Sony racing to beat Apple to next-generation of connected TV sets - Page 2

Sony has great engineers. Sony has products that range from mediocre to great.

But I will never again buy a Sony product, because their customer service is horrible.

deleted

Sony has great engineers. Sony has products that range from mediocre to great.

But I will never again buy a Sony product, because their customer service is horrible.

Yep. Touch interfaces are waaay more flexible than using 4 directional arrows to highlight on-screen items. And a remote of a bajillion buttons isn't terribly appealing, being too confusing for casual users and too static for the advanced functionality of hard-core geeks.

The future of TV is tied to smart phones and tablets. Dedicated hardware can be used but so can the devices everyone already has in their pockets. TVs will eventually support both.

AirPlay has given everyone a glimpse of the future. But so far, it has only been a glimpse. I can't wait!

They are like Microsoft. They have lots of "concepts" planned. Just nothing that could be a decent product without a bet-the-company type move.

The future is mobile. Mobile everything. While there will be some of us that will constantly say a bigger screen is better, everyday use scenarios are heading towards mobile platforms. The moment broadcast tv becomes easy to use and accessible on most tablets and mobile phones will be the day tv sets become less of an everyday electronic item and more of an event (or curiosity) piece of tech for gatherings or guests, where you occasionally play a game, watch a sporting event or movie. It is even happening now with some households.

We are not there yet due to content owners and cable operators fearing the worst but eventually we will get there. Things die out eventually. Once the old guard leaves and forward thinking individuals replace them we might even see some interesting out of the box ideas take shape.

Sony problems can be summerized as...software, software and software.

In the PC market they are dependent on Microsoft.
In mobile they are dependent on Google.
And the rest of the company has dozens of competing OSes and embedded platforms.

Apple is winning because they use their software development prowess to make unique, highly integrated hardware products.

deleted

i just a bought a new 55" Sony HX-820 from newegg for about $2000.

the picture is absolutely PERFECT.
the menu system with addins for things like Hulu Plus and Netfix are AWFUL.
part of the deal was to send a 16GB Tablet S to act as a media center remote device. It works but the menu system from the TV is not on the tablet....
it basically is just a simple remote app.

I was really hoping that the tablet could emulate what I see on the screen for navigation. but it does not.

if sony is thinking of something, they have a LONG way to go.

as far as that Tablet S goes, it is pretty nice for an Android tablet. the kids play the market games on it.

Umm... Apple doesn't do the R&D and then everyone else copies. Quite the opposite. Others do the R&D, Apple makes it much better, than everyone says "oh crap- ours should be like that too!". Then the "copying" happens. Apple takes someone else's idea and makes it better/improves it, and then others copy Apple because it is so successful. Let's not pretend that doesn't happen either.

Did Apple create the MP3 Player? Nope. Just a way better one. Did Apple create the smartphone? Or the touchscreen phone? Or the internet, email, etc on their phone? Nope... but they made a way better one. How about the tablet. Theirs was the first, right? Nope... just the best.

Just like if/when they make a TV service or a TV- it won't be the first, but it will be better than the rest, then the copiers of their SUCCESS will follow suit.


Apple is the guy that watches what comes out, and then says "if it looked like this, and did this better, it would sell like hotcakes". Then they do it.

That's B.S. unless your friend bought the low end. Sony has its problems and I think Stringer has got to go, but their top-of-the-line HX929 is an amazing set with an amazing picture - maybe the best LCD out there (there's also the new Sharp Elites, but they only come in very large screen sizes, are very expensive and they change teal to blue, although Sharp says they're going to fix that with a software upgrade.) Vizio doesn't even come close. But with any set, you can't run it with the out-of-the-box settings which are configured for bad display in retail. If you want a perfect picture, the set must be calibrated.

What Sony does screw-up and what Apple is so good at is user-interface. Sony has some settings that their own customer support department can't explain (which actually makes some sense because the description of the settings makes NO sense.)

Here's an example from their Blu-ray player manual:

Huh? "Original" changes the aspect ratio and "Fixed" changes the size? And when you try to set these properly in conjunction with the various settings on the TV, you wind up with more nonsense. When you ask Sony how to set up the BD player and the TV to always display the original aspect ratio, they can't provide you with a response that either works or makes sense.

But having said that, my fear about an Apple-branded TV is that they go to the opposite extreme by removing all controls that enable users (or calibrators) to adjust the picture and sound. Also, would an Apple TV let you access Netflix, Amazon On-Demand, Hulu, etc?

On the other hand, an Apple TV that incorporates Siri could be quite compelling if they can get it to work (which will be tricky because Apple doesn't "know" what programs are being broadcast by your local cable provider at any given time. Even the electronic TV guides frequently get it wrong when schedules change.)

