6 ms·

The difference between Apple and everyone else

39 points by zachwaugh 16y ago

lwhi 16y ago
Okay, but how do you _write_ with the Apple remote? The article doesn't compare like-for-like. It's not a fair comparison.
recoiledsnake 16y ago
Apple TV is meant to be a media browsing and consumption device, whereas Google TV includes Chrome(with Flash). You can use an Android phone to control Google TV anyway. I would love to see Apple solving the problem with typing using a remote(especially things like URLs) without using resorting to an iPhone or iPod Touch.
- YooLi 16y ago
  "I would love to see Apple solving the problem with typing using a remote(especially things like URLs)..." They already solved it; you aren't supposed to be typing URLs while laying on your couch watching TV.
  - jwhitlark 16y ago
    Yes. "You aren't supposes to..." seems to be the subtext with apple. You get a great experience when you buy everything from them and color within the lines. That doesn't make it THE way to run a superior company, but it is A way to do so.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- pornel 16y ago
  > without using resorting to an iPhone or iPod Touch Why not? You have iPod/iPhone in your pocket, or iPad on your coffee table. They can be used to look something up, and with AirPlay you can send content to TV once you find it.
  - nlogn 16y ago
    >Why not? You have iPod/iPhone in your pocket, or iPad on your coffee table. They can be used to look something up, and with AirPlay you can send content to TV once you find it. No, I don't. Do I need to buy one to search?
jkriss 16y ago
It seems obvious, but the number of people (and companies) who don't get this at all is astonishing.
- hvs 16y ago
  It's not really that astonishing. I've been sitting in product design meetings for over a decade for applications, and anything designed through that process almost inevitably ends up looking like that Sony remote. When you have five product managers that have a stake in something and they care more about their little product rather than the larger picture, this is what you end up with. Apple has the singular vision of Steve Jobs/Jony Ive to drive their products. You really need a (well-qualified and competent) dictator when it comes to product design. The better question is "what will happen to Apple after Jobs and Ive are gone?"
ja27 16y ago
The Sony remote looks like a label maker. I'm surprised they didn't style it a bit better.
amastilovic 16y ago
So if you want to search for something on TV, which GoogleTV is supposed to enable you to do, how would you do that using Apple's three-button remote? I have an idea about a prayer and Steve Jobs, but wouldn't elaborate on it. I think the blog post doesn't have a point at all, since it compares apples to pears.
- steveklabnik 16y ago
  You'd do it by grabbing your iPad off of the coffee table, searching for something, and clicking 'send to TV.' So much easier and simpler than trying to make everything do everything. Leave the keyboard to a device that's better used with one, and make the two work together nicely. I still think that little 'Oh, and I can push stuff to my tv with my iPhone' feature they skimmed over at the Ping event will end up huge.
  - stanleydrew 16y ago
    But wait, that's exactly what you can do with an Android device or an iOS device and a GoogleTV already. See the section "Your phone = remote control" here: http://www.google.com/tv/features.html http://www.google.com/tv/features.html.
    - steveklabnik 16y ago
      There's a difference between "There's a checkbox that's been ticked for this feature" and "this product has been designed around this concept."
      - stanleydrew 16y ago
        Of course there is. What is it that makes you think the latter is so vastly superior to the former though? I like the fact that I can choose an input device that meets my needs, one of which happens to be my phone. What's wrong with choice?
        16y ago
Orca 16y ago
It's the balance between engineering and design. Apple naturally knows how to find that center, most others seem to skew too far in either direction.
blueben 16y ago
What's really amazing is that people seem to believe that Google designed products that were actually manufactured and designed by Sony and Logitech.
- zachwaugh 16y ago
  Well, I never said that Google was responsible for the design of the remotes or hardware in the post, that's clearly on Sony and Logitech. But Google did design the interface that requires a keyboard and mouse to operate, so they have some of the blame. You can bet that in the unlikely event Apple had a product where other companies designed the hardware for their software, they'd have some pretty detailed specs to make sure stuff like those remotes didn't happen.
  - Nemisis7654 16y ago
    I haven't used a Google TV either, but I believe a keyboard is required for a lot of the use. I don't see how that is a bad thing. If a user needs to type something in, how are they to do that without a keyboard? "I haven’t used a Google TV, but based on these remotes, I would bet the rest of the interface is just as clunky." - From the blog I think that's an irrational assumption. Again, I haven't used one either so I cannot dispute the claim, but I think one should hold off their opinion until they try it.
  - DougBTX 16y ago
