[allturtles]

> Not to mention even the most expensive TVs come with baffingly slow hardware and software. $2k devices can take 10+ seconds to load the menu with 4 options, where you can modify picture settings. Incredible.

Yes it's really curious how much worse technology has gotten in some dimensions in recent decades. Analog TVs would respond to inputs effectively instantaneously - if you changed the channel, the very next frame would be drawn from the new channel. My TV now takes multiple seconds to change channels.

[unsnap_biceps]

Analog tvs would change in the middle of frames if you swapped channels.

Digital tvs are cursed to wait for the next key frame in the video to start displaying and providers are a-okay with very long waits for key frames as it improves their encoding efficiency and thus allows them to squeeze more channels on the lines.

It's apples to oranges sadly.

[xnx]

> Digital tvs are cursed to wait for the next key frame in the video to start displaying

If they chose too, couldn't TV decoders pretend to have a all-gray keyframe as a starting point and apply the streaming diffs to that until the next true keyframe came? That would at least give some garbled image before snapping in. I'm sure most consumers would consider this "broken" though.

[rbanffy]

> Analog tvs would change in the middle of frames if you swapped channels.

They'd get a little confused, as the next vblank (and hblank) would come at unexpected times, as channels wouldn't synchronize frames.

> Digital tvs are cursed to wait for the next key frame in the video to start displaying

This is very annoying.

[garaetjjte]

It doesn't need to be that bad if they cared about it. If channel is on the same band as previous one it could keep previous data in the buffer and decode it at once when switching.