Slashdot Mirror


Intel's Rumored TV Plans Would Compete With Apple, Google

Nerval's Lobster writes "Google tried to extend its influence to televisions, an effort that largely crashed and burned. Apple executives call Apple TV a 'hobby,' although it's been long-rumored that their company has a television set in the works. And Microsoft's made a muscular attempt to conquer the living room with the Xbox, which now does a lot more than just video games. If current rumors prove correct, you can soon add Intel to that list of IT giants with an eye on televisions. According to TechCrunch and SlashGear, the chip manufacturer is prepping to unveil a first-generation television system of some sort at next month's Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. TechCrunch suggests that Intel will debut the system on a city-by-city basis, similar to what Google's doing with Google Fiber, in order to maintain 'more flexibility in negotiating licensing with reluctant content providers.' (The publication's information comes from the ever-popular unnamed sources.) In essence, Intel is proposing a set-top box paired with a subscription service, which would provide a mixture of traditional programming alongside streaming content."

14 of 82 comments (clear)

  1. Better than Ultrabook I hope... by erp_consultant · · Score: 2

    Hopefully Intel learned a few lessons with their Ultrabook fiasco. Those things were DOA.

    1. Re:Better than Ultrabook I hope... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think they have, much like MS is losing very badly with Windows 8, WP8 and Surface.

      With Apple, my content syncs with my iPad, my iPhone, our iPods and the Apple TV. iTunes makes it all work and sync together. The rating and playlists work nicely too. There's a store to buy TV shows and music at decent prices legally but you can still use content from other sources. It works on all Windows and Mac PCs. And it's so incredibly slick and polished too. The new Remote app is incredible. Being able to control what's playing with my iPad with an interface like this is priceless. It's like a dream... albeit a pricey dream!

      Intel will have yet another media streaming box. Much like all the DLNA players, gaming consoles and countless other devices like the popcorn hour, WD TV, Roku, etc. People who want that already have it. It's all the *other stuff* that's missing. Make it work with Macs and PCs, Android and iOS devices, give me a store, make it work well with online services like Netflix and Hulu, make it "just work" and all, and even then they'd even have to beat Apple on pricing for it to become a big success.

      MS is losing at the game very badly. Their OS got extra DRM for media that people don't watch, FairPlay and Zune are major failures, the new Windows Media Player is unable to play DVDs even if you have the right codecs and hasn't been meaningfully updated in ages, Windows Media Center was supposed to become a paid extra which created huge backslash and that only gets downloaded by pirates as a way to to have a "legally" activated copy of Windows 8... Apple is easily 10 years ahead of them in this game.

    2. Re:Better than Ultrabook I hope... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It is limited and fixated on the whole "walled garden" mentality.

      ... which is what the majority of people want: something that "just works" and isn't hard to use. Apple gives them this, which explains why they are the most valuable technology company.

    3. Re:Better than Ultrabook I hope... by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't worry. Intel will need software for any play in media delivery and content management.

      They fail this every attempt. As bad or worse than does Cisco.

      Failure on the launch pad.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    4. Re:Better than Ultrabook I hope... by thoughtlover · · Score: 2

      ... which is what the majority of people want: something that "just works" and isn't hard to use. Apple gives them this, which explains why they are the most valuable technology company.

      Spoken like a true fan boi! And what a total load of tripe! Apple TV doesn't even play "WMV, AVI, DivX, RealMedia (rm), and Flash format files." So I'd say that's a big fat 'it just doesn't work'. Really, my WD Live+ plays anything I've thrown at it and it was cheaper than an Apple TV and it sees all the SMB mounts on our local network plus the Mac Samba mounts. Apple has remained nothing but a slight disappointment to me since the mid 2000s. I used to be the #1 Evangelist next to Guy Kawasaki back in the 90s, but I really don't care too much for them, anymore. Sad, really. Sorry, I digress a bit, but I really did love them tons.... I still don't understand why they won't let me use my iPhone as a mass-storage device like I could with my iPods.. at least, without the assistance of software I have to pay for and wonder if it's stealing my contacts. **Sigh**

      --
      No sig for you! Come back one year!
  2. divorce from the TV set by zerosomething · · Score: 4, Interesting

    THis isn't the 1950's where the entire entertainment system, TV, HiFi and Phonograph are all integrated into the same box. Some one make a freekin TV monitor without all the tuners and computers in it! I know you can get monitors but could someone make one that cost less than a TV with all that crap in it. Then make the gadgets to attach to the "Monitor". Maybe we could even have 2K and 4K monitors at 50" for less thank $5K?

    --
    It all starts at 0
    1. Re:divorce from the TV set by Nyder · · Score: 3, Funny

      THis isn't the 1950's where the entire entertainment system, TV, HiFi and Phonograph are all integrated into the same box. Some one make a freekin TV monitor without all the tuners and computers in it! I know you can get monitors but could someone make one that cost less than a TV with all that crap in it. Then make the gadgets to attach to the "Monitor". Maybe we could even have 2K and 4K monitors at 50" for less thank $5K?

