's optical spectrogram


Ars asked Samsung to comment on the use of phosphors in its QD TVs, but we didn’t receive a response.

TV brands have become accustomed to slapping a QLED label on their TVs and thinking that’s sufficient to increase prices. It also appears that TV manufacturers are getting away with cutting back on QDs in exchange for phosphors of various levels of quality and with varied performance implications.

It’s a disappointing situation for shoppers who have invested in and relied on QLED TVs for upper-mid-range performance. But it’s important to emphasize that the use of phosphors in QD TVs isn’t necessarily a bad thing.

According to Virey:

There are a lot of reasons why display engineers might want to use phosphors in conjunction with QDs. Having phosphors in a QD TV doesn’t necessarily imply low performance. It can provide a little boost in brightness, improve homogeneity, etc. Various types of phosphors can be used for different purpose. Phosphors are found in many high-performance—even flagship—displays.

Virey noted that in cases where QLED TVs appear to have no detectable QD content and sit at the lower end of a manufacturer’s QD TV offerings, “cost is clearly the driver” for using phosphors.

Better testing, please

So why don’t TCL and Samsung provide optical spectrograms of the TVs in question to prove whether or not color conversion is occurring as the manufacturer claims? In September, TCL did provide a spectrogram, which it claimed proved the presence of QDs in its TVs. But it’s unclear which model was tested, and the results don’t seem to address red or green. You can view TCL’s spectrogram here.

The company declined to comment on why it hasn’t provided more testing results, including for its QLED TVs’ color gamut and accuracy. Samsung didn’t respond to Ars’ request for comment regarding additional testing.

Providing more informative test results would help shoppers better understand what they can expect from a “QLED TV.” But that level of detail is absent from recent accusations against—and defenses of—QLED TVs. The type of test results that have been shared, meanwhile, have succeeded in delivering greater shock value.

In the interest of understanding the actual performance of one of the TVs in question, let’s take another look at the TCL 65Q651G that Samsung had Intertek test. The $370 65Q651G is named in litigation accusing TCL of lying about its QLED TVs.

RTINGS measured the TV’s DCI-P3 coverage at 88.3 percent and its color volume at 26.3 percent (again, RTINGS considers anything above 30 percent on the latter “good”). Both numbers are steps down from the 99.2 percent DCI-P3 coverage and 34 percent color volume that RTINGS recorded for the 2020 Vizio M Series Quantum. It’s also less impressive than TCL’s QM8, a Mini LED QLED TV currently going for $900. That TV covers 94.59 percent of DCI-P3 and has a color volume of 49.2 percent, per RTINGS’ testing.

Growing suspicion

Perhaps somewhat due to the minimal availability of credible testing results, consumers are increasingly suspicious about their QLED TVs and are taking their concerns to court.

Samsung, seemingly looking to add fuel to the fire surrounding rivals like TCL, told Ars that it used Intertek to test TCL TVs because Intertek has been a “credible resource for quality assurance and testing services for the industry for more than a century.” But another likely reason is the fact that Intertek previously tested three other TCL TVs and concluded that they lacked materials required of QD TVs.

We covered those test results in September. Hansol Chemical, a Seoul-headquartered chemical manufacturer and distributor and Samsung supplier, commissioned the testing of three TCL TVs sold outside of the US: the C755, C655, and C655 Pro. Additionally, Hansol hired Geneva-headquartered testing and certification company SGS. SGS also failed to detect indium, even with a higher minimum detection standard of 5 mg/kg and cadmium in the sets.

It’s important to understand the potential here for bias. Considering its relationship with Samsung and its status as a chaebol, Hansol stands to benefit from discrediting TCL QD TVs. Further, the South Korean government has reportedly shown interest in the global TV market and pushed two other chaebols, Samsung and LG, to collaborate in order to maintain market leadership over increasingly competitive Chinese brands like TCL. Considering Hansol’s ties to Samsung, Samsung’s rivalry with TCL, and the unlikely notion of a company going through the effort of making fake QD films for TVs, it’s sensible to be skeptical about the Hansol-commissioned results, as well as the new ones that Samsung supplied.

Still, a lawsuit (PDF) filed on February 11 seeking class-action certification accuses TCL of “marketing its Q651G, Q672G, and A300W televisions as having quantum dot technology when testing of the foregoing models showed that either: (i) the televisions do not have QLED technology, or (ii) that if QLED technology is present, it is not meaningfully contributing to the performance or display of the televisions, meaning that they should not be advertised as QLED televisions.” The complaint is based on the Intertek and SGS testing results provided in September.

Similarly, Hisense is facing a lawsuit accusing it of marketing QD-less TVs as QLED (PDF). “These models include, but are not necessarily limited to, the QD5 series, the QD6 series, QD65 series, the QD7 series, the U7 series, and the U7N series,” the lawsuit, which is also seeking class-action certification, says.

Interestingly, the U7N named in the lawsuit is one of the most frequently recommended QLED TVs from reviews websites, including RTINGS, Digital Trends, Tom’s Guide, and Ars sister site Wired. Per RTINGS’ testing, the TV covers 94.14 percent of DCI-P3 and has a color volume of 37 percent. That’s good enough performance for it to be feasible that the U7N uses some QDs, but without further testing, we can’t know how much of its color capabilities are reliant on the technology.

