Google TV Suffers Setback

An anonymous reader writes "Google TV has now been around long enough for the geeks to play around with it. And they have come back with disappointing reviews. While most were excited at the concept of wedlock between the TV and Internet, the marriage itself looks destined to be challenging."

Comments

Geeky devices

[devxo]

And in other news, Apple TV is selling like hot cakes. It just shows, like always before, that casual people don't really care about the geeky things those devices can offer. The older I get the more I can side with them too - when I was a teenager I had lots of energy and motivation to play around with computers and other technical stuff I had. Then I got a job, a girlfriend, went to travel the world and saw how much you're giving up by spending so much time with that. In the end, it's not really even that interesting.

Now I also just want devices that work great. I don't really have any desire to play around with them, apart from the occasional configuration to make things smoother for me. But there is a limit for that, and I'm not gonna spend hours and days coding something to accomplish it. This is also why general population will never turn to use Linux if something doesn't change, and can you really blame them?

Re:Geeky devices

[Daengbo]

When all the major networks ban your TV product, it's pretty much destined to fail.

Re:Geeky devices

[Flector]

Isn't the simplest idea a cheap hdmi-out computer with a remote keyboard and scroll wheel?

Re:Geeky devices

[theaveng]

Yep. "Google does not support iTunes, and the top video networks such as NBC, CBS, ABC and Hulu have blocked it out."

So basically GoogleTV can't let me view any of the networks I view most often. :-| Rather than spend $250 for this, I'd rather get a DTVpal DVR which pulls television off the air and records it. Then when I come home, I just playback whatever I missed from last night (primetime) or while at work (mostly movies and international programs). ~40 channels free of charge.

Re:Geeky devices

[cyber-vandal]

Its inability to run the software people want to use is what needs to change, nothing else.

Re:Geeky devices

[jimpop]

> When all the major networks ban your TV product, it's pretty much destined to fail. ...sure, if all you ever watch are major network TV shows. BUT, if you really don't care for network TV in your home (i.e. I got to a pub to watch baseball/football), then Google TV might just be right for you. I dumped cable TV in November, and am still loving my Google TV. My favorite apps are Netflix, Youtube (Gadget Show, Fifth Gear, Rocketboom*, Zadi, etc), Revision3, Cartoon Channel, Adult Swim, and Daily Motion. What more in life is there really?

Re:Geeky devices

[Colonel Korn]

And in other news, Apple TV is selling like hot cakes. It just shows, like always before, that casual people don't really care about the geeky things those devices can offer. The older I get the more I can side with them too - when I was a teenager I had lots of energy and motivation to play around with computers and other technical stuff I had. Then I got a job, a girlfriend, went to travel the world and saw how much you're giving up by spending so much time with that. In the end, it's not really even that interesting.

Now I also just want devices that work great. I don't really have any desire to play around with them, apart from the occasional configuration to make things smoother for me. But there is a limit for that, and I'm not gonna spend hours and days coding something to accomplish it. This is also why general population will never turn to use Linux if something doesn't change, and can you really blame them?

Apple TV selling a million times over the course of 4 months sounds very disappointing to me.

Re:Geeky devices

[Anonymous Coward]

At the same time, I'm starting to really realize just how much of the "american dream" traps one into what you describe. I'm 29, divorced, no kids. All of that in part because I was working my ass off to avoid finding myself old and tired. And now I'm 29, only need to work a couple days a month, and have tons of time energy and money to keep learning and improving my mind as my body starts to slow down. Which I think really is the way to go about it.

Re:Geeky devices

[LoudMusic]

That's what I use. Works great. The bits missing from the Google TV stuff is integrating the current TV listing / viewing with internet content. Say you're watching Lost and there's an obvious cameo. You hit pause, get the list of actors for the episode, and load an IMDB page for the person in about 3 seconds. In a non-integrated solution you have to do a lot of extra manual switching and searching to get the data together.

Re:Geeky devices

[Microlith]

Nothing like the growth of apathy as a rationalization for closed, hacker-unfriendly systems!

Re:Geeky devices

[osu-neko]

Isn't the simplest idea a cheap hdmi-out computer with a remote keyboard and scroll wheel?

Geek: Here's a simple idea. ...

Consumer: HDwha? [Consumer wanders off cross-eyed.]

[Consumer seen a half hour later happily leaving the Apple store with an Apple TV in hand.]

Re:Geeky devices

[segedunum]

And in other news, Apple TV is selling like hot cakes

Selling a million devices versus the sum total of TVs sold is actually very disappointing.

Re:Geeky devices

[geekoid]

Except you don't need to play around with it to work. It does what Apple TV does, plays more.

It's just not the global plug to free crap some people want.

And Apples TV s not selling like hot cakes. They've sold a total, since inception, of 1 million units.

Re:Geeky devices

[rolfwind]

And it certainly took Apple more than enough iterations for them to finally hit on a winning formula. I mean, Apple TV has been around since 2006.... although it may be the $99 price point now...

The older I get, however, I don't want devices that just work great. I want less. Of everything. Today, in media overload, I find it a relief to have the TV off (thinking of getting rid of all service altogether and using the screen to watch Redbox, maybe Netflix). I listen to some music, but never the radio. Even Pandora gets on my nerves -- it seems to play the same thing over and over again even if I thumbs up 3 different songs a day, it keeps coming back to my seed. I enjoy media, and while Apple becoming a media empire has pros and cons, I don't want media to encompass my life or be the limit of my experiences.

Re:Geeky devices

[ColdWetDog]

Nothing like the growth of apathy as a rationalization for closed, hacker-unfriendly systems!

Come off it and get out of the basement. On a population basis, the number of people interested in 'hacker friendly, open systems' is a rounding error. THERE IS NO MONEY IN IT. There IS money in simple. There is money in just works.

Re:Geeky devices

[davester666]

> Apple TV selling a million times over the course of 4 months sounds very disappointing to me.

Really? What is your frame of reference for being disappointed?

I would doubt you would say the same thing if Tivo, Boxee, Roku or any other drv/media box company announced a similar number.

And I would be they would all be EXTREMELY pleased to have a number like that for that period of time.

Re:Geeky devices

[ghjm]

Personally, I just turn to my wife and say, "Honey, who's that guy?"

Re:Geeky devices

[beakerMeep]

When all the major networks ban a TV product I would think an anti-competitive FTC investigation should be something worth looking into. Basically they banned a browser with a specific user agent string based on the company that provides the device. Can you imagine if all the networks decided to ban Dell computers but not HP?

Re:Geeky devices

[Anonymous Coward]

No, the networks you view most often wont let you view them on GoogleTV. It's a subtle but important distinction.

Re:Geeky devices

[Lunix Nutcase]

There was ever a time when 99% of the population cared that their device was open source and hacker-friendly outside of your mind?

Re:Geeky devices

[Anonymous Coward]

One company selling one million units of something cutting-edge that most of the population still can't grasp in about four months versus dozens of companies selling something as well-understood as televisions over the course of decades.

Yeah, that's a fair comparison.

You win the medal for most stupid Apple hater I've ever seen.

Re:Geeky devices

[Anonymous Coward]

Personally, I just turn to my wife and say, "Honey, who's that guy?"

He meant when watching TV, not when you come home from work early. -rimshot-

Re:Geeky devices

[lp_bugman]

Obviously you have no wife.

Re:Geeky devices

[kriston]

Wow, even the stillborn AOLTV had some integration between TV listings and internet content.

Why do I want a Google TV when I have a TiVo, anyway?

Re:Geeky devices

[The Good Reverend]

I dunno about that. Roku's super simple to set up and use (it "just works"), but has an open SDK and a fantastic (open) private channel system for those interested in doing more. It's the best of both worlds (plus very inexpensive as well).

Re:Geeky devices

[jimpop]

....as well as complete control of the TV remote. ;-)

Re:Geeky devices

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah but if you had an integrated internet tv appliance you'd still have it in a few years along with half your stuff.

Re:Geeky devices

[Anonymous Coward]

The Apple TV is NOT a DVR. A DVR requires cable or satellite. The Apple TV is about cutting your dependency on cable and satellite providers for getting your TV shows and movies. With iTunes you pick the ONLY shows you want, no need to drag a whole network in your subscription. Their pricing, however, needs some work.

TiVo is a USA-only box, completely unknown to most people in other countries.

So no, the concept of the Apple TV is not well understood, you just proved it yourself.

Re:Geeky devices

[Seumas]

The problem is that it seems like everyone is trying to stuff more internet in my television, when what I really want is more television in my internet. There is a difference.

Re:Geeky devices

[sexconker]

Isn't the simplest idea a cheap hdmi-out computer with a remote keyboard and scroll wheel?

