TooUnskilled

Does the TV read it as external storage and get control of media playback somehow?

I'd rather not go with a solution that requires me to buy something when I cam already do it (albeit somewhat inconveniently) with my laptop. The TV is the TCL 935 if that matters

Is this similar to TeamViewer?

Hi! I have a TV I can stream to using chromecast or VLC, but my issue is that the TV is in another room, and I can't control the media player from there. Other than using a laptop to remotely control the computer itself, does anyone have any suggestions on how to do that? Thanks

It's happening with both my HDR tv and non HDR monitor. On my tv the problem goes away when I switch on HDR in windows. I don't think I have any programs that individually run in HDR on windowed mode. This also happened in safe mode when I was about to use DDU

Hi! Windows 10, Nvidia 3080 I tried this on multiple monitors, DDU'd the drivers away, still happening. It's something else that's causing it, windows related I'm assuming. Night Light is turned off. Power plan set to performance, all sub-options are also "performance", no power saving enabled anywhere. What happens is, if I switch to a bright window, the whole screen shifts to a blue tint after a second. If I switch to a dark window, it shifts to an orange tint. If I have both open at the same time, it starts flickering between them. Any ideas?

That's a fair point, wired ones connect to one device at a time. I just assumed a wireless one would allow for simultaneous access, since there's no physical limitation in the form of usb ports. A NAS solves the same issues (more even) as a wireless external hard drive, but it's still not the same thing. I guess since it satisfies the same demand for wireless local storage, it makes sense that wireless external hard drives seem to be marketed as travel solutions instead. Anyone who wants wireless local storage either pays extra for a NAS, or gives up on the wireless part and buys a regular external hard drive for a lower price.

It's the premium version of what I'm talking about. What I'm talking about is what a wireless mouse is to a wired mouse. You're talking about the shell of a wireless mouse, that you then plug a regular mouse (or multiple) into. To be clear here, I'm not looking for alternatives to a wireless external hard drive (or SSD), I am looking for exactly that. With no added gimmicks, like battery power, or online functionality. Not that those things are necessarily bad, they just seem to add to the cost, and remove from the storage amount. And sometimes they're just bad. The review, and the response from the company rep say you need internet access, which kinda defeats the purpose of local storage. Unless I'm reading it wrong, which I could be.

An external hard drive is pretty much what I'm talking about. I don't want it for use on the go, I want it for use at home. I just don't want it taking up space near my pc, so it'd be nice if there was something I could plug in to the wall in some remote corner in my home, and access it wirelessly across all my devices (at home).

I wonder if it only has 1TB of storage because it's overloaded with features, or if the battery takes up too much space. No, that's apparently local storage that you can only access through the cloud? The fuck If I'm travelling, I'm just taking it with me, since I'm talking about something the size of a hard drive. That seems like overcomplicating a simple concept. What I'm talking about is an external hard drive that you plug in to the wall wherever you want in your home, and it's still accessible wirelessly by your computer. Not a solution that requires configuration, just dumb storage that uses wifi, or whatever other local wireless format would be fast enough to work. Maybe there just aren't that many people who want their local storage to be wireless, but are also not willing to spend enough time/money to set up a NAS. The products I'm finding seem to be meant for online access on the go, or battery powered hard drives.

Not cloud storage. Essentially, same thing as your phone when it comes to storage. Device that can connect to your pc wirelessly, and has a respectable amount of memory you can use. Think wireless external hard drive. I might be just experiencing a brain fart, but I can't recall seeing such a thing, and it seems like such an obviously useful product. Whether over wifi, or using a wireless usb attachment, like mice and keyboards do. Wireless transfer speeds are fast enough now that I can see people willing to take a small hit, when compared to wired solutions, for the added convenience.

Awesome, thanks!

Hi I remember seeing some horror stories about some smart TVs having unavoidable built in ads, I think LG was a big offender. Anyone have recommendations on safe brands, or which ones to avoid? Thanks

This is more of a new series/new channel suggestion. You could cover new game releases/updates, in terms of their performance/optimization on different hardware. It would be almost the same process as what you already do for new hardware releases. But instead of checking how a new CPU/GPU performs on a bunch of games, you check how a new game performs on different systems. And even which settings affect performance the most. When I'm considering buying a new game, I'm always wary of the chance that it's poorly optimized for my hardware, or just a bad console port that doesn't work as well as it should on any system. Having a trusted source put numbers on the performance a game has, would be very helpful when choosing what to buy. And revisiting it after it's been updated would be even better. I remember Linus mentioning something about RDR2 being poorly optimized for the PC in the last WAN show, then immediately retracting his statement because maybe that has changed since the initial release. And from a production standpoint, you would pretty much never run out of content for as long as there are new games/updates to be reviewed. You wouldn't even necessarily need all that many pcs. Just including one midrange CPU/GPU of each brand and generation would give a good enough picture of the performance on the entire generation, since they all share the same architecture. So you might be able to get by with only ~5 workstations, covering the last 5 generations of Intel/AMD CPUs, and Nvidia/AMD GPUs. Sure, you could also mix and match, or include more than one piece of hardware per generation, but that would exponentially increase the amount of work needed per game.

This is more of a new series/new channel suggestion. You could cover new game releases/updates, in terms of their performance/optimization on different hardware. It would be almost the same process as what you already do for new hardware releases. But instead of checking how a new CPU/GPU performs on a bunch of games, you check how a new game performs on different systems. And even which settings affect performance the most. When I'm considering buying a new game, I'm always wary of the chance that it's poorly optimized for my hardware, or just a bad console port that doesn't work as well as it should on any system. Having a trusted source put numbers on the performance a game has, would be very helpful when choosing what to buy. And revisiting it after it's been updated would be even better. I remember Linus mentioning something about RDR2 being poorly optimized for the PC in the last WAN show, then immediately retracting his statement because maybe that has changed since the initial release. And from a production standpoint, you would pretty much never run out of content for as long as there are new games/updates to be reviewed. You wouldn't even necessarily need all that many pcs. Just including one midrange CPU/GPU of each brand and generation would give a good enough picture of the performance on the entire generation, since they all share the same architecture. So you might be able to get by with only ~5 workstations, covering the last 5 generations of Intel/AMD CPUs, and Nvidia/AMD GPUs. Sure, you could also mix and match, or include more than one piece of hardware per generation, but that would exponentially increase the amount of work needed per game.