Both of the lawsuits named above lack evidence to prove that the companies are lying about using QDs. But the litigation illustrates growing customer concern about getting duped by QD TV manufacturers. The complaints also bring to light important questions about what sort of performance a product should deliver before it can reasonably wear the QLED label.

A marketing-made mess

While some Arsians may relish digging into the different components and chemicals driving display performance, the average customer doesn’t really care about what’s inside their TV. What actually impacts TV viewers’ lives is image quality and whether or not the TV does what it claims.

LG gives us a good example of QD-related TV marketing that is likely to confuse shoppers and could lead them to buy a TV that doesn’t align with their needs. For years, LG has been promoting TVs that use QNED, which the company says stands for “quantum nano-emitting diode.” In marketing materials viewable online, LG says QNED TVs use “tiny particles called quantum dots to enhance colors and brightness on screens.”

It’s easy to see the potential for confusion as customers try to digest the TV industry’s alphabet soup, which includes deciphering the difference between the QNED and QLED marketing terms for QD TVs.

But LG made things even more confusing in January when it announced TVs that it calls QNED but which don’t use QDs. Per LG’s announcement of its 2025 QNED Evo lineup, the new TVs use a “new proprietary wide color gamut technology, Dynamic QNED Color Solution, which replaces quantum dots.”

LG claims its Dynamic QNED Color Solution “enables light from the backlight to be expressed in pure colors that are as realistic as they appear to the eye in general life” and that the TVs are “100 percent certified by global testing and certification organization Intertek for Color Volume, measuring a screen’s ability to display the rich colors of original images without distortion.”

But without benchmark results for individual TV models or a full understanding of what a “Dynamic QNED Color Solution” is, LG’s QNED marketing isn’t sufficient for setting realistic expectations for the TV’s performance. And with QNED representing LG’s QD TVs for years, it’s likely that someone will buy a 2025 QNED TV and think that it has QDs.

Performance matters most

What should really matter to a TV viewer is not how many quantum dots a TV has but how strong its image quality is in comparison to the manufacturer’s claims, the TV’s price, and the available alternatives. But the industry’s overuse of acronyms using the letter “Q” and terms like “quantum” has made it difficult to tell the performance potential of so-called QD TVs.

The problem has implications beyond the upper-mid range price point of QLED TVs. QDs have become a major selling point in OLED TVs and monitors. QDs are also at the center of one of the most anticipated premium display technologies, QDEL, or quantum dot electroluminescent displays. Confusion around the application and benefits of QDs could detract from high-end displays that truly leverage QDs for impressive results. Worse, the current approach to QD TV marketing could set a precedent for manufacturers to mislead customers while exploiting the growing popularity of QDs in premium displays.

Companies don’t necessarily need to start telling us exactly how many QDs are in their QLED TVs.  But it shouldn’t be too much to ask to get some clarity on the real-life performance we can expect from these devices. And now that the industry has muddied the definition of QLED, some are calling for a cohesive agreement on what a QD TV really is.

“Ultimately, if the industry wants to maintain some credibility behind that label, it will need to agree on some sort of standard and do some serious self-policing,” Yole’s Virey said.

For now, a reckoning could be coming for TV brands that are found to manipulate the truth about their TVs’ components and composition. The current lawsuits still need to play out in the courts, but the cases have brought attention to the need for TV brands to be honest about the capabilities of their QD TVs.

Things have escalated to the point where TV brands accuse one another of lying. The TV industry is responsible for creating uncertainty around QDs, and it’s starting to face the consequences.

Photo of Scharon Harding

Scharon is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica writing news, reviews, and analysis on consumer gadgets and services. She’s been reporting on technology for over 10 years, with bylines at Tom’s Hardware, Channelnomics, and CRN UK.

Overblown quantum dot conspiracy theories make important points about QLED TVs Read More »

“awful”:-roku-tests-autoplaying-ads-loading-before-the-home-screen

“Awful”: Roku tests autoplaying ads loading before the home screen

ads, Roku, streaming, Tech, TVs / /

Owners of smart TVs and streaming sticks running Roku OS are already subject to video advertisements on the home screen. Now, Roku is testing what it might look like if it took things a step further and forced people to watch a video ad play before getting to the Roku OS home screen.

Reports of Roku customers seeing video ads automatically play before they could view the OS’ home screen started appearing online this week. A Reddit user, for example, posted yesterday: “I just turned on my Roku and got an … ad for a movie, before I got to the regular Roku home screen.” Multiple apparent users reported seeing an ad for the movie Moana 2. The ads have a close option, but some users appear to have not seen it.

When reached for comment, a Roku spokesperson shared a company statement that confirms that the autoplaying ads are expected behavior but not a permanent part of Roku OS currently. Instead, Roku claimed, it was just trying the ad capability out.

Roku’s representative said that Roku’s business “has and will always require continuous testing and innovation across design, navigation, content, and our first-rate advertising products,” adding:

Our recent test is just the latest example, as we explore new ways to showcase brands and programming while still providing a delightful and simple user experience.

Roku didn’t respond to requests for comment on whether it has plans to make autoplaying ads permanent on Roku OS, which devices are affected, why Roku decided to use autoplaying ads, or customer backlash.

“Awful”: Roku tests autoplaying ads loading before the home screen Read More »

sonos’-streaming-box-is-reportedly-canceled-good-riddance.

