'Connected' TVs Mostly Used Just Like the Unconnected Kind

antdude writes "The National Purchase Diary (NPD) Group Blog reports that 'Internet Connected TVs Are Used To Watch TV, And That's About All — The Internet connected high definition television (HDTV) screen has so far failed to break beyond the bounds of its TV-centric heritage, with little use for the big screen beyond the obligatory video services. But the connection is being used to provide access to a far wider variety of alternative sources for video content. The latest NPD Connected Intelligence Application & Convergence report highlights that nearly six out of ten consumers who own a connected HDTV are accessing Over-the-Top video services through the device.' (Seen on DSL reports.)" Wired's headline on a story based on the same information puts things more bluntly: "No One Uses Smart TV Internet Because It Sucks."

Comments

walled gardens don't work

[Anonymous Coward]

I have one of these TVs, and one major problem is that each manufacturer is trying to create a captive audience for their own variety of apps.

As a result, the number of apps available is pathetic, and almost all boil down to TV stations vanity apps

Re:walled gardens don't work

[rikkards]

Yep, I just got a Sony and I tried it out and it can't hold a candle against XBMC. The interface is clunky and slow which I have heard as well about it with Samsung. Now if Samsung was smart they would be using Android instead...

Re:walled gardens don't work

[NIK282000]

TVs should be a display and that's it. Give it the brain to decode HDMI signals and the tuner for over the air digital but that should be it. Every time a manufacturer tries to put more then that in their TV it just makes it worse. I spent a day at best buy looking at TVs this month, not a single internet enabled had an interface that doesn't make you want to rip out all your hair. Added features shouldn't break the main ones.

Re:walled gardens don't work

[nschubach]

I kind of wish that there was a recess in the back of the TV or more "behind the screen" PCs that mount on the VESA pins (or between if you wall mount it) that had a simple 12v power supply and HDMI port. This way you can buy "smart" modules or a PC that mounts on the back of the set to give you the "smart" feature set. Leave the TV up to the task of getting and displaying a signal to the best of it's ability (like you said.) If you ever need to update the "smart" part of the TV, you wouldn't have to replace the whole set. I have a 1080p monitor in my living room that has lasted far longer than the media PC I have connected to it.

Re:walled gardens don't work

[NeutronCowboy]

Sort of. I have a Samsung Smart TV, and while they definitely have their flavor of apps only available for their TV, that's not really the main problem. The main problem is that the apps that do exist are slow, have a terrible interface, and are filled with bugs. For example: for the first 6 months or so, the Netflix app kept losing my login information. I was this close to just not watching Netflix on the TV anymore, and just go back either jerry-rigging it onto the TV via an extra-long DVI/HDMI cable or to just watch it on my laptop.

But yes, the Smart TVs are absolutely retarded and a waste of money (or at least, the Internet connectivity aspect is). They need to fix the following problems:
* no useful apps available outside of Netflix, Amazon Prime and Hulu Plus..
* requirements to use specific and approved USB cameras or widgets.
* Buggy apps.
* Very slow responsiveness.
* Terrible, terrible interface.

The solutions:
* Swallow your pride. Go Google Play Store or iTunes.
* Invest into the connectivity, and throw some real processing power onto it.
* Release a smartphone app that allows you to use its interfaces (voice recognition, touchscreen) to control the action on-screen.
* Make the USB-connectivity more robust, and accept standard webcams, gizmos and widgets.

Until then, I will consider Smart TVs a waste of time.

Oh, and fair warning, dear TV makers: this isn't rocket science, and if Apple is indeed working on an Apple TV, it WILL eat your lunch. Because they will get it right, and people will fall over themselves to get a well-thought out, easy to use, pretty TV that integrates into the Apple eco-system.

Re:walled gardens don't work

[hey!]

Plus, you have all the problems of a computer, because these TVs *are* computers. I have a Vizio which takes forever to boot up. It's currently out of service because of a problem with the logic board, which needs replacing.

Re:walled gardens don't work

[olsmeister]

90% of people wouldn't want to screw around with that. When they spend all that money on a TV, they expect it to do cool stuff, out of the box. If you tell them they need to buy something else, they're going to think you're trying to screw them over. Now that $80 HDMI cable, though, that they'd probably buy.

Re:walled gardens don't work

[CanHasDIY]

90% of people wouldn't want to screw around with that. When they spend all that money on a TV, they expect it to do cool stuff, out of the box.

OK, we all know the 90% is a number you pulled straight from the depths of your ass, but you do still make a valid point, so I'll go ahead and ask:
Really? Since when?

To wit - I was born in the mid 1980's, and it has always been my expectation that my TV is nothing more than a display screen, which only shows me 'cool stuff' from the devices I physically connect to it.

