Slashdot Mirror
I Want My GTV
theodp writes "The NY Times reports that Google and Intel have teamed with Sony to develop a platform called Google TV to bring the Web into the living room through a new generation of TVs and set-top boxes. The three companies have tapped Logitech for peripheral devices, including a remote with a tiny keyboard. Based on Google's Android operating system, the TV technology runs on Intel's Atom chips. Google is expected to deliver a toolkit to outside programmers within the next couple of months, and products based on the software could appear as soon as this summer."
And who still thinks Google's fingers aren't everywhere? This will be just another datamining source.
So does this mean we'll be seeing GTV coming to PS3? No, of course not, SONY will want to sell us another set top box for extra $$$ and we'll want to work extra hard to pay for it too!
If Sony's consistent behavior in the past is any indication, it will be encrypted, region-locked, proprietary, and it will only work with some weird storage or media type that only Sony makes. It will also require you to install a rootkit on your TV and let them search all your media files for pirated songs and movies before you can use it. And you'll have to submit a DNA sample and retina scan to buy one, of course.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
We're seriously doing this again? Aside from video services like YouTube, Hulu, Netflix, etc, haven't we learned that Internet on our TV is kind of...lame? Most of us have at least one computer nowadays, and many people have at least a netbook or laptop if they don't have a desktop computer. Internet + TV just seems like a waste of time and money...would anyone be interested in what they are offering here?
Living With a Nerd
I have some mixed feelings on this. On one hand, like others have said, google seems to have it's fingers in everything. One the other hand, unlike recent new tech items like the ipad, this one did hold some interest. I often use my ps3 to surf the web on my tv, so as far as I'm concerned, let's cut out the middle man.
Well, I'm all for it - as long as I can watch copious amount of porn and videos of kittens...
I mean come the fuck on, it has ALL the internet, now it wants all your phone and television? Shit man, I go live in cave
Quids in for the GTV guys (quake3 game casting software) if they want that name ;oD
And google will mine whatever you watch and target you with ads.
no thanks.
We already have web TV. Video on Demand has been talked about for years and years and tech skeptics have always scoffed about it being a decade out for decades. Well, we have it now. The internet has the carrying capacity. Netflix is doing it for a profit. And the part that really has me excited, small-time people are making money at it without giant corporate backing. Someone wants to be on national television, they're going to have to kiss the ass of a major corporation. There's barriers to entry like the massive cost of building a television network. The internet turns all that on its head.
1. Create the tech that makes internet broadcasting technically feasible. Done.
2. Create the business model that makes internet broadcasting financially feasible. Work still needs done but it's happening. Partially done.
3. Profit
What we've seen so far is the creation of net-based versions of the cheapie mainstream shows. Porn is cheap to produce and there were a lot of amateur and low-rent outfits out there even before the net happened. They were the first ones to make it big on the net. We're seeing computer tech shows, talk shows and the like with various podcasts. They give away the content for free and make their money on sponsorship deals. While a lot of work goes into them, they're still not as expensive to produce as a network television comedy or drama. We've seen a few attempts at net-based sitcoms but they died.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
Think of it as having an Apple TV or Popcorn Hour device embedded in your TV and I think you'll see there's something of a market there. In addition to TV, you get Hulu, YouTube, Pandora (maybe), and the ability to play recorded media from either a local hard drive or an hdna server. I have a Popcorn hour that I use to stream Hulu and Netflix to (via PlayOn), when watching on my living room TV. It's pretty handy.
Sounds like they forgot I can do the same thing with the HDMI output on my laptop.
Ahh, set top boxes, payware... ok, now it makes sense. I thought for a minute that Sony - the king of DRM-infested crapware and hair-brained rootkit schemes was actually going to do something positive. Hey - if google goes along with this, does that make them an evil company yet?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
think of it as Web TV, trying to sucker grandmothers into giving up hundreds of dollars on a lame piece of shit that wont browse its own home page
served up on a TV signal so its hard to read
Infinite Solutions broke this story over two years ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9SK_M_nVWA
Once you get past the easter egg, it's great!
WebTV What?
crap, i meant dlna, no hdna
So when will Google become self aware?
