Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 25th Feb 2013 14:15 UTC
OSNews, Generic OSes "LG said today it was acquiring WebOS from Hewlett-Packard, with the intention to use the operating system not for its mobile phones, but in its smart televisions. With the deal, LG obtains the source code for WebOS, related documentation, engineering talent, and related WebOS Web sites. LG also gets HP licenses for use with its WebOS products, and patents HP obtained from Palm. The financial terms of the deal weren't disclosed." Completely and utterly pointless. Smart TVs are a dead end. The TV should just remain a dumb receiver for input - whether from a computer or console via cables, or wirelessly from a smartphone or tablet. Our phones and tablets are already smart so TVs don't have to be.
Thread beginning with comment 553662
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Alfman
Member since:
2011-01-28

WorknMan,

"These days, you can buy a box for $50-$70 that can play Netflix and its ilk. Even my computer-illiterate parents can work a Roku-like device. You don't need all this crap built into the TV."

Well it's inherently true that anything a smart TV could do could also be done with a dumb TV + external box (*). But is this really supposed to be an argument against integrated smart tvs?

Not to exaggerate the analogy, but the modern laptop itself is the pinnacle of this notion that everything should be built in to minimizing the dependence of external addons. Very few consumers object to having these features built in even if they don't intend to use them (SD card, camera, mic, bluetooth, etc).

It seems to me the primary reason to reject a smarttv is on the basis that it costs more, but people can still buy dumb TVs with external addons if that's what they want to do. In time, I believe smart features will become cheap enough to throw into all TVs whether they get used or not. And like with laptops, most of us will eventually appreciate the integration.

* Edit: please let us set the standard for smart tvs higher than the roku player...it's not good at interoperability between devices like a smart tv should be.

Edited 2013-02-26 05:22 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

Not to exaggerate the analogy, but the modern laptop itself is the pinnacle of this notion that everything should be built in to minimizing the dependence of external addons. Very few consumers object to having these features built in even if they don't intend to use them (SD card, camera, mic, bluetooth, etc).

You have to go all the way with your analogy. In smarttvs you get something that looks like the real thing(a tablet) but isn't as fast, fun, smooth, easy etc.
So your smart laptop would have an sd card, camera, mic, bluetooth that are of such low quality that you would rather attach a seperate sd card, camera, mic, bluetooth.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

Fergy,

"You have to go all the way with your analogy. In smarttvs you get something that looks like the real thing(a tablet) but isn't as fast, fun, smooth, easy etc."


That's completely presumptuous isn't it? Why in the world would the TV have to be less powerful? In fact without the power constraints, it's likely the smart tvs can afford to use more powerful chips/more cores than the portable counterparts.

"So your smart laptop would have an sd card, camera, mic, bluetooth that are of such low quality that you would rather attach a seperate sd card, camera, mic, bluetooth."


"Would have"?? Haha, it sounds like your speaking hypothetically...It's not hypothetical at all and in fact I'm much happier with the integrated laptop I have today than the old one I had that didn't have a webcam or mic.

I don't understand what your complaint is though because you can still use external peripherals when you want to. However, if you buy a laptop meeting your specs in the first place then you won't need them. Just as laptops come in many feature combinations, so will smart tvs. If someone wants to cheap out on integrated features, that's their right, ultimately noone should expect to get more than what they pay for.

In the end, do you agree it should be left to the consumer's choice? I personally would buy a TV with an integrated computer for NAS streaming (more points for an open/hackable unit). We're entering an era where such functionality should be offered as an integrated feature especially as the cost differential becomes insignificant.


I mentioned it already but I think it's such a good idea so I'll mention it again: Ideally the smart tv computer would be located in a user serviceable slot that could be upgraded independently from the rest of the TV. This could be even less wasteful than a tablet where a CPU upgrade implies throwing away the peripherals like a touchscreen, speakers, cameras, battery, etc.

Reply Parent Score: 2