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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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.

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...

[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...

[DogDude]

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

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

[DogDude]

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

Yes and yes.

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.

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.

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"

[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.

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.

Too much failures

[diegocg]

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

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 :)

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.

The '90s called...

[Bill_the_Engineer]

and they want their WebTV back.

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.