Aside from video services like YouTube, Hulu, Netflix, etc, haven't we learned that Internet on our TV is kind of...lame?
So you're saying that, aside from good Internet services which are good, the Internet on the TV is lame...?
Prediction: the eventual plan is to get Hulu-like programming on YouTube, then release a YouTube set-top box that can replace cable TV.
First of all, Google doing anything is not a news :)
Second, GTV is a platform by Philips. So, even if Google launches this 'TV', it may not be called GTV
I have an HTPC and watch internet television services (hulu and netflix, primarily) all the time. The HTPC will never penetrate the my-mother market (too much setup, cost), so a set top box which functions in such a way has great potential. Oh, and don't say the Wii already provides this functionality: my mother does not have one of those, either :)
Until it's integrated so that you can overlay or window the web over whatever you are watching currently I have no real desire for the web on my TV. It's nice to do in between innings in a ball game, but I don't want to have to go changing input sources to be able to do it. I nice windows system ala PiP without choosing the source, or even a way to control the transparency of the browser and plop it over whatever you have actually on TV would be great. To do this is has to be integrated in the TV, not as an add on box.
Saw the WebTV tag, do we really want to go back to mid-90s?
WebTV was a great way for the technologically impaired to join the internet, for only $10/month to Microsoft through blazing fast dial-up.
At least as Internet was defined back then, chat rooms for only the people on your service provider and wonderful text only pages. Search only yielded companies paying to list
Made Geocities look professional in comparison.
OT, but it seems like the paid search is what M$ is trying with Bing. Yeah, they are re-creating the bygone days of Prodigy, Compuserve, and AOL (Service provider, pre-TW merger).
Why not a computer with tv reception already?
factor 966971: 966971
I actually greatly prefer watching video in a TV-like environment - somewhat back from the screen, able to sit on something comfy and relaxing, maybe with other people. I spend most of my time on the computer, but I really prefer that it be a somewhat differentiated and more social activity to watch video.
I have a 48" big screen TV.
I do not have Cable
I do not have Satellite/Dish/DirectTV
I do not have a DVD player
I do not have decent OTA reception
I do have DSL
I do have Netflix
I do have Boxee
Pretty much the only thing that happens on my TV is the Internet. Now if the folks behind Boxee could improve the playback performance I would use nothing else. But as is I still jump out to a web browser for most Hulu content.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
Think of it as having an Apple TV... and I think you'll see there's something of a market there.
AppleTV? Yes I think that was his point about the lack of market :)
You know that Google will tracking normal TV watching too so they will be able provide ratings for web and broadcast viewing. Wonder if Nielsen is shaking in their boots yet?
TV will need to evolve to include the internet in order to accommodate market changes. If TV can become a networked experience it will (along with smart phones) easily render a computer unnecessary in most households. Most people don't really want the wild and woolly, wide-open internet, nor do they want to use a keyboard and mouse -- they want a pre-masticated experience delivered through an appliance controlled with an idiot-proof remote.
Caveat Utilitor
Seriously, I have a computer to do that. It's a laptop. I just put it away when I'm done with it. I don't interrupt the viewing of everyone else in my household. I don't want a lot of applications either. Computers run them well enough.
Streaming TV, and possibly youtube might work, but we don't need anything as sophisticated or complicated as a general purpose computer for those.
The article is talking about "Internet on TV" in the sense of accessing webpages or applications on a TV, which for the most part doesn't seem to be taking off anytime soon.
Things like Hulu are "TV on Internet" - so putting that on a TV is "TV (on Internet) on TV", so it's hardly surprising that that might have more of a market. It's pretty obvious that TV via the Internet ought to win long term, and there's a market for a TV/box that makes this easy for the living room TV, rather than just watching it on a web browser on a computer. (Similar to how hard disk recording first appeared on computers, but now it's commonplace on cable/satellite set-top boxes as standard, which makes it much easier for most people.) Perhaps this is Google's end intention, and things like browsing the web or running applications are an added bonus.
That you can plug a PC into a TV also?
HUH?
I can build your mom a HTPC for $250.00 RIGHT NOW that can do HD.