Sonos’ streaming box is reportedly canceled. Good riddance.

ads, audio, Sonos, streaming, Tech, TVs / /

Opinion: The long-rumored Sonos streaming box wasn’t a good idea anyway.

Sonos has canceled plans to release a streaming box, The Verge reported today. The audio company never publicly confirmed that it was making a streaming set-top box, but rumors of its impending release have been floating around since November 2023. With everything that both Sonos and streaming users have going on right now, though, a Sonos-branded rival to the Apple TV 4K wasn’t a good idea anyway.

Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman was the first to report on Sonos’ purported streaming ambitions. He reported that Sonos’ device would be a black box that cost $150 to $200.

At first glance, it seemed like a reasonable idea. Sonos was facing increased competition for wireless speakers from big names like Apple and Bose. Meanwhile, Sonos speaker sales growth had slowed down, making portfolio diversification seem like a prudent way to protect business.

By 2025, however, the reported plans for Sonos’ streaming box sounded less reasonable and appealing, while the market for streaming devices had become significantly more competitive.

A saturated market

In February, The Verge, citing anonymous sources, reported that Sonos was now planning a streaming player that would “cost between $200 and $400.” That’s a lot to charge in a market where most people have already found their preferred platform. Those who want something cheap and don’t mind ads settle for something like Roku. People who hate ads opt for an Apple TV box. There are people who swear by their Fire Sticks and plenty who are happy with whatever operating system (OS) their smart TV arrives with. Sonos would have struggled to convince people who have successfully used some of those streaming devices for years that they suddenly need a new one that’s costlier than alternatives, including some smart TVs. In the US especially, the TV OS market is considered heavily saturated, presenting an uphill battle for newcomers.

Without Sonos ever confirming its streaming device, it’s hard to judge what the company would have offered to lure people to a new streaming platform. Perhaps the Sonos box could have worked better with Sonos devices than non-Sonos streaming devices. But vendor lock-in isn’t the best way to try to win new customers. That approach would also force Sonos to test if it has accrued the same type of customer loyalty as a company like Apple. Much of the goodwill needed for such customer loyalty was blatantly obliterated during Sonos’ botched app update last year.

According to The Verge, Sonos’ box didn’t even have a standout appearance. The publication said that by February 2025, the box was “deep into development,” and “about as nondescript as streaming hardware gets.”

“Viewed from the top, the device is a flattened black square and slightly thicker than a deck of trading cards,” The Verge reported at the time, citing images it reviewed.

Among the most appealing planned features was unified content from various streaming apps, like Netflix and Max, with “universal search across streaming accounts.” With the growing number of streaming services required to watch all your favorite content, this would be a good way to attract streamers but not necessarily a unique one. The ability to offer a more unified streaming experience is already being tackled by various smart TV OSes, including Samsung Tizen and Amazon Fire OS, as well as the Apple TV app and sister streaming services, like Disney+ and Hulu.

A potentially ad-riddled OS

There’s reason to suspect that the software that Sonos’ streaming box would have come out with would have been ad-coddling, user-tracking garbage.

In January, Janko Roettgers reported that ad giant The Trade Desk was supplying Sonos with its “core smart TV OS and facilitating deals with app publishers,” while Sonos worked on the streaming box’s hardware and user interface. The Trade Desk makes one of the world’s biggest demand-side platforms and hasn’t made streaming software or hardware before.

Sonos opting for The Trade Desk’s OS would have represented a boastful commitment to advertisers. Among the features that The Trade Desk markets its TV OS as having are a “cleaner supply chain for streaming TV advertising” and “cross-platform content discovery,” something that Sonos was reportedly targeting for its streaming hardware.

When reached for comment, a Sonos spokesperson confirmed that Sonos was working with The Trade Desk, saying: “We don’t comment on our roadmap, but as has been previously announced we have a long-standing relationship with The Trade Desk and that relationship continues.”

Sonos should take a moment to regroup

It’s also arguable that Sonos has much more important things to do than try to convince people that they need expensive, iterative improvements to their streaming software and hardware. Sonos’ bigger focus should be on convincing customers that it can still handle its bread and butter, which is audio devices.

In November 2023, when word first dropped about Sonos’ reported streaming plans, there was no doubt that Sonos understood how to make quality speakers. But last year, Sonos tarnished its reputation by rushing an app update to coincide with its first wireless headphones, the Sonos Ace. The app’s launch will go down as one of the biggest app failures in history. Sonos employees would go on to say that Sonos rushed the update with insufficient testing, resulting in Sonos device owners suddenly losing key features, like accessibility capabilities and the abilities to edit song queues and playlists and access local music libraries. Owners of older Sonos devices, aka long-time Sonos customers, were the most affected. Amid the fallout, hundreds of people were laid off, Sonos’ market value dropped by $600 million, and the company pegged initial remediation costs at $20 million to $30 million.

At this point, Sonos’ best hope at recovering losses is restoring the customer trust and brand reputation that it took years to build and months to deplete.

Sonos could also use time to recover and distill lessons from its most recent attempt at entering a new device category. Likely due to the app controversy associated with the cans, the Ace hasn’t been meeting sales expectations, per a February report from The Verge citing anonymous sources. If Sonos should learn anything from the Ace, it’s that breaking into a new field requires time, patience, and incredible attention to detail, including how long-time and incoming customers want to use their gear.

