Slashdot Mirror


Google TV Next Month, Boxee In November

itwbennett writes "In a WSJ interview, Intel CEO Paul Otellini said that 'Google TV starts shipping this month.' Although, as blogger Peter Smith notes, 'Exactly which devices he means isn't clear. Sony TVs and the Logitech Revue will be the first out so if he is referring to a finished consumer project, he's referring to one or the other of those, but as CNET points out, he might be referring to product shipping to retail rather than being on sale to consumers this month. Either way, it looks like you'll be able to have Google TV in your living room by sometime in October at the latest.' What, if anything does this mean for the Boxee Box, which is still due in November? 'If Google is out there first, and puts marketing muscle behind Google TV (and of course they're including it built into some televisions) it might be hard for Boxee to find its niche,' says Smith. 'Particularly with that bizarre form factor that won't fit anywhere.'"

13 of 132 comments (clear)

  1. Google as a verb by mathmatt · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why do I have to wait until next month to google "TV"?

  2. Re:I want google TV in my TV by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't want anyone's 'TV stuff' to be IN my TV. I want the option of buying any TV, TV related hardware and TV services I want separately. Bundling seems like a nice feature when it's not available from anyone but when you can only get TV-X with company-Y's TV stuff then the complaints will start streaming in.

    Game console resellers are notorious for screwing customers with 'bundling' and I'd hate to see it end up *inside* the TV hardware so I'm forced to use it if I want that particular product.

  3. XBMC - Now! by luckytroll · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I dont see the point of either of these "services" when we already have a decent and open solution that solves most of the issues I had with "TV" - advertising contaminating my content.

    XBMC with a few plugins (Which is basically what Boxee is) and a well stocked media library from the torrents/usenet gives me all the television I could want, all the web content I can chew - and NO fscking adverts!

    What are Google and Boxee except that, plus advertising put back in? What value can they possibly insert that would make it worth my while to get screaming mad ad annoying ads again? None.

    1. Re:XBMC - Now! by Jon_S · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What are Google and Boxee except that, plus advertising put back in?

      Maybe the fact that they provide content legally as opposed to illegally from torrents/usenet? Debate all you want whether US Copyright laws make sense, but downloading from torrents/usenet is still illegal. Boxee provides a great way to watch TV on my own schedule, and at least currently with much much fewer commercials.

    2. Re:XBMC - Now! by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Informative

      WRONG. Downloading is NOT ILLEGAL. No one has ever been sued for downloading a single thing. You are not breaking copyright laws by downloading.

      Uploading, such as in torrents, is illegal. You are the one breaking copyright because you don't have the right to distribute the work.

      Semantics, yes. But there is a difference.

      I can't wait for the Boxee Box just because it'll be a prepackaged XBMC box. I'm really hoping D-Link is good with releasing the drivers and such.

      SickBeard + SABnzbd + Server in the closet ... It's like having my own Awesome 12.5TB PVR. I'm so far behind on most shows I don't really care if I watch them the night they come out. The automation is amazing. Much better than the manual or RSS only feed I was doing earlier.

    3. Re:XBMC - Now! by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >>>Uploading, such as in torrents, is illegal.

      Okay. Show me a bittorrent client that lets me disable uploading (or sets the upload speed to 0.0 KB/s). Or provide another solution that would make us users legal and untouchable by RIAA/MPAA.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    4. Re:XBMC - Now! by John+Hasler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Downloading is NOT ILLEGAL.

      Downloading creates a copy. If done in the USA without the permission of the copyright owner it infringes the copyright in the downloaded work.

      No one has ever been sued for downloading a single thing.

      True, so far as I know. Suing people who only download is impractical.

      You are not breaking copyright laws by downloading.

      If you do it without the permission of the copyright owner you are infringing her copyright by creating an unauthorized copy.

      Uploading, such as in torrents, is illegal. You are the one breaking copyright because you don't have the right to distribute the work.

      True, and this is where publishers concentrate their efforts for obvious reasons.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  4. Where will I put it? by 605dave · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "'Particularly with that bizarre form factor that won't fit anywhere"

    Bingo. That was my first thought when I saw the shape. It won't fit in anyone's stereo cabinet with the other components.

    --
    Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a difficult battle. - Plato
  5. The end of cable.. by iONiUM · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm pretty happy about this. I think it's time for cable tv (non on-demand) to go away. I also think Netflix is a great way to get movies and tv as you want it. Isn't this how it should be, what you want when you want it?

  6. Thank GOD by mayberry42 · · Score: 5, Funny

    'If Google is out there first, and puts marketing muscle behind Google TV (and of course they're including it built into some televisions) it might be hard for Boxee to find its niche

    See, may people complain about Google being evil corporate overlords, but I say - you go Google! I mean, do you really want to see this on your TV!?