You mean the very thing I've been doing for over a decade (sans HDMI, until it was available)? How is anyone supposed to sell that? And you mean people are using their OLD computers for this task? They're not buying new hardware? And it's compatible with everything? And they can already access the FULL internet with whatever browser they CHOOSE? And they can multitask? Share files over a network? They can fucking COPY discs with the included DVD/CD burner? They can strip out the ads? They can normalize the volume? They can completely bypass or menus and waste-of-time interfaces? And the subscription cost is ZERO?!

If people spent half an hour thinking, dusting off their old PC, and hooking up cables, they'd be GODS of their media.

But no - they choose to restrict themselves, let themselves get fucked by the media corporations, endure ads, use hardware that's tiny and shiny but functionally deficient, etc. And they pay for the privilege.

They get excited at the prospect of "apps for my TV!".
Fuck them. "Apps" are what you get at Chili's. (I recommend the sampler or the Texas Cheese Fries.) Software. Programs. Perhaps even applications. Not "apps".

They see a commercial and genuinely feel the excitement of the fake dad who says "Look son, you're on the big screen now, boy!".
Fuck them again. I've told those idiots a billion times how computers are useful things. They have a cable box outputting over coax through 2 daisy-chained VCRs. Yet only when faced with the prospect of computer + t do they go "Uh... why?". They fail to see any potential. It takes a fucking marketing term to get their dumb assed to figure out that computers are useful, TVs are accessible, and that the two might be able to cooperate. Those fucks figured out applesauce and pork chops without a problem. But somehow computer + tv only results in blank stares.

Re:Geeky devices

[Flytrap]

Apple TV 2 was launched in October 2010 http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Desktops-and-Notebooks/Apple-TV-Sells-1-Million-Units-297554/. That is less than 3 months ago. By comparison, Roku, an arguably superior offering, is yet to reach its 1 millionth sale (across all models), after 2 years!

Most news articles comenting on the 1 million units milestone have made a point of comparing it to the 74 days it took for the original iPhone to reach the same milestone. That is a phenominal achievement by anyone's yard stick. However, I doubt that the Apple TV will follow the same trajectory as the iPhone.

Looking forward, even Roku CEO, Anthony Wood, acknowledges that Apple TV will only become even more compelling as he expects Apple to launch an App Store for Apple TV, which would bring along many more content sources, more games, and more attention to the Apple TV http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2010/12/20/businessinsider-roku-2010-12.DTL

Re:Geeky devices

[node 3]

Does knowing this "subtle but important" distinction somehow make the unavailable networks available? Because if it doesn't, I don't see how it's particularly important here.

Re:Geeky devices

[vgerclover]

There is no reason for it to not be both.

Re:Geeky devices

[Ben Newman]

First this is an attempt to become the defacto platform for Internet enabled tv, So you'll have set top boxes, televisions with integrated functionality, dvrs with it built in, blu-ray players, etc. The "Google TV Box" is to Google TV what the Nexus One is to Android.

Second, I think their strategy is just like every other Google product out there. They are going to enter the market early with a so-so product and then just iterate the hell out of it. So this version might not be all that great, but in 2 years when they've gone through 8 upgrades its going to be much better. Android, Chrome, Docs, even their search engine followed this exact strategy. This is how they've always done business. I'm not saying they're going to succeed here, its a tricky market and a product that doesn't have a a quick answer to the "What problem does it solve" question, but knowing Google I wouldn't count them out on a review of a v1.0 product.

Re:Geeky devices

[Flytrap]

From Apple's web site (http://www.apple.com/hotnews/):
Apple today announced that it expects sales of its new Apple TV to top one million units later this week. The new Apple TV offers the simplest way to watch your favorite HD movies and TV shows and stream content from Netflix, YouTube, Flickr, and MobileMe — all on your HD TV, for the breakthrough price of just $99. iTunes users are now renting and purchasing over 400,000 TV episodes and over 150,000 movies per day. the emphasis is mine

It may have taken Apple a while to get to this formula... but that still trumps Microsoft which is still advocating an HTPC in the living room or using an expensive gaming console as a media server and Intel and Google who are advocating putting an embeded computer inside the TV (whether it be Android or Meabo powered) and then using a keyboard and track pad/ball to navigate one's TV [yish]

Re:Geeky devices

[the cdrive]

Actually, a DVR requires a source. Cable and Satellite are sources, as is Over The Air Broadcast. My Windows 7 box serves as my DVR and media center with OTA Broadcast just fine.

Re:Geeky devices

[RocketRabbit]

This is analogous to buying an HD FM radio and complaining that it can not receive shortwave signals.

There's no reason to appeal to the government. Just get a device that receives the media streams you want.

Re:Geeky devices

[Anonymous Coward]

You're right that OTA is a source, however not everyone has access to OTA. Count yourself lucky.

Re:Geeky devices

[Anonymous Coward]

You're wondering why people think Google is dangerous?

Re:Geeky devices

[MMerc]

I myself have went through the same transition with the same conclusions and wholeheartedly agree with what you said. My hope is that at least one person gets the message, because I can guarantee their life will be for the better.

Re:Geeky devices

[tepples]

sure, if all you ever watch are major network TV shows.

In order to know what everyone else is talking about around the water cooler...

I got to a pub to watch baseball/football

Due to alcohol control laws in the United States, students don't have that option unless they're college seniors.

Re:Geeky devices

[Overzeetop]

It can't be both. Anything configurable and hacker friendly enough to make geeks happy will (a) be he opposite of what major content creators and distributors want and (b) likely to get accidentally screwed up by a clueless user.

One of the reasons Apple products fare well is because there are almost no settings to change. Without that expectation, if it doesn't do something automatically, people assume it won't do it at all and will live with it as is. There's a lot of CS dollars saved with that model. Supporting something that has a complex user interface available to the enduser is just asking for a support nightmare.

Re:Geeky devices

[ZombieBraintrust]

1) They didn't target Google only though. They also banned Boxee, PS3, Wii, mobile browsers on phones, IPad, and the Kylo browser. This could be seen from miles away. It strange that Google thought they would be treated differently. 2) The networks don't have a choice. They sold away the TV and mobile phone rights years ago. That why Hulu Plus cost extra. They have to charge you the same as they charge the cable companies.

Re:Geeky devices

[jimpop]

> Due to alcohol control laws in the United States,
> students don't have that option unless they're
> college seniors.

Good point. I personally believe that if you are in college, or the armed services, you should be able to legally drink. Old enough to vote, old enough to puke. ;-)

Re:Geeky devices

[jedidiah]

> that casual people don't really care about the geeky things those devices can offer

Yeah. "Geeky" things like playing your own videos.

A device that "just works" is something that doesn't force you to futz with Handbrake.

Just point your girlfriend/wife to the local media server and let her drag & drop stuff on it as she finds it.

Re:Geeky devices

[jedidiah]

It does if you can spoof the identity of the box.

That's kind of the point.

If the Dinosaur Networks don't know that you are using a Google Appliance, they don't know to block you.

This is a bit different than say the total lack of a Netflix client for Linux.

Re:Geeky devices

[jedidiah]

It would not be the first time that an inferior offering sold more units due to a number of factors besides actual product quality (including marketing).

One could point out the whole Macintosh vs MS-DOS paradox if one were so inclined.

Re:Geeky devices

[jedidiah]

Hacker friendly devices lead to other side effects that apathetic consumers actually care about even if they are not directly aware of any notion of "open-ness".

Re:Geeky devices

[elashish14]

Great. Thanks for letting us know that you've succumbed to the notion that the world revolves around nothing but money. I haven't stooped to that level yet, and I hope I never do, but let me at least say this: no matter how great your product may be, there's never any justification for closing it off in order to prevent your customers for actually harnessing it to its full potential. Just because it doesn't harm _you_ doesn't mean it's okay to support it when its limiting the potential of real users who want to to use it for what its worth, not for what some executive thinks its worth.

Re:Geeky devices

[breagerey]

not *total lack ... just *available lack

http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/roku%E2%80%94breaking-linux-not-invited-rule

Re:Geeky devices

[GameboyRMH]

Bad analogy, there is no technical reason the Google TV can't receive these channels (AFAIK)

Re:Geeky devices

[aesiamun]

I'd like to see how you spoof the adobe flash client that is on android. That's what is stopping this from working, not the browser string.

Re:Geeky devices

[GameboyRMH]

Pretty soon anything other than buying a trinket from an official app/media store is going to be considered "geeky hacker stuff"...in fact for certain devices we may already be at that point.

Re:Geeky devices

[Anonymous Coward]

AMEN

Re:Geeky devices

[Anonymous Coward]

5 years and Google will have min 3 OTA HD TV stations in every one of our markets somehow, that somehow will be Great, and all Great shows will play only on this Great new network,

Colleges will have Google Bowls in a January Time frame every year very close to the beginning of the new year

ya it will be Great

skynet

Re:Geeky devices

[Narcogen]

Why on God's green earth is "apps" an acceptable abbreviation for "appetizer" but not for "applications"? I've heard and used the latter far earlier and far more often than the former.

