Boxee Sold To Samsung

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by timothy on Thursday July 4, 2013 @12:19AM from the korean-volvo dept.

New submitter TheRecklessWanderer writes "Boxee, manufacturer of The Boxee Box and Boxee DVR as well as developer of the Boxee software, has been sold to Samsung. Boxee has had a hard time adapting to the quickly changing environment where appliances have converged with televisions (morphing into Smart TVs), and I'm sure Samsung is looking to integrate the software in some form or another into their smart TVs."

13 of 128 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Oh, by the way... by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · 2013-07-04 00:31 · Score: 4, Insightful

However, the beta Cloud DVR functionality we provided to certain Boxee TV users will be discontinued on July 10th. You will not have access to your existing recordings after that date. We realize many of you loved the service, and we're sorry it won't be available moving forward.

Cloud, shmoud. I wonder how many times we see variations of this over the next few years?
1. Re:Oh, by the way... by somersault · 2013-07-04 00:48 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  You say that as if it's a bad thing. If you are stupid enough to put something highly monetisable into a cloud service without at least encrypting it, you deserve what you get.. otherwise, yeah, who gives a shit?
  Anyway, those types of services are for convenient synchronisation and data access - not for backup of essential data (unless you have a machine somewhere that you only activate every so often and synch as a backup).
  
  --
  which is totally what she said
2. Re:Oh, by the way... by hairyfeet · 2013-07-04 03:31 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Wow, its nice to know that elitism and being an arrogant asshole is alive and well on the Internet.
  The reason Mr Arrogant that users want this is because THEY DON'T KNOW BETTER and are fricking bombarded with all these "the cloud is magical" ads constantly and they have ZERO clue as to how any of this shit works, but for you to expect that Joe and Jane average is gonna understand the nature of the cloud, encryption, and the value of data control is elitism at its most douchebaggy.
  So how about instead of saying "Fuck them noobs LULZ" your ass put some of your time where your mouth is and try educating people? I try to spend at least an hour or two of my extremely limited free time online going to sites where there are plenty of noobs so i can point out the risks with this or that technology and showing them how they DO have alternatives. Its nice to get all these emails saying things like "Hey thanks for pointing me to several alternatives, i bought the one you suggested and its been working great, thanks again" and at least I'm doing my little part to share knowledge and experience and to point people away from these DRM "cloud in a box" solutions that just hand control to the corps.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Re:Microsoft Media Center by NFN_NLN · 2013-07-04 00:34 · Score: 3, Funny

Microsoft Media Center. That is all.
If Samsung started building Microsoft Media Center into their smart TVs, I would stop viewing them as an option.
Smart TV? Help me understand... by jeffb+(2.718) · 2013-07-04 01:02 · Score: 5, Insightful

I'm in the market for a new TV. Since I'm very, very old, I'm upgrading from a 25-year-old CRT TV, and I don't think I care much about 4K. I'm prone to VR sickness, so I don't want 3D, either.
I realize that I probably can't count on my next TV lasting 25 years. But why on Earth would I want my media box built into my television, so that following the curve of technological advancement means pitching the entire huge TV into the waste stream? A media box has a single, well-defined interface to the TV -- one cord, a few if you want to get fancy -- and occupies not very many cubic inches of space. What's the advantage of integrating it into the TV, other than increasing the TV manufacturer's profit margin?
Someone upthread issued flamebait about MS Media Center, and I'm surprised the flamebait for Apple TV didn't appear even sooner. To me, buying a "Smart TV" is buying into another ecosystem just like them, only with a much tinier R&D budget, probably a less-polished UI, and much dimmer prospects for long-term support.
1. Re:Smart TV? Help me understand... by drinkypoo · 2013-07-04 01:23 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  If I could get Google TV integrated into my TV for little money, I'd take it. It's relatively open, etc. I wouldn't pay a lot. But I would actively avoid a TV with a highly proprietary software stack, and I certainly wouldn't pay very much for any integrated system.
  It seems like they ought to be able to add in the functionality we're talking about for twenty or thirty bucks, though, given the price of a Raspberry Pi. I would certainly pay thirty dollars to get Google TV added to a decent-sized TV.
  It also seems to me that if we had a standard involving a power jack, an HDMI connection, and CEC, that we could have upgradable media player modules. It's not rocket surgery. But of course, it would require cooperation, which is why it won't happen.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
2. Re:Smart TV? Help me understand... by MightyYar · 2013-07-04 02:01 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  But why on Earth would I want my media box built into my television, so that following the curve of technological advancement means pitching the entire huge TV into the waste stream?
  You don't pitch it - you use the built-in media box until it becomes obsolete, and then you hook up an external box and use it like a dumb TV. At the end of the day, you've spent money on one less media box.
  
