Paul1977:

 

@eracode Can you advise whether other network functions work using this adapter? E.g. does the TV still show up on a smartphone as a device you can push YouTube to etc?

 

I have some UHD BluRay remuxes that constantly pause if trying to run over 100Mbps Ethernet.  Despite many emphatically claiming there's no use case where a TV requires more than 100Mbps, that's simply not true.

 

I currently get good 5GHz wifi speed which gets around my issue, but I'd much rather have the TV cabled.

 

As far as I can see, other network functions remain unchanged - certainly TV still shows on my phone re YouTube in the way you ask.

I don' think there are 'many' claiming there's no use case - just one or two highly-opinionated and self-righteous 'experts' who pour scorn and are often dead wrong. Their argument here makes no more sense than me telling them there is no use case for their car that can do way more than 110 kph just because that's the highest speed limit in NZ.

eracode:

Paul1977:

I have some UHD BluRay remuxes that constantly pause if trying to run over 100Mbps Ethernet.  Despite many emphatically claiming there's no use case where a TV requires more than 100Mbps, that's simply not true.

I don' think there are 'many' claiming there's no use case - just one or two highly-opinionated and self-righteous 'experts' who pour scorn and are often dead wrong. Their argument here makes no more sense than me telling them there is no use case for their car that can do way more than 110 kph just because that's the highest speed limit in NZ.

give those who need more than 100mbps are likely not even a rounding error here, why would a tv manufacture put more than that in their tv? 99.9% of people dont need it.

and as proven, there are ways you can DIY.

Paul1977:

 

@eracode Can you advise whether other network functions work using this adapter? E.g. does the TV still show up on a smartphone as a device you can push YouTube to etc?

 

It most likely will work but this will depend on the rest of your network configuration. For example D-Link routers automatically block access from devices on the wired LAN to the wireless side. This would cause problems if you were to try using Chromecast functionality or trying to get content from a device on a different part of the network. 

eracode:

 

As far as I can see, other network functions remain unchanged - certainly TV still shows on my phone re YouTube in the way you ask.

 

Awesome thanks.

freitasm:

 

It most likely will work but this will depend on the rest of your network configuration. For example D-Link routers automatically block access from devices on the wired LAN to the wireless side. This would cause problems if you were to try using Chromecast functionality or trying to get content from a device on a different part of the network. 

 

Thanks. I'm using Ubiquiti gear so no issues with this as I have full control over LAN/WLAN communication, along with WLAN/LAN broadcasting etc.

I was thinking more along the lines of it using an adapter that only seems to be partially recognised by the TV. According to what I've read, when using this adapter, if you look in the network settings the TV reports that there is no network connection even though there is. So I was wondering if there were any "gotchas" in there. It sounds like it's worth the risk.

rscole86: The fact that TV manufactures do not put gigabit in their TV's and there are not millions of complaints about streaming to TV's would suggest they are not dead wrong (both the TV manufactures and those trying to help the OP).

 

It can be very difficult to figure out where the issue lies, especially if you only want to believe it's the slowest network adapter, it could be many other things including the TV processing performance, local network issues, the streaming server etc etc.

@rscole86 I've read the same argument on many forums, not just here. But for my (admittedly very niche) use case it is absolutely a limitation of the 100Mpbs NIC.

• Many UHD Remuxes when played back from local media server sporadically freezes on TV when connected via Ethernet.
• No issues when TV connected via 5GHz Wifi (rules out TV processing limitation or media server limitation/issues)
• Playback devices with gigabit ports have no issues when using same cabling back to the same switch port (rules out cabling and network equipment)
• When monitoring media server network bandwidth use when streaming to TV over Ethernet can see it hit a "ceiling" at around 100Mbps whenever it freezes (suggests 100Mbps bottleneck)
• When monitoring media server network bandwidth use when streaming to gigabit playback device (or to TV over 5Ghz wifi) can see it going above 100Mbps at the same points in the video, but no freezing (confirms 100Mbps bottleneck)
• Problem is consistently reproducible.

I didn't want to reignite an argument, but anyone saying that there is no use case at all actually is dead wrong about this. I have a use case and, as far as I'm concerned, have definitively pinpointed why. "Very limited use cases" does not equal "no use case".

Jase2985: give those who need more than 100mbps are likely not even a rounding error here, why would a tv manufacture put more than that in their tv? 99.9% of people dont need it.

 

and as proven, there are ways you can DIY.

Fair enough, and I agree. The market who "require" gigabit LAN adapters in their TVs would be tiny. That said, I still think it's poor that you can spend many thousands of dollars on a TV and the manufacturers are too cheap to use a gigabit chip. I was more than a little annoyed when I realised my problem was that the VERY expensive flagship model TV I purchased didn't have gigabit - maybe I should have checked the network specs, but I just assumed it would have it for what it was costing.

