Poll: Would you buy a TV running ChromeOS?
By Richard Lawler 
posted Jul 12th 2009 1:15PM
posted Jul 12th 2009 1:15PM
posted Jul 12th 2009 1:15PM
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
The only thing I want built into my TV is Netflix with wireless N. Is that so freaking hard people????
Apparently not:
http://www.engadgethd.com/2009/07/09/sonys-connected-bravia-hdtvs-score-netflix-streaming-ps3-left/
Not sure if they have wireless-N, but why would you need it? Is your internet connection anything over 10 Mbit? And if you're using Netflix, your intranet speed won't have mean anything to the service.
At my house, I'm running a 22 M bit connection and it does make a difference when I run at 5 Ghz vs. 2.4, so yeah I need it. F/E I consistently get my HD stream with 5 Ghz on my Samsung 2500, but it's hit or miss with 2.4 Ghz. Secondly, I don't just want any old TV, let alone a bravia. Since Kuro has died, Panasonic Plasma's need to build it in.
So just wire for Gigabit Ethernet and be done with it. Wireless is almost never satisfactory for video anyway.
I'd like an OS a lot better if 1) it was easy to add apps or upgrade the OS (this leaves out any form of Linux) and 2) I did not actually have to USE the OS to watch TV if I didn't want to. In other words, I'd like the kids to be able to watch TV without having to worry about the hard drive getting formatted or a virus installed.
Yeah you tard, I'm just going to re-wire my house when my 5 Ghz works perfectly fine...
Your first condition is pointless. You might as wel say: 1) It has to be a windows based system because I know how to install .exe's.
Takes two button presses and a password to update a modern Linux system, can’t say that about another OS.
As for software install, search for what you want in a package manager, click install, enter password, done. Again, can’t say that about another OS.
Oh, I use Linux for my network, and maintain it, but it is not even remotely possible for a casual user to do. "search for what you want in a package manager" says it all.
Hopefully ChromeOS has the ease of Windows without the bloat or baggage.
If you can write your own apps for it/put XBMC on it, then I'll buy one today.
However, what I really want: If Apple could transfer the iphone OS to a TV and have a well done gesture system/iphone control, I'd be all over that shit. And multi-tasking by flip pages up and down, and flip through pages of apps left and right. Something like that, with the option to switch right to a XBMC style interface with a gesture.
Something like a combo Natal/multi-touch (without touching) gesture system. All built in to the TV.
And actually have content partners that port console-style games over. I'm really wishing for an end-all be-all solution that combines all those things. Of course I'll probably NEVER see it. But I can dream :)
I think I'd like to try ChromeOS first before saying I want it on my TV.
For all I know, it could give me a chrome-colored screen of death.
Oh, and would "Beta" be on the screen for five years too?
That could cause burn-in. ;)
Displays will be in service for many years, decades even. Over its lifetime it will be connected to all sorts of different source boxes. Building streaming hardware into them makes no more sense than building VCRs into TVs did. The streaming landscape will have totally changed in three or five years. Services come and go, merge and diverge, change.
What we need is to lose this artificial barrier between "TVs" and other displays. What difference should it make that I stream Neflix to my PC and display it on my 60" plasma, vs streaming it to my TV directly, or to a TiVo or a Roku box? Why should HD not be available through any of those means, not just some? My display should be equally available to any source I choose to connect to it, and those sources should not care about what they're being displayed on.
If it's a PC, a Mac, a PS3, a Roku, an AppleTV, a TiVo, a tuner, a disc player... just build displays that can accommodate any source device, and let the source devices work well with any display. Why is this so hard?
Well in all honesty an operating system will help that happen for 8-10 years max. IT's just all around stupid to put anything in your TV software or Hardware if it'll become obsolete in the TV's lifetime.
There's a lot of changes that are coming in the set-top box where users will be able to get a box with the functionalities of Tivo or a Media Center PC for under $150
Nvidia for instance will start producing mini-sized desktop PC's that are about the size of a AppleTV with the processing power to watch full 1080p. Combine that with the ability for the user to upgrade the HDD overtime, upgrade software as you please and connect wireless. This seems to be the most reasonable route to go.