    I guess when it comes down to it, Google makes its money by search. For search on TVs to work, they need to get people typing search keywords. Hence keyboards.
83457 16y ago
Boxee hits a sweet spot on the remote IMO
- blehn 16y ago
  Agree, however the box itself is another story. Aside from the needlessly wacky shape, isn't it obvious that it should fit in the ~2" high gap between the top of the table/stand and the bottom of the display? Apple has it right with the AppleTV, and it seems like they figured it out with the new Mac Mini, which is much thinner than the old one.
ary 16y ago
As these types of epiphanies pop up on the web over time I wish someone would just come out and say it. Apple, as an organization, approaches problems in a way that just about every other company is too chickenshit to try. When Jobs returned and launched the Think Different campaign it wasn't for the masses, it was for Apple. It's difficult to articulate this properly because most people don't even have a good understanding of what it means to dissent. Being rebellious isn't thinking differently, it is merely fighting the imposition of someone else's will upon your own. Thinking differently is looking at something in the most honest way you possibly can and attempting to refine your vision without allowing undue external influences to distract from the pursuit. Rarely can you find a single person, much less an organization, that can avoid tunnel vision and approach problems without the taint of past success spoiling new opportunities. It's kind of amazing to watch.
- White_N_Nerdy 16y ago
  Oh gawd. Drink the kool-aid much? That remote is horrible compared to what you can get for Windows Media Center. Have you even tried a Gyration air-remote?
gvb 16y ago
Engineers are all basically high-functioning autistics who have no idea how normal people do stuff. -- Cory Doctorow http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Cory_Doctorow#Eastern_Standard_Tribe http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Cory_Doctorow#Eastern_Standard_... Apple takes the time to figure out how normal people do stuff. I'm not sure what Microsoft does, but I'm picturing what some a focus group determines followed by the interpretation by committee (with the necessary compromises) followed by what some engineer implemented, all constrained by years of legacy code. I've been using Win7 at work (I'm linux-only at home) and expected it to be a smooth experience. After all, everybody says linux isn't ready for the desktop yet. I am surprised at how often Win7 guesses my intent wrong or does stupid annoying things like jumping the list under the mouse when I click on an entry.
- gaius 16y ago
  It would be equally valid to observe that bloggers are all basically self-absorbed wankers who have no idea how normal engineers do stuff.
siglesias 16y ago
The best remote for the TV products are touch screen phone apps with shifting UIs: a four-d pad when it needs to be, a keyboard when it needs to be. (A quick reference IMDB device when it needs to be).
- bbatsell 16y ago
  I'm really not sure I agree. Remotes do their jobs best when one fully learns their layout and can operate every function while keeping their eyes on the content they're wanting to see, not looking down at a small screen to figure out where your tap target is at any given moment.
  - siglesias 16y ago
    Apple's implementation solves this by allowing you to perform directional swipe gestures within a large area of the screen, with a tap proxying for the select button. It's quite nice.
jherdman 16y ago
I had a really good conversation yesterday at the Dev Lunch in Toronto about so-called Smart TVs. Here's a quick summary: * TVs are about media consumption, not about interaction in the PC-sense of the word. * When one wants extra content or information regarding the media they are consuming, they tend to use a secondary device (e.g. iPad, notebook) * Most devs in the room merely wanted a device that would allow them to better manage and consume the media they wanted * It's not clear what sort of apps (besides the aforementioned management tool) would be beneficial to write for a Smart TV platform. This is likely a function of not groking what a future with a Smart TV might be like. * Over and over again, it was noted that the TV is a social device. You watch it with friends, be it in a bar, or a home. It's not clear that interacting with a Smart TV could be a social activity. I'm interested to see what happens in this sphere, but I frankly can't shake the feeling that it's a dead end. Mostly dumb boxes that enable consumption, and management of media are probably the most likely thing to succeed, a la TiVo.
- gamble 16y ago
  Yeah, I think the tech industry has consistently overestimated how much people want to interact with their television. TV is a fundamentally passive experience. Basic DVRs are probably pushing the limit of how much thought most people want to put into the viewing experience.
- mikeryan 16y ago