Re:Geeky devices

[The End Of Days]

You want people to supply you with the things that you want out of the goodness of their heart? What utopia do you imagine that happens in?

Re:Geeky devices

[indiechild]

It's 1 million units of the new Apple TV. If you count the older generation, it's way more than that. Don't let facts get in the way of your rant though.

Re:Geeky devices

[Anonymous Coward]

MOD PARENT UP

Re:Geeky devices

[rtb61]

Google TV goes no where. At minimum stackable external hard disk and dvd drives, for ripping and media serving. More useful software like firewall and internet serving. While they are at it why not an IPv6 mail and web server. They basically went nowhere with it. The apple product is of course just another outlet for limited licence content with a low entry price to trap the unwary.

The idiot box is so last century, to kick it into this century it becomes nothing but a display for home media centre that should link all the other digital devices in the home and server content from where and when ever it is sourced. Can not get channels, pfft, better to provide ISP localised and secured restricted torrents for friends to access each other libraries, of course only one at time.

For live there is always time shifted free to air or thousands of streams from all over the web.

Re:Geeky devices

[eharvill]

Due to alcohol control laws in the United States, students don't have that option unless they're college seniors.

I suppose that depends on how you define a "pub" or "bar". Most "bars" (in the US) that restrict entry to 21 and up aren't ideal places to watch a sports game anyway (1 or 2 small TVs placed in bad viewing areas). Most "sports bars" I am aware of have no age restrictions and have dozens (depending on size of establishment) of TVs scattered throughout. Heck, most chain restaurants have plenty of TVs in their bar areas and no age restrictions. I am not sure where you are getting your information from.

Re:Geeky devices

[Hijacked Public]

i'm running Linux!

Re:Geeky devices

[dr.newton]

It can't be both.

OS X.

Re:Geeky devices

[Anonymous Coward]

Seconded.

Re:Geeky devices

[Anonymous Coward]

And there's the other side of net neutrality, providers discriminating based on delivery method. If the content provider is willing to send content to a particular carrier, neither the provider nor the carrier should have any say in how the consumer chooses to have that content delivered once it's on their private network.

Re:Geeky devices

[dzfoo]

There's a difference between Android et al and Google TV, mainly that the formers were "so-so" products introduced into existing markets; while it is still not clear whether searching and browsing the web from your couch is even a good idea. My guess is that it is not. It seems like people want their TV to passively watch professionally produced movies, shows, and sports. The web is an interesting diversion, but most people just like to sit there and turn off their brains when watching TV.

Google really want this to work, for their entire business model depends on web advertising. However, it may come to pass that, just like 3-D TV and Video Conferencing, the web on TV is just an interesting solution in search of a problem; and not the "killer app" everybody expects it to be.

          -dZ.

Re:Geeky devices

[dzfoo]

Well, most people saw the original Apple TV (if they noticed it at all) and said, "meh, another DVR; and an expensive one at that!"

On the other hand, Google is basically been laughed out of the floor by the tech media and the non-believers.

        -dZ.

Re:Geeky devices

[bonch]

I guess we'll just have to live without another Google-branded device in our lives among the Google phones, Google web browsers, Google search engines, Google email, Google documents, and other cynical technologies that only exist to get users' personal content indexed for advertisers.

Re:Geeky devices

[sexconker]

Protip: It's not an acceptable abbreviation for anything.

Also, whoosh.

Re:Geeky devices

[Anonymous Coward]

This is about right. Someone convinced my neighbor to buy an AppleTV and the guy (supposedly tech literate) didn't even know what HDMI was. I'm interested in seeing how they hook the device up.

Re:Geeky devices

[RocketRabbit]

Sure there is - it has a poor user agent string.

Folks talk about...

[forkfail]

... "the concept of wedlock between the TV and Internet" as though it was a new thing.

Yet obtrusive, annoying and unblockable popup ads started showing up during display of the main content years ago...

Why a STB?

[doroshjt]

Is a search appliance for video that complex that they need a STB for it? Running as a stand alone application that you can put on a HTPC would be much more useful to me.

Re:Why a STB?

[DragonWriter]

Is a search appliance for video that complex that they need a STB for it? Running as a stand alone application that you can put on a HTPC would be much more useful to me.

STBs that do one thing and require minimal management are more accessible to the general market than an application that needs to run on an HTPC, which is idea that hasn't taken off with non-geeks as much as it once seemed it might.

Re:Why a STB?

[RalphTheWonderLlama]

I'm guessing it's cheaper than an HTPC :)

Re:Why a STB?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is a search appliance for video that complex that they need a STB for it? Running as a stand alone application that you can put on a HTPC would be much more useful to me.

What the hell is a 'Hot-Top PC'?

Re:Why a STB?

[Anonymous Coward]

> I'm guessing it's cheaper than an HTPC :)

Hmm, doesn't really seem like it. The TFA says $300-400 for the STB. My HTPC cost me right around $300 a few years ago including a nice HTPC style case. So the price is about the same.

Of course, I had to actually order my own parts and bolt them together, which took time, maybe an hour. The STB comes "pre-assembled", so will be easier for most people. But to balance that it's less flexible than my HTPC is.

Re:Why a STB?

[tepples]

Google HTPC, first result: Home theater PC on Wikipedia. In essence, a home theater PC is a personal computer connected to a television monitor, which is used to play videos and may be used to play video games.

Summary = Article 1st Paragraph

[slshwtw]

For those that have the attention span to read either the entire article, or the summary, but not both.

Problem identified...

[Midnight Thunder]

Sounds like they should have release Google TV beta first.

Joking aside, this is probably why Apple is taking such a cautious approach with Apple TV. They realise that there is potential, though it is not clear how it should manifest itself. Playing around with other solutions like XBMC and Plex it feels like there is certainly a future, but it may still be a few years down the road. Maybe devices like the Wii would be better, if it simply offered the missing components like being able to stream from a home media server?

Re:Problem identified...

[defaria]

Huh? There are many solutions for streaming form a home media server not the least of which are Windows Media, things like PS3MediaServer and ushare as well as Playon, Tveristy (not sure about that one), as well as XBMC and Boxee, etc. You don't need a Wii to do it. As for many years down the road, I'm going on my 3rd year of not having cable/sat at all and doing everything from the net. It's not that hard. It's here. It's now already.

Re:Problem identified...

[Nyeerrmm]

Thats not a normal person solution. I have boxee on a home media server, used to do mythtv but I moved out of a place where I had provided cable and without cable it wasn't worth the hassle. Its certainly possible, and its great once its set up, but it requires active maintenance.

My personal desires are for a single, low-power, easy-setup box that can:
- Stream from Netflix
- Stream from Hulu/Hulu Plus (to be legit it probably requires hulu plus)
- Stream from Pandora
- Run local/LAN-shared video and audio with good codec support
- Extensible to help future proof it (i.e. easy to integrate some new streaming service)
Additionally, I'm sure there are those who would appreciate some kind of DVR functionality in it as well.

So far the Boxee Box is supposed to be that, but between the hideous hardware, and the fact that they screwed up the interface and that it doesn't work with Hulu or Netflix anymore., its just not quite there. Maybe the next iteration. The Wii with a few more apps would do a decent job too (although the resolution might annoy some).

Sadly, its impossible to have a good, easy to use solution at this point, not due to technological challenges, (I think Google TV, Apple TV and Boxee all have a lot of potential), but because the content providers are scared to death of us not tuning in 8 eastern/7 central with everyone else. I suppose in time it will turn around, but for now its very frustrating for those of us who dont want to have to hack together 'creative' solutions.

Re:Problem identified...

[Joe Tie.]

It's there for you and me. What seems simple and intuitive for us often isn't for the average person though. I've lived with three people since I first tossed XBMC onto an xbox and went to just streaming. Of those, one person could use it with a cheat sheet I wrote out. And two others just refused to even try and would instead just find me to get their show playing.

Re:Problem identified...

[DogDude]

The PS3 is about 90% of the way there, and it's incredibly simple to use.

Re:Problem identified...

[aztracker1]

Agreed, even on the software front for an HTPC... Media Portal seems to do the best job playing various formats over the network... Boxee is the best for "internet" channels, but needs some tweaking, and I wish I could nuke the "social" aspects.. or at *LEAST* have it backup my added channels (and settings) if I have to login anyhow. For Live recording, it's a tossup, Media Center (Windows) does a good job with this, but outside of TV, I find that there are other options that do everything else better (though I honestly gave up since HD options for WMC were few and far between. I also wanted something like GameEX, but better online handling like Boxee... *sigh* It's not been an irritation enough, that using a combination of software bugs me enough to scratch my own itch in this space, but it is irritating to say the least.

Re:Problem identified...

[lp_bugman]

I switched from mythtv to PS3. Surprisingly it can do almost everything you are listing.
It even supports playing DiX from a network drive.The one thing that bothers me is Hulu does not list all the shows in PS3 compared to a PC.

