7 ms·

That doesn't make sense as this was added additionally, so when people purchased their devices the ads were not present. To quote one review verbatim: > I pur

That doesn't make sense as this was added additionally, so when people purchased their devices the ads were not present. 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.

Ansil849 5y ago
People still bought products that had the capability of ads being inserted retroactively. 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.
- dagmx 5y ago
  So you're future victim blaming now? People need to be able to predict all possible eventualities and are to blame for any future changes to a system?
  - Ansil849 5y ago
    If you buy a product that someone can remotely control, then you are setting yourself up for a world of hurt. Whether that is advertising or having all your data wiped (like is currently the case for those Western Digital Live Book hard drives). '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.
    - dagmx 5y ago
      To take your example to the extreme, unless people control their entire tech stack, they deserve whatever is coming to them. 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.
  - nitrogen 5y ago
    Many people definitely predicted this outcome years ago. At the time it was dismissed with "slippery slope fallacy" etc.
    - dagmx 5y ago
      You're assuming everyone is sufficiently tech savvy however to understand this could happen. Unless you're going up to every would be buyer and telling them "hey in the future this product might have ads...but also all the other high ends brands might have ads too..." then you can't expect the average person to really prepare for something like this
  - ipaddr 5y ago
    In the end you didn't you read the fine print where it said google can make changes. You relied on their brand name and popularity and thought you were making a solid choice. You will get outraged today and forget about it tomorrow. You got played. You were scammed. You are a victim of following what society told you. Accept it and think though your next purchase.
    - dagmx 5y ago
      This is such an absurd take on things. So every change should just be brushed of and people should just move on? No software company is open to criticism for their changes and it's the consumers fault for not understanding every little nuance?
      - ipaddr 5y ago
        Trusting google to control your tv experience is not the same thing as trusting any company to provide any service. 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.
- milankragujevic 5y ago
  It is absolutely not straightforward and you are arguing a black-or-white fallacy. 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.
  - Ansil849 5y ago
    > 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. 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
- qwertywert_ 5y ago
  So you are suggesting you should never purchase an android phone like a Pixel because google has the capability of putting tons of ads in? Customers can and should complain here, that's like saying don't purchase any software ever? People like smart TVs for good reasons.
tyingq 5y ago
Does the Nvidea Shield TV come with this Google controlled "Android TV Home" as the home screen / launcher? 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/introduction-to-android-tv/ https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/shield/support/shield-tv/introd...
- milankragujevic 5y ago
  Yes, it is required by Google for Android TV devices.
  - tyingq 5y ago
    Ah, okay. That does make for a confusing consumer experience. I would guess most non-tech users would assume this is something Nvidea can control. Edit: You can see some complaints flowing in on Nvidea's forum: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/shield-tv/9/ 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/9/457996/new-ad-bar-please-remove/ https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/shield-tv/9/4579...

Ansil849 5y ago

People still bought products that had the capability of ads being inserted retroactively. 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.

dagmx 5y ago
So you're future victim blaming now? People need to be able to predict all possible eventualities and are to blame for any future changes to a system?
- Ansil849 5y ago
  If you buy a product that someone can remotely control, then you are setting yourself up for a world of hurt. Whether that is advertising or having all your data wiped (like is currently the case for those Western Digital Live Book hard drives). '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.
  - dagmx 5y ago
    To take your example to the extreme, unless people control their entire tech stack, they deserve whatever is coming to them. 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.
- nitrogen 5y ago
  Many people definitely predicted this outcome years ago. At the time it was dismissed with "slippery slope fallacy" etc.
  - dagmx 5y ago
    You're assuming everyone is sufficiently tech savvy however to understand this could happen. Unless you're going up to every would be buyer and telling them "hey in the future this product might have ads...but also all the other high ends brands might have ads too..." then you can't expect the average person to really prepare for something like this
- ipaddr 5y ago
  In the end you didn't you read the fine print where it said google can make changes. You relied on their brand name and popularity and thought you were making a solid choice. You will get outraged today and forget about it tomorrow. You got played. You were scammed. You are a victim of following what society told you. Accept it and think though your next purchase.
  - dagmx 5y ago
    This is such an absurd take on things. So every change should just be brushed of and people should just move on? No software company is open to criticism for their changes and it's the consumers fault for not understanding every little nuance?
    - ipaddr 5y ago
      Trusting google to control your tv experience is not the same thing as trusting any company to provide any service. 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.
milankragujevic 5y ago
It is absolutely not straightforward and you are arguing a black-or-white fallacy. 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.
- Ansil849 5y ago
  > 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. 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
qwertywert_ 5y ago
So you are suggesting you should never purchase an android phone like a Pixel because google has the capability of putting tons of ads in? Customers can and should complain here, that's like saying don't purchase any software ever? People like smart TVs for good reasons.

tyingq 5y ago

Does the Nvidea Shield TV come with this Google controlled "Android TV Home" as the home screen / launcher? 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/introduction-to-android-tv/ https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/shield/support/shield-tv/introd...

milankragujevic 5y ago
Yes, it is required by Google for Android TV devices.
- tyingq 5y ago
  Ah, okay. That does make for a confusing consumer experience. I would guess most non-tech users would assume this is something Nvidea can control. Edit: You can see some complaints flowing in on Nvidea's forum: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/shield-tv/9/ 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/9/457996/new-ad-bar-please-remove/ https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/shield-tv/9/4579...