(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
Poll: Smart TV or dumb monitor? | Crave - CNET
The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20110617075905/http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20015791-1.html
September 8, 2010 7:05 AM PDT

Poll: Smart TV or dumb monitor?

by
14 comments

The first mainstream TVs with built-in Internet connectivity appeared a couple of years ago, such as Samsung's LNA650 series. Here's a section from that review:

"New for 2008, the 650 series also includes an Ethernet port, which allows the TV to access the Internet to display news, stock ticker information, and local weather. USA Today provides the news feed, which can sit in the corner of the screen like a ticker (turn "Desperate Housewives" into Fox News!), or be expanded to allow you to read numerous top stories in a variety of topics."

We've come a long way, baby. Today's Internet-connected TVs integrate streaming video from YouTube, Netflix, Amazon Video on Demand, Vudu, and Hulu Plus; audio from Pandora, Rhapsody, Napster and NPR; and photos from Picasa and Flickr. They also deliver weather, traffic, maps, fantasy football, Facebook, Twitter, and even rudimentary games that are designed to be played with one thumb and your TV's remote.

Those remotes can have touch screens or full QWERTY keyboards. The TVs may have Wi-Fi and may stream content not just from the Internet but also from your own PC via a network or directly from a connected hard drive. Samsung has an apps store for its TVs, complete with a call for developers to create apps, and Vizio calls its Internet service by the same Apple-inspired name.

Tomorrow's TVs will include Google TV's integrated search, program guide, DVR/cable box control, and access to the Android Marketplace--the first due from Sony (photos) before the end of 2010. Samsung could follow suit by building a TV with Android, and I won't be surprised when the Apple logo appears on a TV someday.

But do you want all that stuff built-in? External boxes--including DVRs, Blu-ray players, game consoles such as the PS3 and Xbox 360; dedicated streamers like Roku, Boxee, Apple TV and Logitech's Google TV-enabled Revue (also due before the end of 2010)l and, yes, even actual PCs--all offer similar if not improved functionality. They cost a lot less than a TV to replace or upgrade when something new comes along.

All of which makes us wonder which one is for you? Feel free to augment your vote with a comment.

Thanks to commenter Norseman for the inspiration.

E-mail David Katzmaier

If you have a question or comment for David Katzmaier, you can submit it here. However, because our editors and writers receive hundreds of requests, we cannot tell you when you may receive a response.

Submit your question or comment here: 0 of 1500 characters

David Katzmaier reviews HDTVs for CNET.

Topics:

Home video,

Televisions

Tags:

TV,

Netflix,

Apps,

Poll,

Internet,

streaming,

Hulu

Recent posts from Crave
New Yaris revealed in U.K.
Ford adds fantasy baseball stats to Sync
LG Optimus releases Optimus 3D
Icebreaker Hockey lets you take the slap shot
Dual-screen LG handset leaks with T-Mobile branding
Playing on TVs of the future: Smell-O-Vision?
15 worthy Blu-ray movies for less than $15
X Fingers prosthetic designed to replace lost digits
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (14 Comments)
  • prev
  • next
by Admiral_Collins (5 comments ) September 8, 2010 9:09 AM PDT
My computer already does all of the things an "Internet TV" does and more so why would you pay twice over for a less capable device? A TV is just an over-sized monitor with poor resolution after all. With the right hardware/software your computer can replace many of the set top boxes too.
Reply to this comment 1 person likes this comment
by quesnoy (7 comments ) October 3, 2010 2:40 AM PDT
spoken like a true techie. Unfortunately people with more money than they know what to do with are more interested in simplicity and elegance than they are in playing Macgyver. Sure you can rig your PC to do pretty much anything these days, but you'll probably wind up with a bird's nest of cables and wires running all over your room. Not to mention the 42-step process you'll need to complete in order to watch a simple HD channel. Most wealthy people would rather have a 60 inch flat screen mounted on the wall that has a built-in blu-ray player, built-in 7.1 AV receiver with wireless speakers and HD audio capability, built-in HDDVR, built-in wireless media streaming from both internet sources and home-network pc, etc. That way their living room can maintain the look of a living room rather than look like the dorm room of an MIT undergraduate. No offense.
1 person likes this comment
by SharonGody (17 comments ) September 9, 2010 9:16 AM PDT
I agree with @Admiral_Collins. I just use a cheap ($5) S-cable and connected my Laptop to the TV. I can stream a lot of TV shows, games, old shows, etc over the internet. You can get the software for cheap from LiveTelevisionONPC [dot] com.
Reply to this comment
by timstv (1 comment ) September 10, 2010 3:11 AM PDT
TV have to get better, so people will buy news ones. This is great for us as the buyer.