  So I think you're going to see a few trends happening here which may change your mind. One of the big gaps here is that most TV App platforms are independent of the video you are watching (they are not content aware). Take the Yahoo! platform which is (very well) designed to be used while watching TV, yet the apps don't know what is being watched. This adds some serious difficulty to app developers who want to enhance existing TV content which is kind of the current holy grail for TV apps (Actually most TV apps right now provide alternatives for delivering video content - and that is the killer app on TV right now. I'm going to try to focus this screed on TV apps whose main purpose is not to deliver video). This disconnect between app and video is currently being addressed. Early next year these apps will be able to be content aware and you will be able to have apps which are sync'd to the broadcast and this will add a lot of value to the chain. Unfortunately enhanced ads will likely be the first area where you'll see this functionality but someone needs to pay the bills. The second trend is that a lot of TV interactivity will likely move from the TV to your tablet PC. We've already seen a first implementation of this with ABC's "My Generation" TV Show app (show's already canceled unfortunately). This app sync'd to broadcast using audio fingerprinting. I think that at some point these "second screen" apps will be the main type of TV Apps you see. Likely using the TV app platforms for some simple updates. Think a leaderboard or something while playing - or a twitter feed. With respect to social. I think where the most interesting social aspects for TV aren't "Friend Feeds" via Twitter or Facebook. But using social networks for content discovery. I think we're going to be so inundated with video content that our primary method for content discovery won't be a guide (or search) but some sort of social recommendation system. Maybe a reddit for TV?
moeffju 16y ago
As a nitpick, the Apple Remote has seven buttons: Four direction buttons, center button, Menu button, and play/pause. This does not really detract from the central point of the argument, but then I believe the argument is flawed since the remotes are made for almost entirely different things. You cannot run searches using the Apple Remote, for example. Whether the solution picked by Sony and Logitech is the best solution remains to be seen (although I find it doubtful at best), but the article, IMO, makes a bad point.
rodh 16y ago
I'm really disappointed in the next generation of remotes. What I really want to know is why, when we have touchscreen phones and devices like the iPad, our remotes are still hunks of plastic with dozens of tiny rubber buttons? Forget remotes, I want the whole UI for my TV to be on a dedicated touchscreen device. I want to read about what's on next, preview what's on other channels and schedule recordings without disrupting what's on the display screen. The rest of the time, show me two big volume buttons.
- tortilla 16y ago
  I still like physical buttons I can feel and click when I'm a couch potato.
jordan0day 16y ago
Does anyone else think the recent release (and positive reviews) of Kinect might indicate that the Sony and Logitech solutions will quite soon be anachronisms? People seem to say the Kinect's voice recognition is still a bit dodgy, but for the solutions the monstrous remotes are meant to solve, I don't see why voice input wouldn't generally work? If I want to find the next showing of It's Always Sunny in Philadelpha, it's a heck of a lot easier to just say it than type it out, and since it's search-based, the voice recognition doesn't have to be perfect anyway.
beej71 16y ago
Google TV is more like a computer. Apple TV is more like on-demand TV/video programming. I'm not saying one is better than the other (ok, well, the computer is better ;) ) but it should be apparent why the inputs are so different.
dashdsrdash 16y ago
I have already implemented The Right Solution for my MythTV. Two remotes. One is a TiVo remote control. Fits nicely in my hand, has the important buttons laid out nicely. Good for watching and selecting and OK for most other tasks. The other is a remote keyboard with built-in mouse, similar to the Logitech board. I pull it out when I want to search for something or manipulate the system in a more complex way (like firing up Firefox to play a Flash game). The rest of the time, it's propped next to the sofa. There's no reason not to ship a simple remote and a complex one, and let people decide what they need when they need it.
nkurz 16y ago
I have to wonder how many people proclaiming that "Apple just gets it" have actually used the remote in question rather than looking at its (admittedly gorgeous) picture. We have one of the previous generation Apple TV's with a very similar remote. It currently sits unplugged next to the television on top of an upturned yogurt container. It's on the yogurt container because its lack of vents causes it to overheat if sitting on a smooth surface. It's unplugged because there's no clear power button on its very stylish remote. I happen to know that if you hold down one of the keys long enough it will turn (mostly) off, but I don't think this knowledge is shared by others in the house. It needs to be turned off because of the whine of the harddrive and the aforementioned overheating problem. Using the remote to enter search terms for Youtube is possible, but is a dreaded chore. Generally one says "Here, let me show you something" and then has to call the other party back from another room when done with the laborious process. This is not attempted as much as when the device was new. A keyboard as a remote may look silly, but would at least make simple things like this possible. Overall, it's very cute and warm little boat anchor. We'll probably eventually manage to get Boxee installed on it, but the lack of a reasonable means of entering text will really limit its utility. So while I agree that Apple "really gets it", at least in this case I'd apply this solely to their marketing rather than their usability.
