4 ms·

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.tvlauncher https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.and... The reviews on it a

by ars 4y ago

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.tvlauncher https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.and... The reviews on it are quite something to see.

aix1 4y ago
Yeah, I abandoned Android on my TV for this exact reason and now I use the TV as a dumb screen for an external streaming box (also running Android TV, but one that's less locked down and allows me to install my own launcher and control the UI). I wish dumb TVs with good panels were easier to buy.
- abawany 4y ago
  I'm getting close too, starting with the cancellation of my YT Premium subscription. All I wanted was to be able to watch my subscriptions in peace on my tv (e.g. bigclivedotcom) but instead I get random breaks (e.g. only the home page shows on the yt app, no access to subscriptions), daily reset of my playback speed preferences, etc. I hope the people who think it's cool to experiment with paying customers get to experience the same for the rest of their lives.
permo-w 4y ago
I really have to wonder what the corporate process behind implementing this was. they must have known people wouldn’t like it. they must have known they were literally making their product worse. when these decisions were made, did they feel bad? did they not care? did they delude themselves that people want “recommended content” against their will? did anyone at any point say “hey maybe we shouldn’t do this?”? I bet at least one person who was involved is on hacker news. maybe they’ll see this and can comment. or maybe someone who’s been in a similar position at a company
- blep_ 4y ago
  > did they delude themselves that people want “recommended content” against their will? Probably. In fact, I think you're underestimating the degree to which they can. Very few evil people actually think they're evil. Most think they're legitimately doing good and helpful things, while being extremely misguided as to what is good and helpful.
at-fates-hands 4y ago
WHOAH. Was not expecting the level of animosity for this app. The last update in August apparently forced a ton of ads on the interface, even if people had paid subscriptions that would remove ads. Absolute trash. In their boundless greed, Google decided to force endlessly cycling ads onto the home screen, and had the temerity to highlight it as a feature. I give two @$#@$# about the content they are highlighting, from a Christmas movie (in July) to the latest teen pablum. Pretty sure I had automatic updates disabled, and that was overwritten without my consent (with no way to roll back to the prior version). I took a chance on the Android ecosystem with this device (NVIDIA shield), and that's the last time I make that mistake. I'll be tossing that out and not looking back... Unbelievable. They added unremovable ads right in the home screen. The "Staff Picks" takes over the top 30% of your screen advertising random videos from apps that I don't ever want to install. No way to turn off. How quickly my $2k TV turned from pleasant to ad infested junk. The only solution I had was was to uninstall updates in App manager. If this is the future of Android TV, I'm certainly not buying another TV with this OS again. I paid a hefty sum for a top-end TV, then again for the most expansive TV box one can find, and what did I get? Ads! Ads that blink and distract. Ads that take more than a third of the screen, pushing what I want to see on the second page. Ads for movies I cannot be less interested in, on services I have absolutely no intention to subscribe to. Ads that have been trying to sell me the exact same three movies in genres I don't care about since they appeared. Evil greedy corporation at its worst.
- permo-w 4y ago
  IANAL but some of this stuff might be class-action-worthy. if you’ve paid to remove ads and they forced them back upon you, surely that’s an infringement of some variety?
  - at-fates-hands 4y ago
    I would think this would fall under the "false advertising" laws in any given state: Minnesota Statue 325F.67 FALSE STATEMENT IN ADVERTISEMENT. Any person, firm, corporation, or association who, with intent to sell or in anywise dispose of merchandise, securities, service, or anything offered by such person, firm, corporation, or association, directly or indirectly, to the public, for sale or distribution, or with intent to increase the consumption thereof, or to induce the public in any manner to enter into any obligation relating thereto, or to acquire title thereto, or any interest therein, makes, publishes, disseminates, circulates, or places before the public, or causes, directly or indirectly, to be made, published, disseminated, circulated, or placed before the public, in this state, in a newspaper or other publication, or in the form of a book, notice, handbill, poster, bill, label, price tag, circular, pamphlet, program, or letter, or over any radio or television station, or in any other way, an advertisement of any sort regarding merchandise, securities, service, or anything so offered to the public, for use, consumption, purchase, or sale, which advertisement contains any material assertion, representation, or statement of fact which is untrue, deceptive, or misleading, shall, whether or not pecuniary or other specific damage to any person occurs as a direct result thereof, be guilty of a misdemeanor, and any such act is declared to be a public nuisance and may be enjoined as such. They advertised there would be no ads, then promptly started serving ads while still collecting monthly subscription revenue I think fall into this area.