Sony has made a decision to split the TV division into three. It's hard to tell what it all means, but it looks like high-end sets will still be designed by Sony, but low-end sets will be all OEM, which essentially means you'll pay extra just to have the Sony name on a TV that you can buy for less under a different brand (maybe even Vizio). Of course once Sony's board wises up and throws out Stringer, this could all change again.

(And it's not a "mute" point (unless the audio doesn't work). It's a "moot" point and it's Jobs, not Hobs. Can we show the guy a little respect, especially now that he's no longer with us?)

He's 100% right.

You definitely miss out on the movie experience watching it on a phone (as opposed to a dedicated media room, or nice TV/sound system). TV shows, or kids movies/babysitters are one thing, but David Lynch hit the nail on the head.

"Sony racing to beat Apple to next generation of connected TV sets"

Oh, no: Sony could get there first! Remember what happened with the Walkman?

No. Mobile will certainly be big (it already is) and I agree that when mobile can get live broadcasts easily it will become bigger. And I also agree that there are some people, especially young people, who are satisfied watching TV or movies on a 3" screen.

But to say that everything will be mobile and that people will only watch on large screens on special occasions is a complete misreading of the market and actual consumer behavior. Large screens are selling in ever-increasing sizes as costs come down. Sharp's new (but expensive) Elite line only comes in 70" and 80" sizes. Two years ago, 37" was the most popular screen size. Now it's 52 to 55". Both mobile and large screens will co-exist forever. They serve completely different purposes. A 20 year old who doesn't want to be at home with their parents will watch mobile (when they're not texting trivia). But a 37-year-old with two kids is going to be at home watching that large screen. They might not be watching broadcast TV, but that's the screen they'll be using.

I have an internet-connected Sony Bravia. I love what it offers (cable tv, hdmi inputs, netflix, amazon vod, youtube, shutterfly, pandora, etc...). Really an upgrade to the way I used to watch TV and rent movies.

But it's laggy (unresponsive), the viewing angle is limited, the interface leaves a lot to be desired, and the choices are dictated by them, not me.

Those are the things I'd like to see enhanced by whomever, whenever.

This is not entirely true.

You are differentiating between all Apple computers and all Apple "consumer" products (a subtle distinction at best), but ignoring the incredible success they have had with laptops. You are also conflating several periods of history into one.

Yes, Apple was not making a killing in desktops and Jobs admitted that when he came back to Apple. That doesn't mean that they never did any good in desktop computers at all, nor that they didn't do fantastic in them later, once the iMac was made. The iMac was very popular and very instrumental in the initial turnaround both financially and otherwise.

What "brought Apple back"was (more arguably), the huge success of the mobile (laptop) computers. Apple was pretty much the first to "solve" the mobile computer problem just as they were the first to come up with a viable desktop. Their laptops have always been the best, industry leading, devices and have always sold like gangbusters.

This then led to iPods and more directly consumer related stuff, but what actually brought them back and kept them alive was huge success in mobiles (laptops) as well as steadily increasing success in old-fashioned desktops.

The success of the iPod and now the iPhone and iPad are almost like extra-extra gravy on top of Apple's original stellar success. To paint the company as failing until they were "saved" by entering the consumer space with these products is a mis-representation IMO.

I cannot figure out why Jobs would have allowed the mention of TV in his book. He was so appropriately secretive with projects like this. To read that Sony is now "racing" is the obvious conclusion now that the cat's out of the bag. Did Jobs do it to light a fire under the studios' asses? Perhaps we'll understand in the next few years. But I sure wish iTV was launching today.

Thank you for linking to that video which clearly stated what needed to be said.

I have to agree with you. Though I'm not a die-hard Sony fan, I do like their TVs and my year-old 46NX810 is a fantastic set. The cross media bar menu system may be ok for the PS-3 but I don't personally think it's the best way to go for their TVs. Can you imagine that there is no sleep button on the remote and I had to find "hidden" discrete sleep commands from RTI's code library. Besides those two things though, the picture is great, exhibits no banding issues like my Sharp LCD nor ghosting issues like some other Sony and Samsung sets. It also has great black-level (contrast ratio) for an edge-lit LCD. My brother-in-law just bought a 55NX720 for less than what I paid for my smaller set and it also has a fantastic picture. Meanwhile, my friend Miki's 55" Vizio with 240Hz and all the bells and whistles (except 3D) has a crappy picture. I'd probably liken it to my 4 year old 46" Sharp (which was good enough at the time). Coming from a high-end A/V background, I never much cared for the quality of Vizio's picture.

It'll be interesting to see what Apple comes up with if/when they release their TV.

My 42" Sony is about 5 years old. The very first week I had it some major component went out, but the repair service came right to my house the next day and fixed it. Since then it has work perfectly. The menu is a little clunky, when trying to switch inputs to use Apple TV, but the screen is fine for my needs. The thing that Apple needs to release is the way to be the first in line set top box and the hub for everything else. If Apple can convince cable and satellite companies to work together along with local antenna inputs and the Internet that would make the remote control and input selection a lot better for sure. As always though, content is king. There needs to be something worth watching, and Netflix isn't it.

