Advantages like inbuilt speakers and other features.
Are there any disadvantages in particular. Please Explain. Thanks.

 

It depends on what you intend to do with it. If you intend to use it as a monitor it needs to have a monitor like interface and support one or more standard formats. I can't think of any advantage a TV might have except interfaces you won't use.

 

The in-built Speakers are terrible,
otherwise, a TV is designed to be an advertising and brainwashing machine
with all sorts of ridiculous "features" that You probably don't want.

The biggest downside is,
a real Computer "Monitor" will probably cost You twice as much as a comparably sized TV.
"Sometimes", You get what You paid for.

Do your due-diligence before shelling-out your hard earned Money,
TVs and Monitors both change daily,
and the decision depends on what You want and/or expect.

TVs generally come with a plethora of goofy and absurd "Picture-Enhancing-Features"
that can be very difficult, or impossible, to bypass,
but who knows, You may actually enjoy the cartoonish picture-"effects",
these "effects" are very tiring to me.
They also come with "built-in" advertising Software that can't be removed.

And, if You like to do any Picture or Video-Editing, stay totally far-away from any TVs.

If You spend enough time putzing around with a TV,
You may be able to get it to perform satisfactorily for your wants and needs,
just be prepared for plenty of frustrating hours if you're really picky about accurate picture-performance.
.
.
.

 

TV's also usually have different inputs, as COAX and some other stuff, also a remote control... monitors (especially new ones) can have only HDMI.
So if you have some random PC that it is not your main... you play a little bit of solitaire and maybe later watch a little bit of football... it is kinda OK to have TV as monitor.
But as others mentioned if this is your work PC where you spend some time doing serious activities I would never recommend a TV as monitor.

 

Hi Shafty,
Check the claimed screen resolution, between the TV and PC monitor you are considering.
E

 

See. My main concern is. Will the TV affect eye more than a monitor does?

 

I do not recall seeing any credible study that showed that either TV receivers or computer monitors affect user’s eyes significantly.

 

I am using mostly TVs because I got them free. lol
Years ago, there was a difference between...........
TV usually do not go to sleep when there is no signal from the PC. Monitors go to sleep.
TV has sound. Monitors usually do not.
When looking for a TV to use as a monitor look at its resolution. Look up the specs. The first flat TVs had low resolution. 720 lines Many of the newer ones have 1080. The two I am looking at right now are 1920x1080.
I just looked up the specs on a 4k Sony. 3840 x 2160 Who has $3000.00? My old computer will not do that. lol
Do not use a TV if it does not have a digital port. ( HDMI ) Maybe use it if it has a VGA. (not as good)

 

If both are same resolution and desired size, a television has the advantage of being also a confined receiver. No difference about eye strain when both are set at same brightness.

 

TVs and monitors have different aspect ratios...something you may need to consider.

 

Here are the things I don't like about having a TV for a second monitor:

1) The resolution - while good enough - is sometimes not good enough. For instance: type written text can be hard to read. Especially if the text is small. I find myself having to zoom in just to be able to read the text. Yet, if I move the image to the computer monitor (iMac 2021) the text is perfectly readable even though the screen is smaller than the TV.

2) At the top of my monitor I can see the icons and such that are present. However, on the TV, they're just off screen. The ONLY way I can get them down to where they can be seen is if I set the TV to a lower resolution, but then I'm not utilizing the full screen. And resolution goes down that much more.

3) I can use the speakers in my TV but they don't sound any better than that in the iMac.

Here's one thing I DO like about the TV as a second monitor; I can adjust the color intensity. Since I'm partially color blind (True Color Perception) I play a game where I have to set the saturation to full in order to tell the difference between Yellow and Light Green. If I try to play that game on my monitor those two colors are so close to each other that I can't tell any difference.

Now: the TV I bought came from WallyWorld and it was a cheap TV. It has 3 HDMI inputs, one of which I use from my computer. There IS a "Computer Monitor Input" port but my Mac doesn't have that output. Then there's TV but I never use it as a regular TV. The most I watch on it is YouTube. The resolution is good enough for that. The TV brand is "element". And it was cheap. Maybe $150.00. So in many cases - you get what you pay for. But at least it works.

 

TV Monitor: (and No - I don't see the interferon lines. The camera does but the eye doesn't. So you can ignore that part. But notice the lack of clarity of the text. Any smaller and it would be unreadable. But that's MY TV Monitor.


