30
Jun
Zoidberg on Google TV
Last Updated: July 2nd, 2012

Last night, I finally sold my Logitech Revue.

Why? Google's absolute silence on Google TV (GTV) during I/O keynotes represented, as I saw it, the last straw for the platform (at least in its current state). Of course, Google TV hasn't really seen much action since last fall, but after former Google CEO Eric Schmidt promised big, magical things for this summer, it seemed Mountain View might still have some GTV tricks up its sleeves. As it turns out, those sleeves were empty, and the company now seems to view its attempt to save us from cable boxes as a dead horse.

Schmidt predicted Google TV would be on the majority of televisions by this summer. While we don't have updated stats on that, as of late February, the number was only 1 million total users. We haven't exactly seen any evidence that number has suddenly started to increase exponentially, as would be necessary should Google want to reach all ~115+ million TVs in the US.

And I'm not expecting that to change any time soon - frankly, Google TV is going nowhere fast. Here's why.

Zoidberg on Google TV

We Could've Had It All

When Google TV was originally released, almost every single reviewer - even those who hated it - seemed to agree that the platform had much potential yet hanging in the stars. And it's true: had content providers signed on (they didn't), Google TV could, potentially, have changed content consumption entirely. If all had gone well, we could now be relying on an entirely Internet-based model of the TV, complete with free, on-demand content from providers like Hulu.

Google had the potential to dominate the TV business - or at the very least, to dominate both the subset of the TV business that products like the Revue and the Co-Star belong to, and also the subset of the Apple TV and the Roku.

The keyword being "potential." As I see it, there are three reasons this potential remained as unutilized as the leftover gas in a sinking boat, and will likely continue to do so:

  1. Consumer interest - As we saw in the introduction, Google TV has failed to go mainstream. It has, largely, remained a truly niche product - whatever appeal it might once have had decreased rapidly, especially as devices like the XBOX 360 gradually gained features that were previously bragging rights for Google TV. This could have played a large part in the next reason.
  2. Content provider interest - Perhaps due to low customer interest and perhaps due to the fact that content providers can't get past the 90s, content providers were, at least initially, very much hostile to the whole Google TV concept. Unwilling to accept that people do, in fact, consume their content in a multitude of forms, companies like Hulu, ABC, CBS, and Fox blocked Google TV. This is undeniably not entirely Google's fault; however, Google should certainly have signed deals with these corporations ahead of time so as to prevent these "misunderstandings." We can see a vicious cycle between this reason and the first: because of said misunderstandings, consumers will be less likely to buy a GTV (since there'll be an inadequate amount of content if they do); because of low consumer adoption, content providers will be less likely to sign on to Google's TV platform.
  3. Google's own interest - I think this is the main reason Google TV is failing. If Google put its engineers (and lawyers) to the GTV job, it's pretty clear both of the above issues could be resolved - if not immediately, then at least in the long term. Agreements could be worked out with content providers, and from there Google would have a lot more to advertise about the platform. Sadly, Google simply doesn't seem to be interested in that - as exemplified by the (nearly) utter lack of GTV-related announcements at I/O, GTV seems to have been permanently put on Mountain View's backburner. In fact, the only vaguely related I/O announcement was that the music, movies, and TV shows already available to all other Android devices via the Play Store will be coming to Google TV... sometime "in the future." Additionally, there are some new APIs, which, as I must concede, could be pretty neat - they've already promised to bring us Howard Stern. That said, the number of new apps that will actually be built with said APIs is questionable - the limited number of consumers using the TV companion box is just another reason it makes more sense to concentrate on the smartphone/tablet form factor. And note one more thing: these two additions weren't even announced during a keynote; instead, the word was quietly whispered out to the media by Blogspot entry.

So, that should explain Google TV's commercial failure. But there's more.

Obviously, point #2 directly affects the end user experience, as it means less content will be available to the consumer; however, that's not the only reason Google TV is failing not only commercially, but also from a usability standpoint.