Then again, I've never spent more than maybe $350 on a television (hooray pawnshops and demo units!), so I'm guessing this is a YMMV situation.

Re:walled gardens don't work

[mcrbids]

Apple TV has existed for quite some time now. Despite this, it has yet to become much of a success. Apple probably makes some money on it, but it's just not getting all that much reach. Its integration with an ipad is pretty slick. There's also Google TV which is embedded into other players.

So far, the winner for the alternative TV seems to be gaming devices, like Xbox or PS3.

Re:walled gardens don't work

[scot4875]

90% of people wouldn't want to screw around with that. When they spend all that money on a TV, they expect it to do cool stuff, out of the box.

It's particularly amusing that you make this unfounded assertion in a story about how nobody who buys smart TVs uses them do do any of the 'cool stuff' that they're capable of.

--Jeremy

Re:walled gardens don't work

[SJHillman]

I bought a car expecting it to go real fast. The reality is that regardless of whether or not it can go real fast, I rarely drive much above the speed limit anyway. I bought a Wii expecting to use it to exercise. The reality is I sit on the couch and play games with wrist flicks. People buy based on expectations, not how they'll actually use it.

Re:walled gardens don't work

[BitZtream]

Windows Media Center on Win7 with XBox360's as extenders and a HDHomeRun Prime on the server for cable is pretty much the best thing there is on the planet for this stuff.

Re:walled gardens don't work

[Githaron]

The apps are already on Android. The app developers might have to make some small modifications to allow for remote control input but overall the small cost would be worth it if they could get their app of compatible with 70% of new smart TVs.

Re:walled gardens don't work

[AmiMoJo]

no useful apps available outside of Netflix, Amazon Prime and Hulu Plus..

+ iPlayer and YouTube. Those apps alone are worth their weight in gold.

requirements to use specific and approved USB cameras or widgets.

I'm afraid that unless you want your TV to run Windows you are probably going to be SOL on that one, since no manufacturer is going to try and support every random ultra low-cost craptastic webcam chipset with a custom driver when they can just sell you one of their own. If the fault lies anywhere it is with the USB standard for not defining a standard driver-neutral webcam interface.

Very slow responsiveness.

Try Panasonic TVs. The higher end models have dual core CPUs and are pretty responsive. You get what you pay for.

Release a smartphone app that allows you to use its interfaces (voice recognition, touchscreen) to control the action on-screen.

Already exists, works pretty well.

Re:walled gardens don't work

[phantomfive]

Rumors from some pretty good sources suggest Apple is working on a new TV that will be somewhat different than that product. It will change TV the way the iPhone changed smartphones.

Re:walled gardens don't work

[Kaenneth]

" It will change TV the way the iPhone changed smartphones."

I am filled with so much sarcasm right now, I literally can't decide which snide comment to make.

Re:walled gardens don't work

[rtkluttz]

I would go a step further with that statement... the reason it sucks SO badly is that they try to create revenue streams because they falsly believe they have a captive audience. Hulu is free on a computer, but hulu plus blocks some shows depending on your device. WTF??? I'll just hook my computer to my TV and bypass your damn cripple ware. Stop trying to lock me in and give me value that makes me WANT to stay.

Re:walled gardens don't work

[Dan667]

personally, I like MythTV even better. It will even skip commercials without even needing to press a remote button.

Re:walled gardens don't work

[schnell]

Snark if you want, but as someone who worked in the industry at the time I can tell you when Apple first showed off the iPhone in January 2007 it changed damn near everything (or at least it did when the other OEMs and carriers realized to their horror that people were actually buying the damned things). Full touchscreen-based UI, functional web browser, no carrier software deck and WAP store, real music player functionality and good video viewing, multitouch, visual voicemail ... It all seems old hat now but if you don't remember what it was like, go pick up a contemporary BlackBerry or Windows Mobile 6 phone and tell me if it doesn't just beat the shit out of it in terms of usability.

you can hate Apple for what they have become, but you cannot dismiss how that original iPhone changed the wireless landscape. If they can do the same for TVs, it could be very very interesting.

Re:walled gardens don't work

[Kjella]

That was my idea as well, I saw what an uncle of mine spent on a fancy new smart TV, I was thinking "so... this is like a TV + a $99 AppleTV in one, except it is less flexible and costs way more". Personally I got myself a dumb TV, no 3D, apparently no buzzword-compliance because it was on a huge going-out sale but it's a 60" LCD. For one my fiber company has a smart set top box, I have a PC hooked up and for some reason I thought I could use an AppleTV and I recently got a Wii U that can browse the Internet too so I already have four "smart" devices to hook up, why would I need a 5th one in the TV itself? Personally I'm just hoping 4K can come down from lottery winner to semi-reasonable prices, I'd like both a 4K monitor and a 4K TV, dumb as a brick thank you.