by ars 4y ago

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.tvlauncher https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.and... The reviews on it are quite something to see.

aix1 4y ago

Yeah, I abandoned Android on my TV for this exact reason and now I use the TV as a dumb screen for an external streaming box (also running Android TV, but one that's less locked down and allows me to install my own launcher and control the UI). I wish dumb TVs with good panels were easier to buy.

abawany 4y ago
I'm getting close too, starting with the cancellation of my YT Premium subscription. All I wanted was to be able to watch my subscriptions in peace on my tv (e.g. bigclivedotcom) but instead I get random breaks (e.g. only the home page shows on the yt app, no access to subscriptions), daily reset of my playback speed preferences, etc. I hope the people who think it's cool to experiment with paying customers get to experience the same for the rest of their lives.

permo-w 4y ago

I really have to wonder what the corporate process behind implementing this was. they must have known people wouldn’t like it. they must have known they were literally making their product worse. when these decisions were made, did they feel bad? did they not care? did they delude themselves that people want “recommended content” against their will? did anyone at any point say “hey maybe we shouldn’t do this?”? I bet at least one person who was involved is on hacker news. maybe they’ll see this and can comment. or maybe someone who’s been in a similar position at a company

blep_ 4y ago
> did they delude themselves that people want “recommended content” against their will? Probably. In fact, I think you're underestimating the degree to which they can. Very few evil people actually think they're evil. Most think they're legitimately doing good and helpful things, while being extremely misguided as to what is good and helpful.

at-fates-hands 4y ago

WHOAH. Was not expecting the level of animosity for this app. The last update in August apparently forced a ton of ads on the interface, even if people had paid subscriptions that would remove ads. Absolute trash. In their boundless greed, Google decided to force endlessly cycling ads onto the home screen, and had the temerity to highlight it as a feature. I give two @$#@$# about the content they are highlighting, from a Christmas movie (in July) to the latest teen pablum. Pretty sure I had automatic updates disabled, and that was overwritten without my consent (with no way to roll back to the prior version). I took a chance on the Android ecosystem with this device (NVIDIA shield), and that's the last time I make that mistake. I'll be tossing that out and not looking back... Unbelievable. They added unremovable ads right in the home screen. The "Staff Picks" takes over the top 30% of your screen advertising random videos from apps that I don't ever want to install. No way to turn off. How quickly my $2k TV turned from pleasant to ad infested junk. The only solution I had was was to uninstall updates in App manager. If this is the future of Android TV, I'm certainly not buying another TV with this OS again. I paid a hefty sum for a top-end TV, then again for the most expansive TV box one can find, and what did I get? Ads! Ads that blink and distract. Ads that take more than a third of the screen, pushing what I want to see on the second page. Ads for movies I cannot be less interested in, on services I have absolutely no intention to subscribe to. Ads that have been trying to sell me the exact same three movies in genres I don't care about since they appeared. Evil greedy corporation at its worst.

permo-w 4y ago
IANAL but some of this stuff might be class-action-worthy. if you’ve paid to remove ads and they forced them back upon you, surely that’s an infringement of some variety?
- at-fates-hands 4y ago
  I would think this would fall under the "false advertising" laws in any given state: Minnesota Statue 325F.67 FALSE STATEMENT IN ADVERTISEMENT. Any person, firm, corporation, or association who, with intent to sell or in anywise dispose of merchandise, securities, service, or anything offered by such person, firm, corporation, or association, directly or indirectly, to the public, for sale or distribution, or with intent to increase the consumption thereof, or to induce the public in any manner to enter into any obligation relating thereto, or to acquire title thereto, or any interest therein, makes, publishes, disseminates, circulates, or places before the public, or causes, directly or indirectly, to be made, published, disseminated, circulated, or placed before the public, in this state, in a newspaper or other publication, or in the form of a book, notice, handbill, poster, bill, label, price tag, circular, pamphlet, program, or letter, or over any radio or television station, or in any other way, an advertisement of any sort regarding merchandise, securities, service, or anything so offered to the public, for use, consumption, purchase, or sale, which advertisement contains any material assertion, representation, or statement of fact which is untrue, deceptive, or misleading, shall, whether or not pecuniary or other specific damage to any person occurs as a direct result thereof, be guilty of a misdemeanor, and any such act is declared to be a public nuisance and may be enjoined as such. They advertised there would be no ads, then promptly started serving ads while still collecting monthly subscription revenue I think fall into this area.