For one thing, due in no small part to Google's aforementioned silence on GTV at I/O, it's still not clear whether the platform will ever advance beyond Android 3.x. For another, it's still missing basic Android apps like CNN and Angry Birds (c'mon, don't tell me you can't fling birds with a trackpad - it's been done before). And that's not to mention the UI, which has been universally deemed so hideous that manufacturers have already begun to overlay it. This all checks back the extent to which one can enjoy a GTV-powered device - after all, a platform can only be as good as the apps that run on it and the ways in which you can interact with it.

But in spite of all this, there may still be hope - certainly not with Google's current attitude toward GTV, and perhaps not even with the current branding - but maybe, just maybe, Mountain View can pull a similar product off.

Question Begins With Q

nexus Q

Rather than commissioning Google TV as its chief commander in the invasion of our living rooms, Mountain View's I/O keynotes indicated the company seems to have changed up its strategy so that it's now focusing on the $300 "social streaming media player" that is the Nexus Q (NQ). At first glance, this might make at least a little bit of sense - GTV's sales, as we've already discussed, have been less than spectacular, so the Big G might have wanted to try a different approach to home entertainment. Unfortunately, it seems to have jumped on a boat that has several major holes in it - and is already filled with water.

Let's set aside, for a moment, the myriad bugs early reviewers have discovered in the NQ (though these alone could, arguably, disqualify it from the public stage). I think there are three main problems with the device as is: A.) It's $300! B.) I'm not sure anyone outside the tech blogosphere understands what a "social streaming media player" is, and I'm even less convinced that after finding out, they'll still be interested in coughing up three Benjamins to own one. C.) Did I mention it's $300?

However, the Nexus Q isn't totally hopeless. In my view, if Google could somehow combine it with Google TV - and slash its price tag by at least $200 - they could potentially have a winner on their hands. This shouldn't be all that hard - the NQ can already plug into your TV via microHDMI, and it does have Android 4.0.4 under its hood. Why, then, couldn't the NQ initiate a GTV setup when plugged into your TV? It certainly has the necessary horsepower - both the NQ and the latest GTV models have dual-core processors, so that shouldn't be an issue in the slightest.

I'm not quite sure why Google chose to fork the Nexus Q off from what was previously its main reach into the living room - separately (at least in their current forms), I think both the NQ and the GTV are doomed to failure; together (and in modified forms), I think success would be far more likely.

Conclusion

It's often said that two wrongs don't make a right, but in this case, I think that by combining the commercial/content failure that has been GTV with the pricing/functionality failure that is the Nexus Q (and pricing the resulting package affordably), Google could finally take over the living room once and for all.

Again, this won't happen without a significantly higher interest investment from Google in its eponymous TV companion. But it might be worth it - it could pave the road for more content (through considerable deals with providers), better adoption (through a major marketing push), and ultimately an affordable product that doesn't suck (through GTV- and wallet-friendly modifications to the Nexus Q).

Honestly, though, I'm not holding my breath - smartphone/tablet versions of Android understandably remain a priority for Google, and it doesn't really seem like that's going to change anytime soon. And so the vicious cycle continues, and the boats continue to sink.

Jaroslav Stekl
Jaroslav Stekl is a tech enthusiast whose favorite gadgets almost always happen to be the latest Android devices. When he's not writing for Android Police, he's probably hiking, camping, or canoeing. He is also an aspiring coffee aficionado and an avid moviegoer.

  • Ryan Young

    Seriously?
    I'm actually looking into getting the new Sony remote if I can. That's the only thing my family has had any issues with.

    The rest is great, sure it doesn't get apps, but comparing the Sony GTV blu-ray player to any bluray player that we had before, we don't need to change TV inputs anymore. Which is good because our tv has you use left-right arrows to change inputs, and is not very consistent between attempts trying to use it.

    Out of every android device in the house, I think Google TV was my best investment.

  • NeedName

    Nexus Q + Google TV = win IMO.