- White_N_Nerdy 16y ago
  I have that Apple remote and it's nowhere near as useful as what you can get for Windows Media Center. I much prefer my Gyration remote - http://www.amazon.com/Gyration-GYR4101US-Air-Music-Remote/dp/B0018DH696 http://www.amazon.com/Gyration-GYR4101US-Air-Music-Remote/dp...
- Bostwick 16y ago
  I really like how the Boxee Box team approached the "simple remote vs. youtube searching" problem. Their remote has two sides. On the top is a four-way directional pad, a select, and a menu/back button. On the bottom is a full, cell-phone style keyboard. I think it's the best of both worlds.
- saurik 16y ago
  Amen: the Apple remote is /ludicrous/. The original poster also was talking about how great it is for being small... it isn't like the people who make television remotes couldn't easily make them smaller: if you take one apart you realize they are almost entirely hollow. The real world use case for a remote involves grasping it in your hand, which is not even remotely comfortable to do with the Apple remote. Meanwhile, I normally can't even find the thing, because it is so irritatingly small, thin, smooth, and tapered that it is constantly lost: it slides under papers, falls into the couch, or even manages to disappear into your own lap. This simply isn't a remote that a normal person can use. Frankly, the more I deal with people who insist "Apple is for end users" the more I realize that these people don't even understand what an end user is. Instead, these people are all geeks who happen to be geeky in the same way the product designers at Apple are, and therefore they get turned on by the same ludicrously ineffective-for-actual-end-users design choices that Apple often ends up making. (By the way, it isn't usually holding one button: the Apple remote has a bunch of "secret" combo pushes that involve holding down two buttons at once for at least 6 seconds and then letting go. Rather than add buttons to a design, Apple prefers forcing users to remember large numbers of obscure gestures and modifiers keys, and the Apple remote is no different.)
xenophanes 16y ago
Did they really need to put CAPS LOCK on a remote?
- sukuriant 16y ago
  How else are you going to make YouTube comments? Hold shift?! Pssh.
- brudgers 16y ago
  Handy if you're going to email, message, chat, or enter a password.
  - xenophanes 16y ago
    Are you joking? Do you know what shift is? Why would you write all caps emails or anything else?
    - brudgers 16y ago
      IMO, leaving a caps lock off makes a device more cumbersome to use - particularly for NFL, MLB, and NASCAR fans. AFIK, most phones offer capslock to improve communications efficiency, but YMMV.
      - xenophanes 16y ago
        Again, are you joking? Who the hell uses caps lock for just a few letters like that? Maybe you don't know how to type? Are you trying to say that people who can't touch type find caps lock useful while they hunt and peck or something? If you're looking at the keyboard anyway it seems easy to hold shift while you peck with the other hand. Do you realize it's pretty standard for people here to disable their caps lock key and replace it with something else? Do you realize that adding hardware buttons that duplicate features b/c it's slightly convenient for some small group of people is bad design?
        brudgers 16y ago
YeeHaw 16y ago
I think Netflix solves this problem nicely. You use a computer to add things to a queue and then a remote to browse through the queue.
hyperbovine 16y ago
BUT APPLE TV WON"T PLAY OGG VORBIS :-P
johngalt 16y ago
Apple is just a good IT department for everyone else. Every good IT department attempts to distill computer usage into a few core functions that are reliable and easy to use.
rbranson 16y ago
Doesn't seem to amount to a hill of beans when it comes to sales figures though, does it?
brudgers 16y ago
>"I can see the Apple designers starting from scratch, sitting down on their couches in their living rooms and imagining what they would want to use" The result of imagining rather than testing is a tiny remote that easily falls between the cushions of said couch or gets buried under a magazine on the end table.
A1kmm 16y ago
The article misses the point - Apple is aiming for a particular niche market, and it achieves that very successfully. Its niche market will pay through the roof for devices which look nice and make it easy to do the most common things but very hard or difficult to do something outside a particular square. However, this is only a small (albeit high paying) niche, and to suggest that other companies are making poor business decisions because they aren't targeting the same niche that Apple does is simply wrong. I'm sure entering a URL, for example, on the Sony-Google remote would be far easier and more obvious than on the Apple one - and so I'm sure the majority of consumers would prefer that one over the Apple one. In summary, all the designs on the page are appropriate for a market segment the brands they are being marketed under target.