The monitor:

So that's MY difference. Again, when I look at the TV I don't see those color gradients (interferon lines), it looks clear. And readable; as long as it's not too small.

Note: The two pictures were taken with iPhone 16.

 

I do not recall seeing any credible study that showed that either TV receivers or computer monitors affect user’s eyes significantly.

They forgot to ask my momma! LOL not that she was terribly credible in her assertions.

Curved screen? Pixel density? I do see folks using their HUGE wall mounted monster TV to play their shoot em up games on so I guess they are considered as passable monitors. TV speaker sound fidelity is pitiful. I was using a surround sound stereo auxiliary input even before they started making them as a TV accessory. Then our youngest son brought home a free Denon home theatre sound system from his job at one of the electronics stores that was "considered" a throwaway after being replaced under warranty. All it needed was a bit of glue on the subwoofer speaker from where it had been overdriven and torn at the edge. Then it sounded a whole lot better! It is amazing what sounds you don't hear from their standard speakers.

 

At the top of my monitor I can see the icons and such that are present. However, on the TV, they're just off screen.

I saw that in a TV. From the manual, there is a "zoom" function. Some manuals call it "overscan". One change in the setup menu and that was fixed.

I do not know why your TV looks bad. The same glass (LCD panel) goes into TVs or Monitors. You are comparing two different venders with different glass. The camera adds so many artifacts I can't see.
Some panels, only 50% of the screen emits light. Some are more like 80%. (need an eye loop to see) I get this idea from the fact that the camera is upset. moiré patterns It also might be the TV is altering the data.

 

I am very happy with the TVs that I use as monitors. I have two 32" and one 24". I bought them all, low cost, at the local thrift store. They all have VGA connectors and are a few years old. How clear they are depends on how well you adjust them. I use them for a lot of graphic drawing and photo editing on my desktop computers ( WinXP, Win8 and Linux Mint ). There is no visible distortion, the colors are very accurate and lines and edges are very crisp. The only computer I have that is not compatible with TV monitors is my Win10 Asus laptop. It only has HDMI video output and I can not set the resolution to fit the screen size. The edges are clipped off. I use a second-hand 22" HP monitor on it.

 

To the human eye both screens appear to be clear. There IS a marked difference in resolution between the two screens. The Mac screen has what they call "Retina display" and I have no idea what that means except that it's easy on the eyes.

As for "Overscan" I'll see if I can find that. Thanks for the tip @ronsimpson

 

My TV doesn't have a zoom or overscan that I can adjust.

 

Using a TV as a monitor is certainly possible and became fairly easy with the advent of HDMI. But it's not ideal because the pixel density of a TV is lower than for a monitor, and you can see the pixels. This is less of a problem with TVs capable of 4K and up resolutions. Mere HD at 1080 pixels is workable and I'd say it's the minimum acceptable. The laptop I'm writing this on is 3456 pixels wide, a so-called "retina" display. You can't see the pixels. A TV at that resolution is probably impractical - not sure.

Another issue is the refresh rate. TVs tend to have lower rates than monitors, because people using monitors experience fatigue from watching a slower rate.

Computer users also want accurate color representation and a wide gamut. These are desired in TVs as well but accuracy is less critical.

The advantage of using a TV is the broader function capability. Some TVs can be used as a monitor and show you a TV signal in a picture-in-picture window. If you want to keep tabs on a game while "working" on the computer, that can be a pretty nice feature.

 

TVs are quite poor substitute for a monitor... but it may work for you depending on what you use it for. If you want to be sure test it before buying.

In my experience monitors always produce far superior image, and smoother refresh. Using large TV screen can be a decent substitute during meeting or presentation, but it is simply not fit for regular use. i have tried it many times and find it amazing how poorly TVs perform for things like programming. May be ok for video games.

 

TVs tend to have lower rates than monitors, because people using monitors experience fatigue from watching a slower rate.

Refresh rate was a problem back with CRTs. The way light is made is very different with LCD and LED type TVs.
Now days refresh rate is used by "gamers" to indicate how fast something can move across the screen or how many time the picture can be updated/second.
As I read the forum the refresh rate could be updated 5 times a second, I would hardly notice. This monitor does not flash light like a CRT.