Re:walled gardens don't work

[krakelohm]

There is a huge difference in doing something and doing something the right, first out of the gate is not a guaranteed win.

Sounds a lot like...

[Anonymous Coward]

the failed MSN TV debacle. People (for the most part) don't want to surf the net on their set top boxes.

Let's think about this...

[Synerg1y]

When you expand a TV's capabilities outwards far enough what do you get?

A PC? A mini-PC? aka a computer.
Right now they act more like an embedded machine with preset apps & software limitations.
They'd have to have an app market & flash based storage for one, but let's think even more (head hurt? not really),
I can use my TV as a monitor making it a computer and the latest FF & IE > anything on that Sony for web browsing + I get a USB keyboard (I already own) to use, that kind of helps. The same goes for the rest of the apps including netflix, which I have a big red button for on my remote, the PC version is more stable, faster, and overall better.

I don't use my TV as a monitor however, so I appreciate the netflix button and the amazon video app all over wifi, can't say I use a whole lot besides that, but the webcam & bluetooth might have some uses every once in a blue moon.

My point is a TV should remain a TV, I'd rather pay for a better image processor than a crappy browser, but if they were to try and make them smarter, they'd have to follow the cell phone's evolution into a smartphone and add similar features in regards to UI design & customization.

Re:Let's think about this...

[Fluffeh]

I utterly agree with your sentiment.

The concept of "Smart" TVs is a marketing concept gone terribly wrong. Yes, the technology is here to allow us to do some wonderful things with the internet and through apps, but until a TV can do better than a PC as far as the internet is concerned, or better than a media player than is connected to it, or better than the media server that is connected to that, then why on earth would I want my TV to do any of it?

If I want to pay games, I will do so on a gaming system, not through the TV using the remote as a controller. If I want to watch a movie or show, I will do it via the easiest and most intuitive manner I can find - and that being in the TV is a LONG way off the features and maturity of more specialized items. Heck, when I look for features in a TV, I don't even care about sound, I want it to do nothing more than display a picture that is being supplied to it.

If manufacturers want to ween me off using a western digital media player, make the features of the built-in media player better than those of the western digital player I use. I admit that I did try the Samsung version that came with my TV. It was horrific. If you want me to use *your* software, make it at least as good as what I have - which will make it more convenient to have it built-in and therefore better overall, otherwise, stop wasting my time and money.

Re:Let's think about this...

[sjames]

Exactly. In my case, I would like to see it able to mount a volume on my LAN (NFS preferred, Samba is acceptable) and be willing to play any A/V files there. An HTML5 browser with flash will be preferred over a special youtube app. Available remote control apps for Android and iPhone would be nice.

No surprise

[Bender Unit 22]

I spent around 3300$(converted to $) a few years ago on a so called "smart TV" from Samsung. Less than a year after I bought it, they stopped updating the software. They never fixed it's problems with remember subtitles settings.
The "Smart TV" part never got to be in any usable state and now after Netflix has entered my country, it is clear that this model will never get a downloadable app for Netflix.

So, no, I am not going to spend YET more money on a new TV when it is capable of showing a picture. Although I would have liked to have a all-in-one box, I guess it is not possible so I still have to buy boxes and then still use the tv as a monitor.

Re:No surprise

[roc97007]

I spent around 3300$(converted to $) a few years ago on a so called "smart TV" from Samsung. Less than a year after I bought it, they stopped updating the software. They never fixed it's problems with remember subtitles settings.
The "Smart TV" part never got to be in any usable state and now after Netflix has entered my country, it is clear that this model will never get a downloadable app for Netflix.

So, no, I am not going to spend YET more money on a new TV when it is capable of showing a picture. Although I would have liked to have a all-in-one box, I guess it is not possible so I still have to buy boxes and then still use the tv as a monitor.

...but but but... I think that's the business model. You buy a TV, find that the apps are crap, and that you need to buy another TV for some of the apps to work, and then another TV comes along where more features work, so you have to have that, and so on in incremental improvements. It keeps workers in China, helpdesk people in India, and marketing people in the US all employed. As an added bonus, since the TVs are flat, the old ones stack really well in landfills.

Re:No surprise

[dgatwood]

That's certainly Samsung's business model, anyway. They break things in firmware updates, and then they stop shipping updates after about a year or so, so you never actually get what you paid for. From now on, the only thing I'm ever going to buy from Samsung is TVs, and even then, only the dumbest variety. I just don't trust them to do anything remotely complicated software-wise without completely screwing it up.

But in some ways, it's bigger than that. Consumer device manufacturers are good at hardware and generally suck at writing software. And they have no motivation to support that hardware after they stop selling it, or even while they're selling it. With the short product cycles of today's consumer electronics industry, by the time consumers discover how buggy the software is, the next version of the product is on the market, and potential consumers are reading a fresh set of reviews about that new product, written by people who haven't discovered the glaring flaws yet.