Re:Problem identified...

[Jason Levine]

Look into the Roku ( http://www.roku.com/ ). It streams Netflix, Hulu Plus and Pandora among others. (Total number of channels is over 100 now, though many of them, though many of them are niche.) They're constantly adding new channels. Thanks to the open SDK, anyone can write a channel (assuming the person knows how to code, of course).

There's no DVR functionality but there is a channel which supposedly streams from media servers on your LAN. (I say "supposedly" because I haven't tested this one out yet.) Plus, at $99, it's quite reasonable.

I have no connection with them beyond being a satisfied Roku user.

Re:Problem identified...

[Glendale2x]

Thats not a normal person solution. I have boxee on a home media server, used to do mythtv but I moved out of a place where I had provided cable and without cable it wasn't worth the hassle. Its certainly possible, and its great once its set up, but it requires active maintenance.

My personal desires are for a single, low-power, easy-setup box that can:
- Stream from Netflix
- Stream from Hulu/Hulu Plus (to be legit it probably requires hulu plus)
- Stream from Pandora

The Roku does all of those, and more (like Amazon video).

- Run local/LAN-shared video and audio with good codec support

Roku has channels that say it will do LAN streaming, but I haven't tried because I don't really care to use it for that.

- Extensible to help future proof it (i.e. easy to integrate some new streaming service)

Roku has an open SDK, assuming you or someone else writes a channel for said new streaming service.

I've had mine since the early days when it was "the Netflix box" and they've released a whole lot of firmware upgrades since then. It was most certainly worth the $99 I spent on it, especially since its functionally continued to increase with each update. The only thing it can't do that the current hardware can is 1080p (mine does 720p).

Re:Problem identified...

[donstenk]

There certainly must be potential, but the end-all device currently is the pc (or mac) for access to web based tv.

We live abroad and use a computer to watch dutch, swedish and Italian TV and a VPN to connect to BBC iPlayer and 4OD. Once you get past the slightly lower quality there is no going back to not-on-demand TV.

If only the new AppleTV would include a browser and Flash / Silverlight... It would be perfect for my purposes.

Re:Problem identified...

[Riceballsan]

true, but without having it hacked, you do have to worry about features randomly being removed in the event that sony gets spooked

Re:Problem identified...

[larry bagina]

That other 10% is "don't sound like an airplane taking off".

Re:Problem identified...

[aesiamun]

Boxee Box will have Netflix and Hulu in the coming weeks. Don't need another iteration, just wait for the software updates to roll out.

Re:Problem identified...

[ciggieposeur]

My solution to all of those was to upgrade my TV to the LG 32LE5400 with a USB wireless stick. Plays Netflix, has many component and HDMI inputs, and plays my videos served from mediatomb.

Re:Problem identified...

[CronoCloud]

Ha ha....It's not that loud...but it's louder than I'd like.

Re:Problem identified...

[Midnight Thunder]

If only the new AppleTV would include a browser and Flash / Silverlight... It would be perfect for my purposes.

The alternative would be for content services to provide the content in non-Flash/Silverlight format, such as MPEG4.

Re:Problem identified...

[Late Adopter]

For some reason, aside from a crappy workaround on the Boxee box, they don't sell a set-top box that does both Netflix and LAN-shared video. There's plenty that does either! It's frustrating... I would kill for a box that does this for $150 or under.

I'm personally waiting for the new Apple TV to be hacked and have custom software written for it to add the LAN functionality. Or for the PS3 to drop to bargain basement prices.

Re:Problem identified...

[Anonymous Coward]

You want two boxes: a Roku (for most of your stuff) and a WD TV Live (for the local network stuff). You can get both for under $200.

why not just a plain old computer?

[Anonymous Coward]

From TFA: "Google, for its part, seems well aware of the problem, having delayed the showcasing of Toshiba, LG Electronics and Sharp TVs using its software,"

Building something like that into your TV seems pretty dumb to me. TVs last a long time - usually a lot longer than either computers or any particular streaming technology. It seems like building ICQ into your TV: it'll be long obsolete while the rest of your TV is perfectly good. Plus, you can no longer upgrade them independently once you build them into the same box.

It seems to me the best approach is just to hook a computer up to your TV. Then the issues from TFA like "the top video networks such as NBC, CBS, ABC and Hulu have blocked it" are not a problem. So what's the story here? Why would anyone want google TV over just a "plain old computer"? It seems less flexible and not supporting as much content.

Re:why not just a plain old computer?

[Maltheus]

My TV gets app updates (netflix, youtube, etc) pushed to it all the time. I'm not worried about obsolescence. They are software, not hardware apps.

Alternate Link

[theaveng]

Since original article refuses to load anything but the Ad.
http://www.google.com/#q=Google+TV+Suffers+Setback

ps3, 360, etc

[smoondog]

the internet has made it to my tv, i get it through my ps3. why would i want another device that basically does the same thing but less of it?

Re:ps3, 360, etc

[timeOday]

Newer TVs don't even need a PS3. I have a Sony Bravia set with support for Netflix and Amazon video streaming (plus about 100 others I've hardly looked at). It's slightly harder than changing the channel, but not hard. I upgraded my Comcast service for no other reason than to get better streaming quality, and am very happy with it. Standard-def looks about equivalent to DVD, and high-def even better. (Neither quite as good as broadcast TV, and I haven't tried Blu-Ray).

I also have a homebrew PVR, although I get sick of fiddling with its instability (e.g. linux drivers for HVR 950 that flake out).

So, I guess I'm wondering why this is hard? It seems like a solved problem, other than getting more and more content providers to sign on.

Re:ps3, 360, etc

[DragonWriter]

the internet has made it to my tv, i get it through my ps3. why would i want another device that basically does the same thing but less of it?

I get internet TV (Netflix, mostly) from my PlayStation. The search function for GoogleTV and its combination of internet-based video and traditional TV in results is a feature that I haven't seen anywhere else. OTOH, it seems from reviews that their are interface (particularly, controller) issues that need polish, and the major networks blocking it because they thought that easy access to their internet-delivered videos on customers TVs would mean losses in advertising sales does reduce the advantage it offers as a convergence device.

Re:ps3, 360, etc

[geekoid]

Nope

Will the PS3 search your network? stream content from a computer? Can you control it from your phone? ca you seamlessly show content from your phone to the TV? can you watch and browse at the same time? Can you be watching something from a site and send it to your DVR?

No, it won't. You have to buy 3rd party addins.

Re:ps3, 360, etc

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, my Vizio TV with built-in internet apps all on one bluetooth controller has been around for over a year as well. I got my 42" tv for under $1000 and it's AWESOME.

Re:ps3, 360, etc

[DogDude]

"Will the PS3 search your network? stream content from a computer?"

Yes and yes.

Re:ps3, 360, etc

[aztracker1]

What's funny, is the Netflix streaming on my TV rarely has to buffer, and the video quality is better than via boxee on my HTPC.

Re:ps3, 360, etc

[Anonymous Coward]

i get it through my ps3.

THERE. You have done it. You have admitted yourself to be a corporate sheep for willingly subjecting yourself to the tyranny of the evil SONY corporations.

The only thing worse you can do now is admit you also browse /. on your iPhone.

Be prepared for the flood of condescending replies for Google liberation fanboy army to tell you why "open" is important in your TV gadget, and you have been brainwashed by the corporate for using their locked-down products.

Re:ps3, 360, etc

[DJRumpy]

PS3 has a built in function to scan for media servers. I use a Mac (my primary HTPC) to stream content to my PS3 in the bedroom). It will also offer to convert any formats that PS3 doesn't understand on the fly. It really has turned into a very flexible piece of hardware. That said, I still use my HTPC for most needs.

For basic streaming like Netflix, a PS3 more than suffices, just as an Apple TV does. They've made it about as simple as you can get, which is what consumers want.

Re:ps3, 360, etc

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey I browse Slashdot on my iPhone and it works a lot better than any other phone I have had did. I am however posting this from my Windows PC. Posting as AC as this will obviously be modded incorrectly (troll).

Re:ps3, 360, etc

[Anonymous Coward]

Here in Australia, Foxtel, one (of 3) pay TV networks has released FOXTEL on the 360: http://www.foxtel.com.au/xbox/default.htm. It pulls live Foxtel streams across the Internet and integrates with their On-Demand services. No set contracts, no need to run new cables or put up dishes, a cheap low feature entry level package.

I think this piggybacks into the Zune TV functionality already deployed a few months ago.

Re:ps3, 360, etc

[Anonymous Coward]

You wouldn't. I did because I was going to replace my old tube tv, and wanted to watch NHL Gamecenter on something other than my laptop.

