Reviews of Android TV launcher after Google added ads to the homescreen
play.google.com
play.google.com
1. Install a new launcher from play store (I found one called "Basic Launcher" that matches the aesthetics of the default one). This doesn't solve the problem though, because Google disabled changing the default launcher for some user hostile reason, until you delete the existing launcher.
2. Enable development mode by tapping on the build number in settings
3. Connect an adb shell to your device
4. Remove the built in launcher
5. Reboot, select basic launcher when prompted
I own a few android TV devices, have recommended them to people in the past, and won't be purchasing another. I think what happened here should be illegal and shame on whoever worked on this.
nVidia should absolutely get ahead of this to preserve their own reputation.
Regardless of where they choose to lay blame, if Nvidia doesn't fix this I am done with their devices when it's time to replace them.
Sony's "smart" TVs all come with Android TV (now called Google TV). Their top of the line OLED TV Sony Z9J starts at $8,000 in 75" and costs $10,000 in 85".
(I mean, their reputation in some circless is AFAIK quite bad - 500+ MB drivers requiring registration on windows, lack of cooperation on Linux drivers, nerfing of some of their GPUs for shady reasons, attempts to buy ARM, etc.)
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/shield-tv/9/4579...
If they want me to be secure, package essential security updates into seperate downloads.
So you mean ads are increasing security ?
Not just the security updates, but also things like APIs that prevent some applications from being compatible. Still, I have to wonder how much of a tradeoff would be possible when all the code is managed together, and the security and feature updates would be interwoven in the same repo. There is only so much manpower available to keep maintaining every version of each update.
> Software Updates
> iOS now offers a choice between two software update versions in the Settings app. You can update to the latest version of iOS 15 as soon as it’s released for the latest features and most complete set of security updates. Or continue on iOS 14 and still get important security updates until you’re ready to upgrade to the next major version.
So many updates these days have nothing to do with security, just with "feautes" nobody asked for apart from random product manager who needs his paycheck.
The ads hadn’t rolled out yet on Shield when I moved over but for some reason I just assumed Apple wouldn’t be shilling ads at me constantly for services I don’t have, or trying to sell me content I already have access to.
More fool me. Fire TV is worse, but I’ve heard Roku is much the same.
The Smart TV ecosystem is rot all over.
Years ago, the App Store also used to not show ads.
Google TV launcher == Apple TV app on tvOS
You can remove the Google TV launcher but with it huge amounts of device functionality (including search). Same as for the TV app.
Literally zero difference other than the customary Apple free pass they always get.
I am currently building a magic mirror like smart map. Basically, the goal is to have a big touchscreen with Google maps or Google earth running.
For touch screen support I bought a cheap USB infrared frame. I have tested it with the USB C port of my Android phone and it works well, but I have sadly not found any Android TV box which has an USB port.
https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/marketplace/electronics-photogra...
Build your own with a Raspberry Pi. The new ones pack quite some heat in terms of performance.
I have a Google notification that I cannot dismiss and 3 buttons on my App menu that all take me to the Play Store that I cannot remove. I'm livid.
This should be illegal and I'm frankly worried about Google's future if this is the kind of shit that they need to pull to continue to profit. Some of the brightest sw eng's around yet they do this shit rather than innovate. Lazy
1. Install your new launcher through play store. (I used the Basic Launcher as well).
2. Settings -> Device Preferences -> About. Scroll to "Build" and click on it until it pops up that you are a developer (it will give you a countdown)
3. Settings -> Device Preferences -> Developer options (this was just unlocked in step 2) -> Network debugging (this will let you use adb)
4. Install adb (platform tools) on your computer.
5. adb connect <ip address of your shield>
6. adb shell pm disable-user --user 0 com.google.android.tvlauncher
7. adb shell reboot
Should find yourself in the launcher you installed Note, I also stopped the google launcher (cleared data/reset defaults)/tested the new launcher in the middle. So if these steps don't seem to work, before doing step 5 try doing those and then retry.
I would also argue that some of these bad acts could be considered to be false / deceptive trade practices under the various state laws (in the U.S. at least). For example, some people would never have bought a FireTV cube for streaming video if Amazon had revealed that they would be adding advertisements to the consumer's video-viewing experience.
But: how much incentive is there for individuals to file a small claims suit against Amazon for a $79 device? Generally speaking you might get treble damages but not much more unless you've had actual damages.
And although class action suits are frustrating and should be "fixed" so that those harmed get the bulk of the proceeds (i.e. it's not okay that consumers receive discount coupons or $10 checks while plaintiff's counsel receives a disproportionally huge payday) this is one thing we've lost by generally not allowing class actions.
David v. Goliath is not as effective as 15,000 Davids v. Goliath.
Not to even mention the mandatory arbitration imposed on consumers (which do sometimes carve out the ability to file in small claims court).
We have cultivated, or at least allowed, a very anti-consumer bias to take hold in U.S. law.
Retroactively adding ads to an ad-free device after the customer has purchased it, sometimes buying it specifically to avoid competing devices with ads, is inexcusable bullshit.
Ie, u less a service explicitly promotes am ad-free experience, there should be no expectations of such.
"Once screens and connectivity costs fall below a threshold, advertising is guaranteed to follow."
When they push a software update that makes the treadmill unusable without the subscription, now you're tied to not only paying for the service (at whatever price they decide that week), but you're also tied to the company itself continuing to exist and OFFER content.
A bunch of lawsuits have been filed, I'm sure it'll be reverted to 'the way it was' soon. (I honestly believe it was a largely clumsy move in trying to quickly tie a PIN code to the software to keep kids/unauthorized users from turning it on).
But it's a parallel here. My Google TV device might show ads on the TV network, but you pay for the device to not get ads on the home screen like the awful Fire Stick I have. (every time you hit 'play' to try to unpause a program, you are actually hitting 'play' on the terrible ad they gave you).
