Google Chrome OS for your TV?

[LinuxFanBoi]

I recently started a thread about how the internet could kill cable TV. Some suggested that the Television we buy could eventually evolve to connect directly to the internet.

Could this possibly be one of the intended uses for Google Chrome OS?

Is it that far fetched to suggest that a TV, when powered on could be configured to access a wireless router to boot Chrome OS and use it as a platform to access video media via outlets such as Hulu or even subscription video services that the users buys a' la carte from the producer directly?

Chrome OS sounds at this point a preposterous option for a desktop OS, but this sounds viable..

Any thoughts?

[gnomeuser]

Odds are that your TV already runs Linux (Sony e.g. has used Linux in their TVs since 2000 or there about). There has been talk of using Android in settop boxes which I think is a far better fit currently.

[LinuxFanBoi]

Odds are that your TV already runs Linux (Sony e.g. has used Linux in their TVs since 2000 or there about). There has been talk of using Android in settop boxes which I think is a far better fit currently.


I understand this, But I'm talking about something that the user will feel at ease and accustomed to using to access internet media. As for set top boxes, Connecting to the internet to access your content would remove to requirement of a subscription service that would require a traditional set top box to view TV. Just as TV's became "cable ready" and some are debatably "digital cable ready" (with a cableCARD), these TV's could be marketed as Internet ready.

This would bring the ultimate goal of the HTPC to the masses bypassing the need for the user to be an enthusiast.

I believe the technology already exists to make this a real possibility at a very small expense of the manufacturer to implement. especially since Google will likely give the OS away for free. I believe Google may hold the key to the first step toward the end of cable TV as we have known it for the last 25 years.

Google has earned a trusted reputation among manufacturers and consumers alike. They may just be the ones who can kill that traditional cable TV subscription model that we have known for the last two and a half decades. They also have the financial clout to take on the cable co's should they attempt to traffic shape a "Google OS ready TV" in an effort to steer viewers into continuing to pay for an obsolete TV medium.

I do not expect that this will be an easy task as killing cable TV is probably a kin to killing internal combustion. This Kind of idea could start a war.

[LowSky]

HTPC is and always will be an enthisiast market.
Normal customers only buy what they require. Very few pay for high end goods, most settle on the cheapest and most reliable brands. People don't care if their TV can fetch email or use google or yahoo, if they want a movie they will rent from netflix or the cable provider, if they want music they will turn on the radio or se itunes. otherwise watching Cops will comtinue the way it has.

As for Cable ready Televisions. The cable companies have focibly required that a customer rent their set top boxes. Often buy scrambling channels or offering them on channels far outside the 125 channels most TV's can tune to. Want HBO or on Demand you need these boxes. Even Cable Card cant use On Demand features.

Your idea isn't a war, as the Cable companies have squashed the outcries, because 99% of the market just assumes they need a set top box for 500 channels of nothing good to watch. Look at how many availible TV's have CABLEcard tech. just try searching their websites with the keyword cablecard, the best you will get is Tivo and maybe some PCI/USB TV tuner cards.

And now you have Comcast buying NBC/Universal, who has a major investment in Hulu, How well do you think that will go once Comcast owns it? I see things becoming worse than they are now.

[LinuxFanBoi]

HTPC is and always will be an enthisiast market.
Normal customers only buy what they require. Very few pay for high end goods, most settle on the cheapest and most reliable brands. People don't care if their TV can fetch email or use google or yahoo, if they want a movie they will rent from netflix or the cable provider, if they want music they will turn on the radio or se itunes. otherwise watching Cops will comtinue the way it has.

As for Cable ready Televisions. The cable companies have focibly required that a customer rent their set top boxes. Often buy scrambling channels or offering them on channels far outside the 125 channels most TV's can tune to. Want HBO or on Demand you need these boxes. Even Cable Card cant use On Demand features.

Your idea isn't a war, as the Cable companies have squashed the outcries, because 99% of the market just assumes they need a set top box for 500 channels of nothing good to watch. Look at how many availible TV's have CABLEcard tech. just try searching their websites with the keyword cablecard, the best you will get is Tivo and maybe some PCI/USB TV tuner cards.

And now you have Comcast buying NBC/Universal, who has a major investment in Hulu, How well do you think that will go once Comcast owns it? I see things becoming worse than they are now.

I get what you're saying, but do you think a TV can have wireless Tx/Rx functionality built in and be configurable to boot something as light as Google Chrome OS? If so, do you think this could be a first step towards bringing PC to the TV for people other than enthusiasts? Do you think this would enable the viewer to get TV content via IP whilst only paying for internet service?

This concept would undoubtedly start only as a concept on a limited basis, but I can see where Google could market this in such a fashion that the implications could be understood by the non tech savvy and even an 85 year old great grand mother could understand the potential implications of getting 2 services for the price of one. If anyone could pull it of do you think Google could be the one?

[Johnsie]

I have a computer hooked up to my TV. Personally I will be staying away from Google ChromeOS because there's already enough of my private/personal data on the cloud, but sometimes the browser is useful for finding videos. I'm just against everything being 'online' for privacy reasons.

Also, I'm assuming that having everything in a browser kind of limits what protocols you can use.

[LinuxFanBoi]

I don't want to get into the cloud debate or the privacy debate. We've done that to no end. I don't care what you think of the os in these regards. I interested to know if you think this could be a viable use for it.

Also, in response to:


Normal customers only buy what they require.

This is not true, because if they only require network broadcast television, they can achieve this by simply subscribing to the internet and watching the content for free, subsidized by the same advertisements they get on a cable TV subscription. Yet these same viewers naively believe that they MUST subscribe to TV and Internet when only an internet connection could suffice.

[Johnsie]

I think there is no viable use for it specifically because of the issues I mentioned in my previous post. ChromeOS is a data colection agent and should be avoided. And I don't care if you don't care, it's not my data ;-)

[Paqman]

The history of TV/internet mashups is a pretty sorry one. Remember WebTV?

It'll probably happen eventually, but I don't think the majority of people actually want or need this right now.

[LowSky]

This is not true, because if they only require network broadcast television, they can achieve this by simply subscribing to the internet and watching the content for free, subsidized by the same advertisements they get on a cable TV subscription. Yet these same viewers naively believe that they MUST subscribe to TV and Internet when only an internet connection could suffice.

Sorry buy I live in the real world. And in most of the real world network broadcast television is only available from the cable companies because the networks can't broadcast to my location and many others due to a few problems or restrictions, like distance or huge mountains that block signals.

Also High speed internet is needed to feed your idea that you could watch a TV show online. Not to mention you cannot watch the show live as it would air on TV as most of the TV shows on HULU are at least a day old, while some take 8 days to become available to watch. And the dont show the same ads, on HULU they only have 30 second breaks for commercial times. A standard break on TV is 2-3 minutes long.

So where do most people get high speed internet, well its their cable company. And because cable companies want to get as many dimes and nickles from you they invented a pricing structure that means buying 2-3 services are cheaper than buying just one. So people end up with phone, data, and TV on one bill.

If it was up to me I would buy my TV channels a la carte. but the Cable companies don't allow that because it would lower their profits, and so would internet TV, which is why we don't have it, and will not have it in the foreseeable future.
good luck getting Google OS on your TV, I don't see the point.