Re:ps3, 360, etc

[bennomatic]

Good point. You wouldn't. And the PS3 has sold a gazillion units, so there's lots of people who wouldn't. There are, however, lots of people like me, who have not purchased an xbox, a ps3 a wii or any other gaming device in some time--the last one I bought was a Sega Genesis, which doesn't play anything but its own games. Some of us bought Rokus, some Apple TVs, and some built their own devices. Google and their vendors are trying to catch what they see as the mainstream market--really the late adopters--who haven't done any of the above.

Re:ps3, 360, etc

[bennomatic]

And so will my AppleTV.

Re:ps3, 360, etc

[Late Adopter]

If you have iTunes. Out of all the major set-top boxes and consoles, I would place a strong wager that the PS3 actually has the friendliest and most standards-compliant LAN-media browsing.

Re:ps3, 360, etc

[Late Adopter]

Hey! I finally got an Xbox 360... this year.

Re:ps3, 360, etc

[Patch86]

I can only see one Google TV device for sale on Amazon, and its the same price as an X-Box 360 (only $50 less than the PS3, which does double duty as a BluRay). Apple TV is half the price, but does far less (notably, lacks any sort of disk drive).

In other words, even if you never plan on buying a single computer game for the rest of your life, the consoles are still competitors for your set top dollars.

Re:ps3, 360, etc

[UnknowingFool]

Well that assumes that everyone has a console already. Some people don't have one and don't want one. Also those that have a console for the living room/game room may not want a second console for the bedrooms. At $99 it is pretty cheap to add to bedrooms.

Absolutely Correct

[RobotRunAmok]

The consoles have been the Trojan Horse for getting Internet video into the living room and onto the TV for years. I "cut the cord" to my cable a while back, and get all video on my TV screen via the 360. MS (and Sony) won this battle without even firing a shot, as best as I can see.

Customers aren't ready yet

[rubies]

TV is a passive medium for the vast majority of people and that's how they like it. Plop on the couch, select your channel and let somebody else make the decisions about what you'd like to watch. Most people don't have a home media server and don't understand why you'd want one (because nobody has explained that your DVD cupboard is basically a sneakernet server, and having everything you want to watch a button click away like music just hasn't happened yet).

Actually that's a good analogy - we have a home media server and various cobbled together clients around the house, and it's interesting to watch the usage patterns: Music videos get shuffled like a giant video ipod on the main TV, it's like the best MTV that never was with the bonus you can skip stuff you don't want to listen to. Kids want to watch 3 or 4 episodes of iCarly in a row. Parents want to be able to consume a serial like Dexter without the annoying "wait a week for the next episode" that broadcast TV forces on you.

Most people will want this stuff, they just haven't seen it - so do Google a favour and invite your non-tech-savvy friends to a demonstration of your media serving rigs (assuming you've gone to the trouble of making it demo friendly and can resist the urge to fiddle with technical stuff while you're showing them). What is going to be a killer is pricing - if Google could negoatiate to broadcast a channel of cheap stuff so the "plop on the couch and watch" crew could enjoy another TV channel without having to think too much, they may be tempted to purchase premium content like first run serials without the hassle of torrents.

Re:Customers aren't ready yet

[Tancred]

I really don't think using GoogleTV (at least for simple things like using Netflix) is any tougher than using the STB from the cable company to get programming on demand.

Re:Customers aren't ready yet

[rubies]

Probably not, but "on demand" is what's unproven, not the technology itself. If somebody came up with a hybrid service that basically shuffled a TV channel of stuff you like (you tell it how long you want to watch, it knows your preferences or you seed it), the Google people could queue up shows for you (with a few wildcards of things you haven't seen but might like, pilots for shows that you might be interested in etc).

That way you could still use your TV as a passive entertainment device without necessarily being tied down to what some broadcast programmer decided you wanted to watch last year when they were doing their media buying.

Re:Customers aren't ready yet

[Tancred]

I'm not saying some people prefer strictly passive TV, but there are lots of examples of on demand content, in wide use and growing - Netflix, Hulu, cable STBs, TiVo, etc. I don't know why you think that's unproven. I'm sure YouTube will start looking more and more like what you describe, as an option on GoogleTV.

Re:Customers aren't ready yet

[rubies]

It's unproven as the take-up is low, especially outside of the US. Problem one is that because we have no effective micro-payment systems, these things are subscriber based or require the purchase of expensive dedicated hardware like a TiVo (a complete flop in Australia as it happens). Hulu, not available outside the US at all. Ditto for Netflix (I assume because rights to the shows are sold on a regional basis). The only companies at the moment who can afford to buy the rights here in Oz offer some of the most expensive, subscription driven services and their subscriber numbers are either steady or falling.

Second problem is partly related to that: Minimum "on demand" here is approximately $5 an item, which is a lot for something that you will have restricted, time based access to, but the economics from a provider point of view don't add up unless they charge that kind of dough (again, micro payments would help).

Lastly, it's one thing to want to watch "charlie bit my finger" on demand, but most content in the 20m/40m/movie length traditional broadcast TV formats aren't consumed like that. Generally, some consideration is required if you have decided to park yourself on the couch - wasting 20 minutes trying to decide what to watch just doesn't work for most TV oriented viewing. I still think the two different modes of watching content (either pre-planned and saved up, or "what's on the telly") won't merge.

Re:Customers aren't ready yet

[dzfoo]

The difference is the focus. The main "killer feature" pushed by Google on their Google TV is search. Any other set-top-box focuses on content but Google focuses on search, and maybe that's not the right approach.

Sure, Google TV may do all the other fancy stuff that all the other boxes do; but to many people the Google brand is synonymous with search (quite literally), and pushing this as the main feature of a set-top-box may invoke in their minds the effort and unnatural feel of sitting at their desks and having to figure out what magical incantations will summon forth what they are looking for; when all they want to do is sit there and watch a show.

          -dZ.

Re:Customers aren't ready yet

[tooyoung]

so do Google a favour and invite your non-tech-savvy friends to a demonstration of your media serving rigs (assuming you've gone to the trouble of making it demo friendly and can resist the urge to fiddle with technical stuff while you're showing them)

Just to make sure that I'm understanding you correctly, I should invite over some friends that aren't very tech savy and don't like spending time fiddling with electronics, so I can show them a demo of a media server and convince them that they should get one too. Before hand, I want to "invest some time making it demo friendly" so that it looks really easy to use. When I do the demo, I should avoid showing them how complex it all really is. Then they can go home and buy the same stuff that I have, with the expectation that they can just plug it in and it will all work. Is that what you were going for?

Re:Customers aren't ready yet

[rubies]

Heh. OK, I didn't think my cunning plan all the way through.

What about DivX TV?

[Anonymous Coward]

Has anyone review DivX TV. It seems like a really great alternative.

This is a poor band-aid for "push TV"

[Rude Turnip]

Steve Jobs has it right on this one: The only way to empower users is to only offer programming via an on-demand model, whether it's $0.99 per show on iTunes or unlimited streaming on Netflix. The "push model" of television is incredibly inefficient and any DVR-style device (ie, think TiVo, not AppleTV or Roku) is just prolonging its death spiral and keeping consumers trapped in the past.

I refuse to install an antenna on my house to receive push TV programming and will certainly not subscribe to push TV over cable or fiber.

Re:This is a poor band-aid for "push TV"

[vivek7006]

OK, just keep paying $0.99 per show on iTunes, while I record it in pristine HD for *free* using windows 7 MCE.

Re:This is a poor band-aid for "push TV"

[Rude Turnip]

I'm happy to put my money where my mouth is. That airwave bandwidth is better repurposed into a high speed national wireless network.

Re:This is a poor band-aid for "push TV"

[Anonymous Coward]

Have fun when your DVR fills up and you missed an episode and you have to wait until they broadcast it again. Have fun missing the first 2 minutes or last 2 minutes of a show. Have fun when you want to record three shows at the same time and you only have two tuners. Have fun paying the $$$ for cable or satellite in the first place to receive content. Have fun having to manually fast forward through commercials.

Re:This is a poor band-aid for "push TV"

[vivek7006]

I have had none of the problems you mention. Hard-disk is cheap. Never missed recording a show since 2004 when I first setup an XP MCE box. Never seen a commercial since I installed DVRMSToolbox which was also 2004

Best option

[Anonymous Coward]

Sadly, there's no substitute for searching on google and playing it on an HTPC, like a Mac Mini with bluetooth keyboard and mouse (which, by the way, at least are stylish enough that they don't look bad on your coffee table).

too little for too much

[frovingslosh]

I had looked at various "media" devices such as the Roku, but all came up way short. I was shocked to find that, apparently because of their business model, the Roku will not play the free Hulu content, even if you buy a Hulu Plus subscription (and there is a lot on regular Hulu that is unavailable on Hulu Plus). Google TV was about the only consumer oriented appliance that I found that gave me everything that a browser would have access to. But at the $300 price of the Logitech version it is way too much for too little. For that kind of money I might as well build a PC that I can dedicate to the living room. I could not only browse everything on the web, but I could also install and play web oriented games on the big screen, and run other applications that Web TV can't such as Skype, TeamSpeak, Google Earth and so on. And I've also found myself wanting a DVR that isn't dependent on my having a cable or satellite provider, and it looks like to get that done right I'll have to base it on a PC anyway. So it was obvious that Web TV as it is currently offered is too little for too high of a price. A cute toy, but only for those who have too much money and not enough imagination to see what they can do with a real computer instead.