    Call it "Nexus Home" — a device that can do all the heavy lifting in the home, control everything — thermostats, play games, stream music/video, apps, etc. . . all via an Android device being used like a remote so it doesn't drain all the battery.

    Will Nexus Q go there? It's got the guts in it. . .  but hackers need to show Google the was because they clearly have no vision in this area for some reason.

    It's a simple concept — give me a small, media centered, wireless computing device that seamlessly integrates my Android world and my Android devices. . . . 

    • banjoonmyknee

      Not at those prices.

  • Ron Amadeo

    The problem is, no one can answer this question about Google TV:

    In a perfect world, what would you want it to do? What exactly does an awesome companion box look like?

    We all could answer what an awesome smartphone would look like. We all want a great communication device for email and IM and a killer internet browsing machine, but why do you want a computer hooked up to your TV? What exactly do you want it to do?

    Google built this thing and threw a bunch of apps on it, but none of them are good, none of them are useful, and no one can imagine a good TV app. I've yet to hear a good "This is why you need to hook a computer up to your TV" sales pitch.

    I don't want to Google things on my TV, or use twitter, I just want to watch TV on it. I have a phone or tablet for all those other things.

    • RedPandaAlex

      DVR, a nice TV-friendly interface for web content like youtube and TED talks, and light gaming. Is it that hard for others to imagine why you'd want an internet box for a tv?

    • http://www.androidpolice.com/author/jaroslav-stekl/ Jaroslav Stekl

      I agree with InvaderDJ - the ability to access free online content from the likes of Hulu on that nice 50" display in addition to the regularly scheduled television programming would be awesome. 

      Additionally, with some tighter integration with other Google products (i.e. Android on your smartphone / tablet), I don't see why we couldn't see things like inter-device gaming, say with your phone as a controller and your GTV as a display - think Frisbee Rush, only developed specially for Google TV.

    • banjoonmyknee

      Google never seems to get the content thing right.  This is where Amazon and others really do their homework.

      People like the XBox not because it has spectacular hardware or that you can do "apps" on it.  People like XBox because of Halo, Modern Warfare, Splinter Cell, etc.

      People buy Roku because well, everything....NFL, NBA, MLB, Amazon Video, Netflix, and a whole host of weird do-it-yourself channels.  

      ...and they just work.  

      What exactly can I watch on Google TV that I can't get anywhere else?  
      Bueller?  Bueller?  Anyone? 

      BTW, this goes for that 7" tablet too.   The Kindle Fire is not a great piece of hardware.  Clearly the new Nexus tablet blows it away hardware-wise.  But you can get a lot of great tv and movies on a Fire (Game of Thrones,all 5 seasons of The Wire), plus lots of free books through the Amazon Lending library if you have a Prime membership.    Again I ask, what unique content can I see/read/play on the new Nexus tablet that I can't see/read/play anywhere else?

      Google needs to fix its content story if it has a prayer to succeed with any devices over 5 inch form.

      • Chiper_tss_tss

        As far as content, nothing. But the GoogleTV integrates your online content, netflix, amazon, youtube, web with your cable service. U can search for any movie or tv show. And from that one search it will show you all your services together... Sure there other things cheaper that has the same content. But they don't do the integration's like GoogleTV does... With things like OnLive coming, it will do more then the other media boxs that are cheaper... I had a PC hooked up to my TV, then I got a WD HD media player, and now own a Sony blu-ray GoogleTV a 360, and PS3. Out of all of them. GoogleTV gives me the best experience vs them all. And easier for my kids and wife to uses as well...

    • Core Rooted

      I have to disagree with the asking of the question of why someone would want a computer hooked up to their television as it's the wrong question. The correct question really should be "How can I consume the media that matters to me in a central location or multiple locations?" That is what Google needs to be able to both ask and answer.

      My rig at home has been as follows for the past few years:
      50" living room display (I don't call it a TV as I don't have any kind of incoming signal [cable, satellite, etc] hooked up to it), a Logitech Revue for media streaming (and novelty at this point), and a Xbox 360 for gaming. All driven by a Linux server which has 8TB of space [4.3Tb used on media]. 