On a general-purpose device, by contrast, the software vendors are continuing to improve a single product over time to gain new customers, which means that everyone gets the improvements. This is why you're always better off with a general-purpose device—a laptop, an iPad connected through an Apple TV, an HTPC, whatever. And if the software sucks, you can always ditch it and install different software. You can't do that with specialized devices; if your Blu-Ray Player or TV's software sucks, you're stuck. Hence, there is no real benefit to having software-based features on those devices. If anything, the very existence of additional software on those devices is a waste of engineering resources that could be better spent making those single-purpose devices actually do the job they're supposed to do.

Re:No surprise

[roc97007]

That's a good argument to stay far enough behind the curve that you can find out what the typical user experience is (and the most common fixes/upgrades/workarounds) before buying the device.

It's often said that the user community acts as a gigantic unpaid QA department. This breaks down if nobody benefits. As you said, the manufacturers are generally not listening, and the early adopters will always adopt early regardless. It's the middle-to-late adopters that reap the benefits.

For instance, I have yet to buy a tablet, because I don't want another device in addition to my Windows laptop, I want a device that *replaces* my Windows laptop, and that includes media creative work. (As opposed to media consumption.) Until the apps I need are available in true touch-centric fashion, and vetted by other users, I'm not interested. (Counter-clockwise squiggle to emulate the right mouse button does *not* count.)

Back when I was looking at tablets, I noticed that a tablet would come out with a certain version of Android, and that would pretty much be it. So buying a tablet with Froyo and hoping to upgrade it some day to Ice Cream Sandwich (for instance) was a losing proposition. So I waited, and then I realized that the apps I wanted weren't available yet, so I waited some more. I'm still waiting. Why buy electronic junk that doesn't do the job? I choose not to contribute to e-landfill.

(My daughter bought a Win7 slate because her drawing programs ran on Windows, but it was so difficult to use that she went back to her digitizing pad on her desktop machine. Lesson learned. She hasn't decided yet whether to upgrade to Win8, attempt to load Android, or just dump it.)

Obvious study is obvious

[iamhassi]

Did they really need a study for this? Why would someone use their 52" TV for twitter or Facebook when they have a tablet or laptop already?

Re:Obvious study is obvious

[aaarrrgggh]

What is surprising is that you can't connect to Amazon or Netflix on some of the units despite being "smart." They have their own video store and other such nonsense.

Re:Sounds about right

[swanzilla]

+1 Fascinating

It Should be Simple (but it's not)

[Anonymous Coward]

DVD players have this mostly figured out (game consoles as well I guess) if I'm going to plug a video playing device to my network it better damn well play videos FROM MY NETWORK, simple right?

I should be able to attach to a network share or DLNA server or hit up any number of services and just pull content across the wire. Any content. Content of my own choosing.

I shouldn't have to bounce out to the internet to do it

I shouldn't have to verify who I am

I shouldn't have to log in to anything

But nope, all we get are little toy apps and NETFLIX which is hamstrung by ancient covenants that adhere to imaginary lines where content may exist on only one side.

Save the money you'd flush down the toilet buying an SMRT television and just buy a set top media box.

If it isn't plainly obvious I'm getting pretty fucking sick of all this VAST technology being used to deliver a half-assed solution that can be solved with a cheap "unlocked" DVD player I bought at the mall in Chinatown and Plex Media Server running on my 7 year old XP machine.

My "Dumb-TV" Technology.

[MindPrison]

I have what I like to call a "Dumb-TV", made by the brand Denver Electronics. No seriously, it's the dumbest TV on the planet. It's marketed as a "Smart-TV", but read on, and make your own judgement:

It's your typical super feature filled tv, with recording capabilities, Digital TV (DVB-T & C etc.). Media Playback, Pictures, Videos and whatnot...
Wonderful ...if it actually worked...