One big downside is that somehow turning a case from the typical vertical design into a horizontal case that would better fit in a media center seems to be very expensive. In my shopping I've found horizontal form factor cases for as much as $200, and that is without a power supply. Obviously I can get much nicer vertical cases a lot cheaper. I'm still hoping to find a case maker that is making a decent case at a reasonable price (responses welcome).

Re:too little for too much

[The Good Reverend]

I was shocked to find that, apparently because of their business model, the Roku will not play the free Hulu content, even if you buy a Hulu Plus subscription (and there is a lot on regular Hulu that is unavailable on Hulu Plus).

This has absolutely nothing to do with Roku, and everything to do with Hulu's licensing agreements. Hulu has the rights to show their non-plus shows on the internet, but NOT on set-top boxes or via streaming (to Roku, Internet-enabled TVs, game systems, or anything else). Agree or disagree with the pay model that Hulu+ is using, but the "+" refers to the ability to watch it on your television via these devices. They can't show the non-plus material because they don't have the rights to do that.

Re:too little for too much

[Polymorph2000]

I had the same problem when I was building a HTPC a year ago. At the time I ended up getting a cheap $20 desktop case and a long HDMI so that I could hide the desktop. When I built my second HTPC, I got the Zotac ZBOX (about $200 right now on newegg). I run the xbmc-live distro from a 4GB USB flash drive in the computer, and it runs great (1080p streaming from a network drive or youtube works flawlessly thanks to the recent v10 of xbmc). As for control, you can either use an iphone/droid, an IR receiver (iguanaIR is what I use), or a keyboard/mouse.

Re:too little for too much

[Anonymous Coward]

One big downside is that somehow turning a case from the typical vertical design into a horizontal case that would better fit in a media center seems to be very expensive. In my shopping I've found horizontal form factor cases for as much as $200, and that is without a power supply. Obviously I can get much nicer vertical cases a lot cheaper. I'm still hoping to find a case maker that is making a decent case at a reasonable price (responses welcome).

Take a look at server cases, such as http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811182061 . I agree; there's not much available in horizontal cases. Also take a look at the few desktop cases available.

Re:too little for too much

[Xarius]

Have you investigate net-top form-factor PCs at all? The Acer Aspire Revo has caught my eye recently and sounds promising and good enough to play High Definition media.

Not much storage, but external HDDs are cheap and plentiful and easy to hide away--alternative a NAS box could be nice in a cupboard somewhere!

Re:too little for too much

[Fnkmaster]

+1. Roku would love to show you *everything* Hulu has. Hulu won't let them. Specifically because the networks won't let Hulu. And the stuff they won't show on Roku, they won't show elsewhere either.

Feel free to say that Hulu+ sucks, but don't blame Roku for that. I use Roku for Netflix and Amazon VOD content all the time. I have a Hulu+ subscription that I got a few weeks ago but I feel like a chump for paying for advertisement-laden content, especially when the content I want or my wife wants is often blocked anyway by licensing arrangements.

Re:too little for too much

[TheTyrannyOfForcedRe]

Some of the following are shown "standing up" (as tower cases) but all of them are designed as "desktop style" cases, which you seem to be calling "a horizontal case."

Don't use a power supply that's included with a case unless it's a Silverstone, Antec, or (possibly rebranded) FSP. Anything else is guaranteed to be crap. Crap PSU's can cause all kinds of subtle problems including data corruption and random crashes. No need to go overboard on the wattage though. Figure out how many watts you machine will draw and buy 25% more.

$101 Antec Minuet 350 http://www.amazon.com/Slimline-Micro-Pc-Case-350PS/dp/B0012QLUAK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1293035737&sr=8-1

$114 Antec NSK2480 http://www.amazon.com/Antec-NSK2480-Desktop-case-380W/dp/B000T4MRF8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1293035814&sr=1-1

$113 NSK 1480 http://www.amazon.com/NSK1480-Microatx-Mini-Desktop-Case/dp/B0012QP6QY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1293035882&sr=1-1

$40 HEC 7106BB http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811121010

Re:too little for too much

[Phoenix0]

I've been thinking along a similar line. I'm currently in the market for a DVR, but couldn't find one that wasn't dependent on Tivo's ridiculous subscription fee. When I first saw Google TV, I was hoping it was the answer to my prayers, but instead found an odd little device that could only play streaming video from the internet - something almost all other comparable devices have as a secondary feature.

Thus, I set out to build something comparably better - But I'm lazy, so I'm just buying the cheapest desktop with a HDMI out port and popping in a USB TV capture dongle I already had. With the right software, this may work out to being an instant DVR while doing everything a Google TV would. Or it could be a nightmare if the cheap computer can't handle the video acceleration required for this...

(currently thinking this one: http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0348958)

Too much failures

[diegocg]

It's just me, or Google is failing at everything that is not their core bussiness of search & ads?

Re:Too much failures

[Anonymous Coward]

Depends if you are counting Google Maps, Gmail, Google Docs, Android...

Re:Too much failures

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't fool yourself. Android apps are largely funded by ads and Gmail is just another ad magnet. Maps wasn't really developed by Google, just polished. I've never used Docs so I can't honestly say.

Re:Too much failures

[Joe Tie.]

Android apps funded by ads? I've known people who tried to do that, but saying it as a fact contradicts what I've heard. Every dev I know who's trying going with an ad support model with android has gotten pretty much nothing, even on very popular programs. People don't click ads on phones.

Re:Too much failures

[Nerdfest]

Their email and calendar solutions are very good, as is their browser. There's that YouTube thing ... and Android of course.

Re:Too much failures

[Merk42]

Android and Gmail are funded/fund ads, but something that plugs into your TV to get content (which of course has ads) isn't??

Re:Too much failures

[dzfoo]

But those are not businesses, just extensions of search and ads.

        -dZ.

Kevin Bacon???

[Anonymous Coward]

So how am I supposed to to find Kevin Bacon on TV now?

Make it unblockable

[Tancred]

Google must be considering making it look like any Chrome browser out there. If they don't do that, it's probably come down to either:

- it's hard to do. maybe they'd need Adobe cooperation to disguise the Flash plugin for GoogleTV. Adobe may not want to upset content providers.
- they're afraid of confronting content providers, who may retaliate by blocking all Chrome browsers or switch to Silverlight, or...?

Hopefully some hacking will resolve the issues. I like the interface. A big plus with GoogleTV compared to others is the elegant interface that comes up on top of the normal TV picture. It doesn't require switching to another TV input. It's always a quick single button click away.

Re:Make it unblockable

[Ben Newman]

You just have to change the user agent in the Google TV browser. Its trivially easy to do, but of course Google can't "officially" support a work around like that. The issue was resolved like 5 minutes after it happened. I fixed the problem on my box before I actually experienced it.

Re:Make it unblockable

[Tancred]

So are all the reports of blocking despite user agent changes wrong? Aren't the sites looking at the Flash version now? I'd be glad to be corrected.

Re:Make it unblockable

[SilentChasm]

I don't know about GoogleTV but my Android based media player has an option in the browser settings for using a desktop user agent.

Re:Make it unblockable

[Beaker74]

AFAIK, they are checking the Flash version contained on these boxes, which is not a "regular" version found on desktops and other devices, so changing the user-agent in the browser isn't the solution. But I've yet to find a way to spoof the flash version (without recompiling)

Oh great. More unwatchable crap.

[lewko]

200 Channels and nothing but cats...

Not the kind of TV I'm looking for

[Stormwatch]

I've been looking into TVs to replace my crappy ancient CRT set, and I can't find anything satisfactory. They keep adding shit I don't care about and don't want to pay for. I just want a screen, damnit! If I wanted my TV to access the web and run programs, I'd plug my goddamn computer to it. And much worse: at the same time, pretty much all manufacturers have abandoned S-Video and SCART. Since I have some classic game consoles that really could use something less shitty than composite, yet do not support component... this is the deal breaker. No legacy ports, no sale.

AND GET OFF MY LAWN!

Re:Not the kind of TV I'm looking for

[Tancred]

Just buy a used one...they'll have those old ports. Lots of people sell older TVs to upgrade to get the biggest and best. Check craigslist.

Re:Not the kind of TV I'm looking for

[Joe Tie.]

Emulators. I love the old consoles, but there's really no reason to keep their bulky forms around when you can just emulate it on a newer one.

Re:Not the kind of TV I'm looking for

[Stormwatch]

Up to the 4th generation, that's true. After that, things get more complicated.