39 points by zachwaugh 16y ago

lwhi 16y ago

Okay, but how do you _write_ with the Apple remote? The article doesn't compare like-for-like. It's not a fair comparison.

recoiledsnake 16y ago

Apple TV is meant to be a media browsing and consumption device, whereas Google TV includes Chrome(with Flash). You can use an Android phone to control Google TV anyway. I would love to see Apple solving the problem with typing using a remote(especially things like URLs) without using resorting to an iPhone or iPod Touch.

YooLi 16y ago
"I would love to see Apple solving the problem with typing using a remote(especially things like URLs)..." They already solved it; you aren't supposed to be typing URLs while laying on your couch watching TV.
- jwhitlark 16y ago
  Yes. "You aren't supposes to..." seems to be the subtext with apple. You get a great experience when you buy everything from them and color within the lines. That doesn't make it THE way to run a superior company, but it is A way to do so.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
pornel 16y ago
> without using resorting to an iPhone or iPod Touch Why not? You have iPod/iPhone in your pocket, or iPad on your coffee table. They can be used to look something up, and with AirPlay you can send content to TV once you find it.
- nlogn 16y ago
  >Why not? You have iPod/iPhone in your pocket, or iPad on your coffee table. They can be used to look something up, and with AirPlay you can send content to TV once you find it. No, I don't. Do I need to buy one to search?

jkriss 16y ago

It seems obvious, but the number of people (and companies) who don't get this at all is astonishing.

hvs 16y ago
It's not really that astonishing. I've been sitting in product design meetings for over a decade for applications, and anything designed through that process almost inevitably ends up looking like that Sony remote. When you have five product managers that have a stake in something and they care more about their little product rather than the larger picture, this is what you end up with. Apple has the singular vision of Steve Jobs/Jony Ive to drive their products. You really need a (well-qualified and competent) dictator when it comes to product design. The better question is "what will happen to Apple after Jobs and Ive are gone?"

ja27 16y ago

The Sony remote looks like a label maker. I'm surprised they didn't style it a bit better.

amastilovic 16y ago

So if you want to search for something on TV, which GoogleTV is supposed to enable you to do, how would you do that using Apple's three-button remote? I have an idea about a prayer and Steve Jobs, but wouldn't elaborate on it. I think the blog post doesn't have a point at all, since it compares apples to pears.

steveklabnik 16y ago
You'd do it by grabbing your iPad off of the coffee table, searching for something, and clicking 'send to TV.' So much easier and simpler than trying to make everything do everything. Leave the keyboard to a device that's better used with one, and make the two work together nicely. I still think that little 'Oh, and I can push stuff to my tv with my iPhone' feature they skimmed over at the Ping event will end up huge.
- stanleydrew 16y ago
  But wait, that's exactly what you can do with an Android device or an iOS device and a GoogleTV already. See the section "Your phone = remote control" here: http://www.google.com/tv/features.html http://www.google.com/tv/features.html.
  - steveklabnik 16y ago
    There's a difference between "There's a checkbox that's been ticked for this feature" and "this product has been designed around this concept."
    - stanleydrew 16y ago
      Of course there is. What is it that makes you think the latter is so vastly superior to the former though? I like the fact that I can choose an input device that meets my needs, one of which happens to be my phone. What's wrong with choice?
      - 16y ago

Orca 16y ago

It's the balance between engineering and design. Apple naturally knows how to find that center, most others seem to skew too far in either direction.

blueben 16y ago

What's really amazing is that people seem to believe that Google designed products that were actually manufactured and designed by Sony and Logitech.

zachwaugh 16y ago
Well, I never said that Google was responsible for the design of the remotes or hardware in the post, that's clearly on Sony and Logitech. But Google did design the interface that requires a keyboard and mouse to operate, so they have some of the blame. You can bet that in the unlikely event Apple had a product where other companies designed the hardware for their software, they'd have some pretty detailed specs to make sure stuff like those remotes didn't happen.
- Nemisis7654 16y ago
  I haven't used a Google TV either, but I believe a keyboard is required for a lot of the use. I don't see how that is a bad thing. If a user needs to type something in, how are they to do that without a keyboard? "I haven’t used a Google TV, but based on these remotes, I would bet the rest of the interface is just as clunky." - From the blog I think that's an irrational assumption. Again, I haven't used one either so I cannot dispute the claim, but I think one should hold off their opinion until they try it.
- DougBTX 16y ago
  I guess when it comes down to it, Google makes its money by search. For search on TVs to work, they need to get people typing search keywords. Hence keyboards.