Not that I agree with anything Peloton has done in this situation, but you make it sound much worse than it already is.
I don't see how a single word of my comment makes it sound much worse than it is. I pointed out what they did as a result of CPSC, and indicated that they'll likely reverse course, which you confirmed.
I'm not super well-versed in how it works at the moment. I've got a Tread, but can't use it due to knee surgery, so I've been watching the CPSC uproar / PIN requirement from afar, and generally think it's pretty silly.
I bought my Shield as a premium device, not expecting the launcher to change substantially - much less to put ads on the screen.
The fact that they use the monopoly power on the phone to force Manufacturers to use Android TV is insane to me. The fact that they then quickly made the experience extremely anti consumer is a playbook monopoly play.
That's the context - they can't do evil, by definition! (By circular definition, sure.)
Actually, mandatory arbitration can massively backfire, and the ad change seems like a compelling case.
Example: https://www.vox.com/2020/2/12/21133486/doordash-workers-10-m...
Unfortunately I have seen recently some arbitration clauses now include language saying, for example, that arbitration costs will be shared equally(!) or otherwise limiting their use by consumers.
However, the more that these mandatory arbitration clauses limit consumer rights the more likely that they will be found to be unenforceable. This is one reason that you'll often find that contracts with mandatory arbitration will have a clause specifying that in the event the arbitration clause is unenforceable that the rest of the agreement still stands.
The MegaCorps add this clause because they know that they are pushing the boundaries of what will be allowed by the courts.
Historically arbitration was intended to be a solution for parties of comparable bargaining power (e.g. MegaCorpABC vs MegaCorpXYZ) but instead are increasingly used by MegaCorp vs LittleConsumer.
Does anybody in the U.S. have a credit card that doesn't impose mandatory arbitration? Not that I've seen.
This is a topic that deserves much more news coverage. Most consumers have no clue how mandatory arbitration is being used against them.
And that's before we even consider their more egregious use in, for example, employment agreements as was the case in the article you've shared.
I don't understand why most people have a problem with this. It's the company that sold you the $79 product that cheated you. Be upset with them.
Personally, I don't care if I get $0 out of a class action lawsuit. I've already been cheated out of my money, so my main concern is punishing the company that ripped me off so they don't do it again.
Class action lawyers get a lot of hate, but those firms are fronting a ton of money and taking a ton of (monetary) risk by litigating on behalf of the class. They deserve a big reward when they win.
If you want to change the system, impose MASSIVE penalties on the companies that are cheating consumers. Make them pay 3-5x the going rate for the plaintiff's lawyers PLUS 100% refunds to all the customers that got ripped off.
Then the shenanigans will stop.
https://www.engadget.com/vizio-q1-earnings-inscape-013937337...
A smooth, clean ad-free experience is certainly worth the extra price if you can afford it.
I generally prefer more open ecosystems, but Apple has built a pretty strong reputation for not just being an ad company and for making solid products that are supported much longer than competitor devices.
The problem is that Android TV users used to think the exact same thing. It's even said in the reviews explicitly by some people. I don't and I won't trust a corporation, be it Apple or Google, to not do something in a future update - if it works fine right now then unfortunately that has to be good enough.
Some make money by selling things so they have an incentive to keep happy customers. Some companies don’t.
Like, this isn't meant to be a post against Apple btw. Just that I don't see a point in saying "company X did a bad thing, that's why I buy company Y, they would never do this!" - they don't right now, that's what counts. But for the future? Who knows.
But it’s more likely if a company’s business model doesn’t involve ads vs does.
Past performance doesn’t guarantee future performance, but it’s the best we got.
While people may not have had the foresight to know that Google would be adding advertisements to their tv box, the behavior itself isn't unexpected given that Google is an advertising company. For Apple the behavior is both unexpected and disincentivized by the brand they've built for themselves.
I could die tomorrow but living my life under that impression would be foolish.
I guess it's a choice of if you want to bend over at the checkout or at home when you have started using the product.
By cable connectors I'm assuming you are mostly referring to the lightning connector, which came before USB-C was an option. I actually still think it's a better connector than USB-C, but the advantages of adopting USB-C at this point heavily outweigh the merits of keeping it. Still, Apple doesn't shy away from adopting new standards that it thinks it's better. They famously ditched their own serial connector (ADB) for USB in the iMac.
I have no clue what you meany by keyboard layout or how Apple in any way locks someone into a specific keyboard layout.
> You always have to go all in to their ecosystem
Why do you have to go all in on their ecosystem again? There are plenty of people with airpods or an iPad without any other Apple device and are perfectly happy with just that. Apple puts a lot of effort into creating an attractive ecosystem because their business is in selling hardware.
> pay a 50% premium on everything just for the Apple logo.
... And for the software, the ecosystem, the hardware, and a lot of other factors. I find it extremely weird that you say this in the same sentence that you mention the ecosystem. Beyond that, it's not even true? What devices cost 50% more when compared against comparable options from other manufacturers?
> I guess it's a choice of if you want to bend over at the checkout or at home when you have started using the product.
You're making of choice of paying for higher quality hardware that isn't subsidized or lower quality hardware that is. The biggest slap in the face here is for people that bought premium Android TV devices like the Nvidia Shield and still have to put up with this bullshit from Google.
PS: I don't actually complain :-) I'm a recent convert and compared to Chromecast I find Apple TV a massive upgrade.
I didn’t update the shield in quite some time as most new features are of no interest to me. And from the looks of it that won’t happen anytime soon. It’s worse enough that google did the same with the YouTube app …
Would’ve gone for an apple tv otherwise
Futzing with Kodi updates, patches, updates to the OS, drivers, etc is all way too much to be considered ’smooth’ for most.