XBMC + ASUS ION based nettop + Mediacenter remote. All done. That is dirt cheap for what you get plus it's more stable than Windows7media center. and 100% open. you can configure it easily to grab all of mommies video podcasts. If mom wants to broadcast her viewing habits then use Boxee instead.
Very easy, plug and play. really stable and pretty much virus proof so you dont have to babysit it.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
I have an HTPC and watch internet television services (hulu and netflix, primarily) all the time.
As do I. My point is that things like Hulu and Netflix are ALL that I use it for. Do you browse the Internet on y our TV/ Because that is what this article is talking about.
Living With a Nerd
The statement above becomes even more true across regional markets... Let's just make sure everything runs HTML 5 and we'll be fine, right?
"It's a doughnut stuffed with M&M's. That way when you finish the doughnut, you don't have to eat any M&M's."
My Samsung BR player plays YouTube, Pandora, Netflix, and Blockbuster on Demand. It was under $100 new. It even has a couple USB ports which I understand that in other countries software can play Divx.
If it had Hulu it would be perfect, so for now we hook up the laptop to the TV when needed.
I don't need the internet on my TV, just a few web based services like those listed. With the Wii getting Netflix this summer, all we'd need it to do is support a little more recent flash to be comparable. These types of boxes shouldn't be any surprise as they are the next set top device.
Apple TV proves there's not a large market for an expensive set-top box designed only to facilitate credit card transactions. Google is more likely to use the traditional paid-for-by-ad-revenue, plus of course datamining. The market is nearly unlimited for the right device at the right price point.
Caveat Utilitor
Sign me the hell up for Dollhouse. I'll pay a regular fee for that show.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Are you sure you are not confusing "internet" with "web browser"?
TV will need to evolve to include the internet in order to accommodate market changes. If TV can become a networked experience it will (along with smart phones) easily render a computer unnecessary in most households
Eh...I don't know about that. I can follow your logic and can understand how you came to that conclusion, but I'm still not sold.
Most people don't really want the wild and woolly, wide-open internet, nor do they want to use a keyboard and mouse -- they want a pre-masticated experience delivered through an appliance controlled with an idiot-proof remote.
Which is why the iPad will sell quite well :p
(And yes, Apple fans, I know you can access the "whole" Internet with an iPad...I was just being a smartass.)
Living With a Nerd
I think i have seen this gizmo already :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AyVh1_vWYQ
To sum it up: It never ends this s**t...
We're seriously doing this again? Aside from video services like YouTube, Hulu, Netflix, etc, haven't we learned that Internet on our TV is kind of...lame?
That was my first thought, too -- I remembered the bad old days of having to design web pages to accommodate WebTV. But the vital difference between now and then is HDTV. The newer televisions actually have the resolution to do a decent job of displaying web pages. Add a Wii-style controller for positioning the pointer, and it might actually be usable.
Mind you, *I* won't be one of their customers -- I don't even have a TV. But I suspect that there might actually be a market for this.
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
so no HD then? at least not worth watching HD.
3D movies again? Really? didn't that trend die out in 1955?
Touch screen displays? Really? Those sucked in the early 1990s when they were all the rage.
"cloud computing?" Oh brother... didn't we ditch the mainframe/terminal model in the 80s/90s?
World of Warcraft? yeah, I remember when it was called everquest and it sucked, nobody wants an MMO
Remember 1996 when FPS games got boring and old... why do we need Modern Warfare 2, nobody is gonna play it.
(hint, there is nothing new, just better executions of old ideas.) Sometimes it takes balls to go after something that was stigmatized beyond feasibility due to early missteps.
My Windows 7 Media Center box does awesome things:
It's a NAS storage device,
A virtual server host (VirtualBox) that currently runs my personal TurnKey MediaWiki,
A backup device,
A frontend for windows 7 media center in my livingroom that hooks up to Boxee, Hulu, game emulators, and all of my stored media in an amazing interface,
Runs drivers for a wireless xbox 360 controller that works with my video game emulators, and PC games,
etc, etc, etc.
All for cheaper than a PS3.
>>>Internet + TV just seems like a waste of time and money...would anyone be interested in what they are offering here?
