Reports just in suggest that a couple of manufacturers are about to launch televisions with the capacity to view films immediately built in. At least that's what the confusingly-worded news report I picked up said (unusual for Reuters to confuse us in this way). What it means is that TVs will start to have video on demand software embedded into them.

To which I can only reply, oh great. Ter-riffic. Last month I blogged about 3D TV and how the Murdoch empire wants to deliver it as soon as possible. Meanwhile the recession means end customers are having ordinary high-def TVs pushed at them in vast quantities at low prices.

Pause here and consider the other elements emerging in the TV market. Computers are increasingly becoming TV receivers as well as computers - if you're starting over there's no need to have two devices in the living room, one will suffice nicely. Then there's the annual IPTV show around the globe, in which the Internet and television are coming together and - wait for it - you need the right hardware to make it work.

So there's now another entrant, the TV with on-demand built in. Forgive me if I fail to jump for joy, but I can see 2009 becoming the year when the customer didn't know which way to turn already, and it's only five days in.

Dani AI

Generated

A quick retrospective for context: what called “TVs with video‑on‑demand built in” was the start of the smart‑TV shift, not just a gimmick. Sets with app stores and streaming clients became the mainstream direction through the 2010s — industry analysts projected smart/connected sets would make up the majority of shipments by the mid‑2010s. (scribd.com)

That helps explain ’s frustration with tech-first thinking: the market chased features (3D, proprietary formats) more than solid content. The 3D‑TV era was heavily hyped at CES around 2010–2012 but consumer uptake stayed tiny and broadcasters and makers steadily abandoned it; by the mid‑2010s the industry pivoted toward 4K/HDR and streaming instead. Vizio’s 2014 push toward Ultra HD while dropping 3D support is a useful marker of that shift. (en.wikipedia.org)

The real driver was content and scale. Streaming platforms grew into the audience engines that powered built‑in VOD: subscriber scale and heavy content investment made app ecosystems the primary reason customers used smart functionality rather than one‑off services pushed by manufacturers. That change is visible in the big streaming services’ subscriber and spend numbers later in the decade. (sec.gov)

Practical takeaway (useful years on): pick a TV for picture and platform longevity, not flash features. Prioritise a set that supports the major streaming apps and receives OS updates; if ecosystem/updates matter, prefer platforms with wide adoption (examples include Roku, Google TV, platform‑branded OSes) or use an external stick so the TV itself can be chosen purely for panel quality. For gamers or future‑proofing, look for 4K/HDR support and HDMI 2.1 features (4K@120Hz, VRR, eARC). These choices replace the “what‑new‑feature” confusion with a practical checklist that still applies years later. (sec.gov)

Big Brother is shit.
Big Brother in HD would be HD shit.
Big Brother in 3D would be 3D shit.
Then there's the "repeats", the "making of", the "talk show" and the "uncut" versions to deal with. 100s of hours of airtime filled for a pittance of production budget.

The technology ain't worth squat unless there's some decent programming to go along with it. Sure, you find the occasional gem in the muck, but they're becoming increasingly hard to find.

The bad news for me is that the vast majority seem to prefer TV which dulls the mind rather than challenges the mind.

Pink Floyd only had 13 channels to deal with:

We're well into the hundreds.

HD is barely out of the blocks, and it's already on the track to being obsolete.

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.