Why doesn't it have a way to directly push an image to the screen like a $30 router from worst buy? It looks like the software to push an image to a display can be run on your own device but then you need an $80 box and if I read this right you need to pay $72 a year forever.
Well if you’re sold on paying 2000 euro for the display it’s a drop in the bucket. Who reads newspapers in 2023 anyway? Why not just get a subscription to a newspaper for like $50/yr? Then you can sit and read it instead of standing facing a wall. I don’t get this product. A solution in need of a problem
If you or some future buyer want to keep it for 20 years and want to run your own hardware to deal with it you will probably end up sourcing at least 2 single board computers for around $160 and paying $72x20 adjusted up for inflation or 1440-2160. You will spend at least 30 minutes picking out a machine and some number of hours over the years managing each machine.
This is of course assuming it doesn't actually stop working or some aspect of the process isn't broken.
All this so you can run a docker container with postgres instead of pushing an image to an endpoint on the local network. It's both bad and unimpressive engineering.
Furthermore if it did need central management for business purpose THAT would be something that consumes the same simple process for showing something on the screen.
<COMPLEX SOFTWARE> => posts image => shows image
This would trivially allow you to build on the simple process if that is all you need. It's not so much bad engineering as gross engineering its engineered to be complicated to they can insert themselves into the process to stick their hand in your wallet.
Because the Visonect devices and software are meant for commercial and business customers as information displays that are centrally managed, not for use as a consumer product, and is designed around those use cases. That somebody bought one and repurposed it for a hobby art project doesn't change that.
https://www.visionect.com/software/