The comments are not related...Hence more than one comment. This comment is my annoyance at trying to imply that currently I'm not experiencing my TV currently. I don't want to use a computer; I want to experience it!! I don't want eat a meal I want to experience it!! I don't want to drive a car; I want to experience it! Please don't reply to my comments before reading them.
What is this on about why so many diggs. They have been on about this for about 15 years. We lost Ceefax. The Internet is great, but that will probably come from a the portable in your hand device IMHO. What people want from your current TV is on demand quality shows, with as little intrusive advertisements as possible.
I bought a new TV last month. Being fairly higher-end, it came with internet & wi-fi built in, and a tiny keyboard on the back side of the remote. It is difficult to put in words just how useless it is. Everything is horribly slow, and I really can't see why anyone would want a gigantic Facebook feed. I tried loading a couple of web pages but got tired of waiting and gave up.
The price was pretty good and the TV picture is fantastic, but I have to wonder how much less I'd pay without useless junk like that and 3-D (which are all now standard on high-end sets).
lol I am not against watching advertisements especially I say as a method of payment. That said everyone pays now for product placement! I am not against advertisements at all. I'm against intrusive advertisements.
I suppose one of the potential benefits of connected TV is that you could CHOOSE whether to watch the adverts or pay for ad-free TV. We don't have that choice now.
Wouldn't it be the other way around? If you're imparting costs to people on a per-user basis, while not fully subsidizing costs to the entire general populace, wouldn't that be considered less "socialist"?
I have no idea, but have the thought of Apps on your TV with the exception of streaming Game services to be pretty useless. Compared with the alternatives.
This is where the quality of the interaction matters greatly. I have a 2010 model 3DTV from Sony with network and internet connectivity and I use it more in that mode than any other. It has a stream lined interface that is easy to use, simple remote friendly and can run online content like videos and music smoothly without issue.
If the manufacturer is trying to turn the TV into a computer, they are doing it wrong and it has demonstrably done poorly in the past (see the old WebTV platform). If, on the other hand, it does media bar style functionality to web content with some basic searching for content, it works great. It all depends on the UI.
I bought a Logitech Revue (Google TV) box when they dropped the price to $99. It is one of the best devices I've ever owned. The search functionality is fantastic and simply having a browser available on the TV is one of the most useful things I've used.
I truly do not understand everyone's difficulty and frustration in using Google TV.
The problem with TV isn't the hardware, it's the crappy content. Commercial TV is completely unwatchable. The cable companies force you to buy tons of crap to get a handful of decent programming. Anything with commercials is a complete waste of time. TV news is worthless. Internet programming is so scattered that it's hardly worth the trouble to track down anything decent. At this point, I just use my TVs to watch movies I've purchased (downloads or rips), a few TV series I've subscribed to on iTunes (to avoid commercials), and some Netflix (if I can find anything decent). Most of the time they are turned off.
No, it's just crap. No one is going to "fix" TV until they fix the content, or at least fix the business model so you can just buy what you want. The hardware is fine; They are working on the wrong problem.
The 1990s entertainment industry's model of passive consumption is slowly taking a back seat. Now that people want to experience and even create content as a form of entertainment.
No matter what is on TV, it's the same ol' thing: sitting on your butt barely moving for hours on end. That "experience" will always remain the same because that's part of what people enjoy about TV. What a mind and body numbing experience...
tuppe666Feb 9, 2012Buried
I am still offended, by the term "Experiencing TV" Sometimes its nice not to be marketed to.
tuppe666Feb 10, 2012Buried
The comments are not related...Hence more than one comment. This comment is my annoyance at trying to imply that currently I'm not experiencing my TV currently. I don't want to use a computer; I want to experience it!! I don't want eat a meal I want to experience it!! I don't want to drive a car; I want to experience it! Please don't reply to my comments before reading them.
tuppe666Feb 9, 2012Buried
What is this on about why so many diggs. They have been on about this for about 15 years. We lost Ceefax. The Internet is great, but that will probably come from a the portable in your hand device IMHO. What people want from your current TV is on demand quality shows, with as little intrusive advertisements as possible.
tuppe666Feb 9, 2012Buried
I saw android TV with a fishtank application. OK I so want that a little.
bdbrFeb 10, 2012Buried
I bought a new TV last month. Being fairly higher-end, it came with internet & wi-fi built in, and a tiny keyboard on the back side of the remote. It is difficult to put in words just how useless it is. Everything is horribly slow, and I really can't see why anyone would want a gigantic Facebook feed. I tried loading a couple of web pages but got tired of waiting and gave up.