      On my display in the living room, I can consume any content available online either through the Revue or switching the input over to my 360 (Occasionally, I'll hook my laptop up to it over WiFi and stream that way. Or from my phone or tablet using Twonky). I may not be getting media in true "real-time"; but that is of minor consequence to me.

      So, I can easily answer the question of why having a computer connected to my TV [display] is needed.

      However, with this said; it's taken me years to get everything setup perfectly and still be easy enough for my wife and kids to be able to use without getting the "How do I do this again?" question over and over again. I have everything setup through the Revue and it's keyboard remote so that all they have to do is push a button, type a few characters and they have what they want to watch.

      That is really what Google needs to solve. They need to be able to build and deliver a seamless device that can consume media from anywhere and push said content anywhere. Once they do that (either with GTV or some other product), then they will score big.

    • Chiper_tss_tss

      The integrates with all your services is undermined... That's a big plus I get out of my GoogleTV. It makes everything easier to use and find what you want to watch, and what you want to watch it on... This is something everything else doesn't do, 360, PS3, computers, and other media boxes... 

  • http://twitter.com/bongdw Dustin Watson

    My Revue always needs to be flashed each time it's unplugged. And sometimes it takes upwards of 100 tries to get it working. Mine's been sitting in a box for 6 months now. Such a disappointment :(

  • InvaderDJ

    Google TV and Google Wallet are both pretty much dead. I agree though that Google could have changed at least Google T.V.'s fate if they put some resources and backbone behind it, but Google seems incapable of standing up for itself or pushing its products if there is any pushback (Google Plus excluded).

    Meh, there are other products like the Roku that help soften the blow.

    • cashd00d

      Google Wallet is dead? It's barely even started. Mainstream America doesn't even know what it is yet. Google TV is in a similar boat.

      They'll both be around for a long time.

      • InvaderDJ

        Every carrier is going a different way. Sprint was its one guaranteed carrier partner and even they're developing their own Wallet type app.

        Wallet is less dead than Google TV is, but it is on the brink of death. If Google doesn't do anything about it before Isis launches then it is game over.

        • cashd00d

          That is true about Sprint. But Sprint has tried to do it's own thing before, only the go back to the de-facto "standard" when they fail. I don't think Sprint's wallet will take off, and I seriously think Google Wallet will be the leader, especially if they can get more partners in addition to Citi.

          PayPal, Payza, and Serve from American Express are all moving in to the same area as Wallet, so the general public awareness and acceptance of like applications will only increase. I look forward to the future.

    • RedPandaAlex

      Both platforms have the same problem--getting cockblocked by stakeholders, be it content providers or wireless carriers.

  • RedPandaAlex

    I know I'm getting a new Google TV box when the Sony/Vizeo units are released, but yes, I expected at least SOME space at I/O for it. Granted, they announced you can buy movies from Play which was a big whole in Google TV before. But really, the ability to search my cable listings instead of channel surfing plus having web content like youtube and TED available (which aren't on my ps3) is worth the 100-200-dollar price. And I can just hope it continues to improve.

    You have to think that it's going to be continually behind until the boxes are getting updated to the newest versions of Android.

  • http://www.nerdshowandtell.com nerdshowandtell.com

    what he said... yup... and throw in that google purchased SageTV last year and could have released the server with Android clients which would also boost the platform.. but instead.. no new information on that or even why they purchased sagetv in the first place a year later.. and now sagetv boxes that once cost $150 new are selling for $400 on eBay because google stopped sagetv from being sold direct after their purchase of the company.. Instead google now promotes plex at public engagements as some super Google TV app, when they have been sitting on what could have been a much better app/product for over a year now..

  • cashd00d

    Logitech Google TV sucks.
    Sony Google TV does not.

    • RedPandaAlex

      Yeah, I'm kind of leaning towards the new Sony box even though it's more expensive just because they have some experience with GTV and Android in general, and Vizeo may be another Logitech.