83457 16y ago

Boxee hits a sweet spot on the remote IMO

blehn 16y ago
Agree, however the box itself is another story. Aside from the needlessly wacky shape, isn't it obvious that it should fit in the ~2" high gap between the top of the table/stand and the bottom of the display? Apple has it right with the AppleTV, and it seems like they figured it out with the new Mac Mini, which is much thinner than the old one.

ary 16y ago

As these types of epiphanies pop up on the web over time I wish someone would just come out and say it. Apple, as an organization, approaches problems in a way that just about every other company is too chickenshit to try. When Jobs returned and launched the Think Different campaign it wasn't for the masses, it was for Apple. It's difficult to articulate this properly because most people don't even have a good understanding of what it means to dissent. Being rebellious isn't thinking differently, it is merely fighting the imposition of someone else's will upon your own. Thinking differently is looking at something in the most honest way you possibly can and attempting to refine your vision without allowing undue external influences to distract from the pursuit. Rarely can you find a single person, much less an organization, that can avoid tunnel vision and approach problems without the taint of past success spoiling new opportunities. It's kind of amazing to watch.

White_N_Nerdy 16y ago
Oh gawd. Drink the kool-aid much? That remote is horrible compared to what you can get for Windows Media Center. Have you even tried a Gyration air-remote?

gvb 16y ago

Engineers are all basically high-functioning autistics who have no idea how normal people do stuff. -- Cory Doctorow http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Cory_Doctorow#Eastern_Standard_Tribe http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Cory_Doctorow#Eastern_Standard_... Apple takes the time to figure out how normal people do stuff. I'm not sure what Microsoft does, but I'm picturing what some a focus group determines followed by the interpretation by committee (with the necessary compromises) followed by what some engineer implemented, all constrained by years of legacy code. I've been using Win7 at work (I'm linux-only at home) and expected it to be a smooth experience. After all, everybody says linux isn't ready for the desktop yet. I am surprised at how often Win7 guesses my intent wrong or does stupid annoying things like jumping the list under the mouse when I click on an entry.

gaius 16y ago
It would be equally valid to observe that bloggers are all basically self-absorbed wankers who have no idea how normal engineers do stuff.

siglesias 16y ago

The best remote for the TV products are touch screen phone apps with shifting UIs: a four-d pad when it needs to be, a keyboard when it needs to be. (A quick reference IMDB device when it needs to be).

bbatsell 16y ago
I'm really not sure I agree. Remotes do their jobs best when one fully learns their layout and can operate every function while keeping their eyes on the content they're wanting to see, not looking down at a small screen to figure out where your tap target is at any given moment.
- siglesias 16y ago
  Apple's implementation solves this by allowing you to perform directional swipe gestures within a large area of the screen, with a tap proxying for the select button. It's quite nice.

jherdman 16y ago

I had a really good conversation yesterday at the Dev Lunch in Toronto about so-called Smart TVs. Here's a quick summary: * TVs are about media consumption, not about interaction in the PC-sense of the word. * When one wants extra content or information regarding the media they are consuming, they tend to use a secondary device (e.g. iPad, notebook) * Most devs in the room merely wanted a device that would allow them to better manage and consume the media they wanted * It's not clear what sort of apps (besides the aforementioned management tool) would be beneficial to write for a Smart TV platform. This is likely a function of not groking what a future with a Smart TV might be like. * Over and over again, it was noted that the TV is a social device. You watch it with friends, be it in a bar, or a home. It's not clear that interacting with a Smart TV could be a social activity. I'm interested to see what happens in this sphere, but I frankly can't shake the feeling that it's a dead end. Mostly dumb boxes that enable consumption, and management of media are probably the most likely thing to succeed, a la TiVo.

