Skip to main content

Five reasons Google TV could fail

Image used with permission by copyright holder

As someone who browses with Google Chrome, taps out articles on Google Docs, and watches television exclusively through the Internet these days (also known as “one of those stingy bastards”), I observed the launch of Google TV like the free healthcare crowd watched Obama back in 2008. And now I’m just as disillusioned.

After dabbling hopefully with the Logitech Revue for a few weeks, I’ve come to that sad conclusion that Google TV, in its current form, just isn’t going to cut it for most TV viewers. Here’s why.

The interface is still a mess.

When I sit down to watch TV, I want a remote in one hand, and preferably, a beer in the other. A keyboard in the lap will never be part of the equation. While Sony’s Internet TV controller manages to cram a QWERTY keyboard into a much smaller, handheld controller, the whole interface still relies on controlling a cursor for basic operations like making video full screen. Frankly, if I wanted this much controller baggage with my TV experience, I would just use a computer.

Content providers aren’t on board.

Google has had a lot of doors slamming in its face lately. Like the door to ABC. And NBC. And CBS. And Fox. Meanwhile, customers are left wondering what exactly they’re supposed to watch with the magic box.

Even if Google manages to make amends and win back the hearts of the big networks, the fragility of the arrangement has been exposed. Owners will always know their favorite content could disappear on a whim when one of the network heads gets catty. The only acceptable solution is a technical workaround that gives the finger to stations by making Google TV identical to a TV in the eyes of networks and prevents them from blocking it.

It piggybacks on cable boxes, rather than replacing them.

Internet TV has come a long way in the past few years, but it’s still a supplement for heavy media consumers, not a replacement. Google recognized this, but copped out by acting a pass-through for existing cable boxes, rather than building that functionality in. Want to record live TV? You’ll need another box. Want to watch over-the-air TV? You’ll need another box.

Besides the financial burden of relying on outside hardware (which often has to be leased), the lack of a built-in tuner will ultimately limit the level of interaction Google can provide with that content. It can send a fast-forward command to your DVR, for instance, but Google TV could never improve that experience with something like automated chapters, or the ability to search subtitles.

It’s still glitchy.

Google TV is a set-top box with the reliability of a desktop computer, which is to say, not that great. Sometimes black screens pop up where video should go. Sometimes video stalls or stutters. Sometimes it just doesn’t work with some content.

We wouldn’t go so far as to say these problems are chronic, but it has a ways to go before it becomes rock stable — which is what any viable TV platform needs to be. Interruptions when you’re trying to catch up on e-mail are frustrating. Interruptions in the middle of a Sons of Anarchy motorcycle chase or the last 30 seconds of a tied football game are maddening.

Universal search isn’t universal.

The fragmented nature of Internet content pretty much demands Google-caliber search. The same episode of a TV show might be available on Hulu, SouthParkStudios, as a file on a networked computer, and on subscription services like Netflix.

But Google hasn’t pulled it off yet. Search on the first iteration of Google TV leaves out files on network drives unless you specifically tell it to search only them, and leaves out Netflix, too. Until Google TV can truly pinpoint all potential sources of content with a single search box, like, you know, Google, finding shows to watch remains very difficult.

Editors' Recommendations

Nick Mokey
As Digital Trends’ Managing Editor, Nick Mokey oversees an editorial team delivering definitive reviews, enlightening…
Update your Google Chrome browser now: New exploit could leave you open to hacks
Google Chrome Stock Photo

If you’re a Google Chrome user, you should update the browser immediately. Google released a software update to the browser late yesterday evening that patches two zero-day vulnerabilities to the browser that could potentially allow the browser to be hijacked by hackers.
One of the vulnerabilities affects Chrome’s audio component (CVE-2019-13720) while the other resides in the PDFium (CVE-2019-13721) library.
Hackers can corrupt or modify the data in Chrome’s memory using the exploit, which will eventually give them access to the computer as a whole.
One of the exploits, CVE-2019-13720 has been discovered in the wild by researchers at Kaspersky.
Google says that the update to the browser will be rolling out to users automatically over the coming days and weeks.
That said, if you’re a Chrome user it would be more prudent for you to go ahead and do that update manually right now instead.
To make it happen you’ll want to launch Chrome on your computer and then click on “Chrome” in the menu bar followed by “About Chrome.” That will launch the Settings menu. From there,  click “About Chrome” at the bottom of the menu on the left. That will likely trigger an automatic update if yours hasn’t already happened. If it doesn’t, you’ll see a button to manually update the browser as well.
Once you update the browser you should be good to go without fear of the security threat becoming an issue. Last month many Mac users ran into issues with Google Chrome when it seemed to send computers into an endless reboot cycle.
An investigation by Mac enterprise and IT blog Mr. Macintosh found that the issue was actually a bug that deletes the symlink at the/var path on the Mac it’s running on, which essentially deletes a key in the MacOS system file.
That issue only impacted Macs where the System Integrity Protection (SIP) had been disabled. The issue particularly impacted older Macs that were made before SIP was introduced with OS X El Capitan in 2015.
All this comes as Google is gearing up to launch some major updates to Chrome, including one update that will change how you manage tabs using the browser. That update is expected to roll out later this year.

Read more
4 CPUs you should buy instead of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D
AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D sitting on a motherboard.

The Ryzen 7 7800X3D is one of the best gaming processors you can buy, and it's easy to see why. It's easily the fastest gaming CPU on the market, it's reasonably priced, and it's available on a platform that AMD says it will support for several years. But it's not the right chip for everyone.

Although the Ryzen 7 7800X3D ticks all the right boxes, there are several alternatives available. Some are cheaper while still offering great performance, while others are more powerful in applications outside of gaming. The Ryzen 7 7800X3D is a great CPU, but if you want to do a little more shopping, these are the other processors you should consider.
AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D

Read more
Even the new mid-tier Snapdragon X Plus beats Apple’s M3
A photo of the Snapdragon X Plus CPU in the die

You might have already heard of the Snapdragon X Elite, the upcoming chips from Qualcomm that everyone's excited about. They're not out yet, but Qualcomm is already announcing another configuration to live alongside it: the Snapdragon X Plus.

The Snapdragon X Plus is pretty similar to the flagship Snapdragon X Elite in terms of everyday performance but, as a new chip tier, aims to bring AI capabilities to a wider portfolio of ARM-powered laptops. To be clear, though, this one is a step down from the flagship Snapdragon X Elite, in the same way that an Intel Core Ultra 7 is a step down from Core Ultra 9.

Read more