Some TVs already come with Chrome OS - Linux!
When we "build in" an operating system or software operation, we "lock in" how the hardware functions.
We have to ask, what do we want the visual displays in our lives to do? Make sense? The time has come to make visual displays the literal focal point for all interactive media in our lives. Whether this is the home TV set (maybe we should call it the ID - Interactive Display?), the mobile phone, or whatever, it needs to handle ALL potential media, interactive or otherwise.
So, let's see a push to integrate ALL media capabilities into the ID. If Chrome allows this, great. Microsoft OS does not and likely never will.
Where is the 50' display that lets me use wifi, Bluetooth, or other wireless technology, to display my computer computer screen, in full HD, with full Dolby 5.1?
Let's see what ChromeOS is before we decide whether we want it on a TV. I don't have a problem with the general concept "multifunction computer inside of a TV", I mean, does that solve the Hulu problem or what? (And, you know, if someone can clean up Myth so it doesn't suck ass but still has the functionality, then running that directly on the TV would be awesome), but at this stage it's far from clear that ChromeOS is going to be the kind of environment that would be perfect for all of this.
Yes, assuming, of course, it can view Hulu.
I believe Murphy's Law of Electronics comes into play here: The most functions a device is required to perform, the less effectively it can perform any one. I think TV manufacturers' time, effort, and resources would be far better served by introducing more HDTVs that are worthy successors to Pioneer's now-discontinued Kuro line. The fact that that TV has been been around as long as it has and is still considered the best HDTV out there illustrates my point. The only TVs I know of that even come close to it are a Panasonic line that was just released and Mitsubishi's crazy-expensive "Laser TV", and again they're just now catching up to what Pioneer had several months ago (or longer if you count the 8G Kuros, which still hold their own against the 9G models.)
I would much rather be able to choose the best device for each task I need, even if it means having more devices in my entertainment unit and potentially spending more money. At least I get the best of all worlds rather than consolidated mediocrity. Let the experts in their respective fields work on making great products rather than cross-polinating into fields they don't fully understand.
You can buy a TV with a built in DVD player as well, but why? I have an amp, Satellite DVR, DVD Player, and Wii. No big deal adding an extender to the rack. Plus if the extender dies, I just get another extender -- not have to deal with repairing the whole TV.
If it doesn't have a 10ft interface the wife aint gonna accept it. I'm a nerd that has a computer hooked up to my TV so I'm fine. Wives or GFs, not so much. Companies have tried to through the internet on everything, and people still surf the web on their laptops or desktops.
As a Best Buy employee and dealing with all these tvs all the time and the reps of these companies, its going to happen that the companies are going to move away from picture quality and move to the additions like netflix and Os'. ( just like the receivers have moved away from sound quality to add new decoders and other features to keep cost down aka yamaha! pick up a 3 series over the new 5 series! while you can)
PS. watch for the samsung 8500 coming out in september the new true led backlit like the a950 of last year, ( will be as thick as the a850)..... those unfamiliar of the same class of led's, the lg lh90 is atleast 5 inches thick
What makes any one think that the ChromeOS vapour ware would be any good at this at all? Every one on line has been falling all over them selves to declare that Google has completely won the internet, the OS, and all application space based on a press release. Not every thing Google does turns into gold. There isn't any proof yet that ChromeOS won't suffer the same fate on the net top as Linux. Any one shipping a box with it won't get to renew their Windows licences so no one will ship with it.
Will the ChromeOS even be able to do what my current TV OS will? Will it brick my $3000 TV? Are developers going to want to support ChromeOS? Get back to me when there is actually some thing to talk about.
Chrome OS on a TV?!?! No thanks! The last thing I, or anyone else really needs, is a full OS that needs patching, has vulnerabilities, gets viruses, or can brick my unit when an update goes bad. I want my TV to be a dumb high-quality output display - I'll hook up anything else I need to do whatever else I want. How about focusing on lower power consumption, better color accuracy, higher contrast, lighter weight, lower pricing, and better reliability before even thinking about putting an OS on there?
I am still waiting for Amazon on demand to com to the Panasonic BD-60.
Definitely would consider one. But only if it controlled well via remote.