Active Topics

 



Notices


Reply
Thread Tools
pichlo's Avatar
Posts: 5,233 | Thanked: 15,914 times | Joined on Sep 2012 @ UK
#31
Originally Posted by marxian View Post
I thought Alan Turing had solved that problem during the Second World War.
That's we've been led to believe. The reality is however a bit different.

(But, seriously, Turing did not invent a universal machine. He invented a universal computing machine. Not the same thing. Yes, computers are very good at different computing tasks. But they are not as good at things that are not computing tasks. Like taking good pictures. Only part of it is about number crunching, the other parts such as good optics are still in another domain.)
__________________
In particle accelerators atoms are indeed not only touching each others. But banging together in a massive explosive orgasm.
-- nieldk in a TMO post
 
Copernicus's Avatar
Posts: 1,987 | Thanked: 7,692 times | Joined on Dec 2010 @ Dayton, Ohio
#32
Originally Posted by pichlo View Post
Combining two jobs in one device may work one day but we are still decades if not centuries from that.
Actually, I think portable multifunction devices have been very popular for quite some time now...
 
pichlo's Avatar
Posts: 5,233 | Thanked: 15,914 times | Joined on Sep 2012 @ UK
#33
Originally Posted by Copernicus View Post
Actually, I think portable multifunction devices have been very popular for quite some time now...
I would argue that those were not multifunction devices. They had only one function, computing the position of celestial objects. You may argue that modern smart phones are multifunction devices and I would agree with you. And use them as an argument supporting my statement. They do multiple functions, none of them well. Not even making phone calls.
__________________
In particle accelerators atoms are indeed not only touching each others. But banging together in a massive explosive orgasm.
-- nieldk in a TMO post
 

The Following User Says Thank You to pichlo For This Useful Post:
Copernicus's Avatar
Posts: 1,987 | Thanked: 7,692 times | Joined on Dec 2010 @ Dayton, Ohio
#34
Originally Posted by pichlo View Post
I would argue that those were not multifunction devices. They had only one function, computing the position of celestial objects.
Well, they also had astrological and religious uses. In fact, the top of the Wiki article states:

Its many uses include locating and predicting the positions of the Sun, Moon, planets, and stars, determining local time given local latitude and vice versa, surveying, and triangulation. ... In the Islamic world, it was also used to calculate the Qibla and to find the times for Salat, prayers.

But sure, a device specialized for a single purpose should normally out-perform a multi-function device used for that same purpose.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to Copernicus For This Useful Post:
pichlo's Avatar
Posts: 5,233 | Thanked: 15,914 times | Joined on Sep 2012 @ UK
#35
Hey, we should not be too hard on ourselves for sucking at making good multifunction devices. Mother nature had four and a half milliard (sorry, I just cannot bring myself to use that word that combines bi with million but does not mean million million) years and still got it wrong
__________________
In particle accelerators atoms are indeed not only touching each others. But banging together in a massive explosive orgasm.
-- nieldk in a TMO post
 

The Following User Says Thank You to pichlo For This Useful Post:
Posts: 1,326 | Thanked: 1,523 times | Joined on Mar 2010
#36
The last time I bought a TV, I had to look far and wide for one with a decent screen. Most of those within my budget were smart TVs but lacked in so many areas. And the points raised here against the lack of updates for the apps was a factor that I did mot want to pay for.

I eventually found a Toshiba TV, not a smart TV but could read from a USB stick. The speakers are absolutely shite too. But I have a surrounded sound system.

I also saw that whilst even the best smart TV can be useful, each one of their functions will become redundant, the moment you plug in your xbox, PlayStation or PC in to the thing.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to MINKIN2 For This Useful Post:
gerbick's Avatar
Posts: 6,569 | Thanked: 14,515 times | Joined on Jul 2007 @ undecided.
#37
You know; just like the discussions around the Jolla Tablet have shown, it seems as if there's no real way to universally appease the folks here at TMO versus what's being released.

Too smart usually means too limiting. Too dumb also means too limited. If you had to define (and sell) a perfect TV, what would it be? My take would perhaps be too simplistic - I'd want a high resolution TV (HDTV to 4K) with 5 HDMI 2.0a sockets, 2 USB 3.0 (full powered) sockets and absolutely nothing smart about it - let me bring my own (Amazon TV, HTPC, computer on HDMI) and upgrade at my own leisure. Add modular extension (think Project Ara, but functional) for integration into future purchases (stereo component out for instance) and call it a day.

In fact, I'd take all of that minus the very last addition today.
__________________
gerbick | iPhone X [ 256GB iOS 11.4 Beta ] | iPad Pro [ 256GB iOS 11.4 Beta ]
Former Maemo Council Member - 2015
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to gerbick For This Useful Post:
marxian's Avatar
Posts: 2,448 | Thanked: 9,513 times | Joined on Aug 2010 @ Wigan, UK
#38
Originally Posted by gerbick View Post
If you had to define (and sell) a perfect TV, what would it be?
Something like a Pioneer Kuro would do me nicely. No gimmicks, just top-notch image quality.

To be honest, I doubt most people really care about smart TV. I imagine most of the smart TVs currently in use are used only for basic TV features. Smart TV is mostly of benefit to marketing people looking for something to differentiate their product from someone else's. Features that can be included in a bullet list are easier to market than qualitative differences.
__________________
'Men of high position are allowed, by a special act of grace, to accomodate their reasoning to the answer they need. Logic is only required in those of lesser rank.' - J K Galbraith

My website

GitHub
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to marxian For This Useful Post:
javispedro's Avatar
Posts: 2,330 | Thanked: 5,200 times | Joined on Jan 2009 @ Barcelona
#39
Originally Posted by Copernicus View Post
I have to admit, I don't really understand this point of view; the selling point of a "smart" TV is that it does the work of integrating computing ability into the television viewing experience for you.
My "point of view" is totally unrelated to anything 'smart'. Even 'dumb' TVs are subject to these types of problem these days.

My point of view is artificial restrictions. It's one thing if you didn't provide a feature the customer wants; it's an entirely different thing if you actively fight customers trying to make use of the hardware.

Originally Posted by Copernicus View Post
through speakers connected to my PC.
And remarks like this are the best examples of what's bad when vendors apply these limitations. My TV has a fine set of speakers that will basically have to go unused because of this anti-tinkering policy, and I will be forced to either throw away a perfectly working TV set or buy an additional set of speakers, with its additional AC adapter increasing total vampire power consumption.

Many people buy Raspberry Pi to use as mediacenters when it's quite probable their 'dumb' TVs have processors that rival in performance with the Pi. Not only this is terribly wasteful; I'm also quite sure vendors are already counting down to the day when they remove all video inputs (same as LG's doing with the headphone output, so that you're forced to buy _their_ bluetooth headsets and speakers).
 
Posts: 481 | Thanked: 546 times | Joined on Jul 2012 @ Mexico
#40
The optimal Smart-TV for me will be an TV with to slots to put in a standard Hardisk o SSD and a Standard-Bluray, OS where OSMC or Openelec and that the client have full access (maybe without support). Also like in the last years, the standards a changing continuosly please slots (for less 2) for the access moduls (Satelite, Kabel or terrestre).

Actual for example Sony TV has no Internet TV. Really is more Sony-TV why you connect with a Sony Server and this decide what you have access for. And obviusly they are monitoring you.
For this my TV only have access to looking for updates. All the rest make my Openelec-Mediacenter (R PI2 or Zotac Zbox ID-36 with Bluray 3D)
 

The Following User Says Thank You to chilango For This Useful Post:
Reply

Tags
smart tv, webos, xbmc.

Thread Tools

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 13:16.