Always with the good news. Why do you always have only positive things to say about Apple?

Racing is the wrong strategy. Apple didn't win in the MP3 player market by beating everyone to the market. They built their market share from 0% against competitors who were already there. If Sony is trying to get there before Apple, all that will happen is they can sell some new TVs before Apple sucks all of the air out of the room and changes the game.

The newly revised Google TV has been canned by Logitech. Logitech says Google rushed the product to market. And they are so right. Google's biggest mistake was thinking that all the network providers were just going to let Google use there media without licensing it. Once the networks shutdown access, Google TV was a box with no content and at $300 for the base model and up to $600 for all the accessories it was way to expensive to compete. The only thing they could say was it did flash, now flash is dead too.
Sony really needs to think outside the box if Steve Jobs has figured out the TV. Apple doesn't need to be first out to release a product. They have shown time and time again that it's not about being first, it's about being the best. Steve Jobs only wanted the best, something most companies don't get and probably never will. Apple did it with the MP3 player, the iPhone, and the iPad. Next up is the iTV or whatever they call it. Maybe not the first one to market, but it will surely be the best one.

deleted

Wow, those comments were refreshingly brutal.

Bingo. I can see it.

you're getting carried away. we're still a nation of couch potatoes - those over 30 anyway. big screen HDTV's have been a big, big hit. and as they keep getting cheaper there'll be even more.

but what iOS is showing us is that their UI will indeed shift to hand-held - mobile - devices. no more stupid IR remotes. that's the actual "covergence" of our digital lives people talk about ("three screens" etc). so you're on the right track there.

i don' t know how many commenting here actually have an iPad and Apple TV and so have been able to try out AirPlay Screen Mirroring with a really sophisticated app, like Bloomberg TV. once you do, it is instantly obvious this is the future of "smart television." no TV set alone can match what it does, period. because the app is using the two screens - the iPad and the TV - to show related but different content on each simultaneously. mostly video and graphics on the big screen TV of course, and mainly text with all kinds of HTML links and the overall app UI controls on the iPad. i'm sure that within a year every iOS news app and sports app will be doing the same kind of thing. it's incredibly powerful. and then of course games ... and beyond. (it's also much easier to talk to Siri on something you're holding than to shout across the room at your TV.)

no doubt Google/Android will copy this as quickly as they can. right now they still need a HDMI cable to mirror an Android screen, which ruins the whole experience, and there is no single integrated equivalent to AirPlay. i don' t know if their current chips can match Apple's A5 graphics either, which makes the two screen apps possible. so probably about a year before they can copy Apple (the next Frutti Tutti OS or whatever). and then Sony and the other OEM's can build the STB part of it - like Apple TV - into its TVs. the 2013 models maybe.

what Apple needs to do most of all is complete Apple TV 3 now, without delay. it needs ... .

I don't own a Sony TV, please explain what you mean about "Sony likes to make their products unique and harder to adapt to any change in its environment", and "resolution adaptation"

Also, please provide a link to this quite regarding "steve hobs felt it was a night mare."

well said.

I suspect they will have "delays" until they see what Apple is up to.

I think a bunch of factors come into play.

I think Apple products, far more often than being a source of something to copy, simply highlight that what a compeditor has isn't good enough.

Take for example voice control in phones.

Google and Microsoft already have voice control in their phones, they have for quite a while.

So when Siri was released it is certain Google and Microsoft didn't think "we have to copy that", because they already have voice control, but I can almost gurantee they looked at what they do have and thought "this isn't good enough".

For Crissakes, even Best Buy came out with an Insignia Internet TV this week.

Right- a $500 remote. What are u smoking?

Well Steve Jobs must have liked Sony TVs as Apple stores have all their ATVs connected to them in the stores.

I don't think people think very hard about what they mean by "invent" and "copy."

Name something invented in the last 150 years, and I can point out something of at least roughly similar utility that preceded it.

Did Bell Labs invent the transistor? Of course not, they just took the vacuum tube and made it "better"! Television? Just extending on the idea of radio. Telephony? Just a better telegraph, which was just a better smoke signal.

It really doesn't make any sense to appeal to broad categories as representing prior art when it comes to tech, because tech always builds on previous work, and if you want to play that game you can run everything back at least to the dawn of the industrial revolution, if not prior.

And especially now, when the true definition of a product includes network effects and ecosystems, it's just silly to pretend that something like the iPhone reduces to "just a better phone", because "better" includes such a vast array of technologies, materials design, software, marketing, support systems and media. Apple didn't polish up a somewhat dowdy predecessor, they completely rethought the entire experience of smartphone ownership from A to Z.

For my money that counts as innovation and invention, as do a number of other Apple products. Seriously, can someone tell me what they regard as an actual invention, at this point?