or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Deep hardware discounts suggest sluggish sales of Google TV
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Deep hardware discounts suggest sluggish sales of Google TV - Page 2

post #41 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

that makes no sense at all. if that is true then the tv would have failed long ago, yet, most manage with the remote, most buy dvd players, xbox, ps3 etc, etc, etc,

TV is fine - all those other things are problems. That is why many families have multiple TVs, multiple computers, multiple DVD players etc. Everyone has different needs and interests. Computing is very interactive and personal and there is no way a communal display device that is also used for movies and gaming is ever going to work in the living room. it would work if deployed in multiple rooms.
post #42 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

The only thing revolutionary about Google TV is that now Google can track you in your living room and collect information they previously had no access to. Why anyone would buy a Google telescreen to enable this is a bit of a mystery.

Your tv provider also collects information about your viewing habits, as will the security services about every other aspect of your life. Get over it. Not buying google does not mean that you are not having information on every aspect of your life tracked. Who cares if google know what you watch on TV seriousllllly??!?!!???
post #43 of 78
First, I think it needs to be said that $399 for Google TV / Blu-Ray player combo device is needlessly expensive. The price reduction brings it down to a non-ridiculous level.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post

The article I'm linking below is from June, but the system is simple. Root your phone, buy an app, back it up, hit the market for your refund, reinstall the backup. Voila, app gotten for free. This has been well documented for quite awhile now.

http://kbeezie.com/view/steal-market-app/

That seems needlessly complicated to get a freebie game. Not only that, one of the comments to that story have this link is a solution that came about in response to the problem:

http://downloadsquad.switched.com/20...nsing-servers/

Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

that makes no sense at all. if that is true then the tv would have failed long ago, yet, most manage with the remote, most buy dvd players, xbox, ps3 etc, etc, etc,

I think I might be stepping on a slightly different conversation, but a lot of remotes are needlessly complicated. I bet most people learn the ten buttons out if sixty that they need, and the other 50 never get used.

Console boxes are fine for the most part, the controller has a lot fewer buttons than a remote, and most of those buttons are justifiable. There's always some room for improvement, but I don't think they're part of the problem.

For example, I don't know if anyone ever uses the number pad on a DVD player remote. Maybe for entering the DVD region unlock code, once that's done, it's set and the owner never needs to touch the number keys again.

A lot of set top box user interfaces are unnecessarily complicated too. My satellite tuner / DVR has such a roundabout method to access the timers that it's not funny. I don't think they did a quality check on the UI at all.
post #44 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjw View Post

Your tv provider also collects information about your viewing habits, as will the security services about every other aspect of your life. Get over it. Not buying google does not mean that you are not having information on every aspect of your life tracked. Who cares if google know what you watch on TV seriousllllly??!?!!???

i agree, and if it means i will get ads targeted to my likes then all the better. i would much rather sit through those ads than stuff i could care less about.
post #45 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

First, I think it needs to be said that $399 for Google TV / Blu-Ray player combo device is needlessly expensive. The price reduction brings it down to a non-ridiculous level.



That seems needlessly complicated to get a freebie game. Not only that, one of the comments to that story have this link is a solution that came about in response to the problem:

http://downloadsquad.switched.com/20...nsing-servers/



I think I might be stepping on a slightly different conversation, but a lot of remotes are needlessly complicated. I bet most people learn the ten buttons out if sixty that they need, and the other 50 never get used.

Console boxes are fine for the most part, the controller has a lot fewer buttons than a remote, and most of those buttons are justifiable.

For example, I don't know if anyone ever uses the number pad on a DVD player remote. Maybe for entering the DVD region unlock code, once that's done, it's set and the owner never needs to touch the number keys again.

A lot of set top box user interfaces are unnecessarily complicated too. My satellite tuner / DVR has such a roundabout method to access the timers that it's not funny. I don't think they did a quality check on the UI at all.

i think that kinect is the way to go (or that type technology) it isn't there yet but soon. i think that is why apple wanted to license it. it is the obvious choice for screens out of reach.
post #46 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasenj1 View Post

Let's accept for the moment that the Google TV 1.0 implementation is seriously flawed. But that is entirely (mostly?) a software issue.

