Print 17 comment(s) - last by dark matter.. on Dec 21 at 2:26 PM

Reviews of early Google TV products, like the Logitech Revue set-top box have been mixed.  (Source: Cult of Mac)

Despite Google forcing Toshiba, LG, and Sharp to delay their unanounced Google TV products, Samsung will soon release its Google-powered SmartTV, as previously promised.  (Source: On CE)

Google recently released an Android smart phone update that allows people to use their phone as a remote for Google TV, eschewing the bundled pointer and keyboard.  (Source: Google via YouTube)
Poor reception is partly thanks to TV providers' successful efforts to block the OS

Google's Android operating system has reportedly put its bid to conquer the world of television on hold.  At the 2011 Consumer Electronics Show Toshiba, LG Electronics and Sharp planned to wow visitors with a portfolio of products powered by Google TV, the Android distribution Google cooked up for the television industry.  Now those plans have evaporated.

According to The New York Times, Google is pulling the broader launch of its new platform, as it felt the system wasn't giving users the best experience.

I.  Mo Internet, Mo Problems

In an effort to improve its experience, Google released a number of upgrades last week, according to the project's blog.  Google added many long-promised abilities, including the ability to use Android phones as a remote control; the ability to move and resize website and video windows when in "Dual View" mode; a Netflix app with special features; and a new search engine extension that displays appropriate Amazon Video on Demand and Netflix video options, when searching for movies, plus pertinent results like photos and cast information.

The ability to resize video windows in particular was important, as it fixed one of the early annoyances with the system, which saw the video window covering important messages.

In addition to further tweaking its interface to improve mobile search, Google is also planning to add Google Marketplace access to the sets, allowing users to download third party apps.  In this sense Google TV could serve as a poor man's gaming console, of sorts, and offer crude productivity software.

The biggest headache for Google, though, is the coalition of Fox, NBC, CBS, ABC, Viacom, and Hulu, who have banned together to block Google TVs from accessing their library of online videos.  None of these providers have offered a clear or legitimate reason as to why they are blocking access.  Ultimately, it seems a ploy to force Google or its customers to pay access fees, though.

II.  Google TV's Revised Plan

While the greater GoogleTV launch has been shelved, Samsung will still go ahead and release new SmartTV models featuring Android.  Like Sony's Internet TV, Samsung's models will feature Intel Atom processors.  They also feature a licensed SGX535 GPU core, which is licensed by Intel as part of its "Sodaville" platform.  The SGX core is engineered by PowerVR, a division of Imagination Technologies.

Samsung hasn't announced the price of its offerings, but it will likely be in line with Sony's models, which run for $600 USD for a 24-inch HD flat-screen unit to $1,400 USD for a 46-inch flat screen.

Sony also currently offers a Google TV-sporting Blu-Ray player which retails for $400 USD.  Partner Logitech also offers the Logitech Revue, a Google TV set-top box option, which is currently selling for $250 USD.

So far reviews on Amazon have been mixed.  Self-proclaimed "gadgets geek" J. Ruppenthal declares:
First, you should know that I'm a gadget/tech hound. I've had everything there is out there, from Amiga to Zenith. Remember the WebTV? I had one some 15 years ago. I bring that up because, frankly, I don't see much difference between that failed attempt at bringing the "web" (as it was called then) to TV and Google's latest try. Sure, the graphics are fancier and, yes, there will eventually be more you can do with Google TV, but for now, it's a disaster.
Frankly, I'm tired of being a beta-tester for the latest tech. I'll wait for v2 and rethink a purchase. I recommend you do the same.
But "D. Politis", another commenter responds:
He wasn't too impressed with accessing the Internet from the TV. Well, that was the main point of Google TV. I hardly find Google TV a disaster. Is it complete? No, but Google indicated that things like the marketplace would not be available until later.
From the sounds of things, you should not be an early adopter of things. The initial release of anything is always incomplete. Did the iPhone come released with the AppStore? But eventually it did. Google TV will only get better and still does things no other device can do.
Most of the other reviews fall into one of these two denominations -- those who are praising Google's ambition and preaching patience, and those that are fed up and frustrated.  Google clearly hopes to eliminate the latter category with its delay, but some may just end up perceiving that delay as a sign of weakness.

