Comments on: Google TV’s biggest competitor looks awfully familiar

By: Rohan Juneja

Rohan Juneja — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 21:34:25 +0000

When was the last time Apple made anything original since the graphical user interface though?

By: cheese

cheese — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 06:31:10 +0000

You seem to be certain that Apps will replace channels. While I do not disagree with the consequences of this, I wouldn’t settle for a treadmill as a replacement of a beer mug. Yes, apps imply lean-forward behavior, active participation…essentially, having to exercise my gray cells. Channels allow me to switch off my brain (drinking beer doesn’t require brain power, does it?). Jokes aside, the lifestyle change that apps bring (in place of channels) needs consumer acceptance. I wouldn’t hedge bets that this is an easy thing to happen.

By: Jose Arturo Ornelas

Jose Arturo Ornelas — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 08:56:47 +0000

Your writing style is very reminiscent of Buckminster Fuller.

By: Sloan

Sloan — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:55:27 +0000

The biggest problem that I see is that Google TV is poorly implemented. I’ve only found 1 app that supports picture-in-picture, the new home screen puts a transparent layer over the whole screen, and widgets are part of that same experience. At a fundamental level, Google TV is not treating TV like a shared experience, they seem to be in a Mobile mindset where 1 application at a time has become status quo. Shameless plug: I’ve been working on a couple blog posts to describe some of these issues too: http://www.sloanstudio.com/blog/designing-for-tv-part-1

By: Raymond Cote

Raymond Cote — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 21:21:19 +0000

Apps will replace Channels!

Apps are the new with channels!

This not only gives viewers smarter, easier, access to traditional content.

Even more importantly, when APPs replace CHANNELs the content producers get much more than just smarter 3rd party access pointers to their content. They get to embed, highly interactive, smart behaviours directly into the content itself. This will empower content producers to embed programable content-interfacing techniques targeted at capturing a high quality direct relationship with the consumer.(no cable middleman required)

This completely reframes the competition between content providers.

Smart interactive-content-behaviors become the new irresistible and unstoppable content market differentiators.

This is already sparking a new content production/delivery platform that more or less mandates most serious content producer to join in or die! Example – BBCs- iPlayer App

What does replacing the-Channel as Content-Platform with the-App as Content-Platform mean for content producers?

It means that smart-interactive-content possibilities and viewer relationship capture systems are then limited only by the content producers algorithmic / graphics imagination.

Oh – and one more benefit!

This helps, both content-producers and content-consumers, kneecap those recidivist, monopoly, middlemen, gatekeeping, slackers in the cable and satellite industry that are so fond of running interference on our emerging integrated-media eco-system.

By: Zeeshan Tariq

Zeeshan Tariq — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 07:39:35 +0000

New Google TV is one of the hottest things in the market right now with LG chosen (etechmagdotcom) as a partner to make TV sets that are compatible with newer software for upcoming Google TV. Nothing has been officially stated about LG’s role but assuredly Google wants to capture this market as soon as possible in a perfect way. For me, personally, I am waiting for Apple TV as I am an Apple fan than of Google.

By: Matthew

Matthew — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 04:33:15 +0000

“Consumers are demanding apps” – really? I like to watch TV, not diddle around with cell phone apps on it.

By: Janko Roettgers

Janko Roettgers — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 18:56:19 +0000

Bill, Android-powered TVs by companies like Lenovo won’t have Google apps, so a big part of that ad revenue won’t materialize.

Of course, you can follow Google’s logic and say that the company profits whenever people use the web. And if people use the web on their TVs, Google may actually have a chance to display more ads on its own and other web properties. The problem with that logic is that something like the Alien Vue approach of a curated and controlled Android in the cloud may not even come with a full-fledged web browser, or at least put a much bigger emphasis on apps vs. the web.

Of course, there’s a third argument to be made: Google wins if Android is more attractive to developers. By that logic, Amazon’s Kindle Fire is also a blessing in disguise. I’m not sure what the net positive of this would be, but yeah, there might be a silver lining even in fragmentation.

By: Bill Surowiecki

Bill Surowiecki — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 16:53:58 +0000

I dont understand this at all…
Why do people see AOSP as a competitor to an official Google bless build? Google makes money either way.
Official build = Ad revenue, data collection(equaling more ad revenue) and revenue from apps(not as important as ad revenue)

AOSP Build = Ad revenue and data collection(equaling more ad revenue)

You cant really call it competition, when the competitions product still adds to the competitor coffers.

By: cheese

cheese — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 14:56:33 +0000

Android is surely a big competitor for Google TV and guess what, Google insiders might readily acknowledge. GTV is a kinda NBD marketing venture within Google. Android, on the other hand is seen as a bread-winner.

Anyway, when was the last time Google made a success (or money) from something original — other than search? Google TV is not destined for easy success. Google TV could become a success when inspired by (yeah, hate me for this) Apple TV. But Apple TV is swinging between being a hobby and Fermat’s last theorem. When Cook and co finally crack it, GTV will rejoice. Till then, LeTV and several similar clones (many of which are not on public display at CES) will make hay. And why not?