Slashdot Mirror
What Is the Future of the Television? (ben-evans.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Benedict Evans has an interesting post about where television hardware is headed. In the 1990s and early 2000s, the tech industry made a huge push to invade the living room, trying to make the internet mesh with traditional TV broadcasts. As we all know, their efforts failed. Now, we periodically see new waves of devices to attach to the TV, but none have been particularly ambitious. The most successful devices of the recent wave, like the Chromecast and Apple TV, are simply turning the TV into a dumb screen for streamed content. Meanwhile, consumption of all types of video content is growing on smaller screens — tablets, phones, etc. Even game consoles are starting to see their market eroded by boxes like the Steam Link, which acts as a pipe for a game being played elsewhere on a PC. It raises an intriguing question: where is the television headed? What uses and functions does one giant screen serve that can't be cleverly redistributed to smaller screens? Evans concludes, "The web's open, permissionless innovation beat the closed, top-down visions of interactive TV and the information superhighway."
Just give me enough dumb screen to give me a 47 degree field of view from my chair, and I'm happy. What I plug into that screen could be anything. It could even be a cable box, thus turning into a "television."
The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
Ow My Balls!
The future of television is on-demand and not scheduled programming with the option to pay subscription fees to kill all advertising. This means no cable TV as we currently see it. All TV programming will be sent over IP networks. Over the air local TV stations will start offering TV streaming to smart TV's, and will retire their transmitters. The spectrum will be freed up for other uses.
My take on Advertising: Advertising is a scourge which causes weak minded people to go into debt wasting money purchasing things they don't need. Think of it as the 20th/21st century Jedi Mind Trick.
- Projectors cast shadows when you walk in front of them.
- They generally get duller or break more than a TV over time.
- They are just as - if not more - expensive as a TV over time.
- They get hot, and can be noisy, and sound often sucks compared to an equivalent TV (granted, some people have separate audio systems).
- As you said, you can get 720p. I had that on a monitor back in the 1990's. In fact, I'm pretty sure I beat that quite handsomely. HD is a downgrade for anyone that was used to the first wave of 22" LCD monitors. 720p barely cuts it on a large projected screen (and I'm one of those people who doesn't see the need for HD even!). TV's are going into 4k as we speak, and that means huge res at huge size where you CAN utilise all that resolution.
- You've got to go some to pull a 65" TV off the wall. Projectors can be pulled from even ceiling mounts and put under a coat (trust me, I've filled out the insurance forms for work).
I work in schools. We have DOZENS of projectors on site. Even in a massive industry like education, we're all moving to large-screen touch TV's for the above reasons. Even fancy short-throws mounted above the boards are no longer in vogue.
Projectors have a lot of problems that TV's don't have. The only advantage is (sort of) portability, but for any serious setup, you wouldn't be able to move it around anyway.
I think there should be advances in OTA broadcast technology.
Several years ago I decided that I was tired of paying $50 a month to Comcast for a whole slew of channels I never ever watched, a handful I did, and all the shitty extra re-compression they were doing to jam all the crap channels I never watched into the same size pipe, and got an antenna on the roof and started watching local broadcast stations instead, and never looked back once. Best decision I ever made. I've got more stuff on my DVR than I have time to watch, typically, it cost me nothing other than a one-time expense for the antenna, and the picture quality is about as high as it can be. Updating of OTA broadcast, I think, will find more people turning to it and away from shitty cable and satellite, which is already a trend. Streaming over the Internet, I think, is just another 'pay TV' trap like cable and satellite, and as a matter of fact if you think for a moment, how is it really any different than cable or satellite directly connected to your TV? Worse in some ways, you're paying for the connectivity and paying for the content! Get Netflix or something like it for the things you can't get OTA (newer movies, specific content) but OTA makes so much sense.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
I do not have a television but I do have a computer with a 3 monitor PC setup (24" 27" 24") and a good surround setup. I would by a "TV" if I could get a big basic screen with a decent resolution - but they simply don't sell those. 40" with supposed "HD" which is really 720p half-HD? This the dark ages? Am I to be impressed with a resolution lower than the average cellphone?
I also do NOT want a "smart" screen ("TV") with some ultra lame SOC which will be outdated in a month running some garbage OS with a lot of bugs and no chance of future updates. These "Android on a stick" type things are likely selling because you can simply replace them with newer models when you feel like it without buying a brand new screen.