I agree that the user experience is seriously flawed but what is the real downfall is the networks blocking the content. If it's UI thats the problem, you get a small market of geeks who will purchase it, play with it, and in the end drive innovations to the product. If you can't get content then who does this appeal to at $300 (or less with discount)??

I was really interested in how well it was received, it looked a bit awkward and the price kept me from picking one up at launch (unlike the atv) but with the networks blocking the content, I don't have any interest until they work it out. Otherwise I end up with a premium priced, goofy looking blu ray. Really sad...
post #47 of 78
Google TV seems to be a DUD. It's just not what the cunsumer is looking for. While APPLE seems to have gotten onto the right track it also has a long way to go.
For now this remains a field ofconsumer interest and testing without and real Winners around.
post #48 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

That seems needlessly complicated to get a freebie game. Not only that, one of the comments to that story have this link is a solution that came about in response to the problem:

http://downloadsquad.switched.com/20...nsing-servers/

Eh I didn't think that was all that complex, but yeah I'm sure not everyone did it. I hadn't heard the info from that link you posted before. Guess it managed to sneak by under the radar as I would have thought that would deserve a wider distribution. Glad to see that loophole closed tho
post #49 of 78
"When Google TV goes bad" LOL sounds like... "When Animals Attack" ...Or... When Fandroids Attack
post #50 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog View Post

TV is fine - all those other things are problems. That is why many families have multiple TVs, multiple computers, multiple DVD players etc. Everyone has different needs and interests. Computing is very interactive and personal and there is no way a communal display device that is also used for movies and gaming is ever going to work in the living room. it would work if deployed in multiple rooms.

This is where the iPad comes into play.

With some streaming apps like NetFlix, StreamToMe, etc. the iPad becomes a "Personal TV" for watching movies:

-- several people can be in the same room (with earplugs) watching different movies.
-- same as above in the family room with different content being watched by others on the HDTV.
-- several kids watching a movie an iPad (due to the iPad's large screen and wide viewing angle)
-- several people moving to different rooms or outside while watching movies
-- viewus interruptus - where you walk into the kitchen, interrupt your movie for a recipe, then resume the movie.
-- each family member has an iPad instead of his own TV, Computer, etc.

The only thing missing from this scenario is the recording/streaming of Live TV. (And different-colored cases for the iPads -- so you can tell which is whose).

When AT&T U-Verse, Comcast and the like finally wake up, they will offer an iPad app for streaming of live TV.

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #51 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by BUSHMAN4 View Post

Google TV seems to be a DUD. It's just not what the cunsumer is looking for. While APPLE seems to have gotten onto the right track it also has a long way to go.
For now this remains a field ofconsumer interest and testing without and real Winners around.

When you think about it and consider the way GTV was announced/presented, it the difference apparent.

GTV is designed for Googles benefit -- to extend their ad, search, and data gathering services. Benefit to the user/consumer is secondary.

ATV is designed to enhance the consumer experience in managing and presenting personal content (Home Movies, Music, Videos, Photos) as well as streaming (NetFlix) and rental/purchase (iTunes Store).
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #52 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjw View Post

Just a reminder: Android is the fastest growing OS.

Indeed it is...
post #53 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by BUSHMAN4 View Post

Google TV seems to be a DUD. It's just not what the cunsumer is looking for. While APPLE seems to have gotten onto the right track it also has a long way to go.
For now this remains a field ofconsumer interest and testing without and real Winners around.

That's not saying much because Apple TV is still a "hobby".
post #54 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

When you think about it and consider the way GTV was announced/presented, it the difference apparent.

GTV is designed for Googles benefit -- to extend their ad, search, and data gathering services. ...

ATV is designed to enhance the consumer experience ...

ATV is about adding a revenue stream to iTunes. The only way you could argue it's to "enhance the consumer experience" is the work Apple put into revamping ATV for v2, and in the end that was to put more devices to consumers. The reason for the price point and the addition of Netflix is to sell devices. Devices that are tied to iTunes.