Joking aside, there is not much futzing around to do if you just go with LibreElec, and you can even buy pre-installed boxes nowadays.
It only gets used for local media + radio, twitch and youtube streams though - I don't know about other services.
My setup is like GP's, ie I play the videos on the computer, but what bothers me personally is that I have to boot windows to get the high quality streaming.
I've looked specifically at Kodi maybe a year ago and it didn't seem to support this. I'm OK with tinkering if I know it's actually possible to get this working.
For my use, this is much less friction than any searching and waiting around for torrents or whatever to download.
There's also the discoverability factor. Not following current movies / shows, I don't necessarily know what shows exist. So browsing through random lists and then checking if they're available to download from enough people that it won't take a week is way too much work when all I want is to mindlessly watch something right now.
I’ve always used my PS4 for streaming services but the bloody thing was so loud. I’ve replaced the PS4 with a PS5 but it doesn’t have the national broadcaster’s crappy app and we wanted to keep access to these channels.
I’ve been pleasantly surprised by the Apple TV. It surfaces shows across my streaming apps without pushing TV+ in your face. It integrates beautifully with the Apple ecosystem, I can ask Siri on any device to play $show on Disney+ in the living room and it just works.
I’ve heard how bad the old remote was but the new one is really nice. I’ve paired my dualshock 4 controller to it for Apple Arcade and it works great.
The Apple TV is a device that doesn’t get much attention but I think it’s really impressive.
For example Visio's hardware side could be reinvesting vast sums of revenue back into TV R&D. Or they could have invested in upstream component manufacturers. Maybe they spent a large amount on recruiting new staff. All those expenses are deducted before profit.
Meanwhile the ad division might have made no investments for the future and took the tax-inefficient choice to show a large profit instead.
Without debating what "evil" really means in this context, in the early days of a company there are plenty of ways to grow without being actively user hostile. Once those avenues are thoroughly maxed out, any company that is basically only measured by growth (i.e. every public company) will have to slide more and more into things that only boost revenue to the detriment of users.
I mean, this change is so blatantly abusive and user hostile, and something that never would have been greenlit in, say, the 00s, just shows how far Google has decayed.
Google doesn’t lack revenue streams, it just wants to maximise all of them ans make new ones. It’s the constant desire for growth and the mantra that ‘standing still is going baxkwards’ that I find repulsive.
In this case, the law or regulation is supposed to step in. The problem is that the law pretty much stopped advancing when it comes to the digital world, at least when it benefits the consumer.
It's just that culture/society/law change far slower than technology. Most US Senators are over 65, with associated world-views and educations more than half a century old. A quarter century ago, neither smart TVs, targeted ads, nor Google itself existed.
Children today are warned about Internet tracking tools, privacy management, they're aware of the creepy omnipresent big brother nature of tech, perhaps in 2080 Congress will be ready to address these issues.
DuckDuckGo users are funding ddg’s growth and R&D which makes it a better product over time. Google essentially converted some minimal short term gains into an existential threat. Assuming they become widely known as the worse search engine it’s extremely difficult to regain users.
Facebook bought out several competitors, but Facebook.com for example has serious issues with younger demographics. At this point any platform they don’t buy risks killing the company.
I think there was a time when Apple was screwing up for a while and just making things shittier with new releases that Android actually was better. That time is now gone.
Edit: the iPhone keyboard really hates swearing though.
Lack of 3rd party keyboards was one of the things that kept me from using iPhones for a long time but these days I wonder why do anyone keep the original one?
Thanks for the tip! Which one do you use BTW?
I'm using SwiftKey - but I only type with it, I don't swipe. Also they are slowly introducing more bugs but it is still usable.
You then, which did you end up with?
Remove some magnitudes, and then some more.
At home... libreelec. +importing ipvt playlists... +epg, which gets banned by the telco, and then reappears somewhere else. +subtitle services. +this and that plugin.
That's why we need alternatives.
After seeing screen after screen of one-star reviews, I'm not sure this one will just blow over. People are very, very unhappy with the update.
When instead it should not have been done at the first place.
That’s the problem people are upset about is this is forced upon you with zero realistic alternatives. Apple puts it into the settings whereas you have to use adb to forcefully swap the launcher. That’s a pretty bog difference c
I also assumed it would be there, but unless I’m missing it, the option to disable those ads doesn’t exist.
Why am I getting ads for services I don’t have, and why can’t I switch them off if I want to?
If I’m on the home screen and I want to search across apps (a core feature) I’m routed through the TV app, which will try to make me buy new services or pay fees to watch content I already have access to on Netflix.
It will also mix in banners for shows/movies I don’t have access to without paying additional fees, and doesn’t allow a way to disable this.
This is exactly the problem people are having with the new Google TV app.
Don’t want Google ads? Cool, uninstall the Google TV launcher and remove massive amounts of functionality you already paid for (including universal search) and crack on with a terrible experience.
Don’t want Apple ads? Cool, move the TV app to your junk folder and remove massive amounts of functionality you already paid for (including universal search) and crack on with a terrible experience.
Even Prime video has a free to me button.
The ATV is not a subsidised device, this is shameless gouging and Apple again get a pass on here that other companies are (rightly) dragged for just because they’re Apple.
Others in this thread have already spoken about getting ads for Peacock, Disney+ and Hulu even though they don’t have the services installed, let alone in the app bar.
Today I tried to continue watching a show I’ve been watching for a month and Apple wanted me to pay money just because it’s on Netflix. No mention whatsoever that it’s on Netflix or even a banner to read “content from other services may not appear in this app”.
Sure I can check Netflix separately, but that means that if I want to use the most popular streaming service in the world on this device reliably then I no longer have a universal search feature.
It’s crazy that the experience is this bad and no-one is willing to point it out.
Services are advertised regardless of what’s in the App Bar.
Shows are advertised on services that aren’t even installed, even if they’re on Netflix and Netflix is installed.
