Comments on: Why connected HDTVs are the future

LG has finally launched its Netflix-bundled HDTVs. And although it's just one of very few Web-enabled HDTVs, there's a strong chance it's just the tip of the iceberg.

[debobrata]

HDTV STINKS!

[surferstevo]

Just get it over with and give us (the public) what we want.

A TV with.
1. A browser(ie,firefox,opera whatever) so we can surf the internet and watch videos and movies on any website we want.

2. Put a qwerty keyboard on the remote so its easy to type.

3. Make it easy to PIP between TV and browser.

[Inconnux]

I couldn't think of anything else I would want less than to use my TV as a browser.

[timber2005]

Surfersteveo, I think you should look into the HP All in Ones... which have exactly what you describe.

[vikinzer]

I honestly don't think these televisions are every going to be that big a deal. I could be totally wrong, but the technology that will really make the difference is the simple VGA/HDMI input on your television. I currently have my desktop hooked into my television. We watch Hulu on our big screen TV, we play World of Warcraft on our big screen TV. When we want to show someone something from youtube, boom automatic viewing, and we're starting to get youtube content that look good on the big LCD display. Nothing stellar, but rivaling or beating normal digital cable, and quickly moving to rivaling HD digital cable. We can surf the web, use netflix, you name it.

Not that many people are willing to make this leap just yet, but with products like http://www.linux.com/news/hardware/desktops/18899-fit-pc2-ubuntu-desktop-in-a-tiny-box hitting the market, it's going to become much more common. While most lower end products won't do the gaming stuff I do with my machine, a lot of people don't require that functionality necessarily. Throw in a standard SMB server (also known as windows with a shared directory) and suddenly all your media is available to anyone who jumps on your wireless network. If you want a computer in your bedroom or your kitchen, or anywhere else everything is centralized, and at the center is a delightfully normal HDTV. Why would I want a stripped down TV manufacturer experience when all the software to do everything I just described is free (ok, so I have to pay for the WoW, yay). There just isn't a lot of value proposition there.

[wmclover]

If the sound card on your computer has a DVI output, you can buy a cheap DVI to HDMI cable online from Monoprice to connect to your HDTV to get better video than your describe.

[dcnet23]

Interesting, in 1996 I was in 12th grade. I thought back then it would only take 10 or so years before your TV, Stereo, Phone, and Computer were all one device. Guess I underestimated how slow technology and adoption take. But I guess I was ahead in my thinking then most.

[Deejay1001]

It is about freakin' time! The studies quoted are irrelavent though. Issues not mentioned are: someone creating adaptors for current HDTVs, the response by the cable providers (Verizon, RCN, Comcrap, etc.) possibly offering a la carte options. If I can access the web, can't the cable providers? Can't they stream this content too? Don't forget about another big player - GOOGLE!

HDTV or not, bringing the web to your digital tv is the way of the future.

[wmclover]

If your desktop or notebook computer has a HDMI output, what is so difficult about connecting a $15 HDMI cable to your HDTV, and controlling the cloned HDTV screen output with a wireless mouse??? Mine do not, so for the last several years, I have connected my computer to my 50" HDTV, with a cheap DVI to HDMI cable for video, and an optical cable to my AVR for dolby digital sound. Since my computer video and sound is cloned, I have full use any and all computer output on my HDTV and AVR controlled by my Gyration wireless mouse. I stream any and all video from Netflix, Hulu, Winamp, my computer DVD drive, etc. in high definition to my HDTV with its accompanied optical connection to my AVR in high quality sound. I can listen to Pandora , my computer music, Sirus music from Dish, etc on the large speakers connected to my AVR, at the same time I am displaying a slideshow of my photos or playing a home movie. I am just an old fart with no computer expertise, but it sounds like it will take the industry another 5 years to do what I have been doing for the last 5-10 years for less than $50.