1) Every time I turn on the TV, the TV goes into Schizo-mode. I'll give you 2 channels today...no...4 channels...if you wait 10 more minutes, maybe 10 channels.
2) If you try to watch video via the scart plug (eg, the DVD player), sometimes it comes up with a message: No activity, want to turn off? (It waits until you press ok or cancel)
3) Sometimes it falls asleep - while still on, then a menu will sit and wait for you, until you press OK. (means...backlight still on, a small square saying "No activity for a while, sleep? OK or CANCEL"
4) When you insert a USB memory...it will let you watch TV for 20 seconds, before this HUGE menu covers the ENTIRE screen, geefully informing you of all your amazing multi-media experiences awaiting you. USB CARD INSERTED - OK? OK or CANCEL... The idiot TV will block your TV viewing until you take action.
5) It's amazing schizophrenic mode will be sure to forget that your USB CARD has already been inserted the last time, so the next time you turn on the TV, it will let you watch TV for half a minute before finally ....UH OH...You have an USB CARD INSERTED...HERE's a GIANT menu to block your TV, now make a choice!!!
6) Sometimes it will FIGHT you for ON/OFF mode. Is it on? Maybe it doesn't WANT to be turned on?! You press ON...the LED indicates that it understands, starts searching but decides to fall asleep instead.. OH you meant ON?! OK...press TWICE...and the TV is ON!
7) And it loves to inform you about useless stuff...such as.... CHANNEL 7 or 9 aren't currently transmitting, want to delete these unused channels? YES, No, Cancel!
8) It'll do this until you run out of channels. :)

Yep, dumb TV technology at it's best.

Re:My "Dumb-TV" Technology.

[servognome]

Dear confused owner:

Thank you for purchasing our product. We would like to address your concerns, as they are unique patented features of this device.

1) Schizo-mode(TM) has been developed after years of research and development to provide the maximum enjoyment for the viewer. It allivates what the industry has called "channel overload." By limiting the number of channels, viewers do not experience the initial 3-5 minute distraction of trying to decide what to watch. As the user becomes acclimated, their options are incrimentally expanded.

2) The Exercise Suggestion(TM) feature, has been developed to comply with 2020 EU health guidelines. Using patented methods, the system can determine the user's fitness level via the DVD button. In response to a low fitness rating, the television will remind the user that they have not engaged in recent physical activity and suggest they turn off the device.

3) The Sleep Suggestion(TM) feature, has been developed to comply with 2020 EU health guidelines. Our patented system can determine user fatigue by measuring pupil activity while watching the device. If the pupil activity drops below a specific threshold, the system will prompt the user and suggest they sleep.

4) Unlike competitive products which pop-up a menu upon USB insertion, your device includes USB Insertion Regret Prevention(TM). This is a patented feature designed to provide users the opportunity to remove the card without interruption in the event that they decide to continue watching their current program.

5) This is another feature of USB Regret Prevention(TM). Users are given a brief opportunity to view what is currently airing, so they can make an informed decision on whether they prefer to engage in the amazing multimedia experiences enabled by using the USB card.

6) Program Pre-Scanning(TM) is a patented feature where upon start-up the television scans the channels available and determines based on the user's viewing history if there are any programs they might be interested in. If there are none, the system will go into sleep mode. This can be overrided by pressing the power button twice. Please note that the accuracy of this feature will improve over time as it gains more data about the user's preferences.

7) This is an extension of the Schizo-mode(TM) feature, and is designed to assist the user by removing unnecessary channels.

8) Schizo Continuous Program Scanning(TM) allows the user to experience the best of Schizo-mode(TM) and Program Pre-Scanning(TM) while they are using the device. Based on user preferences from their history, the device will reduce the number of channels available. By removing channels with programs the user is not interested in, the user can more quickly find programs they are interested in. If you find that all available channels are removed, we suggest you contact your cable provider and order a package that includes programs you are interested in.

We thank you for your continued business.

I admit to liking the features

[mu51c10rd]

I like my Smart TV's apps and internet capability. I much prefer using the builtin Netflix/Hulu+/Amazon apps than running cables to another device. As it is, I ran power into a outlet in the wall behind my mounted TV. No cables, entertainment center or any other furniture are needed. I also got a sound bar mounted right above the TV for better sound. Not everyone wants a PC sitting in their room (and some of us like the simplicity of a single device).

Re:I admit to liking the features

[R3d M3rcury]

I have a Sony Bravia and I got the USB/WiFi adapter more as chuckle than anything else. But it's been fun.

I've used the YouTube and Crackle apps. It has NetFlix and Amazon's movie stores, but I haven't bothered to use them. Usually every few months I'll flip it on, update the Internet content, and see if there's anything new.

But is it life-changing? Nope.

People Said The Same Thing About Smart Phones Too

[EXTomar]

In my experience, my TV habits have shift radically since getting a Google TV. Instead of connecting a bunch of boxes to it, they've all gone to the older HDTV. Things I've noticed off the top of my head and in no particular order:

- The DLNA features is a necessary thing for all my TVs now. I've relied on less and less live TV due to this feature alone.
- Apps like Netflix run just as well if not more directly when it is on the TV itself instead of a secondary box.
- Since Google TV has Chrome, if there is not an app for something that offers video or a stream I can just browse to it, play it at full screen and enjoy it like watching a TV channel.

The only "traditional" thing I can think that TV does any longer is that it has a console connected to it where the console has duplicate features too which I would never run since they are all on the TV.