Movies that are on Netflix are shown as iTunes rentals for additional fees, with no message to the user that they can watch it on Netflix.
I asked if you know of a toggle to switch these of, I’ve been unable to find anything to suggest such an option exists either on my device or via Google.
I like a lot of what they make, but tvOS is just bad in it’s current state.
- There were practically no ads, and especially no ads with easy traps such as “You have a virus, install this to remove it”.
- There were no OEM drivers, and thus no Askbar, the 404 pages were really 404s, and the Search on Google bar really went to Google.com. That was new for me, coming from Windows.
- If there were ads, on Mac, they were for higher-class products, not fast food.
People joke about the 20% to 100% higher cost of Apple products, but being away from the grandma/noobs ecosystem has no price. Corollary: Grandmas and noobs endure an obnoxious OS experience, because advertisers know that a lot of them will click on traps like “Error 404. Enter your credit card to view content” (or, today, “Want in on the Bitcoin experience?”).
My wife and I went from flagship Android phones (latest and greatest Samsung or Sonys) to mid-range iPhones (XR) over the last few years and it feels like a massive improvement.
I'm not going back anytime soon and next week two more of my kids are getting (refurbished) iPhone 8 to replace their aging Samsung Galaxy S7 and Huawei <something I can't remember>.
Show me ads in YouTube, show me ads in whatever other app, but not my home screen. There's a difference. The home screen is MINE, not Google's.
People are slowly realizing these commissions don't care about consumers, just making it seem they do.
Android is owned by Alphabet (or Google if you prefer) and you decided to buy a device that runs their OS with their services that are not open source. You probably didn't even pay for the OS. What makes you think it is yours?
And people wonder why Congress wants to break up FAANG
That we paid for it in the store?
Nowhere did it say "free OS included" so it is entirely reasonable to think that some of the price was for the included OS and software at the time which has now been substantially degraded.
Smart toasters that force you to watch ads before getting your toast in the morning?
Smart windows that display ads that block your view of your backyard?
Smart paints that display ads on your bedroom walls?
Smart shower-heads that play jingles as you wash yourself?
Smart brain implants that directly induce subconscious desire to buy certain products and services?
Is there some kind of limit at which we value the right to personal privacy and the right to peace-of-mind over the right to advertise?
I remember asking the CEO why would someone pay $5/month just to control their fan and he basically responded that the idea seems ludicrous and this point in time, but eventually people will catch on, and then he made an allusion to Microsoft Office and how that it's becoming a subscription product despite initially being one-off purchase 15 years ago.
I was pointing out that even the parent comment's very example of a slow slide towards universal subscriptions that add no value didn't hold. It was framed as "I have inside knowledge of this nascent product category and its capture by useless subscriptions", while in reality this is already a market category that exists without any such issues.
This bizarre wild-eyed fearmongering about insane, lose-lose, somehow-inescapable business models is HN's version of QAnon.
If you're willing to do some technical work, there is fantastic open source tooling in this space. Then you'll have a setup that isn't affected by the business desires or financial problems of others. As a bonus, you get better latency over lan.
https://tasmota.github.io/docs/Tasmota-IR/#sending-irhvac-co...
My only point was that even this server-based system is already selling without a subscription, and as you point out, the off-ramp to a system with no cloud dependency is pretty clear for those who want to avoid subscriptions (or dependencies in general).
Thanks for the pointer!
https://martechseries.com/mts-insights/guest-authors/why-ref...
It's from 2018, and no progress has been mad on this wonderous world for ad-subsidized fridges that I know of. Still, it's clear people are thinking along these lines.
And I remain adamant that any appliance I own like this must not have wifi or bluetooth functionality. After my TV started showing ads when I switched inputs, I'm done giving these people an inch.
And they say:
"Why not? We indicated in the TOS (on page 4) our ability to 'modify the program as needed to better support our customers or our services.'
"Also please note that our TOS, which incorporates our Privacy Policy, allows us to sell your wake-up time to third parties in real-time.
"And before you say you never agreed to our TOS, we say you did when you plugged the SuperSmartestAlarm into a power outlet (as clearly indicated on page 22 of the aforementioned TOS, which can be conveniently viewed in a 6" x 2" frame with vertical and horizontal scrollbars)."
[Since this is too close to the truth to be obvious satire: no, this is not happening AFAIK (right now).]
Similarly, if ads partially fund a toaster, just....pay more for the toaster without ads? The expansion of ads to every product category doesn't warrant the assumption that it will _consume_ every product category, leaving no ad-free alternatives.
As alternatives, you can buy commercial displays that are effectively TVs (with HDMI in), however they lag in specs and lack some features. You can also buy hospitality versions of TVs as 'dumb' TVs for a similar price, but these also tend to have lower specs. You can buy large format computer monitors (55" is about the highest I've seen) but they are substantially more expensive (roughly 3x more expensive) and typically use DisplayPort instead of HDMI.
I only learned about the options because I'm looking to replace my 2013 Plasma TV that has a power supply problem.
(a) introduce new products that require additional subscriptions (but eventually the company runs out of new products to introduce),
(b) raise subscription fees a tiny little bit every year (but there's a limit to how much any company can do that without angering customers too much), and
(c) break existing ad-free plans into new tiers of service, some or all of which have... ads.
None of the examples you gave (toasters, windows, paint, and shower-heads) are services. I used YouTube (a service) as an example, because we're not in a world where products are overrun with ads the way services are, but my point was that even the service market has started to offer alternatives to ads.
The idea that the market will bear every product getting service-ized but somehow not offer any ad-free versions is nonsensical, at least in the steady state.