An android TV that is integrated with your phone sound great to me. I would want to see a blackberry TV myself.

This trend will lead to great product over the next 5 to 10 years wall drive down energy usage because one device will us less energy than 2 or 3 or even 4 devices.

Capitalism is a great then for everybody.
Reply to this comment
by Tec Consumer (40 comments ) September 15, 2010 7:05 AM PDT
I'm not a fan of television marketing bells and whistles. Things like "internet TVs" are just that. That said, I am a fan of a lot of the "internet TV" media center capabilities. The real problem is that all of the special features you can add to a TV are completely unnecessary. These days just about everyone is adding a TV service that has these capabilities, a game console with these capabilities and things like blu ray players that already have these features. Its starting to look to me more like the PC bloatware days, where they would pack them full of content so there was more to list in the marketing sheet while making profits off of the products they are preinstalling into the computer at the factory. With television, its really "picture in picture" taken to a whole new level. Everyone loved to brag about their TVs "picture in picture" capabilites in the past, but no one actually ever used it.
Reply to this comment 1 person likes this comment
by David Quinn Carder (1 comment ) September 17, 2010 1:33 PM PDT
There's only one problem with monitors, and that's their small size. Aside from that, a monitor is just a television done right. My main gripe with TVs is the way they alter the picture unless you're in the tiny minority of in-the-know videophiles who calibrates their set to get rid of the overscan, edge "enhancement", store-display colors, and all the rest.

And no, I prefer not to have services built in to my displays, but I can see the market for it? that being said, I'd be surprised if most people who buy these feature-stuffed sets actually make use of more than one or two of the features at most, since most people who buy HDTVs also have an assortment of external devices.

But I don't know, I just know what I like, and I'm obviously in the minority. I do really, really, really wish TV manufacturers would leave the picture alone (like a monitor) and leave the video "enhancements" to the people producing the video itself.
Reply to this comment
by B-Boston (1 comment ) September 20, 2010 6:27 AM PDT
I would rather have a dumb TV. Why you ask? TV makers (maybe with the exception of Sony, are just that TV makers. I know Samsung does a lot of consumer electronics and LG too.. whatever. The point is that they are not as good at making the software component needed. PS3, Xbox 360, even your DVR, and Computer all have superior software (in speed an performance) than the TV makers can fit into a half inch deep panel. Let the software/media companies build the "smart" features and have the TV makers focus on their job.. giving me the best image possible for the cheapest amount of money. :)

I think of this much like TVs and their "sound systems" They realized they should leave sound to home theater companies and better their TV by making it thiner, lighter, and advancing picture technologies.

Just my 2 cents...
Reply to this comment 2 people like this comment
by MeepMan (235 comments ) September 25, 2010 8:05 PM PDT
"I would rather have a dumb TV. Why? TV makers (maybe with the exception of Sony) are just that TV makers.

I know Samsung and LG do a fair bit with consumer interface and consumer electronics. The point is that they are not as good at making the software component needed.

Besides, PS3, Xbox 360, even your DVR and Computer all have superior software (in speed an performance) than the TV makers can fit into a half inch deep panel. Let the software/media companies build the "smart" features and have the TV makers focus on their job, giving me the best image possible for the cheapest amount of money!

I think of this much like TVs and their "sound systems." TV makers realized they should leave sound to separate home theater components to their own niche and better their TV by making it thiner, lighter, and advancing picture technologies."

With this clean-up, I am now charging a dollar. Great ideas, B-Boston! I believe that this will be like sound as well, B-B, where there are integrated interfaces (integrated speakers) that are no where as good as the external Google TV/Apple TV (Home Theatre).
by Paul77M (1 comment ) September 24, 2010 3:03 PM PDT
A "Smart TV" or a "Dumb Monitor" depends on what I am doing with it. In my living room I would actually prefer a "Dumb Monitor" because my other AV equipment (Network Enabled AV Receiver, PS3, DVR, and Windows Media Center even though most of the other devices already do most of what that does too) will do everything I need. But in my bedroom it would be nice to have Netflix built into the TV or the ability to stream video over my home network (even this has a BluRay Player and DVR connected to it) would be great.