I wish it was smart enough to "scrape" a web page that has been book marked for video or audio content or stream and show it like a channel. Although Youtube and Chrome works fine, crossing between them is a still a bit clunky since it requires minimizing one/activating the other but that is something all tablets and phones. I also wish it would have a more intelligent guide where the information on a show should be available across all sources instead of "Now search Live TV", "Now search Internet" etc.

In the end I will admit that I'm not sure having "fancy TV" changed how I use it as much as my taste and habits changed. I no longer spend much time watching "Live TV" where an net aware and internet connected TV has been more useful.

Vidoe Game Consoles

[ZombieBraintrust]

Game consoles won the smart TV war. They have more realiable apps. They provide better games. They have better browsers.

Re:Remember Web TV?

[bmo]

WebTV, when even the keyboard was an *option* for using the Internet. You had AOLers, and then you really scraped the bottom of the barrel in Usenet with WebTVers.

"SmartTVs" are WebTV but with even less functionality and more walled-garden. It's simply better to have a dumb device that only receives signal from various devices like computers, game consoles, and video-storage devices and acts like a "receiver" of sorts, much like how a stereo receiver takes input from various audio sources.

This "television cum internet terminal" was always a dumb idea, mostly because instead of being used to enable people, such devices are used to separate people from their money in the crudest ways possible.

And manufacturers wonder why the uptake isn't as much as they'd hope.

--
BMO

Vizio Smart TV

[theurge14]

I just purchased a smaller HDTV (32") very recently and I made my purchase based on what many of you would, the screen quality. The Vizio I picked has a brighter and more clear display than the others on the shelf and it has a thinner bezel. Additionally it has built-in WiFi and "Smart TV" features even though the price was the same as the others around it.

The TV has apps for Netflix, Amazon, Hulu and many others. Apparently it checks in with Vizio for firmware updates and app updates on its own, I'm ok with that. I only have a Netflix account so I tried that first. The app interface is nearly identical to the one on the XBOX, so I prefer now to use the TV's built in Netflix then powering on the XBOX and going through all the motions of logging in and launching it. Accessing Netflix with the TV remote is about equally clunky as the XBOX controller so nothing lost or gained through that, but without the added noise of the XBOX fans it's a gain.

It's not like I was seeking these features out, but they do seem to have a place just as long as they don't try to do too much. I have no desire to open a web browser up using a TV remote. However, if there was a way to wirelessly stream a laptop screen to the TV without too much added hardware or software then that would be the way to go. Or control the TV with my touchscreen smartphone. Vizio sells some stupid dongle for the iPhone to accomplish this along with some badly programmed app. No thanks, let me know when it doesn't suck.

the apps suck and are snail slow

[alen]

my father in law bought a smart TV because the person in best buy sold it to him
the apps suck
they are so slow its like watching trees grow
netflix is OK but the interface is better on the consoles and apple TV
my mom bought a smart TV with no wifi adapter and doesn't want to spend more money

when i showed her my x-box and what it does and explained that a smart TV only streams content for more money she lost interest. when i showed her how to stream russian TV over the internet to my apple TV without a cable sub her interest peaked.

the best smart TV i have is my apple TV. i can stream the apps from my iphones or ipad to the TV. and some apps are custom built for it so you see the picture on the TV and data stays on the device. like the wii u and 3ds do with their multiple screens

Of course I don't need an internet-connected TV

[Khyber]

You know why they suck? Because we have devices far more powerful than what they put in these TVs, which are more capable in the department of handling internet stuff.

This is why my 32" Samsung is a TV/monitor ONLY. Every other device I have hooked to it has all the 'smart' capability I need.

I use my Samsung Smart TV

[BenJeremy]

We mostly watch Netflix, YouTube, etc... and also use it to connect to our DLNA server for movies and TV shows.

Crappy Javascript games and apps, though? Why would I?

Still... as long as the "Smart" in the TV is geared towards watching content, we will always use it.

For our "dumb" other TVs we are forced to use "Smart" Blu-ray players to get our content.

Sucks - Canadian Style

[rueger]

I bought Sony BluRay specifically because I wanted to access content via the 'net instead of paying robber baron cable company prices.

My immediate thought was NetFlix, until I found out that we low-life Canadians only are allowed to access one quarter of the content available in the US. Despite paying the same price. So as well as paying Netflix their $8 a month, I pay a second company another $5 a month so that it looks like we're living in the US. Of course the Sony box is the one Internet unit in the house that won't let you set the DNS address - despite being the only thing that needs it, so the entire house is now pretending to be American.

I still have to say that Netflix interface sucks big time, either on the 'net, or on the TV. The only way to use it is to search, as there's no sensible browse method.