Of course, financial blowback from the app debacle could be more directly behind why Sonos isn’t releasing a streaming box. Additionally, Sonos saw numerous executive changes following the app fiasco, including the departure of the CEO who greenlit the streaming box, Patrick Spence. New executive leaders, including a new chief product officer and chief marketing officer, could have different views on the value of Sonos to enter the streaming market, too.

Sonos’ spokesperson didn’t answer Ars’ questions about Sonos’ reported plans to cancel the streaming box and whether the decision is related to the company’s app woes.

Sonos may have dodged a bullet

Ultimately, it didn’t sound like Sonos’ streaming box had the greatest potential to disrupt other TV streaming platforms already settled into people’s homes. It’s possible Sonos had other products that weren’t leaked. But the company would have had to come up with a unique and helpful feature in order to command a high price and compete with the likes of Apple’s TV 4K set-top box.

Even if Sonos came up with some killer feature or app for its streaming box, people are a lot less likely to gamble on a new product from the company now than they were before 2024’s app catastrophe. Sonos should prove that it can handle the basics before attempting to upcharge technologists for new streaming hardware.

Sonos’ streaming ambitions may only be off the table “for now,” new CEO Tom Conrad reportedly told employees today, per The Verge. But it’s probably best that Sonos focus its attention elsewhere for a while.

Photo of Scharon Harding

Scharon is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica writing news, reviews, and analysis on consumer gadgets and services. She’s been reporting on technology for over 10 years, with bylines at Tom’s Hardware, Channelnomics, and CRN UK.

Sonos’ streaming box is reportedly canceled. Good riddance. Read More »

why-i’m-disappointed-with-the-tvs-at-ces-2025

Why I’m disappointed with the TVs at CES 2025

AI, CES, CES 2025, generative ai, Google, lg, Microsoft Copilot, oled, samsung, Software, Tech, TVs / /

Won’t someone please think of the viewer?

Op-ed: TVs miss opportunity for real improvement by prioritizing corporate needs.

The TV industry is hitting users over the head with AI and other questionable gimmicks Credit: Getty

If you asked someone what they wanted from TVs released in 2025, I doubt they’d say “more software and AI.” Yet, if you look at what TV companies have planned for this year, which is being primarily promoted at the CES technology trade show in Las Vegas this week, software and AI are where much of the focus is.

The trend reveals the implications of TV brands increasingly viewing themselves as software rather than hardware companies, with their products being customer data rather than TV sets. This points to an alarming future for smart TVs, where even premium models sought after for top-end image quality and hardware capabilities are stuffed with unwanted gimmicks.

LG’s remote regression

LG has long made some of the best—and most expensive—TVs available. Its OLED lineup, in particular, has appealed to people who use their TVs to watch Blu-rays, enjoy HDR, and the like. However, some features that LG is introducing to high-end TVs this year seem to better serve LG’s business interests than those users’ needs.

Take the new remote. Formerly known as the Magic Remote, LG is calling the 2025 edition the AI Remote. That is already likely to dissuade people who are skeptical about AI marketing in products (research suggests there are many such people). But the more immediately frustrating part is that the new remote doesn’t have a dedicated button for switching input modes, as previous remotes from LG and countless other remotes do.

LG AI remote

LG’s AI Remote. Credit: Tom’s Guide/YouTube

To use the AI Remote to change the TV’s input—a common task for people using their sets to play video games, watch Blu-rays or DVDs, connect their PC, et cetera—you have to long-press the Home Hub button. Single-pressing that button brings up a dashboard of webOS (the operating system for LG TVs) apps. That functionality isn’t immediately apparent to someone picking up the remote for the first time and detracts from the remote’s convenience.

By overlooking other obviously helpful controls (play/pause, fast forward/rewind, and numbers) while including buttons dedicated to things like LG’s free ad-supported streaming TV (FAST) channels and Amazon Alexa, LG missed an opportunity to update its remote in a way centered on how people frequently use TVs. That said, it feels like user convenience didn’t drive this change. Instead, LG seems more focused on getting people to use webOS apps. LG can monetize app usage through, i.e., getting a cut of streaming subscription sign-ups, selling ads on webOS, and selling and leveraging user data.

Moving from hardware provider to software platform

LG, like many other TV OEMs, has been growing its ads and data business. Deals with data analytics firms like Nielsen give it more incentive to acquire customer data. Declining TV margins and rock-bottom prices from budget brands (like Vizio and Roku, which sometimes lose money on TV hardware sales and make up for the losses through ad sales and data collection) are also pushing LG’s software focus. In the case of the AI Remote, software prioritization comes at the cost of an oft-used hardware capability.

Further demonstrating its motives, in September 2023, LG announced intentions to “become a media and entertainment platform company” by offering “services” and a “collection of curated content in products, including LG OLED and LG QNED TVs.” At the time, the South Korean firm said it would invest 1 trillion KRW (about $737.7 million) into its webOS business through 2028.

Low TV margins, improved TV durability, market saturation, and broader economic challenges are all serious challenges for an electronics company like LG and have pushed LG to explore alternative ways to make money off of TVs. However, after paying four figures for TV sets, LG customers shouldn’t be further burdened to help LG accrue revenue.