gamble 16y ago
Yeah, I think the tech industry has consistently overestimated how much people want to interact with their television. TV is a fundamentally passive experience. Basic DVRs are probably pushing the limit of how much thought most people want to put into the viewing experience.
mikeryan 16y ago
So I think you're going to see a few trends happening here which may change your mind. One of the big gaps here is that most TV App platforms are independent of the video you are watching (they are not content aware). Take the Yahoo! platform which is (very well) designed to be used while watching TV, yet the apps don't know what is being watched. This adds some serious difficulty to app developers who want to enhance existing TV content which is kind of the current holy grail for TV apps (Actually most TV apps right now provide alternatives for delivering video content - and that is the killer app on TV right now. I'm going to try to focus this screed on TV apps whose main purpose is not to deliver video). This disconnect between app and video is currently being addressed. Early next year these apps will be able to be content aware and you will be able to have apps which are sync'd to the broadcast and this will add a lot of value to the chain. Unfortunately enhanced ads will likely be the first area where you'll see this functionality but someone needs to pay the bills. The second trend is that a lot of TV interactivity will likely move from the TV to your tablet PC. We've already seen a first implementation of this with ABC's "My Generation" TV Show app (show's already canceled unfortunately). This app sync'd to broadcast using audio fingerprinting. I think that at some point these "second screen" apps will be the main type of TV Apps you see. Likely using the TV app platforms for some simple updates. Think a leaderboard or something while playing - or a twitter feed. With respect to social. I think where the most interesting social aspects for TV aren't "Friend Feeds" via Twitter or Facebook. But using social networks for content discovery. I think we're going to be so inundated with video content that our primary method for content discovery won't be a guide (or search) but some sort of social recommendation system. Maybe a reddit for TV?

moeffju 16y ago

As a nitpick, the Apple Remote has seven buttons: Four direction buttons, center button, Menu button, and play/pause. This does not really detract from the central point of the argument, but then I believe the argument is flawed since the remotes are made for almost entirely different things. You cannot run searches using the Apple Remote, for example. Whether the solution picked by Sony and Logitech is the best solution remains to be seen (although I find it doubtful at best), but the article, IMO, makes a bad point.

rodh 16y ago

I'm really disappointed in the next generation of remotes. What I really want to know is why, when we have touchscreen phones and devices like the iPad, our remotes are still hunks of plastic with dozens of tiny rubber buttons? Forget remotes, I want the whole UI for my TV to be on a dedicated touchscreen device. I want to read about what's on next, preview what's on other channels and schedule recordings without disrupting what's on the display screen. The rest of the time, show me two big volume buttons.

tortilla 16y ago
I still like physical buttons I can feel and click when I'm a couch potato.

jordan0day 16y ago

Does anyone else think the recent release (and positive reviews) of Kinect might indicate that the Sony and Logitech solutions will quite soon be anachronisms? People seem to say the Kinect's voice recognition is still a bit dodgy, but for the solutions the monstrous remotes are meant to solve, I don't see why voice input wouldn't generally work? If I want to find the next showing of It's Always Sunny in Philadelpha, it's a heck of a lot easier to just say it than type it out, and since it's search-based, the voice recognition doesn't have to be perfect anyway.

beej71 16y ago

Google TV is more like a computer. Apple TV is more like on-demand TV/video programming. I'm not saying one is better than the other (ok, well, the computer is better ;) ) but it should be apparent why the inputs are so different.

dashdsrdash 16y ago

I have already implemented The Right Solution for my MythTV. Two remotes. One is a TiVo remote control. Fits nicely in my hand, has the important buttons laid out nicely. Good for watching and selecting and OK for most other tasks. The other is a remote keyboard with built-in mouse, similar to the Logitech board. I pull it out when I want to search for something or manipulate the system in a more complex way (like firing up Firefox to play a Flash game). The rest of the time, it's propped next to the sofa. There's no reason not to ship a simple remote and a complex one, and let people decide what they need when they need it.

nkurz 16y ago

I have to wonder how many people proclaiming that "Apple just gets it" have actually used the remote in question rather than looking at its (admittedly gorgeous) picture. We have one of the previous generation Apple TV's with a very similar remote. It currently sits unplugged next to the television on top of an upturned yogurt container. It's on the yogurt container because its lack of vents causes it to overheat if sitting on a smooth surface. It's unplugged because there's no clear power button on its very stylish remote. I happen to know that if you hold down one of the keys long enough it will turn (mostly) off, but I don't think this knowledge is shared by others in the house. It needs to be turned off because of the whine of the harddrive and the aforementioned overheating problem. Using the remote to enter search terms for Youtube is possible, but is a dreaded chore. Generally one says "Here, let me show you something" and then has to call the other party back from another room when done with the laborious process. This is not attempted as much as when the device was new. A keyboard as a remote may look silly, but would at least make simple things like this possible. Overall, it's very cute and warm little boat anchor. We'll probably eventually manage to get Boxee installed on it, but the lack of a reasonable means of entering text will really limit its utility. So while I agree that Apple "really gets it", at least in this case I'd apply this solely to their marketing rather than their usability.