Because we're in Canada our Sony box doesn't get us stuff like Hulu or Google TV or Amazon Prime. We do get Crackle. Oh joy. And the option to pay Sony on a pay per view basis for whatever they're flogging.

What I found with this box: I can't use the built in browser to play back content on the web. I mean really folks?? My hometown TV station streams their newscast, but you won't allow me to see it? There's a thing called vRadio that plays streaming radio stations, but again you only get what Sony decides you want. There's no option to add other stations.

Gave Servioo a whirl, and Plex, but haven't had the time or patience to figure out why they won't get video from my Ubuntu box to the TV via the Sony.

Really, my complaint isn't that I'm locked into Sony's choices, it's that I'm locked out of 95% of the Internet.

Including, and this really surprised me, any and all sports programming.

I guess I'm spoiled by using Linux and Android/Cyanogenmod, but I really feel that this box needs to be jailbroken so that the user can make full use of it's capabilities.

Roku TV

[na1led]

I'm really surprised we haven't seen a TV with Roku built in. IMO Roku is the best IPTV box out there when it comes to simple design interface, and lots of Internet channels. If they could add UPnP it would be even better. I'm curious about Ubuntu TVs which should be coming next year.

Consumer confusion

[scotts13]

My Significant Other can afford the best of everything; not stupid but not a computer/internet specialist. She has a high-end internet-enabled TV, an internet-enabled BluRay player, and a TiVo (with internet features). All have the ability to access, say, YouTube, but each component has a slightly different interface and capabilities. She's gotten lost and frustrated in the interface(s) so many times (Was it the YouTube viewer accessed through the TV, or the other one? What interface on the receiver do I use?) that she no longer uses ANY of the features. She's locked all the remotes but the one for the TiVo in the closet; she doesn't even play DVD's anymore, because if she switches to that input she's afraid she won't find her way back.

Thanks, consumer electronics industry.

out of step, yet again

[PopeRatzo]

Man, I'm really out of the mainstream, I guess. The only thing our TV is used for is Netflix, via Roku, and occasionally DVDs and sometimes some of the other Internet TV streams. My daughter used to watch some Saturday morning cartoons, but that was over a decade ago. I remember a particular show she watched that had animated foodstuffs fighting with martial arts. Since the quality of network offerings in that area were nowhere near the quality of the Saturday morning cartoons when I was a kid, my daughter's interest only lasted a few years (whereas I can still be transfixed by Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, George of the Jungle, Rocky and Bullwinkle, et al.

We've never had any cable or satellite service. If it wasn't for an occasional sporting event, there wouldn't even be a need for a tuner.

Oh, and we watched a few minutes of the election returns.

But I've learned over the years that I am absolutely not unique, so there's a a good chance that there are some (or maybe a lot) of people out there who are using their TVs the same way we're using ours.

Oh C'mon

[MikShapi]

TVs with REAL brains (read: Android or iOS) not out yet.
We know that.

Nobody else (that includes you, Samsung) has either invested heavily in developing a suitable OS, has not published capable APIs, nor have they worn the long hard slog of gearing up an app and app developer ecosystem. The "feature-rich" UI's of current televisions are rubbish.
We know that.

You can attach an android or iOS brain to the TV and do more with it.
A very small subset of the population does this (and we here on this site happen to correlate nicely with it.)
We know that.

TVs with android brains are still rare but forthcoming.
They are (still) (unneccesarily) pitched as high-end and expensive (most people buy the 800$ loss leader unknown-brand 55'' at the isle entry, not the 4000$ samsung).
We know that.

In five years time, there'll be a brain - same brain powering $50 android phones in Asia today - in everyone's TV running Android. That TV will be sold as the $800 loss leader at the entry to the isle in the store.
And I suspect we all know that that's where the harsh competition will lead the industry.

Re:Leave the tuner out too

[realityimpaired]

Err...you know, they do sell large format, HD monitors out there, with no tuner, etc.

They can't actually call it a TV if it doesn't have a tuner, though, which means that they're harder to lay your hands on, and at least in my experience more expensive than an equivalently sized "TV" despite having *less* electronics. Supply and Demand. :)

Besides which, the tuner is very useful to folks like me who'd rather buy a pair of rabbit ears than pay a monthly tithe to a cable company. It's also really not that difficult to connect it back into the A/V system. I put the TV on an HDMI input from the A/V system and plug my BluRay, etc. into the A/V system by HDMI. I plug the optical audio out from the TV into a different input on the HDMI. When I want to watch an OTA broadcast, I switch input on the TV and set the A/V system to the input from the TV. When I want to watch something else, I switch back to the input from the A/V system and use it as a switch.

And if *that* is too difficult for people, then buy a TV with more than one HDMI input, and just run optical audio out to the A/V system. Use the TV as the input switch. A reasonably high end TV will pass the HD audio through the optical without breaking the HDMI authentication chain. The only reason I'm not doing it that way myself is that the TV only has 3 HDMI inputs while the stereo has 6.