My parents would be... or anyone else who doesn't know how to use a computer, but would like to watch videos on youtube or hulu.com. Or go to government websites to look-up information. PLUS this won't be as a bad as the old WebTV which was limited to NTSC connections (approximately 440x480 resolution) with analog blur.
People today have ATSC sets that can show 1280x1080 or higher, and with the crystal clarity of a VGA/digital screen.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
In fact.....
http://lifehacker.com/5391308/build-a-silent-standalone-xbmc-media-center-on-the-cheap
For a step by step guide.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
We're seriously doing this again? Aside from video services like YouTube, Hulu, Netflix, etc, haven't we learned that Internet on our TV is kind of...lame? Most of us have at least one computer nowadays, and many people have at least a netbook or laptop if they don't have a desktop computer. Internet + TV just seems like a waste of time and money...would anyone be interested in what they are offering here?
People use their computers / TVs differently than you do. Most of my friends aren't tech people, and they want basic internet on their TVs. These people would never buy a computer just for their TV. Some TVs have caller-ID on them. I think "What a ridiculous feature", but the people who have it, love it.
Don't you mean "because of services like YouTube, Hulu, Netflix, etc. haven't we learned that Internet on our TV is kind of lame?" (Ok, I haven't actually seen what Netflix looks like, but Hulu and Youtube utterly and completely suck beyond belief.) The only place I want to "stream" video from, is the file server / mythbackend on my own LAN. Nobody (currently) can stream video even roughly approximating the video that I either
Streaming internet video sucks, and is a great example of a retarded tech where people took a step the days before the invention of the VCR, and then pretend it's cool and modern.
Realtime: lame quality and inefficient too. Letting things take as long as they need regardless of however much bandwidth you have (downloading) and multicast (OTA TV), both time-shifted: awesome. If anyone ever wonders, "Why is Hulu such a let down?" there's your answer: think about the technology.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Apple already has a platform. Now they need to execute.
Because:
- nobody likes to wait for startup and miss the first minutes of their favorite show (convenience)
- complicated to use (for non slashdotters)
- cooling a pc is noisy, ruining the movie expirience (quality)
- most computers don't fit into the normal TV settup (design)
- a full pc is overkill in almost any case (cost)
- system updates / blue screen of death / kernel panic
- MAFIAA
If you just want to watch TV on your pc instead of using it as a full replacement, well you can allways buy a card / usb device for that.
There is no reason to Include the cost of a TV card in a computer when most people own a sepparate TV, especially when you already require two different devices.
After all computers and TVs are most often used in different locations.
Note: I am aware that you can remove the first three points by raising the cost.
I know many will hate me for this, but if it supports Flash, and they could get joystick support put into Flash, I would be all over it. The amount of free and legal games that my son plays that are Flash is huge.
And google will mine whatever you watch
I thought the GTV idea sounded horrendous, but after reading this I can see the appeal. Sign me up!
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Microsoft apparently claimed the WebTV branding why not have an offering by Google? It appears that from now on what Google does Microsoft will do and vice-versa.
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once
We're seriously doing this again? Aside from video services like YouTube, Hulu, Netflix, etc...
So - aside from video services that do rather well - haven't we learned its lame to do something that works?
It always works out that either
A) Your CableCo will offer you TV, landline, and internet through your Coax
B) Your Telco will offer you TV, landline, and internet, all through DSL!
So if the services are already digitally compatible, I don't see why we DON'T go this route. I'd much prefer my TV to be a networked device in my home - that way I can just pull up stuff off of a server, or plug in a flash drive, or an MP3 Player, yada yada yada.
Whats the downside? If you bring up Bandwidth, I'll remind you about how Google is in on this, and they are starting to offer Gigabit connections.
I actually greatly prefer watching video in a TV-like environment - somewhat back from the screen, able to sit on something comfy and relaxing
Given a good enough projector, I'd like to use my computer in the same way. The keynote speaker at Eurographics 2005 (I think, possibly 2004) talked a bit about his office setup. He had two 1600x1200 projectors and used a wireless keyboard and mouse from a comfortable chair in the middle of the room. The setup costs were pretty large and so were the electricity costs, but with cheap laser / LED projectors hitting the market this seems like a good direction.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Which is more money than my mother will be spending on anything television related, and far more than a set top box would have to be.