White_N_Nerdy 16y ago
I have that Apple remote and it's nowhere near as useful as what you can get for Windows Media Center. I much prefer my Gyration remote - http://www.amazon.com/Gyration-GYR4101US-Air-Music-Remote/dp/B0018DH696 http://www.amazon.com/Gyration-GYR4101US-Air-Music-Remote/dp...
Bostwick 16y ago
I really like how the Boxee Box team approached the "simple remote vs. youtube searching" problem. Their remote has two sides. On the top is a four-way directional pad, a select, and a menu/back button. On the bottom is a full, cell-phone style keyboard. I think it's the best of both worlds.
saurik 16y ago
Amen: the Apple remote is /ludicrous/. The original poster also was talking about how great it is for being small... it isn't like the people who make television remotes couldn't easily make them smaller: if you take one apart you realize they are almost entirely hollow. The real world use case for a remote involves grasping it in your hand, which is not even remotely comfortable to do with the Apple remote. Meanwhile, I normally can't even find the thing, because it is so irritatingly small, thin, smooth, and tapered that it is constantly lost: it slides under papers, falls into the couch, or even manages to disappear into your own lap. This simply isn't a remote that a normal person can use. Frankly, the more I deal with people who insist "Apple is for end users" the more I realize that these people don't even understand what an end user is. Instead, these people are all geeks who happen to be geeky in the same way the product designers at Apple are, and therefore they get turned on by the same ludicrously ineffective-for-actual-end-users design choices that Apple often ends up making. (By the way, it isn't usually holding one button: the Apple remote has a bunch of "secret" combo pushes that involve holding down two buttons at once for at least 6 seconds and then letting go. Rather than add buttons to a design, Apple prefers forcing users to remember large numbers of obscure gestures and modifiers keys, and the Apple remote is no different.)

xenophanes 16y ago

Did they really need to put CAPS LOCK on a remote?

sukuriant 16y ago
How else are you going to make YouTube comments? Hold shift?! Pssh.
brudgers 16y ago
Handy if you're going to email, message, chat, or enter a password.
- xenophanes 16y ago
  Are you joking? Do you know what shift is? Why would you write all caps emails or anything else?
  - brudgers 16y ago
    IMO, leaving a caps lock off makes a device more cumbersome to use - particularly for NFL, MLB, and NASCAR fans. AFIK, most phones offer capslock to improve communications efficiency, but YMMV.
    - xenophanes 16y ago
      Again, are you joking? Who the hell uses caps lock for just a few letters like that? Maybe you don't know how to type? Are you trying to say that people who can't touch type find caps lock useful while they hunt and peck or something? If you're looking at the keyboard anyway it seems easy to hold shift while you peck with the other hand. Do you realize it's pretty standard for people here to disable their caps lock key and replace it with something else? Do you realize that adding hardware buttons that duplicate features b/c it's slightly convenient for some small group of people is bad design?
      - brudgers 16y ago

YeeHaw 16y ago

I think Netflix solves this problem nicely. You use a computer to add things to a queue and then a remote to browse through the queue.

hyperbovine 16y ago

BUT APPLE TV WON"T PLAY OGG VORBIS :-P

johngalt 16y ago

Apple is just a good IT department for everyone else. Every good IT department attempts to distill computer usage into a few core functions that are reliable and easy to use.

rbranson 16y ago

Doesn't seem to amount to a hill of beans when it comes to sales figures though, does it?

brudgers 16y ago

>"I can see the Apple designers starting from scratch, sitting down on their couches in their living rooms and imagining what they would want to use" The result of imagining rather than testing is a tiny remote that easily falls between the cushions of said couch or gets buried under a magazine on the end table.

A1kmm 16y ago

The article misses the point - Apple is aiming for a particular niche market, and it achieves that very successfully. Its niche market will pay through the roof for devices which look nice and make it easy to do the most common things but very hard or difficult to do something outside a particular square. However, this is only a small (albeit high paying) niche, and to suggest that other companies are making poor business decisions because they aren't targeting the same niche that Apple does is simply wrong. I'm sure entering a URL, for example, on the Sony-Google remote would be far easier and more obvious than on the Apple one - and so I'm sure the majority of consumers would prefer that one over the Apple one. In summary, all the designs on the page are appropriate for a market segment the brands they are being marketed under target.