    • http://www.androidpolice.com/author/jaroslav-stekl/ Jaroslav Stekl

      I think the problem isn't with a particular GTV device; rather, I'd say the main issue lies with the software and with Google's own interest in the platform. The hardware is largely irrelevant to my complaints.

      • cashd00d

        As far as the controller type, software upgrade record, and overall reliability, the Sony box blows the Logitech out of the water. We will see how the next generation of boxes perform.

  • InvaderDJ

    I don't know if I'd say no one knows what we want Google T.V. to do. We (or I should say I) want a box that is easy to set up, quick and intuitive that can bring in content from all the places it is on the Web. Netflex, Hulu, HBO, Youtube, all the cable and broadcast networks, wherever. Some good social integration would be nice too (although not for me). Being able to post about a show on Facebook or Twitter while it is airing and seeing a news ticker type stream of tweets or Facebook posts would be nice and doing something like what the Xbox used to do where you and some friends could join a group (in this case a Google Plus hangout would work) and watch a movie at the same time with voice chat support between everyone would be killer. Then add the Play Store on top of that so that its features can be expanded as wants are thought of.

    Finally make it cheap and get it out there. It's as you say a PC (or a smartphone) connected to the T.V. You just have to get the base experience right and then make an app ecosystem to add functionality for users with different needs.

  • storm14k

    Honestly I think the Q is a big ole FU to the major media channels. Let's look at it this way. Google's Channel program is apparently about to draw in ridiculous money. In short order it alone may pass the revenue of Facebook as a whole. Its Google's shot at circumventing traditional TV and bringing original content to the web. And they aren't alone. Netflix and Hulu are doing the same. The Nexus Q says screw cable and satellite. We'll give people a slick and modern way to get content online.

    Its the blocking by the networks that started this to me. And I don't see how they get away with selectively blocking a device while other computers access the same content for free.

    • Danjimaru

      they blocked GTV only because Google let them... why is it that you can't change user/browser agent in GTV? Obviously this was an agreement of some sort to sign some content over to the device... after all Google also rents out movies and episodes through their own channels, as small a library as it may be...

      • storm14k

        I think they did it to avoid a major incident in the media about them circumventing the blocks. I still think the government should have investigated that. How do you single out one OS...not even device...from one company and block it from your sites while allowing everything else. If Google singled out one of their networks and cleaned it from search there would certainly be an investigation.

  • Pbooker117

    I hate to say it because I like disagreeing with people but...I have to agree with every point you have made. I'll be grabbing a Co-Star when they become available (I too sold my Review for extra cash a few weeks ago) but this well be the last GTV product I buy or suggest until I see some real support. Integrating it through my set top box help with problem #2 but with the NQ, I think Gtv is on it's last leg. I hope I'm wrong.

  • Jahf

    I whole-heartedly and sadly agree. My Revue was decomissioned earlier this week as well.

  • RedPandaAlex

    I was really hoping that Google would breathe some life into Google TV with a Nexus TV device like they're trying to do with tablets. Maybe they're just trying to do one thing at a time, I don't know. But I really have no idea what a Nexus Q is supposed to be. 

    • banjoonmyknee

      Nexus Q is the Google Wave of hardware.

  • beaverhausen

    The only reason I am commenting is because I saw Zoidberg.

  • http://twitter.com/LV2355 Laurentiu

    Google should think out of the box. There are many clients outside US who wants this Google TV but cannot have it because they choose to sell only on US. Bad idea.

    Logitech Revue - outdated hardware => bad quality

    This is the Google TV I want: http://www.vizio.com/costar/overview/
    I hope they'll deliver in Europe too.

  • LazarusDark

    GTV was the first thing that came to mind when they said Nexus Q has hdmi out (no hdmi in though, so couldn't do everthing GTV was intended for).