If I check my crystal ball, I see iAds integration with network content and genius recommendations for shows based on viewing habits. Don't get me wrong I love my Apple products, but to say they're fighting for the customer vs fighting for the customers dollar is pure poppycock.
post #55 of 78
You mean its not selling cause its overpriced and a terrible product like the original Apple TV? Go figure
post #56 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjw View Post

Your tv provider also collects information about your viewing habits, as will the security services about every other aspect of your life. Get over it. Not buying google does not mean that you are not having information on every aspect of your life tracked. Who cares if google know what you watch on TV seriousllllly??!?!!???

It's just another piece of the Big Brother profile Google is accumulating on every man, woman and child everywhere they can. As for "the security services" it would be illegal for them to do so in the U.S., and that's exactly the reason why Congress axed the TIA program. Why should we allow a private company able and willing to share (and probably already sharing) information with "the security services" to get away with the same thing, as an actual or potential government proxy, we decided the government ought not be doing. Google represents a threat to an open and free society.
post #57 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

It's just another piece of the Big Brother profile Google is accumulating on every man, woman and child everywhere they can. As for "the security services" it would be illegal for them to do so in the U.S., and that's exactly the reason why Congress axed the TIA program. Why should we allow a private company able and willing to share (and probably already sharing) information with "the security services" to get away with the same thing, as an actual or potential government proxy, we decided the government ought not be doing. Google represents a threat to an open and free society.

I'm sorry, but after reading that rant, this image came to mind:

\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
post #58 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

When you think about it and consider the way GTV was announced/presented, it the difference apparent.

GTV is designed for Googles benefit -- to extend their ad, search, and data gathering services. Benefit to the user/consumer is secondary.

ATV is designed to enhance the consumer experience in managing and presenting personal content (Home Movies, Music, Videos, Photos) as well as streaming (NetFlix) and rental/purchase (iTunes Store).

Wow, so GTV is all about extending their brand, but ATV has nothing to do with extending Apple's iTunes brand? Apple is just trying to do a service to the world, without thinking about the bottom line? You must be on the extra strength koolaid...
post #59 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

The only thing revolutionary about Google TV is that now Google can track you in your living room and collect information they previously had no access to. Why anyone would buy a Google telescreen to enable this is a bit of a mystery.

I cannot not agree more. I do not want Google in every aspect of my life. Google search is the only product from google that I use.
post #60 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjw View Post

Your tv provider also collects information about your viewing habits, as will the security services about every other aspect of your life. Get over it. Not buying google does not mean that you are not having information on every aspect of your life tracked. Who cares if google know what you watch on TV seriousllllly??!?!!???

my tv provider does not know what I watch. Where would it pull the info? The air?
post #61 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjbruce View Post

ATV is about adding a revenue stream to iTunes. The only way you could argue it's to "enhance the consumer experience" is the work Apple put into revamping ATV for v2, and in the end that was to put more devices to consumers. The reason for the price point and the addition of Netflix is to sell devices. Devices that are tied to iTunes.

If I check my crystal ball, I see iAds integration with network content and genius recommendations for shows based on viewing habits. Don't get me wrong I love my Apple products, but to say they're fighting for the customer vs fighting for the customers dollar is pure poppycock.

Nobody claimed that Apple was doing it out of charity or good will. Apple's approach is to put themselves in the place of the costumer to determine what they need and see if they can make a profit by satisfying that need.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #62 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

But that's precisely the point.
There is zero indication amongst the general market that there is any interest whatsoever in turning the passive and generally shared living room experience of watching content into a computer browsing experience.

So what about all the people on this forum who were clamoring for Apple to add a browser to the AppleTV before the 2.0 version was announced? Now that Google did it first, the tune seems to have changed. If Apple had done it, what would people here be saying?

Quote:
There is indeed a small segment of single geeks for whom that model may be attractive. But any family with multiple people is barely able to survive 'channel clicking wars' with a simple remote, let alone the nightmare of one person browsing as everyone else has to watch.

What decade are you living? I can't remember the last time I was in a single TV home. The "channel clicking wars" ended some time in the 90's when TV's became cheap commodity items.
post #63 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

So what about all the people on this forum who were clamoring for Apple to add a browser to the AppleTV before the 2.0 version was announced? Now that Google did it first, the tune seems to have changed. If Apple had done it, what would people here be saying?



What decade are you living? I can't remember the last time I was in a single TV home. The "channel clicking wars" ended some time in the 90's when TV's became cheap commodity items.

I don't recall any serious clamor for adding a browser to AppleTV. If the only connection to the Internet available in the home were the TV, then I could see the need. Rather, most homes have one or more computers which are superior for web browsing -- more personal interaction, more legible and interactive display, better navigation with integral keyboard and mouse, more robust caching, bookmarking, tabbing, etc.

What is needed, IMO, is a way to surf the web looking for content, scheduling viewing/recording of shows, getting background information (song lyrics, iMDB info, etc) while concurrent using the TV to display content. We have that in two separate devices: a Desktop, Laptop or Tablet computer and a TV. Each device is designed to excel at certain specialized actives -- Why must one device/activity encroach on the other.

There's an old Army Training lyric that says it best:

"This is my rifle, this is my gun -- this one's for shooting, the other's for fun!


The big mistake of GTV, WebTB, et al: why do we need to display our surfing activity on the TV -- full screen Pic-In-Pic, whatever. It makes no sense at all -- unless we enjoy others watching (and critiquing) our typing.


What would be useful, with something as handy and as friendly as the iPad is to use it to do the surfing, scheduling, accessing (queuing or downloading) content while, separately, the HDTV is doing Its Thing -- playing content from whatever source is currently selected.

Periodically, while surfing with the iPad, we may find something of interest to the larger audience watching the HDTV. Wouldn't it be great if we could pause * the HDTV content, interpose the content * from the iPad for all to see, then resume the paused content to HDTV when desired.

* Live content would be automatically recorded in the background

** song lyrics, iMDB profiles, subzin quotes from movies, background on star players, actors, stats, highlights, etc.


In this scenario, the iPad acts as an independent content surfer, programmer, queuer, scheduler communicating with the ATV or HDTV in the background to set content for later viewing.

Alternately, the iPad can be used, via AirPlay to provide content directly to the ATV.

A third use, would be to add IR capability to the iPad and use as an intelligent universal remote control for all components of the home theater.

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #64 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

So what about all the people on this forum who were clamoring for Apple to add a browser to the AppleTV before the 2.0 version was announced? Now that Google did it first, the tune seems to have changed. If Apple had done it, what would people here be saying?



What decade are you living? I can't remember the last time I was in a single TV home. The "channel clicking wars" ended some time in the 90's when TV's became cheap commodity items.

yes, i don't hear anyone proclaiming that music is best left to the ipod and it shouldn't 'encroach' on other things like a 'computer' or a 'phone'. or that people are complaining about a phone that has a lot of computer type functionality.
if the 'family' is watching a movie then of course you don't browse the web, but many times i have been watching tv and wanted to look up something on wikipedia etc and don't want to go to a computer, or find my ipad. i should be able to do it with the TV.
i guess i am one of the weird ones that has more than one tv in the house and don't see why this is such a big deal OTHER than apple fans need to find something wrong with google tv just because apple tv doesn't do it.
post #65 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

yes, i don't hear anyone proclaiming that music is best left to the ipod and it shouldn't 'encroach' on other things like a 'computer' or a 'phone'. or that people are complaining about a phone that has a lot of computer type functionality.
if the 'family' is watching a movie then of course you don't browse the web, but many times i have been watching tv and wanted to look up something on wikipedia etc and don't want to go to a computer, or find my ipad. i should be able to do it with the TV.
i guess i am one of the weird ones that has more than one tv in the house and don't see why this is such a big deal OTHER than apple fans need to find something wrong with google tv just because apple tv doesn't do it.

Except no one is arguing that. No one is saying "Google TV sucks because it has a browser" or "I would hate it if Apple TV had a browser." And most assuredly no one is saying "I don't like Google TV because it can do things that Apple TV can't", which is one of those lazy "ha ha look at the fan boys" formulations that make these threads such a slog at times. Really, man, make your case on the merits, not what imaginary strawman fan boys are babbling.

Google TV sucks, as it stands, because it's too expensive and too complex and they didn't get their content provider ducks in a row. Google's trying for much more than just sticking a browser on there, they're trying to integrate search and browsing and viewing habits and device control and television watching and web video and god knows what else.