Perhaps we are argueing the same thing :)
IMO the only distinction between TV and a monitor at this point is the tuner. I do check e-mail on the HTPC, and sometimes even read the news or do some work, though I doubt this is a market to tap. I didn't read TFA until now, and thought the device was more of a boxee gateway for the tech impaired.
Correct its now a Battlegound!
The Apple/Google war is officially on now.
not a bad idea.. though with projectors i'd worry about adequate color and contrast
> TV will need to evolve to include the internet
A "modern television" is a flatscreen monitor hooked up to an ATSC tuner (OTA) and a QAM tuner (cable).
A "modern personal computer" is a flatscreen monitor hooked up to a box with CPU, audio, video, keyboard, etc.
Run some cable from your your computer audio+video outputs to the TV's inputs (the same ones you use for DVD, BluRay, etc). You've now "evolved" your TV to include the internet. What's so difficult about it?
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
different one though:
this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfa_Romeo_GTV_%26_Spider Preferably a 3.0 v6
People, what a bunch of bastards
On the plus side that A4 powered Apple TV built on the iPhone OS sold at almost no margin code named "Frak Google" will be pretty cool.
PS Palm, Nokia, MS you might want to step back from the mobile phone market. If you get caught in this crossfire you'll be dead in seconds.
And when Microsoft wanted to do this, everyone cried foul. Now that Google wants to do this, it must be good, because they're not Evil(tm).
No thank you. I want a future not dominated by one company bent on tracking and selling me.
It'd better be cheaper than a separate TV and PCH then, and even then I can't imagine why someone would want to couple these two into a signle device. Both streams of technology are advancing pretty quickly, far better to decouple the devices so that they can be independently upgraded (not to mention portability, I love the fact that I can grab my PCH when I head off to my parents for a few days and take all my media with me in one bag, couldn't do that if it was integrated into a 42"+ TV screen). Having said that, for Joe Public who just wants a plug and play device there might be some appeal.
Acer Revo FTW!
Sure its not a power house, but it plays media from the basement server great, it plays Shoutcast radio streams great, my TVtorrents.com account gets a'lot of upload time, and the kids are playing PBSkids.org on it right now. With HDMI and fiber optic audio, it plugs into my LCD TV and amplifier and the VESA mount hangs it off the back of the TV out of site and mind.
If the Google TV can fill all these needs without breaking the bank, I think it will be a hit.
I can already do this by plugging in my phone, my netbook/laptop, not to mention my popcorn hour, why do I need yet another set top box to stream internet video?
Android runs fine on Arm and something like the Beagle Board can decode HD fine, has lower power consumption and costs less per chip. I wonder why they would choose to go with a higher cost higher power consumption chip.
"If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
First, it was lobbying for unlicenced devices to transmit on TV frequencies ("white spaces"), and then it was outright lobbying to shut down OTA altogether. I happen to be fortunate, living in greater Toronto, 6th-storey condo, clear SSE view. An indoor antenna gets me all of the Toronto digitals and most of the Buffalo digitals. That includes high-def... free... and legal.
Google knows they can't charge for Youtube as long as there is high def free-TV OTA. So they're lobbying to shut down OTA television altogether, so that streaming internet video will become the only game in town. Talk about conflict of interest. I repeat; Google is evil.
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
I can't wait for my local cable co branded google TV full of content pages that say "this content is not available in your country"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freebox
But most people agree that browsing the web on your TV is less useful than having the TV through VLC.
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
And that 640K is still more than enough, huh?
Sony is also fading in the TV department. Disc players and LCD TVs of good are available from a lot of cheaper vendors and choosing Sony no longer makes as much sense as it might have even 5 years ago.
Sony has to start doing something to remain relevant.
Although with or without Sony's involvement you can bet that this isn't some open system box you can just remote into and download unencrypted video from.
If I were able to play Robot Unicorn Attack on it, I'd be all over it too :P
"True refinement seeks simplicity."
Well maybe it would be better?
I mean... I don't know, what kind of an answer do you want? Evidently you have a set top box, so your question strikes me a little like saying, "Why is Toyota offering cars? I already have a car, and it does everything I need a car to do." Well... great. You're all set then.