In reality I like the idea of a "Smart TV" but it would be a better to "have and not need rather than need and not have" situation (especially since it would be nice to have as a backup in case something fails).
Reply to this comment
by MeepMan (235 comments ) September 25, 2010 8:07 PM PDT
Monitors are actually more stupid than TVs, and are just more focused. Monitors are good at displaying content only. They rarely even have internal speakers, have very little computerized functions outside of the basic settings, the inputs, scaling, and now HDCP.
Reply to this comment
by PhineasBoggs (6 comments ) October 1, 2010 2:35 AM PDT
Generally, what I MOST want added to my TV is BLUETOOTH speakers attached or capable of broadcasting my bluetooth cellphone calls over the speakers. I want my house to be as hospitable and immersed in sound as I can make my car. Since televisions are connected even more than stereos, it makes sense to me that people should be able to pair cellphones with home systems.

Of course, if people have no interest in pairing their phones or having conversations easily, they wouldn't need to utilize that capability any more than we must use PC, S-Video, Composite, Component, etc., they wouldn't have to!

I think that Bluetooth needs to be more used in my house!
Reply to this comment
by ruex0014 (1 comment ) October 5, 2010 4:32 PM PDT
Is there a reason no one makes a large all-in-one combo (Let's say in the vein of an iMac)? I would prefer not to connect a pc to my 46" LCD TV to record television broadcasts, access my movies, music, internet video, play dvds, etc. Rather than having a handful of "internet widgets" and a crappy browser, give me a full PC built into the TV! What am I missing?
Reply to this comment
by Ellett (15 comments ) November 10, 2010 11:14 AM PST
I have a Sharp Aquos TV with a great picture, but I also have an A/V receiver, a Dish HD PVR. a PS3 and a Logitech Revue is on the way. I haven't used my TV's remote since I calibrated the set when I installed it. I'd much rather my TV money go to a larger screen with better response, contrast and brightness. Note to TV manufacturers, please concentrate on the picture, the whole picture and only the picture.

Then sell me a newer, better, more intelligent A/V receiver with built-in Google TV. Those two devices are a natural for convergence. Don't include a Blu-Ray player since that's a mechanical device that's much more prone to failure, and since my game console already has one. But you could add a bluetooth audio output so we could listen in hi fidelity sound when others in the house need peace and quiet.

And everyone, please provide WiFi and Ethernet interconnectivity so we can get synergy with devices can talking with each other and we can reduce the ridiculous amount of cabling currently required, and make all remote controls Bluetooth and provide remote control clients to our phones. Dedicated remote controls are dinosaurs (Sorry, but that's even true for your beautiful Harmony controllers, Logitech. But you've done the right thing with the Revue phone apps. Thank you.
Reply to this comment
by dpressm (1 comment ) December 24, 2010 4:05 PM PST
Dumb Monitor & ceton infiniTV Quad card

I have one computer with the Cceton infiniTV Quad card and love it. Why do I have to pay for a tuner and all of these apps????

I just want a 55inch back lit led-lcd monitor. Does anyone make them?

Now if someone would have the media center extender or its equivalent built in so I did not need the xbox I would be delighted.
Reply to this comment 1 person likes this comment
(14 Comments)
  • prev
  • next
  
advertisement
Click Here

About Crave

The name says it all. Crave is our blog about gorgeous gadgets and other crushworthy stuff. If you would like to contact Crave with a tip or comment, please write to: crave@cnet.com

Add this feed to your online news reader

Subscribe to the show

Video (SD) |  Video (HQ) Video (SD) |  Video (HQ)

Crave topics

Facebook going Spartan to take on Apple?

Social network could soon unveil an HTML5-based, Safari-centric platform in an attempt to create a major challenge to Apple's App Store, according to a report.

Bounty set for negating Lodsys patents

scoop The group that's gone after a number of mobile app developers and big companies alike is now having its four patents targeted for invalidation by a crowdsourced research group.

POPULAR TOPICS: