GoogleTV Giving Networks the Jitters

A

admin

Audioholics Robot
Staff member
In our recent review of Logitech's Revue Google TV Box, it was apparent that a lot of people, most notably Hulu, aren't exactly excited about the prospect of bypassing set top boxes with GoogleTV. ArsTechnica has an interesting article that taps into the discussion further by looking at how Google TV is attempting to calm down studio execs and arguing that people aren't really turning off cable and satellite because of set top boxes, merely that they are adding these things to enhance their TV viewing experiences. Our experience has been a bit two-sided. On one hand, we've seen the economy drive a lot of peple we know to put up antennas and drop cableTV in favor of Netflix and now Hulu Plus. On the other hand, our personal experience is that connecting GoogleTV (a Logitech Revue) to a DISH Network DVR yields one of the most interactive and powerful TV experiences we've yet seen.


Discuss "GoogleTV Giving Networks the Jitters" here. Read the article.
 
krzywica

krzywica

Audioholic Samurai
"a lot of people" should have been proactive in their approach when it comes to developing front ends and delivering content at a reasonable price. STB's haven't brought anything new to the table in 10 years, and Hulu should have been providing their services to a wider audience by now.
 
BoredSysAdmin

BoredSysAdmin

Audioholic Slumlord
Big content is still stuck at their old ways and like ARS says pretty much the only way to break this pattern is to have new Independent studios provide NEW content which will be available online without limitations.

One way or other a-la-carte model which consumer want more and more as time goes - will prevail (hopefully)
Boxee had/have exactly same problems before as now Google TV facing. Imo Google shouldn't learned from them and not to stumble upon like blind kittens.

Update:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2010/11/boxee-box-now-shipping-netflix-and-hulu-plus-coming-soon.ars
 
Last edited:
cwall99

cwall99

Full Audioholic
How does the quality of the video and audio streamed through GoogleTV compare to, oh, say, any major player on HD?

My internet connection typically runs between 18 and 22 Mbps (as measured by www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/), and I've yet to see anything streamed over NetFlix come anywhere close to even a standard DVD.

I didn't spend a boatload of money on my HT rig (well, it's a boatload for my budget, anyhow) to watch and listen to low-res content. And that's where I put the standard NetFlix content. It's full of video artifacts and it's only stereo.

Whereas, if I watch any regular channel in HD over my set-top box, I get a great picture and great audio (especially on HBO HD).

So, my question to the participants in this thread, especially those who regularly use GoogleTV... How good is the audio and video over this thing?
 
sholling

sholling

Audioholic Ninja
I have to agree with BSA that the quickest way to jump start demand for GoogleTV or any of the others is with new unique content, but to have any chance at all of going mainstream it's going to have to do include Hulu Plus and Netflix and every other service and website.

Nobody wants to have 10 boxes hanging off their AVR (well maybe some here ;)). I'm waiting for the "one box to rule them all" before I lay out any more money. Reports of the Boxee Box complain of missing services (Netflix etc) and technical issues, and the beta PC version was too limited. The PS3 won't play some web content (such as Revision3.com) or FLACs, or video rips. The WDTV Live does great with rips but doesn't do web content. I want one box to do it all.
 
BoredSysAdmin

BoredSysAdmin

Audioholic Slumlord
I'm waiting for the "one box to rule them all" before I lay out any more money. Reports of the Boxee Box complain of missing services (Netflix etc) and technical issues, and the beta PC version was too limited. The PS3 won't play some web content (such as Revision3.com) or FLACs, or video rips. The WDTV Live does great with rips but doesn't do web content. I want one box to do it all.
I agree with sholling - people will sit on the bench till "there only can be one box", however i'm impatient - I want my htpc now and I want it to have x features. In my case Boxee has the X features i'm looking for, but it may not have Y features someone else is looking for.

Boxee Box now includes BD ISO images playback (lite - no menus on BR yet, yes for DVD)
Netflix support is pretty much guaranteed on Boxee Box before end of this year. Hulu Plus is a very likely to be added as well.

How does the quality of the video and audio streamed through GoogleTV compare to, oh, say, any major player on HD?
This has nothing to do with the box, rather with Netflix themselfs - it's the quality of video they stream. Unfortunately very small minority of home broadband users have anything over 15-20Mbps down-streams which obviously limits the Quality of so called "HD" netflix video.

To put things simply it'll be a long while (Then Home 100/100Mbps line will cost under $100/month) till internet streams will compare to PQ of FIOS HD Channel or even Cable's one.
 
Last edited:
Z

Ziontrain

Audioholic Intern
Google is just saying empty words. Anyone with an ounce of sense can see that the internet has consistently had the effect of disintermediation and opening up the playing field. This has has the result of reducing the profitability of existing player and creating new players both small and big.

Yet the entertainment industry (both content producers and distributors, which are sometimes one and the same) seems to STILL be living under the stone age delusion that as continent distribution moves to the web, they can all demand the same margins and profits as the did before. And that all of them have the right to continue to exist.

This is sheer delusion. No industry has done this since the internet has grown. It doesnt work that way.

Also, the issue isnt purely about cutting cords at all - its about customers who will never have had a cord to cut in the first place, much like today there are people who have never had a fixed phone line in their house - all they know is mobile phones. For those type of customers - the ones who have not had a cable line before and have grown up on internet-based video entertainment, the existing cable players are just one useless middleman - they dont need in the first place. And those people - the Youtube generation - have been quietly raised from teenage years by Google via Youtube. Their numbers will only continue to grow.

The smart ones among them had better get down to changing their business models, because they are not all going to continue living in big fat mansions in Hollywoood. The internet dont work that way.

Besides, the longer these dinosaurs hold out, the more they are giving a head start to new smaller players who will sieze advantage of this new beachhead that Google has put into the living room of the average consumer. For now, yes there is demand for the TV shows that you see on cable TV. But ultimately Google TV is going to give rise to popular shows that were never on traditional TV in the first place.

Of course this is scary to the existing hollywood fat cats. So Google is placating them with empty words. But empty words is all it is - because Google knows as well as anyone what the internet does to traditional businesses who refuse to change.
 
krzywica

krzywica

Audioholic Samurai
I pawed at the option of getting a Boxee Box for my bedroom, until I cam across a used Popcorn Hour A100 for $50, couldn't pass it up. Not to mention I had a laptop in there for a few months running boxee and while it would be great for a stand alone system, having to keep it on all the time just to stay updated with the content that gets added to my server every day was kinda stupid.
 
BoredSysAdmin

BoredSysAdmin

Audioholic Slumlord
I pawed at the option of getting a Boxee Box for my bedroom, until I cam across a used Popcorn Hour A100 for $50, couldn't pass it up. Not to mention I had a laptop in there for a few months running boxee and while it would be great for a stand alone system, having to keep it on all the time just to stay updated with the content that gets added to my server every day was kinda stupid.
Huh? You can have set Boxee scanning frequency to very frequent and it'll update on the power on. I have tons on content on remote server, connected thru vpn tunnel (hard limited by router at 5Mbps) - works fine including scanning and updating. If you updated it from older boxee build, it helped me a lot by full uninstall, wipe all old data and do a clean install. With newest Boxee builds scanning is no more problem.

PCH are ok, but without 3rd party tool like YAMJ it's not much...
 
krzywica

krzywica

Audioholic Samurai
Huh? You can have set Boxee scanning frequency to very frequent and it'll update on the power on. I have tons on content on remote server, connected thru vpn tunnel (hard limited by router at 5Mbps) - works fine including scanning and updating. If you updated it from older boxee build, it helped me a lot by full uninstall, wipe all old data and do a clean install. With newest Boxee builds scanning is no more problem.

PCH are ok, but without 3rd party tool like YAMJ it's not much...
Even with the update frequency set to the max it still doesn't show immediately. And if I keep it powered off for several days it has a lot of content to update, which takes longer. Also it puts more load on the machine needlessly as I already have all my YAMJ batch processes running on the server. Its nice to run 1 update on the server that takes 2 minutes and every client that connects gets update content with the same cover art, movie info, ect. Where as with Boxee/XBMC there is no way to do that. If a movie gets scanned in wrong and selects the wrtong movie you have to do it for each client that is connecting to the server. This gets old very fast.
 
Last edited:
BoredSysAdmin

BoredSysAdmin

Audioholic Slumlord
Even with the update frequency set to the max it still doesn't show immediately. And if I keep it powered off for several days it has a lot of content to update, which takes longer. Also it puts more load on the machine needlessly as I already have all my YAMJ batch processes running on the server. Its nice to run 1 update on the server that takes 2 minutes and every client that connects gets update content with the same cover art, movie info, ect. Where as with Boxee/XBMC there is no way to do that. If a movie gets scanned in wrong and selects the wrtong movie you have to do it for each client that is connecting to the server. This gets old very fast.
Well, speed issues aside, I can see your point re: incorrect identification of same content on multiple clients... Centralized scan and ID definitely solves this issue.
 
krzywica

krzywica

Audioholic Samurai
Well, speed issues aside, I can see your point re: incorrect identification of same content on multiple clients... Centralized scan and ID definitely solves this issue.
Also NOT being able to change the content from the front end is a plus for me. When other people come over and use my stuff they are much more comfortable using it when I tell them that they can't break anything, not to mention my peace of mind knowing that they are not able to modify anything. But to each his own. :)
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top