    However, I think a little patience may be necessary.
    Google only recently completed aquasition of one of the largest manufacturers of SET TOP BOXES in the world.
    While Google can't show favoritism to the Moto phone/tab division, I see no reason why they can't show favoritism to the set top box division!
    A Moto Nexus/GTV set top could just be what Google has been wanting to make all along, and I've thought since the beginning that this could be one of the reasons for the purchase.
    But the purchase is too recent, it would take months to really get something out of Moto. So, maybe by fall we could have some sort of preview of something.

    Failing this though... I'd have to call GTV yet another failure to bring internet to the tv (the fields are littered with the bodies of such failed attempts). The saddest and most angrying part though, is that so far we get the feeling that this was a less than half-assed attempt. And the lack of GTV news at I/O was the loudest silence I've ever heard on a product.

  • D3m0nz

    i dont really see google doing anything with GTV for awhile. considering they just finalized the purchase of the biggest set-top-box manufacturer im sure they will have something down the road

  • Racer24crm

    Does anyone think that Schmidt's ballsy prediction was dependent on the Motorola takeover? I mean, Motorola makes a ridiculous amount of the set top boxes for television providers. Maybe they are working on some type of integration there but the delay in the acquisition of Motorola has delayed it.

  • http://profiles.google.com/remmbermytitans Victor Gonzalez

    The moment a hacker can turn the Nexus Q into a Google TV, will be when I buy it. It looks super sexy and I love the whole futuristic thing. However, at it's current price and since it can only do ONE thing (social streaming), I just can't justify it. Give me Google TV, social streaming, phone-to-TV "AirPlay-style" streaming, and then you've got a real winner on your hands.

    • http://profiles.google.com/smedley.jason Jason Smedley

      You forgot about your IR blasters.

    • Danjimaru

      phone-to-TV "AirPlay-style" streaming

      Install Able Remote app on both devices and you can share videos, pictures or entire albums from the Gallery App on any device to Google TV... it just doesn't have a fancy name; it's called - share with able remote "insert the name of your gtv here".

  • http://twitter.com/jordanlong20 Jordan Long

    TL/DR,

    but put an NFC chip inside the google tv and you have just consolidated two products into one. 

  • Guest

    The Nexus Q is obviously GoogleTV/Android@Home in disquise waiting to pounce when they are ready.  They obviously did not want to step on any toes of those manufactures coming out with GoogleTV boxes this summer.  Its obvious that they are ready to deliver their own hardware/solutions bcs they are tired of the mess the other manufacturers are making.  They see the light of how to produce good products but they are doing it strategically.  Once they have the Nexus 7 go mainstream (and other tablets the Nexus 10) have no mistake the living room / home (GoogleTV and Android@Home) is their next target.  They'll open a can of whoop, take names, and turn on the Nexus Q to a full blown Home server with voice commands (Google Now), etc.  I'm calling my "Jarvis"..."Jarvis can you build me Iron Man Mark 9 suit!?  No?  Ok at least turn my lights out when I go to bed, thanks".  This will be the main focus in 2013 ... they are already working on this in secret ...remember we've been told anonymously before that Jelly Bean was a great improvement but the version after that was the one to wait for...it will change everything!

    • Chiper_tss_tss

      I like how you think... :) I hope your right...

    • Danjimaru

      "the mess the other manufacturers are making"
      What mess?
      Logitech being forced to remove mpegav2 and mpeghd codecs because they don't want to pay the royalties? Apart from this there is really not much they are doing wrong, it's not the hardware, its the software! Also Google could actively push nightly builds of latest Android kernels to GTV users themselves.

      Also Google sucks at marketing GTV capabilities. On Apple TV there is Airplay... on Google TV all you need for this is the Able Remote app on both devices then you can easily share all videos and pictures directly from the Gallery - from phone/tablet to TV.

      My Revue is hooked over optical output to my Denon AVR 1912 amp and together with Google Play Music I have my entire music collection and about 350 playlists to reflect/complement my every mood...
      I believe my setup can easily beat a Sonos setup quality wise at about the same setup price (Revue & Amp included).
      Google Play Music is one of the worst advertised, least known features of Android ever!!

  • Esteban_Colberto

    Ok. The logitech revue is not an apple TV. It doesn't have deals with all the content providers. But, you got to love what it still is...the only keyboard based chrome browser running device with flash. My kids love it. My wife loves it. I love it. Its got some glitches, but for 100 bucks and dish integration it rocks. My kids stream movies off my pogoplug, watch Netflix, and play flash based websites like starfall. My wife listens to Pandora during the day, uses YouTube to learn how to do new arts and crafts by tutorials, and checks her Facebook and email. I do all that plus i watch any flash based internet content. Ppv fights and UFC anyone?! Ha. The Revue doesnt really have to do anything else. It kicks ass on its own. Stop grumbling and spend some time learning what you can really do with this device.

  • tylerbrainerd

    didnt vizio give a presentation?

  • davidtb

    I'm curious/excited about this product, this Twonky, not because it's anything but panned.
    I'm curious as to what Google is going to do about rectifying it.

    (The Twonky", written by Henry Kuttner and C.L. Moore)
     

  • http://twitter.com/DocFunkinstien Kid.Drunkadelic

    i just want a google tv to be like MS Media extenders, and be able to pick up the tv streams from my htpc with cable card

  • http://twitter.com/DocFunkinstien Kid.Drunkadelic

    Second comment, these things never take off, cause consumers don't want to have one box for this, another box for this, and another box for this but does some of a and b but does c.

    Honestly they need to make the nexus q, with cable card support(with a setup like a ceton cable card so one card four streams) and google tv as extenders.  then tell consumers look here, have multiple set top boxes in your house, also have to rent DVR.  Well with this suite of google tv products you can cut all that extra bulk off your cable bill, and have a system that is more responsive and easier to use, and a choice of competing movie rental services to get your media also from. Also with onlive, teh google tv could now be the new console for many people for fucks sake does no one else feel this way.

    I admit im home theater geek, htpc in the living room, and extenders though out the house picking up the cable tv streams from the headend. Im alittle passionate about this stuff, and its killing me google nor apple is seeing this.

  • spookytay

    My future outlook, Google TV is dead as a consumer device.  I think Google maybe trying to get themselves into getting android integrated with a new STB design (The New Google TV), that can be added to TV's and stand alone STB's.  

    It would be activated in some way like cell phones, specific to each cable provider with their own specific apps you can download.  

    It would also have access to a Nexus Q app, just like you will be able to on an android phone or tablet to control the Q, which would be the new home "hub" that could control and monitor several things around your house.  More than what it does now than just media.

    Will something like this happen?

    The problem I see is, cable providers might not adapt considering how easy it is to "hack" the system and get it to do what the cable providers do not what you to get it to do.

    But then again, it's not like there aren't several devices out there that can do this all ready.

  • Chiper_tss_tss

    I think the problem with GoogleTV is most people don't understand what it does that a computer or gaming console can't do... which is integrate multiple services together. Also they don't understand, its not meant to cut the cord, rather its to enhance your cable service with your online content... I don't understand the need to go to the content providers websites on your TV. You have cable, most likely on demand, and a DVR already... No need for the websites or Hulu... 

    • Danjimaru

      there are cloud based TV services that record shows and deliver in mp4 already, they don't do that for cable/pay tv channels but this business model could easily crush and destroy the 'old' model and specially PPV models.

      TiVO upgraded recently to the cloud and all they need now is to find a way to integrate live streaming with recorded shows... maybe have a 30 day backbuffer on all channels.

      Cable-companies are slowly understanding that they could potentially lose grip on subscribers if they don't stop forcing 100 channels down the throat of their customers instead of offering a flexible grid of channels

      • Chiper_tss_tss

        Cutting the cord is something I have tried to do. Cable companys aren't going to make it easy for you to do that. I'm a Comcast customer, its the only internet provider worth using in my area. Else where I'm sure people got verizon fios that would be just as good. The problem with cutting the cord as I have found out is, 1; with out other service from camcast, TV and phone. Internet goes from $50.0 a month to $90.0 a month. With TV and internet your looking at $115.0 with a HD DVR that has on demand. So it much more worth my money to pony up that extra $25.0 a month. Number 2; problem is, Comcast has a 250GB data cap. I hear they are thinking of giving a 300GB data cap for more money. But even with that, when I did cut the cord. And I was watching Netflix, YouTube, Amazon On Demand. and torrents. At the end of the month I was always squeezing what I was watching. And either coming close to the cap or going over the cap. They tell you when you go over too many times, in a 6 month period. They can shut your service off for up to a year... Now I'm not sure how other companys do it, But its not a option in my area. 

  • http://twitter.com/wyattearp Wyatt Neal

    It sounds stupid, but if I were Google ... why not just start taking a cut out of existing living room space systems?  The Xbox 360 is a great example. Amazon's put a prime streaming service on it, just like netflix.  Google could add the "Google Play Store" and bam, 37 million homes already covered.  Same with the Apple TV, provide access to the app that allows people to stream from the play store and now you've got the other part covered. Once you prove you can provide a better streaming media experience, then move in with a dedicated box that can provide an even tighter integration because it has the pure Google experience.

    • Chiper_tss_tss

      GoogleTV already does integration with your online content and Live TV better then most...

  • Myria

    The problem with Google TV is, and always has been right there in the name, it's not Google's TV. Or, more accurately, content. Google thought, as they have done with so much else, that they could take the content others were pumping out, rebrand it as "Google TV" and sell it to the masses. The content providers quite rightfully told Google to take that plan and shove it where the sun don't shine, leaving Google, oddly shocked at this totally predictable turn of events, with a product that had little to no meaningful content -- a sad state of affairs that Google *still* has done nothing meaningful to rectify.

    Google is unable or unwilling to change their stripes. Blaming it on the content providers is laughable, they're hardly "stuck in the 90's" when they're doing just peachy with the 360 and other devices. The failure of Google TV is Google's fault and only Google''s fault. I not only wouldn't look to them to fix it, but, if they utterly ludicrous Nexus Q is any indicator, I'd get the popcorn ready because good ol' Google is hellbent on cratering their living room content delivery aspirations in an astoundingly spectacular way.

    The 360/720 has a bright future as a content delivery platform. Google TV? Not so much...

    • Chiper_tss_tss

      Have u used a GoogleTV? The only content missing is Hulu, and the content providers websites. No doubt there are other devices that can provide the same services, plus Hulu and the ability to go to the websites. The things GoogleTV does that the others don't is, gives you a TV friendly UI for a computer type device. The integration with all of your services, Live TV, Netflix, Amazon, YouTube, and other Websites you can still get content from, and soon the Google Play store. These two things are underminded, and the two thing in my own opinion gives you a better experience with watching your content. Over the years I have had a PC, HD WD media box, I have a PS3 and a 360 hooked up to my TV for content, and my GoogleTV is easier to use over all of them. Not just for me but my whole family. I can admit it ant for every one do to the price. And the ability to get other devices around the same price... 

  • 3C-Notes-R-U-Kidding

    2 major issues for me. 1)$300 and 2) Can't stream from local network (XBMC)

  • Freak4Dell

    I'm sure people are tired of hearing me say it, but I'm going to keep saying it anyway. The way for Google to take over the living room is to combine the ideas of TiVo and Google TV/Roku/XBox/etc. Seriously, add cable card support, advertise the hell out of it and get the name out there like TiVo did, but slash the monthly or lifetime fees, and people will come. Motorola knows how to make this stuff work, so no 3rd party help needed. I don't think they need any content specifically for GTV, either. Just make sure apps for other content providers are on there, like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon. Of course, Play should be there, too, and they should always be adding new content to Play.

    Not everyone has cable. Not everyone subscribes to things like Netflix or Hulu. Not everyone rents movies or shows from Google Play. But you know what? I bet that there's a pretty huge number of people that at least one of those things applies to, so Google's best bet to beat out all the other systems is to do it all.

Quantcast