I get what you’re saying about mesh being overkill sometimes. I actually ran into this exact thing when we moved into our new place last year. The builder was all about “future-proofing” and wanted to upsell us on a mesh system, but the house isn’t even that big—just a regular two-story with a finished basement. I figured, why not just try a single router first? Ended up putting it in the laundry room, which is pretty much dead center, and honestly, it’s been solid everywhere except maybe the far corner of the garage (which I don’t really care about).
“Spent more time planning outlets and cable runs than picking gear. That’s what really makes or breaks it...”
Couldn’t agree more here. We spent way too long arguing over where to put ethernet jacks and power outlets, but now I’m glad we did. It’s not flashy, but having those hidden runs means I can plug in my work computer or TV without dealing with lag or dropped signals.
Funny thing is, my wife still wanted to try one of those voice remotes for the TV—she likes the idea of just telling it what to do. But every time I try talking to it, I feel like an idiot. Half the time it misunderstands me anyway (“Play The Office” turns into some random cooking show). Maybe I’m just old school, but pressing a button feels less awkward than having a conversation with my television.
Anyway, yeah—sometimes simpler is better. Mesh has its place if your house is shaped like a maze or has weird dead zones, but if you can plan ahead even a little bit, you can skip all that extra tech clutter.
Title: Anyone Else Feel Awkward Talking To Their TV?
You nailed it—sometimes the “future-proof” pitch is just overkill, especially in a normal-sized house. I’m with you on the voice remote thing, too. Tried it for a week and felt ridiculous, plus it never got my accent right. Honestly, nothing beats a well-placed ethernet jack and a solid router. All this smart tech is cool in theory, but half the time it just adds more steps. I’d rather have reliability than a bunch of gadgets that only work half the time.
Honestly, nothing beats a well-placed ethernet jack and a solid router.
Couldn’t agree more. All these “smart” features are supposed to make life easier, but half the time I’m just troubleshooting or repeating myself to the TV. I get the appeal for some folks, but I’d rather have a simple, reliable setup that doesn’t need constant updates or voice training. Plus, less tech means less energy wasted on stuff running in the background. Sometimes low-tech is just smarter.
Plus, less tech means less energy wasted on stuff running in the background. Sometimes low-tech is just smarter.
That’s a key point I wish more people considered. All these “smart” devices seem convenient, but there’s often a hidden cost—not just in headaches, but in energy use. Even things like smart speakers or TVs draw power constantly for voice recognition and updates. A lot of folks don’t realize those little standby lights and background processes add up over time.
I’ll admit, I appreciate some smart features—automated thermostats, for instance, can help save energy if used right. But when it comes to entertainment setups, I still prefer a straightforward wired connection and a basic remote that works every time. Less hassle, fewer things to break, and honestly, it just feels more sustainable in the long run.
The irony is that “smart” tech sometimes creates more problems than it solves. Like you said, sometimes simpler really is smarter.
I get where you’re coming from. There’s a certain satisfaction in knowing your setup just works, no updates or weird glitches because some cloud service went down. I’ve noticed in new developments, buyers are split—some want every gadget, others ask for the basics only. Personally, I’m wary of how much “always on” tech is creeping in. It’s not just about energy, either. Sometimes I wonder if we’re trading too much control for convenience.