Paul1977:

eracode:

As far as I can see, other network functions remain unchanged - certainly TV still shows on my phone re YouTube in the way you ask.

Awesome thanks.

@paul1977 I have just re-tested this with my iPhone X and LG C1 TV. The TV shows up in the phone’s YT app and I can stream from YT on the phone to the TV without needing a code. Although this works, it’s not something I usually ever do.

Different year models of LG TVs use different versions of WebOS. The C1 works fully with this adapter but maybe the C9 doesn’t. Or maybe it’s due to different versions of the YT app on C1 v C9. Or it could be a hardware thing. In the video by Vincent Teoh that I linked earlier (that sparked off this part of the thread) he tested the adapter on an LG C1 and didn’t mention any other LG TVs.

He tested first on a late-model Samsung which has USB 3 and then on the C1 which has only USB 2. 

Sorry I can’t be of more help.

@paul1977

Our C1 has WebOS v.6.2.0-32

Our C9 has WebOS v.05.20.07

Both TVs have YouTube v.1.1.12

I have just realised that the YT app may be irrelevant. Not sure if casting from phone goes straight to the TV and doesn't involve the YT app.

I don't like second-guessing people but may I ask why are you wanting to cast from your phones rather than using the YT app on the TV? Maybe it's easier than navigating the app.

i use an xbox for media consumption, so this is not an issue for me... but this is geekzone, so i understand the curiosity.

apparently, this works as well (for sony and lg): https://www.amazon.com/Ethernet-Adapter-Power-Cable-Stick/dp/B07VSFXNNT?th=1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIef8iRZhLE&ab_channel=HDTVTest

NGL, when you are getting to this sort of use case, you are far better off getting an external streaming box.

Remember, "Smart" TV features are purely there to sell units to the masses by slapping the Netflix/Prime/Disney+ logo on the side, not as a value-add for consumers. WebOS is better than most TV OSs (bar plain Android TV), but it is still not nearly as supported as a Apple TV, Shield etc. I love my Shield TV Pro and wouldn't dream of ever using a TV OS again.

Given the data gathering practices of most TV makers, the best thing you can do is keep it air-gapped and turn it back to being a "dumb" screen. Yeah, it sucks that you have to spend more hundred's of $$$ on top of the already expensive TV, but that is the price to have "best of breed" devices for each use case.

@eracode

I cast from the phone because it's a lot quicker to search videos etc, it also means we don't need to switch YouTube users on the TV.

The casting process does involve the TVs Youtube app. It links the phone, then the phone tells the TVs YouTube app what video play, the TV app then plays it directly (i.e. doesn't stream from phone). It's really just a faster way to control the TVs inbuilt YouTube app.

The difference I'm seeing is, previously, as long as a phone was on the same network both TVs would appear as options if you hit the "Cast" icon in the phone YouTube app (e.g. would show "Living Room TV" and "Media Room TV"). Now it shows nothing unless you link them with a code, and then each is simply named "YouTube on TV", and even once linked they only show up if the YouTube app is running on the TV. Previously as long as the TV was switched on (regardless of mode) it would show up (and be named appropriately).

This tells me that "Link via Code" pushes all communication between the phone and TV over the Internet, whereas the previous method if "Link via Wifi" was presumably done over the local network.

I'll have to check the WebOS versions, but I'm pretty sure one is 05.20.07 and the other is slightly newer that was just pushed out a couple of days ago. I had a forgetful moment last night, my TVs are actually C8s.

If you had a chance to try the adapter on your C9 and see if you get the same results would be really helpful (C9 at least runs the same firmware as the C8)?

My guess is that the TVs aren't broadcasting the YouTube apps network advertisement. I'm (almost) positive that it's not my network setup, as I've specifically enabled LAN to WLAN broadcast for the USB adapters MAC addresses. But if you get a different result with your C9 on the same firmware then I'm really not sure.

I cant stream 4k from local server to my 70UF770V without major buffering - so just dump at 4k stuff to an external drive and plug that into the TV and play via the app on the TV - seems to work so far. Yes, annoying to have to copy to drive, but it works.

ShinyChrome:

 

NGL, when you are getting to this sort of use case, you are far better off getting an external streaming box.

 

Remember, "Smart" TV features are purely there to sell units to the masses by slapping the Netflix/Prime/Disney+ logo on the side, not as a value-add for consumers. WebOS is better than most TV OSs (bar plain Android TV), but it is still not nearly as supported as a Apple TV, Shield etc. I love my Shield TV Pro and wouldn't dream of ever using a TV OS again.

 

Given the data gathering practices of most TV makers, the best thing you can do is keep it air-gapped and turn it back to being a "dumb" screen. Yeah, it sucks that you have to spend more hundred's of $$$ on top of the already expensive TV, but that is the price to have "best of breed" devices for each use case.

 

Sure, but in my case there are multiple legitimate reasons why I'd rather keep using the TV apps for as long as possible - which is a whole other topic.