The price was pretty good and the TV picture is fantastic, but I have to wonder how much less I'd pay without useless junk like that and 3-D (which are all now standard on high-end sets).
tuppe666Feb 9, 2012Buried
lol I am not against watching advertisements especially I say as a method of payment. That said everyone pays now for product placement! I am not against advertisements at all. I'm against intrusive advertisements.
bdbrFeb 9, 2012Buried
I suppose one of the potential benefits of connected TV is that you could CHOOSE whether to watch the adverts or pay for ad-free TV. We don't have that choice now.
jberiniFeb 10, 2012Buried
Sure you do. Don't want commercials in your programming? Pay for HBO, Cinemax, Showtime, The Movie Channel, Starz or Encore.
floepieFeb 10, 2012Buried
Wouldn't it be the other way around? If you're imparting costs to people on a per-user basis, while not fully subsidizing costs to the entire general populace, wouldn't that be considered less "socialist"?
tuppe666Feb 9, 2012Buried
I have no idea, but have the thought of Apps on your TV with the exception of streaming Game services to be pretty useless. Compared with the alternatives.
rudegarFeb 10, 2012Buried
I want a fish and a parrot flowing around in a lid fireplace app!
ajh16Feb 10, 2012Buried
This is where the quality of the interaction matters greatly. I have a 2010 model 3DTV from Sony with network and internet connectivity and I use it more in that mode than any other. It has a stream lined interface that is easy to use, simple remote friendly and can run online content like videos and music smoothly without issue.
If the manufacturer is trying to turn the TV into a computer, they are doing it wrong and it has demonstrably done poorly in the past (see the old WebTV platform). If, on the other hand, it does media bar style functionality to web content with some basic searching for content, it works great. It all depends on the UI.
cawpinFeb 10, 2012Buried
That's really disappointing.
I bought a Logitech Revue (Google TV) box when they dropped the price to $99. It is one of the best devices I've ever owned. The search functionality is fantastic and simply having a browser available on the TV is one of the most useful things I've used.
I truly do not understand everyone's difficulty and frustration in using Google TV.
craig1958Feb 10, 2012Buried
The problem with TV isn't the hardware, it's the crappy content. Commercial TV is completely unwatchable. The cable companies force you to buy tons of crap to get a handful of decent programming. Anything with commercials is a complete waste of time. TV news is worthless. Internet programming is so scattered that it's hardly worth the trouble to track down anything decent. At this point, I just use my TVs to watch movies I've purchased (downloads or rips), a few TV series I've subscribed to on iTunes (to avoid commercials), and some Netflix (if I can find anything decent). Most of the time they are turned off.
craig1958Feb 10, 2012Buried
No, it's just crap. No one is going to "fix" TV until they fix the content, or at least fix the business model so you can just buy what you want. The hardware is fine; They are working on the wrong problem.
neondistractionFeb 10, 2012Buried
Just ignore him. He's the latest incarnation of diggs most prolific troll.
worldmaster334Feb 10, 2012Buried
The best would be if <a href="http://www.findfiles.net/video">video downloads</a> would be offered by the TV stations. Watch, click, download, hope it will come soon.
mailclassof1Feb 10, 2012Buried
The 1990s entertainment industry's model of passive consumption is slowly taking a back seat. Now that people want to experience and even create content as a form of entertainment.
number4940Feb 10, 2012Buried
No matter what is on TV, it's the same ol' thing: sitting on your butt barely moving for hours on end. That "experience" will always remain the same because that's part of what people enjoy about TV. What a mind and body numbing experience...