Tangential, but you reminded me of it: it's truly fascinating how incredibly brain-damaging discussion of ads seem to be. Every single thread I've ever read on the topic is full of non sequiturs, nonsensical analogues, glaring logical inconsistencies, etc. The only other topic I can think of that makes people similarly insane is airlines (cf my "why should I pay taxes" uncle complaining about airlines no longer requiring other passengers to pay for transporting his suitcases).
Such a high % of the population is clinically addicted to the phone though I can't blame anyone who makes a product to cater to these addicts.
Who's "we"? The advertising companies? Then no.
Adverts scorched into your toast. I sort of want this.
But adverts on my breakfast? Dear god please no.
And the wealthy will get their peace of mind as they buy out of the system while continuing to preside over and profit from it. It's just going to become another thing that poor people have to live with; subservience to the corporate overlords.
Smart condom with smart lubricant - pay as you use.
Smart pants - ads on ass, smart farts.
"They change it after selling it to you for the worse, don't buy their products."
When that becomes the reputation the problem will solve itself when they stop selling them from bad reputation.
In this "fully my property, not a service I'm using" framework, would an update that patches a security vulnerability be "altruism"? Would refusal on Google's part to patch vulnerabilities be a completely acceptable refusal to futz with someone's property?
This is a serious question; my perspective is that "I thought I was buying unchanging property" is disingenuous unless you're similarly surprised by app updates and maintenance (let alone feature development). The expectation of these updates makes it pretty clear to me that this resembles a service more than a static product that Google has ability to "vandalize" (or responsibility to maintain).
If they can't do that, then they need to stay out of the space.
(I know someone will say “just pirate it then!” but even putting moral obligations aside that’s still not realistic for the average viewer)
Argument 1: Sufficiently severe benefits should mitigate the moral fault in theft.
Argument 2: Sufficiently small damage should mitigate the moral fault in theft.
You both seem to at least implicitly agree that both is theft, which would be a traditional point of disagreement in the debate.
I commented because I think one and two might be structurally the same argument: It's a consequentialist idea of utility thresholds.
A key disagreement would be whether there are thresholds that make the quantitative difference in utility a qualitative difference. Think hunger on one side and unquantifiable small loss in profits on the other side.
Even for rocket engines or whatever, it’s not clear if the patent system is still producing acceptable returns.
You'd also not have airplay and mirroring. That might be a bigger deal for some, but for me, it's a feature I basically never use.
Most of the "channel" apps are also very nice, the exception being Amazon's clunky Prime Video app. The Plex client is quite good too.
To be fair, I've not seen any other platform where Prime Video's interface isn't terrible, and that's including Fire-whatevers. Been that way for years. I guess it's working OK for them, since they don't seem inclined to fix it. In particular, they probably regard making it hard to tell whether something's free-with-Prime or pay-per-view until the moment you choose whether to play it, as a feature.
Is there something I'm missing?
This is supporting my believe that expensive (durable) goods like TVs, cars, and appliances should have an external control hardware for their smarts that can be upgraded every few years. This would allow the good to last 10+ years without a crappy experience after the first 2 years.
Amazon got their remote right. Everything is an actual BUTTON and there aren't too many of them. Absolutely no complaints with that.
https://function101.com/pages/button-remote-for-apple-tv-hom...
You can also use Plex to access a media server with whatever you want to put on it.
Does VLC on Apple TV support all VLC codecs?
If so, I highly doubt Apple would allow those on their platform but I've never actually checked. There are semi-sketchy IPTV clients that you can use to watch what seems to be unofficial streaming services, so perhaps those can also be used to watch what you want?
As for VLC, it's open source I encourage you to do your own research as I can't answer your codecs question with confidence.
To be fair my question is already answered, no porn support. You need a another device to stream from.
I guess safari supports porn
Add that the AppleTV has long had sound synchronization, now it has automatic color correction as well.
It's a very nice device. The remote was absolutely trash before -- good god I hate that remote -- but the new one looks significantly improved. And you can connect a controller to it and play a pretty wide variety of fairly decent games if you want, which is an experience that I imagine will improve over time.
The weirdest thing is that these ads have a political agenda, every day it’s for a new LGBT program. Every. Single. Day. Right now the three ads on the carousel are Pride on Disney+, Turn it Around on myCanal (French cable which I don’t use, I have no idea why I have ads for this one) and another LGBT documentary on France TV (same, I don’t have the app installed so no idea why I get this « recommendation »)
Edit: please don't downvote me for stating a fact, I don't emit a judgment of value here. The fact is 100% of the ads I get are flagged as LGBT, which IS weird. It's not the only subject to discuss, and not one I personally care a lot about. I could get ads for documentaries on economy, animals, food, tons of topics, but I just get LGBT. Maybe it's not your experience, but it is mine.
>I don't emit a judgment of value here
It's Pride month, and today is literally the anniversary of Stonewall. Explicitly calling saying that any content even featuring LGBT people "has a political agenda" is a value judgement, implying you think the mere existence of a minority sexual identity in content is a political statement.
You wouldn't call the service advertising heterosexual romance before Valentine's day a "political statement" (and probably wouldn't think twice about it), so it's prejudicial to claim the different for LGBT content during pride.
And not living in the US, I have no idea what Stonewall is nor that it's Pride month, nor even that Pride month is a thing (is it in France too?)
> implying you think the mere existence of a minority sexual identity in content is a political statement
No, I think recommending this and only this is a political statement.
> so it's prejudicial to claim the different for LGBT content during pride
It's literally written "LGBT" in the 1 line description of the ads I have.
You actively have to work in order to block ads and trackers today. Its getting harder everyday. It’s so sad we have some of our worlds best engineers working on how to send ads to people. Our priorities are whack.
I've added it to the adaway.org list [1], so it might find its way into blocklists you are already using soon.
[0] androidtvwatsonfe-pa.googleapis.com
Without the kodi app I would see no reason to recommend a android smart TV over any cheap TV and a small Kodi box.