Google TVs gear up for subscription-based features

There are numerous TV manufacturers, including Sony, TCL, and Philips, relying on Google software to power their TV sets. Numerous TVs announced at CES 2025 will come with what Google calls Gemini Enhanced Google Assistant. The idea that this is something that people using Google TVs have requested is somewhat contradicted by Google Assistant interactions with TVs thus far being “somewhat limited,” per a Lowpass report.

Nevertheless, these TVs are adding far-field microphones so that they can hear commands directed at the voice assistant. For the first time, the voice assistant will include Google’s generative AI chatbot, Gemini, this year—another feature that TV users don’t typically ask for. Despite the lack of demand and the privacy concerns associated with microphones that can pick up audio from far away even when the TV is off, companies are still loading 2025 TVs with far-field mics to support Gemini. Notably, these TVs will likely allow the mics to be disabled, like you can with other TVs using far-field mics. But I still ponder about features/hardware that could have been implemented instead.

Google is also working toward having people pay a subscription fee to use Gemini on their TVs, PCWorld reported.

“For us, our biggest goal is to create enough value that yes, you would be willing to pay for [Gemini],” Google TV VP and GM Shalini Govil-Pai told the publication.

The executive pointed to future capabilities for the Gemini-driven Google Assistant on TVs, including asking it to “suggest a movie like Jurassic Park but suitable for young children” or to show “Bollywood movies that are similar to Mission: Impossible.”

She also pointed to future features like showing weather, top news stories, and upcoming calendar events when someone is near the TV, showing AI-generated news briefings, and the ability to respond to questions like “explain the solar system to a third-grader” with text, audio, and YouTube videos.

But when people have desktops, laptops, tablets, and phones in their homes already, how helpful are these features truly? Govil-Pai admitted to PCWorld that “people are not used to” using their TVs this way “so it will take some time for them to adapt to it.” With this in mind, it seems odd for TV companies to implement new, more powerful microphones to support features that Google acknowledges aren’t in demand. I’m not saying that tech companies shouldn’t get ahead of the curve and offer groundbreaking features that users hadn’t considered might benefit them. But already planning to monetize those capabilities—with a subscription, no less—suggests a prioritization of corporate needs.

Samsung is hungry for AI

People who want to use their TV for cooking inspiration often turn to cooking shows or online cooking videos. However, Samsung wants people to use its TV software to identify dishes they want to try making.

During CES, Samsung announced Samsung Food for TVs. The feature leverages Samsung TVs’ AI processors to identify food displayed on the screen and recommend relevant recipes. Samsung introduced the capability in 2023 as an iOS and Android app after buying the app Whisk in 2019. As noted by TechCrunch, though, other AI tools for providing recipes based on food images are flawed.

So why bother with such a feature? You can get a taste of Samsung’s motivation from its CES-announced deal with Instacart that lets people order off Instacart from Samsung smart fridges that support the capability. Samsung Food on TVs can show users the progress of food orders placed via the Samsung Food mobile app on their TVs. Samsung Food can also create a shopping list for recipe ingredients based on what it knows (using cameras and AI) is in your (supporting) Samsung fridge. The feature also requires a Samsung account, which allows the company to gather more information on users.

Other software-centric features loaded into Samsung TVs this year include a dedicated AI button on the new TVs’ remotes, the ability to use gestures to control the TV but only if you’re wearing a Samsung Galaxy Watch, and AI Karaoke, which lets people sing karaoke using their TVs by stripping vocals from music playing and using their phone as a mic.

Like LG, Samsung has shown growing interest in ads and data collection. In May, for example, it expanded its automatic content recognition tech to track ad exposure on streaming services viewed on its TVs. It also has an ads analytics partnership with Experian.

Large language models on TVs

TVs are mainstream technology in most US homes. Generative AI chatbots, on the other hand, are emerging technology that many people have yet to try. Despite these disparities, LG and Samsung are incorporating Microsoft’s Copilot chatbot into 2025 TVs.

LG claims that Copilot will help its TVs “understand conversational context and uncover subtle user intentions,” adding: “Access to Microsoft Copilot further streamlines the process, allowing users to efficiently find and organize complex information using contextual cues. For an even smoother and more engaging experience, the AI chatbot proactively identifies potential user challenges and offers timely, effective solutions.”

Similarly, Samsung, which is also adding Copilot to some of its smart monitors, said in its announcement that Copilot will help with “personalized content recommendations.” Samsung has also said that Copilot will help its TVs understand strings of commands, like increasing the volume and changing the channel, CNET noted. Samsung said it intends to work with additional AI partners, namely Google, but it’s unclear why it needs multiple AI partners, especially when it hasn’t yet seen how people use large language models on their TVs.

TV-as-a-platform

To be clear, this isn’t a condemnation against new, unexpected TV features. This also isn’t a censure against new TV apps or the usage of AI in TVs.

AI marketing hype is real and misleading regarding the demand, benefits, and possibilities of AI in consumer gadgets. However, there are some cases when innovative software, including AI, can improve things that TV users not only care about but actually want or need. For example, some TVs use AI for things like trying to optimize sound, color, and/or brightness, including based on current environmental conditions or upscaling. This week, Samsung announced AI Live Translate for TVs. The feature is supposed to be able to translate foreign language closed captions in real time, providing a way for people to watch more international content. It’s a feature I didn’t ask for but can see being useful and changing how I use my TV.