Apple will sue Logitech next.
There's something that's changed since the initial set-top boxes: CRTs have been replaced. Browsing the 'nets on a 30" 480i CRT was godawful. Now, the same money will get you at least a 40" 720p LCD. Less eyestrain, clearer display, higher resolution, larger overall size.
For the average consumer, idiot. Reading the whole post before hitting "reply" -- what's so hard about that?
We'll see. Google has been entirely focused on cloud and streaming services, not leveraging local content, so we'll see just how capable this thing will be for managing your own media library in standard formats and integrating with various devices on your network. I'm betting on a complete market failure here, personally, possibly even making the AppleTV look successful by comparison.
"I like systems, their application excepted", George Sand (French)
You still have to overcome the fact that the user is sitting ten feet away from the screen, and using an extremely basic and imprecise input device. Besides going to Hulu.com, or hopefully even more cohesive set-and-forget streaming video services, access to the web brings little value to your TV set. This is a domain where native device-specific apps, even if they were to be built using web APIs, would bring significantly more value than access to the www.
"I like systems, their application excepted", George Sand (French)
i want, i want my g-t-v !!
Read radical news here
Don't equate "internet on TV" to "browse the Web on TV"... "Internet on TV" is more like various services provided via internet and delivered via the TV.
Keep it on (standby).
My mom/dad/brother/non-tecchie room mate knows how to use VLC and MPlayer, and Youtube.
Choose one that makes no noise. My Mac Mini is pretty quiet.
Mine fits in as well as my XBox 360 does along side my stereo equipment (doesn't really fit but could look worse)
Agreed. Apple TV or equivalent would be better suited.
I have an uptime of over a year. No kernel panics. If all you're doing is playing music and video, not plugging in random hardware or fiddling with settings, you're unlikely to have these problems.
???
I don't even want to watch TV on my TV. I have it for using with the computer and XBox, because buying a monitor that's bigger than 50" was kind of expensive. More so than an 1080p TV when I was shopping for it.
Follow me
I call shenanigans.
TFA says, with emphasis on the F, that such offerings exist, but are quite limited and Google will open it all up.
Uh huh. Yeah. How about this - http://connectedtv.yahoo.com/
They're called Yahoo! Widgets, they're available now on TVs and BD players from Samsung, Song, LG and Vizio - read that as Samsung and Vizio already owning over 40% of the North American LCD HDTV market already. (Sony, naturally, markets them as Bravia Widgets.)
I've got 'em on my Sammy TV - YouTube, Weather, eBay, Finance, Yahoo Video, free cartoons, Flicker, Twitter - yadda yadda yadda.
OOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHH - bit news - based on Android.
Bigger news: Yahoo! Widgets look suspiciously the same as my Mac Dashboard Widgets - and how many of those are there? And so what codebase do you think they're based on when they look like Apple Widgets, not Yahoo's other web widgets?
How about the fact that with a Sammy TV, for example, you go into your profile, copy down your Yahoo developer ID *from* the TV, go to Yahoo, enter it, and bypass the whole SDK/setup/rigamarole? How about the fact that TVs supporting this already let you sandbox your widget before releasing it?
Not only is there nothing to see here - it's uneven, biased, slanted reporting without a shred of research into a successfully competing - or should I say, pioneering, product.
And if you own a Panasonic with connectivity, you're already using Viera widgets - those are quite rich and are independently developed.
TFA - emphasis on fucking - makes this sound like a breakthrough.
That happened in January 2009. Assholes.
Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
> For the average consumer, idiot. Reading the whole post
> before hitting "reply" -- what's so hard about that?
A) when I get a computer from Dell, I have to hook up cables from the monitor to the video out and from the speakers to the audio out. Does the average consumer call in Geek Squad to make a house call and set up their computer? A monitor is a monitor is a monitor.
B) what about DVD and BluRay players? Again, most consumers hook up their own. You're talking about the same level of complaxity hooking up a player to a TV as hooking up a PC to a TV.
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
Correct its now a Battlegound!
The Apple/Google war is officially on now.
It's on like Donkey Kong.