Re:Not the kind of TV I'm looking for

[tepples]

at the same time, pretty much all manufacturers have abandoned S-Video and SCART.

SCART never took off in my country, but I can still get S-Video inputs on most TVs. My Vizio VX32L has one on the left side. As I understand it, TV makers cut out SCART to make room for VGA to hook up netbooks and other non-HDMI PCs.

Since I have some classic game consoles that really could use something less shitty than composite

I take it you're referring to the Super NES and Nintendo 64. The NES directly generated its signal in the composite domain due to its hue-value palette arrangement. The PS2 and PS3 can play almost all PS1 games through a component cable, though some TVs can't take a 240p component signal like the one the PS2 makes when playing PS1 games.

Re:Not the kind of TV I'm looking for

[Stormwatch]

No, I have a Sega Saturn (about impossible to emulate decently), a Gamecube (the more recent model, without component output), and a Dreamcast (with a VGA box). I keep toying with the idea of getting a PS2, but whenever I get to play on it... hell, that controller! That thing is simply unacceptable!

Re:Not the kind of TV I'm looking for

[tepples]

a Gamecube (the more recent model, without component output)

Wii plays all GameCube games except for Game Boy Player (and probably one or two that I forgot). Your VGA Dreamcast probably connects to the VGA port on your TV.

Re:Not the kind of TV I'm looking for

[Stormwatch]

The Dreamcast's fine, we've established that. But I'm not really interested on a Wii, although I could get it eventually - and then only if I can run pirated Gamecube games. Then there's the hardcore supremo machine, the Saturn; it can do composite, S-Video, and SCART.

Then again, I guess I could just look into SCART-to-HDMI converters. But, to complicate matters, mine is a Brazilian Saturn (PAL-M), I wonder if that'd be a problem with an imported converter. I better ask around on gaming boards.

Re:Not the kind of TV I'm looking for

[CronoCloud]

though some TVs can't take a 240p component signal like the one the PS2 makes when playing PS1 games.

Yeah, I have a TV like that. It'll sync with 240p eventually, if you switch between inputs a few times. But the PS3 solves that problem since it upscales.

Re:Not the kind of TV I'm looking for

[tepples]

pirated Gamecube games

I didn't take infringement into account, sorry.

Then again, I guess I could just look into SCART-to-HDMI converters. But, to complicate matters, mine is a Brazilian Saturn (PAL-M)

Then make sure to get one supporting 60 Hz. PAL-M runs at the same scanline frequency as NTSC (North America) or PAL60 (some games designed for Europe and Australia). It has a different color subcarrier from those two formats, but RGB video doesn't use a color subcarrier. So if your Saturn is actually outputting RGB over the SCART cable, the SCART to HDMI converter will probably pick it up as PAL60.

WebTV

[mlauzon]

Why do a lot of articles fail to mention WebTV, is it because it's Google and the reporters think that because Google came out with it, it must be a new concept that no one has done before?!

Re:WebTV

[shway]

Why do a lot of articles fail to mention WebTV, is it because it's Google and the reporters think that because Google came out with it, it must be a new concept that no one has done before?!

Where do they think Andy Rubin came from?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Rubin

Re:WebTV

[CronoCloud]

I thought that name was familiar. (I'm a former WebTV user)

The funny thing is, I bet those WebTV boxes can do some things the googleTV's can't. Can the GoogleTV do IRC or USENET (without resorting to using Google groups in a web browser)?

Why do you expect it to be obsolete?

[Tancred]

Considering that it'll have third party apps on it, it's very close to that "plain old computer" you're asking about, though it's a bit limited for now. But since it has the power to do 1080p video output, it's probably good enough for most things for as long as the 1080p TV is not obsolete. What it won't do in its current implementation is keep up with the PS3 and the like on gaming. Maybe there'll be a PS4 w/GoogleTV though.

TV what's that? Haven't used one in years

[cmdr_tofu]

TV is fairly dead and I (and I imagine many many others as well) have not owned a TV or payed for Cable TV service in years.

You can get all the relevant content online (podcasts and streaming mp4, youtube, download services, etc) or simply ordering/renting DVDs. I'd consider getting a Sony-GoogleTV, for the screen (I mean my Sun CRT is nice but..) and for Netflix (now I have to use an annoying Windows Virtualbox). Buyers beware it does not seem to have a VGA input only HDMI... The cheapest model I see is $600! Better wait until that CRT breaks :)

Re:TV what's that? Haven't used one in years

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't seem to get it. I don't have a Cable subscription, I haven't paid Cable TV in years either. Yet, I own a GoogleTV with over the air broadcast, with Netflix, and it would have been awesome to have Hulu, but since that's not happening, I'm just plugging my laptop through the display port (hey, audio included) to the TV and watch hulu.
 
But if I'm not watching hulu, I can watch TV, or movies and browse at the same time (PIP feature). And best of all, I have now 3 remote controls because I can control the TV with any android cellphone (no more "I can't find the remote").

If it weren't for the darn broadcasters and Hulu, this device would be one of the best things I ever had (crackle - sony's approach to Hulu, is not that great, yet it's still good for free movies).

Cumbersome Keyboard?

[karniv0re]

CUMBERSOME KEYBOARD?! This thing is more ergonomic and comfortable than my desktop keyboard. Sent from my Logitech Revue Google TV.

Re:Cumbersome Keyboard?

[jedidiah]

No. Some things just work best with a proper keyboard.

Things like "search" is one of them.

"10 foot interfaces" really fall on their face here.

Given how well established PCs are, people should really be much less phobic when it comes to keyboards.

Videola

[blakhol]

And just today I heard the future of IPTV was Videola.

Roku has the best device in this market

[fyngyrz]

We own both Apple TV and the identically priced Roku XD|S. The XD|S's far superior connectivity, huge advantage in variety and depth of content, and wider range of supported display modes over Apple TV make it a no-question win. The open source channel kit itself serves as incontrovertible evidence that the XD|S isn't intended as a port into a walled garden.

I wish we had found the XD|S first. Would have saved us $99. Oh well. The Apple TV, meanwhile, has found use here as a more-or-less dedicated Internet radio station appliance.

My only connection to Roku is as a happy customer. My connection to Apple is similar, just not quite as happy.

CATS: How are you gentlemen !!

[tepples]

200 Channels and nothing but cats

Then perhaps you shouldn't have opted for the "All Your Base Are Belong To Us" programming package. (Mmm, what you say !!)

How do I dumped ROM?

[tepples]

Emulators.

Now that Retrode is sold out, how would you recommend making ROM files from one's cartridges?

Re:How do I dumped ROM?

[Mr2001]

Now that Retrode is sold out, how would you recommend making ROM files from one's cartridges?

I would recommend not making your own ROM files. Whatever cartridges you have, someone else has already ripped them and put them online, so just download them. You'll end up with exactly the same files as if you'd done it yourself, so there are no moral or ethical arguments to be made against it, and the legal risk is infinitesimal.

But who will be allowed to develop apps?

[tepples]

Considering that it'll have third party apps on it

A Wii console has third-party applications on it, but Nintendo is very selective about which third parties it will allow to develop for its platform. Will Google TV allow the development of applications by individuals in the same way that Android phones and tablets from everyone but AT&T allow for development of applications by individuals?

It appears HTPCs are for geeks

[tepples]

It seems to me the best approach is just to hook a computer up to your TV.

I'm working on an article about why connecting a PC to a TV isn't common. The issues that I know of include build vs. buy (most dedicated HTPCs are built from parts by a PC-enthusiast end user, not ready-to-run), aesthetics (most PC cases would look out of place next to a TV), 10-foot usability, and the fact that there aren't a lot of PC games designed specifically for HTPCs.

Re:It appears HTPCs are for geeks

[jedidiah]

Your article is about 5 years out of date based on a lot of false assumptions.

When you are done. 2001 will probably call and ask for their article back.

Re:It appears HTPCs are for geeks

[tepples]

Feel free to elaborate on the false assumptions on the article's talk page.

Lots o' alternatives including Tivo

[93 Escort Wagon]

Everybody and his brother is in this business. Our Tivo streams Netflix, Amazon, what have you - it doesn't support Hulu (yet), although with a DVR I'm not sure what the value of that would be. Plus thanks to free tools like Handbrake, pyTivo and streambaby we have streaming access to ripped versions of all our DVDs on it as well. Right now I can't think of anything it doesn't do that I wish it did.

Point is, as far as I can tell there's nothing particularly special Google TV offers that's not already available to Tivo owners, Roku owners, or folks with a myriad of other products (including cable company DVRs with on-demand). And FWIW it's the same with AppleTV - a nice interface is great, but most of these existing products already are easy enough to use; and those are already in a lot of homes.

I wonder about their HD clips

[rastoboy29]

I would imagine that Google honors their own "don't play on tv, only play on a 'computer'" tags?  I ran into that on my WDTV box, and a 3rd party (legal) firmware update took care of it.  But will Google support hacking themselves?