It's actually pretty much what I'd expect from Google, Android being an anomaly which has lulled people into imagining that they're any good at this kind of thing. It maximizes synergies, leverages technologies, exploits the cloud, and is a veritable piñata of valuable tracking info, all without concerning itself overly much with what normal people might want to do while watching TV.

Say what you will about Apple's penchant for simplifying things by narrowing functionality, but you never get the impression that Apple expects its users to rise to their level of technological sophistication so they can bask in the glow of IT nerd mastery.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #66 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Except no one is arguing that. No one is saying "Google TV sucks because it has a browser" or "I would hate it if Apple TV had a browser." And most assuredly no one is saying "I don't like Google TV because it can do things that Apple TV can't", which is one of those lazy "ha ha look at the fan boys" formulations that make these threads such a slog at times. Really, man, make your case on the merits, not what imaginary strawman fan boys are babbling.

Google TV sucks, as it stands, because it's too expensive and too complex and they didn't get their content provider ducks in a row. Google's trying for much more than just sticking a browser on there, they're trying to integrate search and browsing and viewing habits and device control and television watching and web video and god knows what else.

It's actually pretty much what I'd expect from Google, Android being an anomaly which has lulled people into imagining that they're any good at this kind of thing. It maximizes synergies, leverages technologies, exploits the cloud, and is a veritable piñata of valuable tracking info, all without concerning itself overly much with what normal people might want to do while watching TV.

Say what you will about Apple's penchant for simplifying things by narrowing functionality, but you never get the impression that Apple expects its users to rise to their level of technological sophistication so they can bask in the glow of IT nerd mastery.

you mouth off about 'strawmen' yadda yadda and then say 'google tv sucks because its too expensive and too complex.' thanks for taking the straw out of the strawman.
sorry but i am a fan of Woz and not the technically stupid like Jobs. thats just my preference. playskool for playskoolers.
post #67 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

you mouth off about 'strawmen' yadda yadda and then say 'google tv sucks because its too expensive and too complex.' thanks for taking the straw out of the strawman.
sorry but i am a fan of Woz and not the technically stupid like Jobs. thats just my preference. playskool for playskoolers.

That doesn't make any sense. How is observing that Google TV is too expensive and too complex a "straw man"? Do you know what the term means?

Calling Jobs "technically stupid" and the tired old "playskool" thing makes me think you're not really interested in anything but trite Apple bashing. The "playskool" iPhone is the model for the industry, as is the toy iPad. I guess we'll see if the really smart Google TV becomes the template from which all further such devices derive.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #68 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

yes, i don't hear anyone proclaiming that music is best left to the ipod and it shouldn't 'encroach' on other things like a 'computer' or a 'phone'. or that people are complaining about a phone that has a lot of computer type functionality.
if the 'family' is watching a movie then of course you don't browse the web, but many times i have been watching tv and wanted to look up something on wikipedia etc and don't want to go to a computer, or find my ipad. i should be able to do it with the TV.
i guess i am one of the weird ones that has more than one tv in the house and don't see why this is such a big deal OTHER than apple fans need to find something wrong with google tv just because apple tv doesn't do it.

When you are browsing on your TV:

-- how do you enter text into search fields and forms?
-- how do you position the cursor accurately on web pages - hover, click links, controls?
-- can you actually read the text displayed on the large screen as it is lower resolution than an LCD display?
-- would you consider creating a several-paragraph post to an AI forum?
-- especially one where you intermittently highlight text for cut/paste, bold/italic/underline/color, etc.
-- do you have to get up of the couch to actually read what you find or type?
-- do you want others reading your private emails, web history, etc?
-- do you believe there will be enough TV web surfers that web sites will be redesigned for their special requirements, ala mobile and iPad.


Personally, I take my iPad with me everywhere. When I plop down in front of the TV, I can surf without disrupting others. I can answer emails, post to forums like AI, even watch or listen to content (with earphones). Any web text activity that uses the 1008P 46" HDTV (6 feet away) is inferior to the iPad in my lap -- and I don't need a clumsy, kludgey, ginormous kb/trackpad/remote combo to enter text, click or navigate.


