Hacker News Reader

Comment by strommen | Hacker News Reader

Ther internet is a looong way from winning.

When I turn on my cable TV, there is always something playing - instantly. When I change the channel, whatever is on the other channel is now playing - instantly. My TV always works - it never buffers, shows glitchy video, or requires a page refresh (or god forbid a reboot).

I've been watching TV on the internet for 5+ years, and it still hasn't overcome these basic quality issues. Until it does, there's no way that it will put a real dent in cable/satellite usage.

View on HN

> My TV always works

TV's can suffer hardware failure too. And if you actually want to watch more than the basic few channels offered on terrestrial, you'd need a freeview / cable / satellite set top box or equivalent built into the TV, and those devices can occasionally crash.

> it never buffers

Technically digital stations (satellite, UK terrestrial, cable, etc) do buffer, albeit tiny amounts.

> shows glitchy video

That can and occasionally does happen. Particularly with satellite or terrestrial signals during really heavy storms. Albeit it's a rarity rather than the norm. But then it's also rare that I have glitchy IPTV / internet streams too.

> or requires a page refresh (or god forbid a reboot)

...unless you're running a set top box of some description. My Sky+ box crashes about once every 2 or 3 months. I can imagine smart TVs would be subject to occasional software glitches over the course of their lifetime as well.

</pedant>

However I do see your point. But to have equivalent features of IPTV without the internet, you need the extra stuff (satellite / cable, DVR, etc) that can be just as error prone as IPTV. And you still miss out on a few niceties like "on demand" services (BBC iPlayer et al).

Personally I could go without a normal TV subscription and go 100% IPTV, but my wife loves Sky (satellite TV - for anyone not UK based). I do realise I'm a nerd so will have biases towards IPTV, but I think we have a good mix of watching 50% "normal" TV and 50% internet TV.

That facilitates people who want to watch anything right now and don't care what it is. But for people for whom consuming video content is just one of the things they do with their free time and who choose what to watch ahead of time, those are not benefits.

Not being suitable for "couch potato" viewers isn't a competitive disadvantage. People under 30 don't watch TV conventionally much any more, and as old people ... ahem ... go away, fewer and fewer people will care about conventional television.

I notice a very distinct difference there between my son and I. I will say "let's turn on the TV". He'll say "I want to watch X".

The concept of just switching on the TV and zapping is something that just does not exist for him.

My "Smart" TV takes an infuriating amount of time to "boot up". To change the video input, I probably have to wait around 2-3 eternities. At least that's how it feels when I already have in my head the instantaneous experience I grew up with. Recognizing external media is just as slow. We picked our set because it had great marks for input latency and motion blur (gaming focus). I wish we had just gotten a simple display with a separate KVM switch, but we found nothing well-reviewed and in-budget like that. Now is that a victory for TV or Internet?

I haven't had any network television - either cable or over airways - for many years. You are correct that the television is reliable and there will always be something or another playing. The thing is this: I don't value such a thing. I do not find that the internet is less reliable than the television/cable were, but the user experience is different. I treasure being able to watch something that fits my needs on my schedule. I treasure variety. These are things that the networks haven't been able to properly provide. A relaxing day of working on artwork in front of entertainment - the absorption others were speaking of - is easily obtained with John Oliver or conspiracy theories set on Youtube's autoplay.

I can relate to your point in general. The Internet is indeed quirky and glitchy, while TV generally works even for the elderly. However...

> My TV always works - it never buffers, shows glitchy video, or requires a page refresh (or god forbid a reboot).

... I guess you haven't had an IPTV setup, yet. :) I did (I have FTA DVB-T now) and buffering + glitchy video is a reality more frequently than I'd expect. Reboots are also necessary and were really deal breakers, as I didn't have RF overlay.

One could argue, though, that IPTV is more Internet than TV, or at least has the bad part of the Internet leaking to the TV realm and adding quirkiness. It's true. However, as mentioned above, now I have DVB-T and, god, buffering and glitchy video are even worst (but that's politics and clientelism, which is different matter for another discussion).

My point being: considering that TV "just works", nowadays, isn't really so clear-cut. Digital transmission and encoding, all these apps and added value with the extra capabilities of set-top boxes, yadda yadda, actually made it worse! Talk about having technology pushed down our throats (and to no advantage!). We just got a worst experience - it's a great example of how much telcos (IT in general, I'd say) aren't customer-centric.

>there is always something playing

I dont care about "something", I only watch what I want, when I want it, and how I want it (fast forward skipping boring bits)

Don't worry, smart TVs will bring internet levels of reliability to your television! /sarcasm

I'm one of a dwindling cohort of people watching TV using Windows Media Center as a PVR. I switched to it after a succession of set-top-boxes from BT were sufficiently bad (slow UI, crashy, locked down) and have been fairly happy with it. What I really want is something like a Chromecast or Apple TV with a DVB-T input and eSATA, but for some reason nobody making things that plug into the TV remembers the TV input.

(Does America even have DVB-T?)

We have ATSC for unencrypted digital broadcasts. It's still possible to build a MythTV PVR system, but the software is getting flaky and fewer and fewer ATSC receivers work in Linux.

Sling TV is exactly the internet version of this experience.

I think that criticism to the internet is unfair. With the internet, you get to control the content you browse while TV more or less makes the decision for you.

I think that's probably the point. Sometimes you want to just sit down, veg out, decompress, and just absorb. There doesn't seem to be a good way to get a near infinite stream of recent, reasonable quality content on the Internet yet, without having to do anything but switch it on, click a link, and adjust the volume. The "channels" that come close on the Internet just don't have enough content. After a few hours (or an hour or so a day over several days) you're watching the same things over again (and this happens on cable networks with less content as well). YouTube and Netflix both made big strides on this by automatically playing relevant content, but there is stil nothing that is the equivalent of a 24 hour news channel.

open a cat video on YT, let YT launch next recommended clip, you just created an endless feed of cats

Reply on news.ycombinator.com