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 553718
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

So what, then... you gonna build a Roku, blu ray player, A/V receiver, game console, cable box, etc. all into the TV? You're gonna have a 'jack of all trades, master of none' device. And that TV is gonna cost an arm and a leg as well. And probably won't receive updates either beyond a year or two. And I can't imagine if one of those components break and can't be repaired... you'd have to replace the entire TV.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Alfman Member since:


"So what, then... you gonna build a Roku, blu ray player, A/V receiver, game console, cable box, etc. all into the TV?"

I'm not sure how meaningful it is for me to talk about what I think a smart tv should be, but here goes:

A smart tv should definitely not need an external roku or receiver since these are very basic features that should be built in and integrated into the smart tv. Ultimately all content could be delivered via ethernet/wifi, but to the extent that homes still use composite/hdmi/cable those will still need to be present on the tv.

A smart tv should be powerful enough to run general interactive apps including a web browser. The basic smart tv wouldn't have to be as powerful as a game console like the PS3, but of course that could always be sold as a premium feature.

I could further elaborate on some further innovations that I can envision happening in the smart tv space but honestly it's not much fun talking amid all this preconcieved critisism.

Reply Parent Score: 2

WorknMan Member since:

Well, I get where your coming from, and it sounds good in theory, but the problem is that, since TVs can operate for 10 years or more, manufacturers would need to keep updates coming through the lifespan of the TV, and they're just not going to do that. I'd say at best, you're going to get 3-5 years of updates, and then you'll be buying a Roku to hook to your TV, because your vendor isn't updating it anymore.

When I bought a Panasonic TV in early 2010, they had a more expensive model with Amazon instant video built-in. But even that service was just a shell of what it is now, so I passed on it; the streaming for Amazon Prime members (which I am one of) didn't even exist back then. And Hulu Plus didn't launch until late 2010. That's how much the landscape can change in just 3 years, so you really don't want to be stuck with a device that won't get updated for 5+ years.

BTW: As to which remote will control which device, a universal remote goes a long way in that regard ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2