To quote David Pogue: "People do not want to surf the Internet on their TV screens (WebTV, AOLTV, Google TV)." I would add AppleTV to that list!

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/25/te...ewanted=2&_r=2

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #69 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

That doesn't make any sense. How is observing that Google TV is too expensive and too complex a "straw man"? Do you know what the term means?

Calling Jobs "technically stupid" and the tired old "playskool" thing makes me think you're not really interested in anything but trite Apple bashing. The "playskool" iPhone is the model for the industry, as is the toy iPad. I guess we'll see if the really smart Google TV becomes the template from which all further such devices derive.

i do know what the term means, but, i am not here to try and do some serious philosophical argumentation. you seem to think that by throwing out such a term that you are, but, when you make statements like 'too expensive and too complex' you show that you do not know what a true philosophical argument is and anyone who understands 'arguments' would see the problem with that statement. so please stop pretending, Aristotle.
post #70 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

i do know what the term means, but, i am not here to try and do some serious philosophical argumentation. you seem to think that by throwing out such a term that you are, but, when you make statements like 'too expensive and too complex' you show that you do not know what a true philosophical argument is and anyone who understands 'arguments' would see the problem with that statement. so please stop pretending, Aristotle.

Holy shit. (backs away slowly)
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #71 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

When you are browsing on your TV:

-- how do you enter text into search fields and forms?
-- how do you position the cursor accurately on web pages - hover, click links, controls?
-- can you actually read the text displayed on the large screen as it is lower resolution than an LCD display?
-- would you consider creating a several-paragraph post to an AI forum?
-- especially one where you intermittently highlight text for cut/paste, bold/italic/underline/color, etc.
-- do you have to get up of the couch to actually read what you find or type?
-- do you want others reading your private emails, web history, etc?
-- do you believe there will be enough TV web surfers that web sites will be redesigned for their special requirements, ala mobile and iPad.


Personally, I take my iPad with me everywhere. When I plop down in front of the TV, I can surf without disrupting others. I can answer emails, post to forums like AI, even watch or listen to content (with earphones). Any web text activity that uses the 1008P 46" HDTV (6 feet away) is inferior to the iPad in my lap -- and I don't need a clumsy, kludgey, ginormous kb/trackpad/remote combo to enter text, click or navigate.


To quote David Pogue: "People do not want to surf the Internet on their TV screens (WebTV, AOLTV, Google TV)." I would add AppleTV to that list!

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/25/te...ewanted=2&_r=2

.

no one would claim that google has solved the problems that you bring up. all good questions i agree. they just took a stab at it. good for them. i am willing to take a stab at it too with their product and play around. i am not interested in apples uninteresting and 'safe' netflix box. push the boundaries a bit for christ sake!
post #72 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

When you are browsing on your TV:

-- how do you enter text into search fields and forms?

I believe both versions of GTV have a way to control an arrow on the screen that you can use to select the field. Then type on the keyboard as normal. This is the Chrome browser here.

Quote:
-- how do you position the cursor accurately on web pages - hover, click links, controls?

Just like the above. Logitech's keyboard has a trackpad on it. Sony's controller has an area on the top right that acts like those thumb nubs you see on laptops.

Quote:
-- can you actually read the text displayed on the large screen as it is lower resolution than an LCD display?

Lower? As far as I can tell, all LED/LCD TVs can run 1080p, which is 1920x1080 pixels. That's higher resolution than many laptop monitors and about on-par with desktop monitors. Now you might mean lower density because it's over 46" instead of 18" - 24". From the videos and demo units I've played with, I don't personally find it difficult to read text.

Quote:
-- would you consider creating a several-paragraph post to an AI forum?

There's a keyboard to type on. I don't see how it'll be any different than if you sat down in front of your laptop or desktop to type.

Quote:
-- especially one where you intermittently highlight text for cut/paste, bold/italic/underline/color, etc.

I believe the browser still recognizes the normal keyboard shortcuts. And there's the before-mentioned trackpad and thumb nub to control the selection. Not as natural as a mouse though.

Quote:
-- do you have to get up of the couch to actually read what you find or type?

You can zoom in/out on the browser.

Quote:
-- do you want others reading your private emails, web history, etc?