      No, this is the 10's where the entire entertainment system, TV, Internet Radio and MP3 Player, Plus camera, computer, mic, and the kitchen sink (not really), Not to mention Internet access are integrated into the same box.

      Hmm, shit doesn't change much, does it?

      --
      Be seeing you...
    2. Re:divorce from the TV set by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 2

      Some one make a freekin TV monitor without all the tuners and computers in it! I know you can get monitors but could someone make one that cost less than a TV with all that crap in it.

      It wouldn't cost much less, though. Multiple inputs, with a means to switch between them? You'd want those. Speakers and an audio amplifier? Probably not necessary, but certainly nice-to-have as audio is carried over HDMI. Basically the only thing you'd probably want to remove is the tuner, and that's probably a dollar's worth of hardware in terms of a tuner on a chip and an antenna input.

    3. Re:divorce from the TV set by vux984 · · Score: 2

      Basically the only thing you'd probably want to remove is the tuner,

      And the camera and microphone, i don't ever plan to video skype with the TV's built in app. Nor do I plan to use its useless gesture controls. Nor do I plan to use its woefully insecure capabilities as a video surveillance system.

      And the wifi chip. I don't need my TV on the network. I'm not using skype, and the netflix app is worse then the one on my HTPC, my xbox, and my wiiu.

      And without wifi and cameras and what not I can do without the whole app thing too. TV apps are as a bad as those awful DVD games they dump on disney movies.

      And DLNA or whatever, lose that too. It doesn't work well, and I stream stuff over to it thtough one of the many infinitely better devices i have attached to the TV.

      And the 3d support. Don't need it don't use it.

      And the tuner. Don't have an antenna. Never will.

      And honestly, i could do without all the inputs too along with the speakers; I bought a modern receiver, everything plugs into it, and I have one HDMI cable running from the receiver up to the TV. I realize I don't speak for everyone here but for me all I want is a large high quality display. The only feature i'm interested in is pictual quality: contrast, viewing angles, refresh rate, etc. That's it.

      Oh and a good remote control system. Not that i use the remote they provide -- I have a harmony one. Nothing is more frustrating to integrate with a universal programmable remote than a tv that only has a power toggle command instead of a dedicated power on/power off. Or a TV that only has a command to cycle inputs or modes instead of commands to go directly to a specified input or mode, etc.

      I'm not sure how much actual hardware i've shaved off the unit, but its more than a little, and I've definitely shaved a ton off of product development and testing.

    4. Re:divorce from the TV set by LoRdTAW · · Score: 2

      The one beef I have with all the bells and whistles on any TV is having multiple HDMI inputs along with a digital audio output but no way to pass the HDMI audio out through the digital audio connector. What is the fucking point of digital audio output then? Surround sound OTR, does that even exist?

      That problem bit my friend in the ass when he bought his Westinghouse 47" a few years ago. He wanted a simple setup and figured the TV would act as an HDMI switch for his PC, Xbox and cable box (It has 4 HDMI inputs). Then he could continue using his older dolby 5.1 receiver by hooking it up to the TV's digital audio output. He thought something was broken because he couldn't get any sound from the digital output when using HDMI but analog worked. He emailed Westinghouse who informed him that due to copyright regulations/agreements, digital audio is not enabled when using HDMI. He had to upgrade his receiver to one with HDMI which made the digital audio output and quad HDMI inputs useless. A stupid waste of money.

  3. What about the backbone? by MrLint · · Score: 2

    It seems of all the folks who want to do TVIP, only Google seems to be taking any action on the sorry ass state of US broadband. The telecomms sure arent. They are in the game of eating taxpayer subsides while lobbying for metered data and data caps. Cable TV has woefully failed at a la carte, instead is a force-fed smorgasbord of rotten tripe, most of which any individual doesn't want.

    I just don't know what will be the tipping point for something to change, will it be when watching tv will become too expensive to do for typical family?

  4. Re:Hardware by UnknowingFool · · Score: 2

    The article seems to imply that Intel will be supply chips for next gen set top boxes rather than make whole products. They currently supply some chips but look likes they are expanding their share. The next gen boxes are supposed to do more; the problem is the content owners still have firm control of content. Getting them to move away from the current model of bundles of channels to a reasonable ala carte system is a challenge. Notice I said "reasonable". The content owners would love to charge exhorbitant amounts for each channel if they could get away with it.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  5. Re:i don't get all this push for tv boxes by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Funny

    do people even watch tv? i haven't had a tv in years.

    Like you, I am too superior for video entertainment. I just meditate and think deep thoughts, unlike TV watchers who wallow in their own filth and poke sharp sticks in their ears.

  6. Future of TV by gr8_phk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The only future I see for TV is when they gain wireless DLNA or some such (Like Apple TV but standardized). Then there's this big screen in the room that anyone can stream stuff too from their phone/whatever. Portable devices then need to be able to encode video for streaming to the big screen so you can use it as a large monitor (with codec dependent latency of course). That's it. All TVs and computer monitors should get this capability in the future. Wired connections should remain available for higher quality and low latency, but TV as display server is the only thing that makes sense IMHO. They'll need to keep tuners for quite a while too.