  --
  W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
3. Re:Smart TV? Help me understand... by laffer1 · 2013-07-04 02:02 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  As someone who owns a smart tv, an apple tv and a ps3, you're not confused. Smart TV features suck in TVs. They do update them periodically regardless if you want them to or not and the menus are awful to navigate. A few times, I've had to reboot my TV due to a flaky update. Buying a new $100 set top box is no big deal... I upgraded the original apple tv to a v2 some years back painlessly. I get a few years out of one and buy a new one when they actually add features I care about. With the TV, I don't want it to do much.. in reality i just want a monitor with a remote to turn it on and off. I don't use the tuner. I don't change the input source. It's all through my receiver and cable box. If anything, I want a dumb tv.
  
  --
  MidnightBSD: The BSD for Everyone
4. Re:Smart TV? Help me understand... by ArcadeMan · 2013-07-04 02:59 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  You want a computer monitor.
  
  --
  Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
5. Re:Smart TV? Help me understand... by maccodemonkey · 2013-07-04 08:59 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  I'm in the market for a new TV. Since I'm very, very old, I'm upgrading from a 25-year-old CRT TV, and I don't think I care much about 4K. I'm prone to VR sickness, so I don't want 3D, either.
  I realize that I probably can't count on my next TV lasting 25 years. But why on Earth would I want my media box built into my television, so that following the curve of technological advancement means pitching the entire huge TV into the waste stream?
  Samsung TV's have upgradable motherboards so you can upgrade the hardware that drives the smart tv functions independently of the rest of the box.
  http://www.samsung.com/au/consumer/tv-audio-video/television/accessories/SEK-1000/XY?subsubtype=accessories
  I'm not a big Samsung fan, but that's your answer.
Smart TV = Dumb Idea ... by gstoddart · 2013-07-04 01:15 · Score: 5, Insightful

I'm of the opinion that a smart TV is a really stupid idea.
Starting with the fact that I don't trust the vendors (not to spy on me, not to be incompetent at security, not to be douchebags), moving on to the fact that my expected lifespan for the display is longer than the software is going to be useful, and moving on to the fact that they'll eventually try to dictate how I can watch TV and feed that information back to someone else ... I just don't see this as being a good thing for me, the consumer.
My current TV (a nice 55" LCD) is used as a monitor only -- my amplifier feeds it a video signal, which it gets from one of several devices. It doesn't participate in channel selection, volume, or anything other than knowing which video signal it needs.
The way manufacturers are going, any device which isn't a full-on computer is never going to be connected to a network, and won't be bought if it requires that. Not my DVD player, not my video game, not my TV. At least not without a firewall rule which prevents it from getting to the internet.
Because they keep demonstrating they're not trustworthy.
I'm not prepared to have some asshole corporation sneak updates onto my TV, or randomly update the EULA saying they're allowed to do whatever bullshit they've come up with this week, or generally act like they own the device when I paid for it.
These smart devices mostly just seem to give the corporations more control over stuff we paid for. Which I'm sure they think is awesome, but I'll pass.

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Re:Plex on Roku by drinkypoo · 2013-07-04 01:25 · Score: 4, Insightful

It seems to work well enough for the purposes, and avoids the XBMC issue of needing a general purpose computing device in the living room.
Unfortunately, it swaps it for having to run your desktop PC and your media player at the same time. That's fine for people whose storage is connected directly to their PC anyway, but for those with NAS it's wasteful.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
No by yoink! · 2013-07-04 02:41 · Score: 5, Informative

FTA: "Boxee has had a hard time adapting to the quickly changing environment where appliances have converged with televisions (morphing into Smart TVs), and I'm sure Samsung is looking to integrate the software in some form or another into their smart TVs."
No. Boxee shunned the very people who championed their product, locking down their previously open software, based on already-open software, and mating it to poor hardware. Boxee abandoned all that made them Boxee to begin with. (I can't seem to find the multi-page comment thread from Boxee's blog when they announced EOL for the still-buggy Boxee-box - maybe someone can get it [FIXED].)
For those who aren't in the loop, a simple (and not yet fully exploited) "hack" was found: http://boxeeplus.com/