Also: - Porn (it's annoying to depend on your phone for that, and many good sites don't have push to TV yet). Kodi has those apps :)
- 'illegal streaming' which is huge in German speaking countries and legal here in Switzerland. No streaming apps on Android, plenty and more on Kodi
Also I don't count the original android YouTube app. With the amount of ads it is basically not useable.
I love it especially now that I can install VPN. I can access US-version of Netflix, Disney+, etc while traveling.
Also taking your TV put to travel definitely is a rare edge case ;P
Edit:// wait? Was that just a subtle Nord placement?
I'm referring to the OS in the newest Chromecast.
It's Google TV which is built on top of Android TV.
You can get pluggable Android TV which plug into HDMI ports in Hotel TVs and things like this.
Last few times I brought my laptop and HDMI cable to a hotel and it was nice. We usually go to places for outdoorsy things and in the night there's not much to do
- since it easily mounts external hard drives over the network, I can use it as a NAS for backing up photos from my phone via SMB.
- Likewise, the Plex server has made it easy for me to make good use of my huge library of music on my external hard drive.
- GameStream is awesome. Streaming games from my PC to my TV is trivial and is much more enjoyable than sitting at my desk.
- I don't get the complaints about the interface. It's the perfect level of intuitive for my entire family. TV on, my entertainment system + Shield switches on quickly via CEC, getting to Netflix/Amazon is trivial.
Would they have agreed to it if they were not anonymous?
Would they have agreed on it if they were in a union?
I am speaking about the influence of anonymity in making and executing on user-hostile decisions.
Let's say I want to opt out of Google for this. What the hell do I do? I do have a Windows PC attached to the TV, for gaming, but if I wanted to run the apps above they wouldn't be optimized for TV input, they'd be cumbersome to use. Attaching a Linux box isn't going to work particularly well for gaming either.
Seriously, what are the alternatives there?
I'm frankly not sure opting into Apple is a solution to the problem at large. It might be a temporary fix, but at the end of the day you're still using a proprietary system which might decide that ads are lucrative tomorrow.
None of them perfect, but you can roll back to what you had before.
There's no such launcher on Windows that doesn't deal with the pitfalls of it being Windows. Even something like Steam's Big Picture doesn't really work very well in certain circumstances because you can be thrown out of the launcher onto the desktop unexpectedly by games it launches.
I think the only way we could see a good implementation of this is if Microsoft themselves made it. They tried doing something like this with Windows Media Center but I think that they're better positioned to try again now that streaming services are ubiquitous.
Works fine, but it is not the most stable software. Plenty of add-ons and themes, and (probably the reason why it's popular) you can sideload some pirate TV add-ons.
It has been a while though, so I might be outdated on this, but I'm guessing it's still not possible to log into spotify from it, browse the spotify library / your playlists, use device remote play from your phone to the tv, and so on. Same goes for youtube (though I do remember some useful-ish youtube plugins, they didn't go beyond logged-out browsing)
Once Google TV Launcher is disabled, Shield picks the next installed Launcher on your system as the default TV Launcher. Be aware that most 3rd party TV launchers aren't very configurable or polished but will launch your other apps. Maybe try a few different ones before disabling Google TV Launcher.
I personally just run mpv on my Linux box plugged into my TV and connected to a DLNA media server in my home and use my Android phone as a remote with KDEConnect, I'm not a big app person. I mostly watch YouTube videos my media server auto downloads when they are available from creators I like. For my family I have Netflix.
You're right it's not as nice as using a TV remote though! I bet Kodi or Plex, etc. would be more navigable with a remote. I wonder if you can get a Bluetooth remote that connects to a PC...
I kinda imagine that a "real solution" would involve some kind of Android environment, though. Your solution works, if the user has not opted into the youtube/spotify/netflix ecosystem. If they have, it's not a real solution.
I care about my youtube account -- I pay for it, in fact. The recommendation engine is extremely good if you curate it, and I've curated it a ton. YouTube is a beast for knowledge/learning center. Spotify has a really good and extensive music library which makes "not pirating" a real option.
At the end of the day, you need a good UI that implements the features of those services. No third party is working full-time to implement these in open source, and they'd likely shut down if they did. So relying on the upstream apps somehow makes sense.
This won't let you sign into Google apps anymore, but most major apps work fine after a reboot.
In the future, maybe the only choice is no-brand Android TV box/ stick which has ads removed.
While technically accurate, you also need a $10 SD card, a $3 usb cable, and a $5-10 power brick, so you’re really looking at a $25 solution here.
I never use SD cards, but I have at least four of them in my drawer...
This is not a "cat and mouse" game, like in-browser ad-blockers where the advertisers change something then the ad-blockers try to catch that. The in-browser ad-blockers have a lot more flexibility with blocking content since they are, basically, the consumer of that content.
With PiHole, there is a point in which PiHole can just DO. NOTHING. to block content. If Google TV fetches its ads/spyware from playstore.google.com (for example), and uses https, what can PiHole do?
Not even MitM, because Google will just pin the certificate. And let's not even get started on DNS-over-HTTPS...
PiHole and the like are not long-term solutions.
I don’t use anything Google so your point, whilst true, doesn’t affect me. In fact I use PiHole to block Google and its tentacles from entering my network.
They changed it under guise of adding 2-factor auth, but the small print reads that they want my phone number so that my friends can discover me.
This is just a disgrace. They should not be allowed to change phone features after purchase.
It responded as it always had, then advertised something after the response, some new Amazon feature I didn't care about.
I calmly but immediately ripped it out of the wall and spiked it hard into the tile floor, where it shattered into pieces. It went out with the garbage that day.
Vote with your eyeballs. Smash that shit to pieces and never buy anything that says Google or Android on it ever again.
[1] https://www.flipkart.com/philips-6600-146-cm-58-inch-ultra-h...