I also do NOT want to pay for a garbage tin-can sounding "stereo" when I buy a SCREEN ("TV"). That joke of an amplifier combined with poor quality stereo speakers they include in TVs have no place anywhere near my living-room.
I personally don't even want that "TV decoder" part of a TV, it's not like any of the channels offered are worth wasting time on anyway. The supposed "news" the "mainstream media" offer is nothing but fascist propaganda mixed with entertainment and watching TV shows with commercial breaks it out of the question.
In short: I personally HOPE that the answer to "What is the future of Television" is nothing, I hope it dies and like the telegraph. If someone were to offer a big screen with an acceptable resolution with nothing but inputs and outputs on the back then I would probably buy that. As it stands right now I don't have a television and I do not want one and I would not accept one if I got one for free.
9/11: Never forget it was a false-flag operation
Some very interesting points! I agree with most of them. However:
... can be noisy, and sound often sucks compared to an equivalent TV (granted, some people have separate audio systems)."
"- They are just as - if not more - expensive as a TV over time."
I paid about $600 for mine, brand new. And because it uses LED instead of a regular bulb it does not get hot like a traditional projector. Nor do I need to replace the bulb ($300) every 3000 hours or so. LED bulb (non-replaceable) on this projector is supposed to last approximately 20,000 hours. So about the same price as a basic TV.
"- They generally get duller or break more than a TV over time."
Mine still works perfectly after 4 years. No degraded picture or problems.
"-
The fan can be a little annoying, depending on where the device is situated. Sound goes to the stereo so audio isn't an issue.
"but for any serious setup, you wouldn't be able to move it around anyway."
The tripod stand is also quite portable. Seriously.
"I work in schools. We have DOZENS of projectors on site."
Projectors may not be the best solution in your case - schools. However, the article specifically mentioned "invading the living room". I normally use my projector in the living room.
"Projectors have a lot of problems that TV's don't have."
That's kind of a moot point. TV's have a lot of problems that projectors don't have.
The biggest reason that I went for a projector as opposed to a TV is a large, portable display. That, and there's nothing like helping friends and relatives move and lugging around some behemoth 50lb+ 52 inch TV, up and down stairs and trying not to scratch the walls or damage the TV. My projector is about as big and heavy as a home DSL router.
Projectors may not be for everyone but they are certainly worth looking into.
Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
I'm getting older. I don't need glasses yet, but after many hours of looking at a nearby screen my vision gets blurry. Looking at something far away keeps my eyes happier. So now I use a bluetooth mouse & keyboard, plug my box into my big screen, and browse/read/CLI/program from the couch. Television means distant seeing; just what I need.
On the one hand you take life too seriously, and on the other, you do not take playful existence seriously enough. Seth
"I like to watch." - Quote from Chauncy Gardener (Peter Sellers) in the movie 'Being There'.
Many people leave the TV on all day, some all night. Some have multiple TVs on in different rooms. These people tend to be home alone and their television is a 'companion'. They like the stream of voices, especially happy voices like from game shows. They usually don't actually watch a show, almost never from beginning to end. They get sound bites, they see an occasional pleasant scene as they vacuum the floor or wash dishes or talk on the phone.
Clearly these are not /. people, but they vastly outnumber us. They are the demographic that advertisers want to reach. TV ads slip in to the distracted mind unnoticed where they can have maximum impact on the subconscious.
The future of television for the masses of dull ignorant people is exactly what we have. What we have had since B&W Jackie Gleason shows. Lots of easily accessible mindless entertainment for mindless people. Thank goodness for some new producers who offer more stimulating fare.
...omphaloskepsis often...
My home theater setup is a 60" plasma screen attached to my laptop. It's only used as a display panel, but it works fine for that (text isn't great, but movies are). I enjoy a real home theater setup over any tablet or whatever. I doubt that use is going away.
I think the big failure is that "Smart TVs" just aren't quite good enough to replace the "TV sticks", or at least not at a competitive price. But a big dumb display panel that looks great; that I want.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
And in 20 years, both of you will realize a close in small screen is a completely dumb idea only a kid would want to have.
Eyesight beyond 40 is NOT conducive to any type of product like that. You'd have to assume lots of medical breakthroughs that are safe, effective, AND inexpensive to fix eyesight first.
Now get off my lawn.
An atheist, a vegan, and a guy who doesn't own a TV walk into a bar. I only know because they told everyone within 2 minutes.