But a lot of this week’s TV announcements underscore an alarming TV-as-a-platform trend where TV sets are sold as a way to infiltrate people’s homes so that apps, AI, and ads can be pushed onto viewers. Even high-end TVs are moving in this direction and amplifying features with questionable usefulness, effectiveness, and privacy considerations. Again, I can’t help but wonder what better innovations could have come out this year if more R&D was directed toward hardware and other improvements that are more immediately rewarding for users than karaoke with AI.

The TV industry is facing economic challenges, and, understandably, TV brands are seeking creative solutions for making money. But for consumers, that means paying for features that you’re likely to ignore. Ultimately, many people just want a TV with amazing image and sound quality. Finding that without having to sift through a bunch of fluff is getting harder.

Photo of Scharon Harding

Scharon is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica writing news, reviews, and analysis on consumer gadgets and services. She’s been reporting on technology for over 10 years, with bylines at Tom’s Hardware, Channelnomics, and CRN UK.

Why I’m disappointed with the TVs at CES 2025 Read More »

buying-a-tv-in-2025?-expect-lower-prices,-more-ads,-and-an-os-war.

Buying a TV in 2025? Expect lower prices, more ads, and an OS war.

ads, Features, Roku, Software, Tech, TVs, Vizio, walmart / /

“I do fear that the pressure to make better TVs will be lost…”

If you’re looking to buy a TV in 2025, you may be disappointed by the types of advancements TV brands will be prioritizing in the new year. While there’s an audience of enthusiasts interested in developments in tech like OLED, QDEL, and Micro LED, plus other features like transparency and improved audio, that doesn’t appear to be what the industry is focused on.

Today’s TV selection has a serious dependency on advertisements and user tracking. In 2025, we expect competition in the TV industry to center around TV operating systems (OSes) and TVs’ ability to deliver more relevant advertisements to viewers.

That yields a complicated question for shoppers: Are you willing to share your data with retail conglomerates and ad giants to save money on a TV?

Vizio is a Walmart brand now

One of the most impactful changes to the TV market next year will be Walmart owning Vizio. For Walmart, the deal, which closed on December 3 for approximately $2.3 billion, is about owning the data collection capabilities of Vizio’s SmartCast OS. For years, Vizio has been shifting its business from hardware sales to Platform+, “which consists largely of its advertising business” and “now accounts for all the company’s gross profit,” as Walmart noted when announcing the acquisition.

Walmart will use data collected from Vizio TVs to fuel its ad business, which sells ads on the OSes of its TVs (including Vizio and Onn brand TVs) and point-of-sale machines in Walmart stores. In a December 3 statement, Walmart confirmed its intentions with Vizio:

The acquisition… allows Walmart to serve its customers in new ways to enhance their shopping journeys. It will also bring to market new and differentiated ways for advertisers to meaningfully connect with customers at scale and boost product discovery, helping brands achieve greater impact from their advertising investments with Walmart Connect—the company’s retail media business in the US.

In 2025, buying a Vizio TV won’t just mean buying a TV from a company that’s essentially an ad business. It will mean fueling Walmart’s ad business. With Walmart also owning Onn and Amazon owning Fire TVs, that means there’s one less TV brand that isn’t a cog in a retail giant’s ever-expanding ad machine. With a history that includes complaints around working conditions and questionable products, including some that are straight scams, some people (including numerous Ars commenters) try to avoid commerce giants like Walmart and Amazon. In 2025, that will be harder for people looking for a new TV, especially an inexpensive one.

“Roku is at grave risk”

Further, Walmart has expressed a goal of becoming one of the 10 biggest ad companies, with the ad business notably having higher margins than groceries. It could use Vizio, via more plentiful and/or intrusive ads, to fuel those goals.

And Walmart’s TV market share is set to grow in the new year. Paul Gray, research director of consumer electronics and devices at Omdia, told Ars Technica he expects that “the new combined sales (Vizio plus Walmart’s white label) will be bigger than the current market leader Samsung.”

There are also potential implications related to how Walmart decides to distribute TVs post-acquisition. As Patrick Horner, practice leader of consumer electronics at Omdia, told Ars:

One of the possibilities is that Walmart could make use of the Vizio operating system a condition for placement in stores. This could change not only the Onn/Vizio TVs but may also include the Chinese brands. The [Korean] and Japanese brands may resist, as they have premium brand positioning, but the Chinese brands would be vulnerable. Roku is at grave risk.

Roku acquisition?

With Walmart set to challenge Roku, some analysts anticipate that Roku will be acquired in 2025. In December, Guggenheim analysts predicted that ad tech firm The Trade Desk, which is launching its own TV OS, will look to buy Roku to scale its OS business.

Needham & Company’s Laura Martin also thinks an acquisition—by The Trade Desk or possibly one of Walmart’s retail competitors—could be on the horizon.

‘’Walmart has told you by buying Vizio that these large retailers need a connected television advertising platform to tie purchases to,” Martin told Bloomberg. “That means Target and other large retailers have that reason to buy Roku to tie Roku’s connected television ad units to their sales in their retail stores. And by the way, Roku has much higher margins than any retailer.’”

She also pointed to Amazon as a potential buyer, noting that it might be able to use Roku’s user data to feed large language models.

Roku was already emboldened enough in 2024 to introduce home screen video ads to its TVs and streaming devices and has even explored technology for showing ads over anything plugged into a Roku set. Imagine how using Roku devices might further evolve if owned by a company like The Trade Desk or Amazon with deep interests in ads and tracking.

TV owners accustomed to being tracked

TV brands have become so dependent on ads that some are selling TVs at a loss to push ads. How did we get to the point where TV brands view their hardware as a way to track and sell to viewers? Part of the reason TV OSes are pushing the limits on ads is that many viewers seem willing to accept them, especially in the name of saving money.

Per the North American Q2 2024 TiVo Video Trends Report, 64.3 percent of subscription video-on-demand users subscribe to an ad-supported tier (compared to 48 percent in Q2 2023). And users are showing more tolerance to ads, with 77.8 percent saying they are “tolerant” or “in favor of” ads, up from 74 percent in Q2 2023. This is compared to 22.2 percent of respondents saying they’re “averse” to ads. TiVo surveyed 4,490 people in the US and Canada ages 18 and up for the report.

“Based on streaming services, many consumers see advertising as a small price to pay for lower cash costs,” Horner said.

The analyst added:

While some consumers will be sensitive to privacy issues or intrusive advertising, at the same time, most people have shown themselves entirely comfortable with being tracked by (for example) social media.

Alan Wolk, co-founder and lead analyst at the TVREV TV and streaming analyst group, agreed that platforms like Instagram have proven people’s willingness to accept ads and tracking, particularly if it leads to them seeing more relevant advertisements or giving shows or movies better ratings. According to the analyst, customers seem to think, “Google is tracking my finances, my porn habits, my everything. Why do I care if NBC knows that I watch football and The Tonight Show?”

While Ars readers may be more guarded about Google having an insider look at their data, many web users have a more accepting attitude. This has opened the door for TVs to test users’ max tolerance for ads and tracking to deliver more relevant ads.

That said, there’s a fine line.

“Companies have to be careful of… finding that line between taking in advertising, especially display ads on the home screen or whatnot, and it becoming overwhelming [for viewers],” Wolk said.

One of the fastest-growing ad vehicles for TVs currently and into 2025 is free, ad-supported streaming television (FAST) channels that come preloaded and make money from targeted ads. TCL is already experimenting with what viewers will accept here. It recently premiered movies made with generative AI that it hopes will fuel its FAST business while saving money. TCL believes that passive viewers will accept a lot of free content, even AI-generated movies and shows. But some viewers are extremely put off by such media, and there’s a risk of souring the reputation of some FAST services.

OS wars

We can expect more competition from TV OS operators in 2025, including from companies that traditionally have had no place in consumer hardware, like ad tech giant The Trade Desk. These firms face steep competition, though. Ultimately, the battle of TV OSes could end up driving improvements around usability, content recommendations, and, for better or worse, ad targeting.

Following heightened competition among TV OSes, Omdia’s Gray expects winners to start emerging, followed by consolidation.

“I expect that the final state will be a big winner, a couple of sizeable players, and some niche offerings,” he said.

Companies without backgrounds in consumer tech will have difficulty getting a foot into an already crowded market, which means we may not have to worry much about companies like The Trade Desk taking over our TVs.

“I have yet to meet a single person who hasn’t looked at me quizzically and said, ‘Wait, what are they thinking?’ Because the US market for the operating system is very tight,” Wolk said. “… So for American consumers, I don’t think we’ll see too many new entrants.”

You can also expect Comcast and Charter to push deeper into TV software as they deal with plummeting cable businesses. In November, they made a deal to put their joint venture’s TV OS, Xumo OS, in Hisense TVs that will be sold in Target. Xumo TVs are already available in almost 8,000 locations, Comcast and Charter said in November. The companies claimed that the retailers selling Xumo TVs “represent nearly 75 percent of all smart TV sales in the US.”

Meanwhile, Xperi Corp. said in November that it expected its TiVo OS to be in 2 million TVs by the end of 2024 and 7 million TVs by the end of 2025. At the heart of Tivo OS is TiVo One, which TiVo describes as a “cross-screen ad platform for new inventory combined with audience targeting and monetization” that is available in TVs and car displays. Announcing TiVo One in May, Xperi declared that the “advertising market is projected to reach [$36] billion” by 2026, meaning that “advertising on smart TVs has never been more imperative.”

But as competition intensifies and pushes the market into selecting a few “sizeable players,” as Gray put it, there’s more pressure for companies to make their OSes stand out to TV owners. This is due to advertising interests, but it also means more focus on making TVs easier to use and better able to help people find something to watch.

Not a lot of options

At the start of this article, we asked if you’d be willing to share your data with retail conglomerates and ad giants to save money on a TV. But the truth is there aren’t many alternative options beyond disconnecting your TV from the Internet or paying for an Apple TV streaming device in addition to your TV. Indeed, amid a war among OSes, many Ars readers will opt not to leverage ad-filled software at all. This shows a disconnect between TV makers and a core audience while suggesting limits in terms of new TV experiences next year.

Still, analysts agree that even among more expensive TV brands, there has been a shift toward building out ad businesses and OSes over improving hardware features like audio.

“This is a low-margin business, and even in the premium segment, the revenues from ads and data are significant. Also, the sort of consumer who buys a premium TV is likely to be especially interesting to advertisers,” Gray said.

Some worry about what this means for TV innovation. With software being at the center of TV businesses, there seems to be less incentive to drive hardware-related advancements. Gray echoed this sentiment while acknowledging that the current state of TVs is at least driving down TV prices.

“I do fear that the pressure to make better TVs will be lost and that matters such as… durability and performance risk being de-prioritized,” he said.

Vendors are largely leaving shoppers to drive improvements themselves, such as by buying additional gadgets like soundbars, Wolk noted.

In 2025, TVs will continue focusing innovation around software, which has immediate returns via ad sales compared to new hardware, which can take years to develop and catch on with shoppers. For some, this is creating a strong demand for dumb TVs, but unfortunately, there are no immediate signs of that becoming a trend.

As Horner put it, “This is an advertising/e-commerce-driven market, not a consumer-driven market. TV content is just the bait in the trap.”

Photo of Scharon Harding

Scharon is Ars Technica’s Senior Product Reviewer writing news, reviews, and analysis on consumer technology, including laptops, mechanical keyboards, and monitors. She’s based in Brooklyn.

Buying a TV in 2025? Expect lower prices, more ads, and an OS war. Read More »

tcl-tvs-will-use-films-made-with-generative-ai-to-push-targeted-ads

TCL TVs will use films made with generative AI to push targeted ads

ads, AI, culture, films, generative ai, movies, streaming, tcl, Tech, TVs / /

Advertising has become a focal point of TV software. We’re seeing companies that sell TV sets be increasingly interested in leveraging TV operating systems (OSes) for ads and tracking. This has led to bold new strategies, like an adtech firm launching a TV OS and ads on TV screensavers.

With new short films set to debut on its free streaming service tomorrow, TV-maker TCL is positing a new approach to monetizing TV owners and to film and TV production that sees reduced costs through reliance on generative AI and targeted ads.

TCL’s five short films are part of a company initiative to get people more accustomed to movies and TV shows made with generative AI. The movies will “be promoted and featured prominently on” TCL’s free ad-supported streaming television (FAST) service, TCLtv+, TCL announced in November. TCLtv+has hundreds of FAST channels and comes on TCL-brand TVs using various OSes, including Google TV and Roku OS.

Some of the movies have real actors. You may even recognize some, (like Kellita Smith, who played Bernie Mac’s wife, Wanda, on The Bernie Mac Show). Others feature characters made through generative AI. All the films use generative AI for special effects and/or animations and took 12 weeks to make, 404 Media, which attended a screening of the movies, reported today. AI tools used include ComfyUI, Nuke, and Runway, 404 reported. However, all of the TCL short movies were written, directed, and scored by real humans (again, including by people you may be familiar with). At the screening, Chris Regina, TCL’s chief content officer for North America, told attendees that “over 50 animators, editors, effects artists, professional researchers, [and] scientists” worked on the movies.

I’ve shared the movies below for you to judge for yourself, but as a spoiler, you can imagine the quality of short films made to promote a service that was created for targeted ads and that use generative AI for fast, affordable content creation. AI-generated videos are expected to improve, but it’s yet to be seen if a TV brand like TCL will commit to finding the best and most natural ways to use generative AI for video production. Currently, TCL’s movies demonstrate the limits of AI-generated video, such as odd background imagery and heavy use of narration that can distract from badly synced audio.

TCL TVs will use films made with generative AI to push targeted ads Read More »

an-ad-giant-wants-to-run-your-next-tv’s-operating-system

An ad giant wants to run your next TV’s operating system

ads, Software, Sonos, Tech, TVs / /

Per The Trade Desk, Ventura’s other top “benefits” will include a “cleaner supply chain for streaming TV advertising, minimizing supply chain hops and costs—ensuring maximum ROI for every advertising dollar and optimized yield for publishers” and improved ad targeting.

TVs sold at a loss in order to bolster ad businesses

The Trade Desk plans to sell Ventura to TV manufacturers and distributors, plus other types of companies, like airlines, hotel chains, and “gaming companies,” Axios reported.

The ad tech firm says it isn’t looking to make money off of the OS directly and doesn’t plan to make hardware.

Instead, Ventura is supposed to benefit The Trade Desk by helping its advertiser customers reach more people. Differing from how TV owners traditionally view TV software’s purpose, Ventura will prioritize the ability to show TV owners the most appealing type of ads. Green will consider Ventura a success “if it drives more pricing transparency and stronger measurement for the CTV advertising ecosystem writ large,” per Axios.

Ventura has reportedly garnered interest from Sonos already, CEO Patrick Spence told Axios. Sonos is rumored to be developing a streaming set-top box. The audio company’s serious and public consideration of something like Ventura hints at the type of business approach it may take with streaming hardware.

The Trade Desk’s interest in creating a TV OS centered on being helpful to advertisers indicates how important ads have become to TVs and/or TV software companies. Some, like Vizio and Roku, have embraced this shift so much that they’re selling TVs “at somewhere between -3 and -7 percent margin” in a scramble to attract users, Paul Gray, Omdia’s research director of consumer electronics and devices, said at a CTV industry conference earlier this month, per Broadband TV News. Then there’s Telly, a startup that has given TVs away for free so it can sell and track ads. (Telly TVs also have a secondary screen that can show ads when the TV is off.)

As companies continue to leverage TV software to sell ads and gather user data, TV owners will likely continue seeing fewer options for an ad-free TV viewing experience.

An ad giant wants to run your next TV’s operating system Read More »