Wasn't the first version of Apple TV a dud too?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems like it took them a while to get it right.

Is 3.5 Stars on Amazon is a bad rating?

[systemsplanet]

How do geeks interpret these Amazon ratings for the Logitech Revue?
5 star: (58)
4 star: (43)
3 star: (15)
2 star: (15)
1 star: (29)

To me, a big geek, Google TV is a great value. I'm voting with my wallet...
It works so well, that I've cancelled my $65 a month AT&T Uverse TV subscription.
In 4.6 months, Google TV will be free and I'll be pocketing $65 a month.

The time I use to spend watching re-runs on Uverse, I now spend
- using the Netflix app to stream videos
- using the built-in chrome browser to surf the web, ck email, watch podcasts, watch YouTube lean-back.
- using DLNA to wirelessly listen to my music collection on my sterio, watch my pictures and videos on my big screen (from my Windows 7 VMware VM), etc.

When the Android Market to opens, I'll be downloading new apps....

But as far as a bad rating goes, I don't see where people are coming from. Maybe they're caught in some reality distortion field, or have some axe to grind.

KISS

[Anonymous Coward]

remember it.

They are waiting to watch Freebox Revolution

[Anonymous Coward]

A very similar, extremely innovative device is about to debut, in the market that saw the birth of the Triple Play STB: the Freebox Revolution. Yes, the sixth version of the device that was created by the guy who basically invented the triple play model.

http://www.free.fr

€36 / month, with bundled DSL (or FTTH where available, and getting available FAST -- symmetric capless 100MBit/s), unlimited phone (national, most 1st world international -- others you have to pay somewhat, cell), 350 TV channels, tons of which are already HD, catch-up TV, 15 different VOD providers, etc.

detailed shots and specs: http://img3.free.fr/iliad/presse/2010/DP_Freebox_Revolution_141210.pdf

I guess Google held their horses, seeing how Sony has trouble executing, in order to see how the Freebox Revolution fares, and THEN try refine their software.

The '90s called...

[Bill_the_Engineer]

and they want their WebTV back.

ridiculous

[ElliotWilcox]

I connected an Asus eee 701 which I purchased used for $25 to my Samsung - easy breezy - that and a $35 dollar wireless keyboard/touchpad- presto - Internet TV- talk about over thinking a technical issue- EEE runs Xandros too. Don't even need to pay for software

wedded bliss

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep, sounds like marriage to me!

Geek != norm

[dazedNconfuzed]

If people spent half an hour thinking, dusting off their old PC, and hooking up cables, they'd be GODS of their media.

People, on the whole, haven't a clue how this stuff works. They're lucky if they can hook up color-coded cables for 3 boxes. Of those who can follow basic installation directions, they still don't see how the magic works, they're just satisfied that it does.

Absent from your obscenity-filled screed about how they're clueless vs. how easy it is, is the generous real-life insertion of "X doesn't work ... oh, that's easy, just do Y ..." Sure, the big pieces are pretty simple, but there's always some glue logic that must be cobbled together to make it all work - and THAT is the hard part for most people.
Anecdote: streaming "The Bachelorette" to the TV for my wife was easy. It's easy, right? Anyone can do it. Probably the easiest thing to do. Just go to the website (requiring clicking around until you find the "full episode" buried amid all the other tangential videos), plug in a $20 MiniDVI-to-Composite adapter on the MacBook (after going to the Apple store to buy one, and knowing which to buy), click 'play' on the notebook which is now sitting on the floor 10' from the couch (the wireless mouse is upstairs 'cuz that's where she usually uses the thing), click 'fullscreen', spend 10 minutes watching and wondering why something seems missing, realize (she didn't) that the allegedly fullscreen window is in fact much larger than the TV resolution so we've watched 1/4 the show with only 1/2 the image, discover after some experimentation of resizing/replugging multiple windows & cables that you have to plug in the adapter THEN open a new window THEN go to the website THEN play and fullscreen the video (wrong order = fractional image), and finally get a dirty look from the wife who wonders why we have to dork around with all this "but it's FREE!" technical bullsqueeze when we could just pay $60/month and watch whatever she wants with a simple remote control. "Oh, but now you've worked it all out, right?" you say. NOT. Next day she wants to see the next episode (like RIGHT NOW), and I have to explain how to do all that over the phone because we had to unplug the computer and attach the VCR because the little girl REALLY wanted to watch "Kipper" again, then explain again why it's stupid to pay $60/month for Cable when we could be, as you put it, "GODS of our media" for free.

Access the FULL internet? most people haven't a clue what's out there to access, much less know how.
Multitask? if it's not visible RIGHT NOW most people think it isn't running.
Share files? you explain media files, much less sharing them, to my mother-in-law.
Copy discs? better be as simple as "insert disc 1, insert disc 2, hit 'Copy'." Oh, right, it isn't.
Strip ads? most people don't care - or even view them as "public service announcements". ("How else will I know what's going on?")
Normalize volume? "normalize"? by this point you'd better know where this is going.
Bypass waste-of-time interfaces? Here's a way they like: for $XX/month, they can plug in a dedicated box with 6 buttons and access whatever they want - rather than hours of dorking around with confusing tech stuff for "free".

And that's why even Google is faltering at the task: Google TV is the culmination of what you describe, out-of-the-box pre-assembled stuff, and it's still to complicated for most people.
Apple seems the only one to get it right: $99 one-time cost, plug in two obvious cables, easy menu system to access huge (yes, limited, but EASY and there's enough to keep most people happy) array of options, and pay a mere $1 per episode for zero-hassle no-commercial on-demand viewing.

Sure, you and I know it's easy & free to do all this stuff. That's because we're NERDS - which most people aren't, so it's cost-effective for them to pay.

Re:Geek != norm

[sexconker]

All the problems you list stem from one thing: You're using a Mac.

Re:Geek != norm

[Synn]

Well, here's something you can setup your wife can probably use if you're interested.

Popcorn hour + hard drive + the NMT tools. This gives you a Media player with a Torrent and NZB client. Bookmark these clients in your wife's web browser.

Torrents you should know, but they're slow. If you want faster use NZB. You'll need a giganews.com subscription(25 a month for unlimeted) and a place to download NZB files: http://nzbmatrix.com/

Bookmark the NZB site on your wife's browser. The "get a show or movie process":

Kid wants to watch Show X. Wife downloads the NZB for Show X, then uploads it to the popcorn hour. In an hour or so you'll have the show or movie you want.

Benefits are it's only 25 a month for the giganews subscription and you have access to a lot more content that you will via cable or dish tv. You can also watch DvDs before they're released to the public.

Roku

[Scroatzilla]

You have pretty much described a Roku box. I have it and it does a lot of that; there are currently a few different home media solutions. The one I am using is only in its development stage, and you have to know how to encode stuff to work on it. Once you figure that out, it's a really nice piece.

Re:TV what's that? Haven't used one in years

[Abcd1234]

TV is fairly dead and I (and I imagine many many others as well)

Yes... you certainly are imagining things.

Stinky PC best?

[gatzke]

We recently spent some money on a new TV for the kitchen. The den is already outfitted with a tivo+HD+tuning adapter+m card+ps3+wii+slingbox.

For the kitchen, I wanted something "simple" that did everything:
    TV
    Digital TV
    HD unencrypted
    HD encrypted
    Stream music, video, pics from PC
    Hulu
    Netflix
    Crap flash games (PBS kids)
    Check email
    Surf web
    Games (Mame?)

I looked at everything. Nothing seemed to fit. We bought the new 40" tv and installed it ayway.

Hook up our old old eeePC and everything works! This three year old POS does everything we wanted. It even puts out 1080p if you want it to, however hulu stutters at that resolution.

So far it seems best to run the eeePC at 1024x764. You have to scroll on the eeePC a bit, but generally you are just using the mousepad and keyboard to navigate the moster monitor. Everything streams without issue and the flash crap games fit onscreen. The tiny eeePC needs a little scroll, but 1024x768 is close enough to 800x600 that you don't miss much.

And it streams awesome off of wifi.

Drawback, I have to run VGA, audio, and power to the crap netbook. Would be better if VGA and audio were on the same side of the netbook.

So, WRT hulu blocking, forget them. Just get a stinky XP netbook and run everything. It may not be a HTPC, but it freaking works without a ton of $$$.

Re:Stinky PC best?

[gatzke]

Hulu desktop did not stream any better. Netflix and slingbox work great, but those monkeys at Hulu can't seem to figure out how to stop dropping frames, or maybe they don't want you to have a decent picture?

I remembered this morning, the eeePC also has a camera so you can video chat via Skype.

The only thing it does not do is pull in encrypted channels. But using the slingbox client, everything can be watched from the tivo.

And we were this close to getting a Google TV box...