III.  Grumbles From the Trenches

Even if Google can survive public criticism, though, it must also shore up its communications with partners.   James L. McQuivey, an analyst at Forrester, in an interview with The New York Times says that Google didn't communicate the delay until the last minute, creating a mess of its partners' CES plans.  He states, "Google as a company is not a particularly partner-friendly or partner-focused company."

Those partners, for the most part, don't sound overly happy about that development, but for now are practicing patience.  Jeff Barney, the vice president of Toshiba’s digital products division comments, "We will not be announcing a Toshiba TV or Blu-ray player or demonstrating the products at C.E.S.  We have an understanding with Google about the future product roadmap and will bring the right product out at the right timeframe."

If Google doesn't do a better job in the future, though, to communicate its roadmap and jointly plan any delays, it may find that patience wearing thin, though, say analysts like Mr. Barney.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Google needs to get a clue...
By eggman on 12/20/2010 3:58:12 PM , Rating: 2
Google Chrome is a good browser and it has an impressive slice of the market and an even more impressive development cycle.

RE: Google needs to get a clue...
By B3an on 12/20/2010 4:23:28 PM , Rating: 2
Chrome development cycle is certainly not impressive.
From the very first version of Chrome to the latest version 9 dev builds it looks exactly the same.

And if you go in to the options menu it still has very few options/features in there.

Just because version numbers increase quicker than other browsers doesn't mean it's progressing faster. It could be argued that MS have made more major changes in a single browser version, going from IE8 to IE9, than Google have with Chrome since release.

RE: Google needs to get a clue...
By vol7ron on 12/20/2010 6:05:10 PM , Rating: 1
I didn't realize looking exactly the same was a criteria in better versions.

I'm more concerned with page load times and pages displaying correctly. Did IE improve on this that many times between version 8 and 9? Pretty sure Chrome is one of the fastest JS engines. - We shouldn't have to wait to browse the internet, we should just do it (like Nike).

RE: Google needs to get a clue...
By OoklaTheMok on 12/20/2010 7:26:47 PM , Rating: 2
OMG... who cares about the fastest javascript engine, when compatibility is much more important.

It's not hard to be super fast when you ignore the details of actually getting things to work correctly and consistently.

By dark matter on 12/21/2010 2:26:42 PM , Rating: 2

RE: Google needs to get a clue...
By Aloonatic on 12/21/2010 5:07:21 AM , Rating: 2
Well, the options menu changed quite a bit a couple of releases ago.

As the poster bellow your comment (so presumably above this comment) points out, it's not just about aesthetics, but performance. Personally, I'm glad that they are investing more time rather there than changing how the browser looks, perhaps just for the sake of it so that you can "see" it changing.

Yes, other browsers have changed more, but might have noticed that other browsers have changed their appearance to look a lot more like... Yep, Chrome. Why change what works so well?

How would you change it anyway? They stripped it right back to just tabs and an address bar, with a couple of buttons. Then the rest is up to the designers of the web page that you are browsing at the time which, IMHO, is probably as it should be.

Maybe I'm biased, as I do a lot off my browsing on Celeron powered, 11.6" 1366x768 screen on which Chrome works really well, whilst other browsers are far less fun to use. When on more powerful machines, with bigger screens then I really don't care all that much so I use IE, FF and Chrome, depending on the sites I'm visiting and what have you. They all seem to have their strengths and weaknesses, with their own little gimmicks and quirks.

"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings
Related Articles

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Laptop or Tablet - Which Do You Prefer?
September 20, 2016, 6:32 AM
Update: Samsung Exchange Program Now in Progress
September 20, 2016, 5:30 AM
Smartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki