Well, cool, then. It’s a genuine struggle to find a 32 inch TV of any decent quality these days.
But by far the most popular TV size today is 65 inch, which as far as I know isn’t available as a PC monitor at all, and even 32/40 inch PC monitors with a similar feature set can be as expensive or significantly more expensive than an equivalent-sized TV. That’s probably partially due to the focus on speed and responsiveness and partially due to the whole… you know, monetizing your data and selling ads thing.
Big screens have gotten easy to mass produce, I guess. I don’t even have space for a TV in my tiny space, but honestly I don’t see the need for a huge screen and the works anyway. Easier to keep things simple. I’m thinking of upgrading to a 32" 4K monitor and calling it a day. Pretty reasonable prices too on secondhand markets.
Dang. I guess I’m more disconnected from the average consumer than I thought. My 48" has felt like plenty for even a good size living room for a while, and I’m used to 32" monitors and 7" phones, so it’s not like I prefer smaller screens. I had to go and fact check that 65" being the most popular. If you had asked me beforehand, I would have thought 55" was pushing it.
Yeah, that number went up pretty fast during the 2010s and 20s. Honestly, I think at this point it’s a cost/manufacturing reliability thing. There aren’t that many panel manufacturers, and these days a 65 inch OLED can be found for like a grand and a LED one for half of that. That’s sort of been “what a TV costs” for most of this century, so cheaper panels at scale in that price range probably means people go for the bigger one they can get in that price range unless they have some hard space limitations.
I mean, 30-something is more than sufficient for my needs, and you can get monitors in that range.
Well, cool, then. It’s a genuine struggle to find a 32 inch TV of any decent quality these days.
But by far the most popular TV size today is 65 inch, which as far as I know isn’t available as a PC monitor at all, and even 32/40 inch PC monitors with a similar feature set can be as expensive or significantly more expensive than an equivalent-sized TV. That’s probably partially due to the focus on speed and responsiveness and partially due to the whole… you know, monetizing your data and selling ads thing.
Big screens have gotten easy to mass produce, I guess. I don’t even have space for a TV in my tiny space, but honestly I don’t see the need for a huge screen and the works anyway. Easier to keep things simple. I’m thinking of upgrading to a 32" 4K monitor and calling it a day. Pretty reasonable prices too on secondhand markets.
Dang. I guess I’m more disconnected from the average consumer than I thought. My 48" has felt like plenty for even a good size living room for a while, and I’m used to 32" monitors and 7" phones, so it’s not like I prefer smaller screens. I had to go and fact check that 65" being the most popular. If you had asked me beforehand, I would have thought 55" was pushing it.
Yeah, that number went up pretty fast during the 2010s and 20s. Honestly, I think at this point it’s a cost/manufacturing reliability thing. There aren’t that many panel manufacturers, and these days a 65 inch OLED can be found for like a grand and a LED one for half of that. That’s sort of been “what a TV costs” for most of this century, so cheaper panels at scale in that price range probably means people go for the bigger one they can get in that price range unless they have some hard space limitations.