Depends on which TV you're doing it on. If it's on in your bedroom, then likely you won't have this issue. For a living room TV, then it'll depend on how comfortable you are with the people around you. Or just don't do it on the TV while they're there.

Quote:
-- do you believe there will be enough TV web surfers that web sites will be redesigned for their special requirements, ala mobile and iPad.

As far as I can tell, Chrome supports viewing of websites no differently than any other browser. I don't think anyone will need to do any modifications.
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
post #73 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

When you are browsing on your TV:

-- how do you enter text into search fields and forms?
-- how do you position the cursor accurately on web pages - hover, click links, controls?

To borrow a phrase, "There's an app for that." Use you iPhone or Android phone.

Quote:
-- can you actually read the text displayed on the large screen as it is lower resolution than an LCD display?
-- do you have to get up of the couch to actually read what you find or type?

I assume you meant computer display, not LCD display since my TV is an LCD display. I can read the text in my PS3's browser on my 37" 1080P TV (and it's one of the worst browsers I've ever used). Plus there's a thing called zoom which will make it easier to read text. I bet a lot of iPhone users can attest to how useful that feature is.

Quote:
-- would you consider creating a several-paragraph post to an AI forum?
-- especially one where you intermittently highlight text for cut/paste, bold/italic/underline/color, etc.

No, but I wouldn't consider doing that on an iPhone or Android phone either (and probably not the iPad either).

Quote:
-- do you want others reading your private emails, web history, etc?

Why would I pull up my private email on the TV? And, no I wouldn't care about my web history. What sites are you going to that you don't want others to see? (Let me guess, a Justin Bieber fan site.)

There are some use cases that just don't work for browsing on a TV, but there are plenty that do. Just like there are use cases for browsing that don't work on an iPhone or iPad. There's been numerous times that I've seen something on TV or a movie I was watching that had me running to my computer to look something up. Maybe a product on Amazon or looking up actor info from the IMDB.

Quote:
-- do you believe there will be enough TV web surfers that web sites will be redesigned for their special requirements, ala mobile and iPad.

Why not? If sites are being redesigned for iPads and smartphones, why not TV sets as well? What's the difference?
post #74 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

Why would I pull up my private email on the TV? And, no I wouldn't care about my web history. What sites are you going to that you don't want others to see? (Let me guess, a Justin Bieber fan site.)

See, there has to be a bit of common sense that needs to be applied here. The TV (unless in a bedroom) can be considered a public device, since it's shared among family/friends. If you don't want people finding out that you go to porn sites (or whatever sites you would find embarrassing), then don't do it on the living room TV. If you do and it shows up when you use GTV in front of your friends/family, then that's not the GTV's fault. That's yours.

But I would think that there's a way to clear the history anyway.
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
post #75 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

..... Use you iPhone or Android phone.

There's been numerous times that I've seen something on TV or a movie I was watching that had me running to my computer to look something up. Maybe a product on Amazon or looking up actor info from the IMDB.

If you already have your smartphone in your hand, then why......?
post #76 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot View Post

If you already have your smartphone in your hand, then why......?

I think it has something to do with you having a huge screen in front of you as opposed to that small one in your hand.
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
post #77 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSquirrel

The article I'm linking below is from June, but the system is simple. Root your phone, buy an app, back it up, hit the market for your refund, reinstall the backup. Voila, app gotten for free. This has been well documented for quite awhile now.

http://kbeezie.com/view/steal-market-app/

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

That seems needlessly complicated to get a freebie game. Not only that, one of the comments to that story have this link is a solution that came about in response to the problem:

While that is true, consider this: an .apk has no DRM protection, once a single person performs that task they can upload the .apk to file sharing sites or to other users so that even non-rooted phones can install them. So that basically means, not only is it possible to do right from the market place, you could instead check out popular file sharing sites for the apps.
post #78 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kbeezie View Post

While that is true, consider this: an .apk has no DRM protection, once a single person performs that task they can upload the .apk to file sharing sites or to other users so that even non-rooted phones can install them. So that basically means, not only is it possible to do right from the market place, you could instead check out popular file sharing sites for the apps.

Whoops, that cuts a few steps right there.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Deep hardware discounts suggest sluggish sales of Google TV