[stephenpace]

I think this is a bad idea unless these televisions are significantly upgradeable. My televisions have tended to last me a long time, and I don't have a problem changing out a cheap external box to handle streaming features as technology changes. Maybe today you want to stream content from Netflix and Hulu, and tomorrow you want to do it from somewhere else. I just don't think the television manufactures are going to be able to keep up in this space.

[alegr]

What it needs is an ability to play video content from USB-connected flash, HDD and DVD drives.

[Lakebook]

They should make up their minds and come up with a standard. The best would be a module/box that hooks in the TV case somewhere in the back. The module should be the same size and have same connectors. This way if the technology changes or want something else you can just change the module.

[ddanckaert]

No, widely used platforms like Tivo HD and game consoles are the future of connected entertainment.

[ndthai]

bad links... click on ... 'READ MORE" then POP UP .POP UP ..POP UP .and i am unable to read "READ MORE" ........... c'mon CNET .... is spy ware next ??????????????

[timber2005]

Maybe you have spyware which takes over links (something jacking)... haven't seen/heard of anyone else with issues.

[C0mmanderB0nd]

These are going to be as big as built in DVD players, or maybe not even that great.

As long as you can do it better with a device that plugs into the monitor/HDTV this will be a fad or throw in.

Xbox 360/PS3 or just a PC already offer much greater flexibility for all this web content.

Really all "net" tv offers is another reason to hold a higher price point.

[dlptvlamps]

Sorry to say, but this article is incorrect for a couple of reasons:

a) everyone doesn't have and won't be able to get an internet connected HDTV for it to make sense to be the "future" - most people don't want to pay more than $600 for a HDTV, so while the day may come where these television drop down in price, they are currently $2000+ and will take at least 5 years for them to come down.

b) connected HDTVs only sound great in theory. Do you remember WebTV? It was a service where for for $9.99 you could see, check, and respond to your email through your television. They were made by companies like Philips, with service from MSN and were sold in electronics stores all around the country. Ultimately they failed because most people who were already paying $25+ for the internet wouldn't want to pay $10 for another service and for people who could pay didn't understand or see the service as useful. The same is true here. Less than 50% of the US has HDTV, even less actually watch HD content through their television. HDTVs will get better and more feature full but the innovation will come through the screen - the color gamut it produces, and the technology used to power them. They've come close to making them as thing as people will care about.

c) cable companies won't allow it. what is to stop cable companies from providing all of the services and widget that samsung, and other companies are providing today. they have millions of people by the balls tied up in triple-play combo packages with rate plans with contracts they can't break out of without paying a fee. if the business gets too big, look for the HDTVs to remain dumb, while the cable companies get smart, and charge an extra fee for access to these applications and the marketplace which under pin them.

d) every manufacturer does it differently. going back to my previous point, when you want to access the internet through a Samsung HDTV, it's a different experience than how you do it through a Sony HDTV, and I'd imagine that every company will implement it differently. There's no reason to expect them to do it all the same when they sell their televisions in different countries, with different standards and there's little money in trying to tweak software for this purpose.

these points are just true. it'll sell a few more televisions, but it won't last. there's a better chance for Comcast, Time Warner, or Cablevision to do that for you.

The real innovation coming to televions and HDTVs which is real is 3D. That's a story I can get behind.

[zedosucks]

you know whats interesting i am currently running

broadbandhdtvs.com and broadbandhdtv.com and hoping that this tvs take off.

That will be the sweetest thing that can happen. :)

3 cheers for lg for making this happen.

Nick
Http://www.broadbandhdtvs.com

[hyghwayman]

yeah!

[zipityzap]

Don - I'm going to have to disagree. The PC, not a "connected TV," will bring the Internet into your living room. The PC will be the brains of the connected home, the TV just a dumb peripheral viewing device. Why spend lots of money for a "connected TV" that limits were you can go and what you can do? Use the expensive device you already have - your PC. It's easy and affordable! [CNET Editors' note: Prohibited spam deleted]

[ydoineedausername]

Do these things support DLNA? Kind of pointless if you're limited to strictly web content when Windows 7 will be available soon with the ability to stream over this protocol.