Not really ads, but kinda ads. I wish Apple TV would let me hide shows they are pushing.
Annoyingly they still show them even if you pay for the News+ subscription.
Make the Home button go to the App screen.
https://support.apple.com/guide/tv/set-the-tv-button-atvbe77...
Short of network level fixes or loader swapping, is the best solution a dumb (disconnected TV) and a STB like AppleTV or Roku?
Should've guessed it was ads.
Stakes are 1 karma point.
I hope they revert both highly unpopular decisions.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.android.ch...
In all seriousness running that pi-hole is power and hardware perfectly well spent. And you literally start saving time
You’re merely in possession of them, with others allowed to set the rules.
As an AppleTV user I could be totally smug about this, but there’s nothing stopping Apple from making a similar move if they wanted to, and I wouldn’t have jack shit to say about it.
I’ve tried more open options and they all suck, but I hope one day there can come an open appliance-platform which at least is usable and supports all the latest standards. Then I might be willing to give it a try.
I've always had a Pixel phone, and (since 2015), the Shield TV Pro. It seems like Google is actively trying to lose. They didn't make a premium Pixel last year, and they've never made a premium digital media player. Rather than being grateful for Nvidia building the premium device they couldn't, they're actively ruining it. I get having ads on a >$50 device, but not on the $200 Shield TV.
Who's running things at Google?
https://www.adexchanger.com/online-advertising/the-birds-eye...
The future is all about video. Brands are paying Amazon top dollar because they can link customers to ads on Fire TV. Amazon is quickly moving into non-ecommerce advertisers, which is where Google shines.
I've never experienced such a regularly broken bit of software.
It's good enough that I prefer it over anything else I've tried bit my god I wish they'd leave features and make it work reliably.
And now ads. We just removed all app channels so my son doesn't see ads as sometimes they'd be scary. Now he can see things he won't be able to watch.
For fucks sake Google.
Its time for a radical shift away from party politics... if you want solutions that is.
This is their business model. Accept it, or buy Apple TV plus a dumb TV (or a stupid "smart" TV with all network features permanently disabled).
Those are the only options.
It appears that the two main options for 4K, non-networked TVs are 'business-grade' panels (e.g. [0]) and Sceptre[1], which are always out of stock.
I haven't bought either yet (my dumb 1080p panel was working just fine until this week,) but I am planning on upgrading soon.
Looks like I lucked out, my older Nvidia shield had not updated yet, it was downloaded Nvidia Experience 8.2.3 - so I just went and disabled auto-update.
1. Go to Settings (the cog at the top right)
2. Click Apps
3. Click See all apps
4. Scroll to the bottom of the list - click Show system apps
5. Scroll down and click Google Play Services
6. Click Force Stop
7. Click Disable
8. Click Clear Cache
9. reboot
10. go back and uninstall google play updates
11. make sure apps are not set to auto update
Now imagine their user base getting screwed over by an update they probably were only informed of.
The execs who made this decision should be punished. They won't be. But I think this has convinced me to move my mail and give up on Google.
Super easy TV and Web. Also Games (streaming) once a good kb and mouse are set.
My big fear is that Apple will do the same in years to come but for now it is all we have.
I just got off chat with amazon UK, who have amazingly decided to process a refund for the device. I'll be buying an apple TV.
Anyone else in Europe getting adverts?
EDIT: wait, what ads are they talking about? OK, I see suggestions of Disney+ shows, and I don't have neither a subscription nor the app installed
(I bought an X950H, as it's known in the US.)
Google did the same thing to the iOS YouTube app recently.
As said somewhere else, calling home issues are just a question of your firewall / DNS setup
I just torrent stuff on my Mac now and use a USB stick to ship it to my dumb TV.
The Mac can't act as a mass storage device for the TV? That's a shame.
I don’t want the two to meet. That’s where the hell starts.
I use this because the HDCP implementation on the TV is broken so it won’t play anything with any streaming boxes. I’m not throwing a perfectly good TV in the trash because of a copyright restriction.
No ads and forget Kodi unless you happen to have a large amount of media files. Almost anything you do with Kodi as far as streaming can be done straight from the web browser.
https://www.amazon.com/Beelink-x5-Z8350-Processor-Windows10-...
Has anyone been able to create a productive and safe environment where updates don't happen that often or don't affect their UX? I'd be interested to hear about such experiences.
Don't sell someone hardware that operates seemingly without ads, then foist them on the user after-the-fact.
wait until you purchase a premium smart TV ;)
that shit should be illegal
Now there is only one left.
It is also (as has been the case with numerous other tech firms) been to take other experiences, here maximal ad saturation, straight up to the pain tolerance, before (one presumes) dialing it down a bit.
(Facebook have similarly done this repeatedly with surveillance, stalking, and dark patterns, Microsoft formerly did this with licensing fee and process requirements, the latter limited by the tendency to drive users to either piracy or, vastly worse in Microsoft's view,[2] Linux or Free Software alternatives.)
The rationale is effectively the same as that captured by Jules Dupuit's 19th century observation on the miserable quality of third-class rail service:
It is not because of the several thousand francs which they would have to spend to cover the third class wagons or to upholster the benches. ... [I]t would happily sacrifice this [expense] for the sake of its popularity.
Its goal is to stop the traveler who can pay for the second class trip from going third class. It hurts the poor not because it wants them to personally suffer, but to scare the rich."[3]
My presumption is that Google are looking to pry those people who can afford a new (and presumably less-ad-saturated) device or (more likely) service off Android TV and onto their alternative offerings. I'm hoping this backfires via defections to other vendors, outright abandonment, and/or regulatory sanction. Though my expectations for all of these responses are low based on prior experience.