  7. Re:I want google TV in my TV by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I agree. I never buy TVs with built-in VCRs or DVDs, because I like to buy a separate player with the specific features I desire (like the ability to record HD on SVHS tape) (or the ability to play DVDs at 1.4x speed with sound). Same with a DVR or NetTV device.

    I have to wonder how successful these things will be long term?

    In 2009 Comcast, Cox, Time-Warner and other companies met with one another, and agreed to set up a new CATV portal site that would only be accessible to cable customers. Next they laid pressure on Cable Channels by telling them they need to stop providing the programs for free (syfy.com, abcfamily.com, etc), because it was the cable companies that PAID for these programs via subscriber fees and they have first rights to distribution. Virtually all the channels agreed. In 2011 this "cable subscribers only" website will go live and the free net viewing disappears.

    While we've not been paying attention, the cable companies quietly signed deals to lock-up these shows behind their own subscriber website. And what's worse: Because they are government-created monopolies, there's not a damn thing we can do to stop them. We have as little choice as deciding which electric, phone, or natural gas company we want. :-|

    Aside -

    I wonder why Microsoft does not try to revive WebTV? I had one of them in the late 90s, and it was crap because lo-definition analog sets made reading the internet difficult (color blur), but now we have high-definition sets that can produce images as clear as a Super VGA monitor. WebTV could succeed this time.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  8. Another product that is mostly USA-only by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I just viewed their video (www.google.com/tv/) and frankly, it's just a fancy DVR+Web browser box. The so-called online content is via the channel websites which means it's still limited to the USA. You still need, in a way, to have cable or satellite for Google TV to be of any use, otherwise it's just a browser box for your TV (which I don't mind since it's WebKit, meaning it's not yet another weird browser to take into account).

    AppleTV, on the other hand, bypasses the cable and satellite companies (the TV side, anyway) and gives you the opportunity to get only the shows and movies you want. I'm not crazy about the rental pricing, but for some people even at those prices it's cheaper than a monthly bill depending on how many shows you watch.

    But for a lot of people, it's still "option 3", driving around in their Pontiac Torrent to get their content.

    I just wish media companies would stop with this region-locked and country-based contracts nonsense and go with worldwide releases already. They don't need local distribution networks anymore.

  9. I'll pass on google tv by Lysol · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm over all this geek complexity crap. Yah, I used to compile all my own Linux OS stuff in the past (read: *everything* so I could get the most performant, tailored install), but now it's boring and a waste of my time - I could be out enjoying life or compiling my os; hmmm... GTV reminds me of the same thing - nerd solutions for nerds that wanna screw around with stuff. I watched the IO demo live for the GTV announcement and was mortified. Honestly, that killed 'Google as great' for me. Felt like it was Bill Gates and co on stage - it was like an episode of the 10 stooges. I'm not an Apple fanboy, but you gotta hand it to them - less is usually more (cept for iTunes) when they're designing and making products. While everyone else is going super complex, with ATV you get 1 remote control with the minimal amount of buttons to control it. Just like the Google search box - minimal, to the point, excellent results; when engineering at Google was used to hide the complexity.

    What strikes me as odd most nowadays is the sense of awe at Google's sheer 'engineering prowess'. Sure, they've done a kick as job in search, maps, and email - they're still the best in my mind. But it's like they inherited this M$ sorta view of the widest distribution of some whacky complex idea with some sort of specification and then leave it up to everyone else to implement it. This is great for the implementers, but not for the end user. Why? Because Google more and more seems to be not looking at things as a complete product and end users don't have all day to figure complex shit out - they're not some protocol engineers that think things are neat 'just because'.
    Kindle and the iPhone are good examples of how Google is not approaching product design & development. The stupidest thing on the planet - to me - is wanting to watch tv and using a keyboard, trackpad, and remote control to do it. If anything, the tv should be voice controlled or at least controlled by some sort of cool iPad device - something that gives the end user some eye candy/techno lust. Making it into a computer that sits in the living room is a joke and keeps the nerds forever 'teh d0rx'.

    Google's whole 'open' sthick and whats starting to happen with Android (carriers own that now) will probably bleed over into GTV. Set, box, and hardware manufacturers will eventually fill everything up with some sort of ad/crapware. This, I think, is the ultimate destination for Google's corporate vision of 'open'. 'Open' if your a corporate partner, suck if you're an end user (I'm not fooled by their plea that they're open as we developers like to think of 'open'). If you need any proof of this, just look at the various Android devices on AT&T or Verizon that don't allow you to uninstall apps and come preloaded with crapware (just like the whole Windows 'experience').

    Just like WebTV and Wave, I think this one's gonna go down in flames.