Re:People Said The Same Thing About Smart Phones T

[Anonymous Coward]

I just spent a weekend at my sisters and realised the hell that some people live in with their TVs.
Sony VHS player.
Toshiba DVD player
Sky Decoder
Component Receiver and 5.1 speaker system.
Connecting it all to a really old school Plasma (no DVI, only 1 PC input and one component input)
To turn it all on requires using no less than three remotes! And then because she is 100% legal, is reliant on Sky's timetable, and has given up trying to record to watch later because getting the VHS or DVD recorder to get teh right channel is near impossible for her.
TV hell!

My Config:
Sony 40" TV, out to a 7.1 Amp and speakers.
2008 Mac Mini running PLEX front end, and a torrent client with TVShows for getting what I want to watch, and a superdrive to rip DVDs I buy.
FreeNAS runing PLEX Media Server and 2TB storage.
One remote with full mini qwerty keyboard and mouse function, programmed to operate the TV and Amp from the classic remote control buttons, and the KB/Mouse for driving PLEX.
Even my 6-year-old can turn all this on (press the spacebar on the keyboard)

Oh, and dont mention Netflix or Hulu, we dont get those here, and internet bandwidth is still expensive and capped, and often very laggy to the US, so instead of streaming, I prefer to download and play without buffering.

Re:Sounds about right

[hairyfeet]

This is why guys like me that build HTPCs aren't worried about "smart TVs"...because they suck. They aren't updated very often (if at all) and use seriously weak chips anyway so what you end up with is a really poor experience.

My advice would be to look at a DIY kit for an HTPC. If you want high def and low power you should look at an AMD Bobcat, if you don't care about HD you can get an Intel Atom (yes I know about ION but they aren't common or easy to come by anymore and its dead end tech since Nvidia left the chipset biz) and if you want to game or be able to transcode an Athlon or even a Phenom X6 if you can find it on sale would be good.

The nice thing about an HTPC is that you can have the latest browser, flash is no problem, it'll easily take wireless remotes (The Lenovo mini-keyboard with trackball is the one I recommend if you want a small and light remote, easily fits in one hand), Steam had big picture mode which is great for an HTPC, hell its one of the few places Windows 8 makes sense as that fugly metro makes a great 10 foot UI as the tiles are easy to hit. For those that don't want to spend the whole $40 for Win 8 there is OpenELEC which is free, has the XBMC front end, even comes with PVR software baked in and is pre-compiled for various chips so you simply pick the one you've got and away you go.

Once you try an HTPC you'll see how truly limited these "Smart TVs" are and will not want to go back. With the HTPC you can do everything a normal PC can, plus use it as a media tank, with all your movies and music loaded and ready to go, it can play games like a console, and you don't have to use some limited browser that most likely won't be getting updates and is slow to begin with. With OpenELEC you can build one for less than $150, Win 8 less than $200, and frankly the things will just last and last. The whole "Smart TV" is a nice novelty but use it any length of time and as you pointed out the limitations start showing pretty quickly, same with using the consoles to surf.

Re:Sounds about right

[hairyfeet]

Then you should have asked old Hairy as you just didn't know what to look for. If you were my customer I'd ask "What do you want it to do?" and could easily tailor a quiet or even completely noise free system to your requirements. If all you are wanting is a standard noise free HTPC that does 1080P I'd recommend this E350 kit as it has but a single tiny fan on the CPU and is quiet as a churchmouse, and is quite easy to customize to what you want it to do. I'd put a 2GB or 4GB stick along with a 1TB HDD and then its up to you whether you want BD or DVD.

Having built several of these systems I can tell you that it blows a WD Live away, as long as you use fast memory (I recommend the 1333 over the 1066) you can play quite a few games on it, I've personally run L4D, Portal 1 & 2 and Torchlight 1 & 2 on one, and if you want even more power and the ability to play the latest games frankly it isn't hard to slap a Zalman silent on an Athlon or Phenom X4, you simply can't use the mini VCR case due to the size of the heatsink. I've found most of my customers don't really care about the mini VCR case when they see they can have something like this that looks quite stylish sitting next to the TV table, but again if you want to do heavy gaming one will have to put up with a fan or spend more on silent coolers, its all a trade off.

But at the end of the day you really need to look at how long the unit will last, I have a couple of customers that have first gen Athlon X2s I built HTPCs around and they are still happy more than 6 years later, all I did was up the storage when they started running low and as drive prices dropped. and unlike the consoles or smart TVs they can still surf the latest websites, use the latest software, watch flash no problem, its really not hard to build a quiet HTPC with just a little thought beforehand.