________________________________
Notes:
1. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/eric-schmidt-google-creepy_n_... (2010-10-4)
2. Bill Gates in 1998: "[A]s long as they’re going to steal it, we want them to steal ours. They’ll get sort of addicted, and then we’ll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade." https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2006-apr-09-fi-micro... (2009-4-6) See also Jeff Raikes "If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it ti be us rather than somebody else" https://www.informationweek.com/if-youre-going-to-steal-soft... (2007-3-12)
3. I don't have the original 1849 source, though this particular translation appears in a now-purged Inc. post by Bill Murphy Jr.: https://web.archive.org/web/20180307183620/https://www.inc.c... Based on dates and Dupuit's publication listing, this is probably found in De l’influence des peages sur 1’utilité des voies de communication.
Decided to buy an Android TV, one that would not need a network connection on the Android side for HDMI input mode to work, and just keep a computer plugged into it. Lack of sensible remote control is annoying. But forced ads are infuriating.
Find the hospitality version of whatever you want from CDW (Samsung and LG do a lot of them, idk about Sony). They are designed for hotels and hospitals, and have the same picture quality but no smart stuff. An example from Samsung: https://www.cdw.com/product/samsung-678u-series-55-4k-uhd-le...
The way to combat this is to not buy products that have this in the first place.
edit: a lot of comments are saying that the ads were added later, after purchase. This doesn't change my opinion at all, because people still bought products that have the capability for ads to be added retroactively. That is on you.
If you don't like the option of it happening, and as this example illustrates it can clearly happen, then do not buy products that have the capability of having ads added retroactively to the product.
There is zero way any of the three televisions in my house will have ads added to them unless someone physically comes into my home and replaces the television sets.
Here's one site to get you started: https://pointerclicker.com/best-dumb-tv/
Edit: down thread someone calls it "commercial display" - search for those.
I've even started to look into buying just a big monitor and an external tv tuner.
The hospitality versions will be cheaper than commercial (commercial displays are designed to last longer with continuous operation).
To quote one review verbatim:
> I purchased two premium-priced Nvidia Shield TV's and loved them until yesterday. That was the day Google began forcing huge dominating ads on the home screen. These ads are for content in services that I haven't eve subscribed to or installed, they're totally irrelevant and obnoxious, and there is no way to disable them. It's offensive to force ads like this in a premium-priced product well after the return window is over. It's a bait-and-switch and I can only hope they realize this and make it right with the users.
If you don't want the potential of ads being inserted into hardware you purchase, then don't purchase hardware that allows it. It is very straightforward.
'Future blaming' is an asinine term. If you point out to someone that, well, they shouldn't be surprised if their home got robbed because they only had a screen door, you could make a similar reply that you're "future blaming" those people because they needed to "to predict all possible eventualities and are to blame for any future changes to a system?" Ridiculous.
People need to take accountability for their purchasing decisions. You buy a product with a gaping front door in it that allows the vendor or whoever else to push whatever crap into the product? Then that is on you.
So if the software you're using on your system breaks functionality or introduces ads, it's on you. Maybe you can reject software updates to your local stack that you're aware of, but what happens when stuff is introduced in part of the stack you can't control?
You also assume everyone is sufficiently tech aware to prevent such things. yes, in an ideal world, every one is sufficiently tech savvy to know all possible eventualities. But that's not the case, and anyone here who thinks they're infallible at doing so, is kidding themselves.
You got played. You were scammed. You are a victim of following what society told you.
Accept it and think though your next purchase.
These changes were foreseeable so much that it is written in the agreement. You have no legal recourse.
To spoil the next discovery, your tv habits are or will be monitored and recorded now or in the near future. This information will spill into your life in unwanted ways.
As was discussed ad nauseum on HN before, in threads about "smart" vs "dumb" TVs, telling consumers to "not buy smart devices" is putting an disproportionate burden on them, given the market conditions as well as the actual consumer expectations and desires.
As ads are not required for the functioning of smart devices, compared to for example, electricity being required for a TV to work, or an internet connection being required for movie streaming to work, it is fallacious to suggest that consumers must avoid such smart devices to avoid unwanted behavior being forced upon them at a later date.
This is true for all consumer goods. The disproportionate burden has and so long as capitalism exists, will continue to be on consumers. Companies selling products have millions or billions to spend on advertising and lobbying. Consumers do not. Being a responsible consumer and carefully researching your desired product is true for everything you buy, TVs are no exception
Customers can and should complain here, that's like saying don't purchase any software ever? People like smart TVs for good reasons.
Seems like a miss on Nvidea's part to let someone else control the default experience, if so.
Edit: It appears so. https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/shield/support/shield-tv/introd...
Edit: You can see some complaints flowing in on Nvidea's forum: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/shield-tv/9/
Lots of comments on this specific thread: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/shield-tv/9/4579...
So, don't buy anything capable of receiving a software update?
Not quite. Don't buy anything that forces updates. Updates are obviously important for security, compatibility and a slew of other reasons. But updates which are forced on the user are no bueno.
Can you point to actual real-world examples where this has been the case?
I don't see the point of this stretched hypothetical. If it were to come up, then you could deal with accordingly - for instance by getting the update and then blocking the ad server somewhere upstream in your network path.
> I don't see the point of this stretched hypothetical. If it were to come up, then you could deal with accordingly - for instance by getting the update and then blocking the ad server somewhere upstream in your network path.
And then not buying that brand's products in the future. And advising others not to buy them.
Can you admit you are wrong now?
This is literally not true.
It’s similar to the whole online advertising thing. I have no qualms about closing your website because of a cookie banner dark pattern or an annoying ad that makes it past my filtering. I’ll never come back either.
The problem is that the vast majority of people do not behave in this manner.
Precisely. It's why shit like this continues to happen. Because the stark reality is that most people do not care. And a large percentage of the ones that do care will still continue to buy the offending products anyway, they'll just complain about them.
I did!
That is the ENTIRE point.