The Digital Signage Insider

Digital Signage Users Prefer Commercial-Grade Equipment: Survey

Published on: 2010-12-09

As part of this year's digital signage pricing survey, we asked whether people are predominantly using consumer-grade hardware, or opting for the more industrial stuff. We polled the nearly 300 respondents about their preferences for screens, projectors, mounts, media players and even cabling and video extenders. The results were quite clear: our survey group overwhelmingly prefers to use professional kit when it's available. Upon reviewing the data, my first thought was "Finally, they're actually getting it!" After more consideration, though, I've started wondering whether going with commercial hardware is always the right thing to do.

What are the benefits of commercial-grade digital signage equipment?

Between all the bloggers in our industry, dozens of articles have been written about the advantages of using commercial-grade hardware. Typically, these focus on screens and media players -- the two most obvious hardware components of a digital signage network. Arguments for going "pro" have included extended service life, better reliability (and thus less downtime), more serviceable components, better service options (like on-site repair and hot spare replacement), and not voiding your warranty by simply using the device in a commercial space (a common issue with consumer-grade screens, in particular). Some things like commercial mounting brackets also have different liability insurance options, so if the bracket fails and a screen drops from the ceiling and injures someone, the network owner is less likely to be on the hook (maybe).

While all of these things were true five years ago, some are less so today. For example, the service life for many consumer and commercial screens is identical these days. The reliability of consumer-grade screens and PC hardware has also grown by leaps and bounds as demand for these devices has grown (and consumer tolerance for malfunction has waned). Combined, these factors have driven down the demand -- and the perceived value -- of superior service and replacement options. That's why I was so surprised to see our survey respondents overwhelmingly indicate their preference for commercial-grade equipment, as evidenced by this graph:

Why are so many people choosing commercial equipment?

As much as I'd like to pretend it's because people have been listening to industry bloggers like myself, I don't think we've had that much to do with shaping people's preferences for commercial hardware. Instead, we can thank the manufacturers of commercial-grade screens, who have done an excellent job of advertising some of the chief features and benefits of their pro-grade units, especially when compared to some of their consumer models. Ironically, the slow pace of many digital signage deployments has probably helped their efforts: many consumer TVs and computers from big PC makers have short lifecycles, which can force deployments that span several years to swap between different models as older ones are discontinued. Commercial units, on the other hand, are typically available for much longer stretches, giving network owners the opportunity to use consistent equipment for the life of their project.

Another factor that's probably driving the use of commercial equipment is, ironically, hardware commoditization. Innumerable consumers and businesses have been purchasing flat screens, computers, mounts and previously high-end AV equipment, leading to two important results. First, the components used by these systems have become more reliable and less expensive. Second, the price premium between consumer and commercial systems has also decreased, due to increased sharing of parts. Increased pressure from increasingly capable lower-end systems has also forced vendors to innovate and add more and better features to their pro lines. As the price premiums shrink and the incremental features become more valuable, commercial-grade hardware will continue to be ideal for a large number of customers.

When doesn't it make sense to use commercial equipment?

Interestingly, with so much growth in the digital signage market coming from smaller networks that have relatively modest needs, there are probably more legitimate uses for consumer grade equipment in digital signage projects than ever before. For example, projects that only require a few screens and players won't see the value of long product life cycles. Systems placed in easily serviced locations make it harder to justify the cost of on-site warranty repair plans. And of course, those who simply couldn't do a project at all unless it's at the lowest possible cost will be better off with all consumer-grade equipment than no equipment at all (though arguably some people just shouldn't be doing these projects to begin with).

So, while much of our industry continues its race to the bottom, it looks like display makers and equipment vendors have done a good job communicating the value of their higher-end (and higher-margin) equipment. Even in light of the increasing adoption of digital signage by smaller organizations -- a segment which might be well enough served by consumer-grade components -- professional equipment continues to be the standard for many. Unfortunately, we won't know which way this trend is heading until we ask the same question in our 2011 pricing survey. In the meantime...

Will the bulk of projects in 2011 continue to use pro-grade equipment, or are commodity parts "good enough" for most projects today? Leave a comment below and tell us what you think!


+1 # Dmitry Sokolov 2010-12-09 18:11
Bill, thanks for openly tackling the elephant emerging in our industry. You bring up some valid points. As part of an organisation that provides both commercial and consumer products (both sometimes used for digital signage) we have a unique perspective on the dilemma of CE vs Commercial hardware. While reserving my judgement on the issue, I'd like to point to emergence of 'PROsumer' ranges of products as another contributing factor to blurring distinction between the two product segments. "PROsumer" displays (such as NEC's E-Series) are marketed as commercial, but by all specs and physical features resemble CE TV's. For many applications (such as boardroom signage) these may be sufficient by all intensive purposes, while I wouldn't deploy them in an airport. Similar "PROsumer" is taken by ViewSonic with VOT132 - sporting a consumer form factor and spec (loaded w/ Win7 Home OS), but listing kiosks and digital signage as a suitable application. Whatever you use, make sure you have properly weighed the pros and cons of your decision and factored the service and downtime costs. Remember that even if the hardware is easy to service, the hourly costs of technicians being called out on-site will eat in the overall profitability of your project. A nominal fee for a vendor-supported on-site warranty on the Commercial equipment may be worth it to keep your technicians installing new projects and not doing out of pocket break-fix.
+1 # Jason Goldberg 2010-12-10 17:51
Intuitively I want to agree with the premise that we are far better off with "industrial grade" equipment but my own experiences in the space have made me more cynical. Often the "industrial" features of commercial equipment such as displays don't seem to cover the most common points of failure. I.E. They will have a longer MTBF backlight but will still allow cables to be easily unplugged. Etc... I've never seen Planar/LG/Etc... publish real word data on service. You'd think by now they would have real data (instead of test specs) if the displays truly did better in the field. If I had a commercial product that actually performed better in the field, I'd have funded a field survey by now. I listened to a top e-commerce manager recently give the advise that he buys the cheapest servers he can possible find, and buy more redundancy. His feeling was the failure rate of the rock bottom product was not much worse than the best, and he'd rather use the cost savings to get good redundancy. Now, we don't often have the luxury of redundancy for customer facing elements of our solutions, but it's a good argument for our own back-ends. Cheers, Jason aka Retailgeek
0 # Bill Gerba 2010-12-16 16:33
Hi Dmitry, I wondered at the time whether to add another category for "prosumer" models, but since those are almost always marketed at consumers, I figured the distinction wasn't really necessary. To your point, though, the fact that so many pro and high-end consumer models (of screens in particular) share the majority of their parts seems to be forcing the manufacturers to turn to service (repair, warranty) as a way to differentiate the offerings. Jason, 100% agreed! The fact that cable retention isn't a standard issue item on many "pro" screens is so ridiculous. However, I have noticed recently that most major manufacturers will at least sell you a locking cable cover now. And I know some higher end pole and wall mounts specifically aimed at digital-signage do have better features for addressing these kinds of problems. So maybe we'll see that kind of thing trickle down into the market soon? With regard to your argument about the low-cost back end, I guess it's all about how much you value your working screens. If you feel that broken screens in your store are going to be a determent to your brand, you might be willing to spend more to keep them online, than if you don't.

Subscribe to the Digital Signage Insider RSS feed

Looking for more articles and research? Our newest articles can always be found at Digital Signage Insider, but there are hundreds of additional research articles in our historical articles archive.

You may also be interested in M2M Insider: our blog about M2M and the Internet of Things.