Comments on: The Coming Remote Control Revolution

By: Alfred Poor

Alfred Poor — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 13:32:32 +0000

Ah, the old “compact” vs. “component” stereo battle reemerges once again! Where is the correct place for intelligence in a TV? History has shown clearly that consumers do not upgrade components. Something like 95% of all desktop PCs have never had their case removed since they left the factory, so why are those expansion slots there?

I think that short term, your concept of monitor attached to intelligence may win out; early adopters are geeks that are willing to struggle with cables and configurations, and current frothiness in the Internet TV choices keeps uncertainty high. But when this is ready for prime time, the average consumer wants one box (with as few cables as possible) that they can “set and forget” and use for the next 10 to 15 years. Intelligence in the set is not such a big problem, now that you can upgrade the software remotely over the Internet, as has been used by set makers to update widgets and Internet services recently.

Intelligence in the set will help drive down remote control costs, however, as there will be fewer boxes that the remotes will have to control. The biggest challenge is creating a user interface that will make Internet content accessible from a remote; Hulu content is great, but it’s a pain to access even with a keyboard and mouse. User interface for Internet content is the next great technology frontier.

By: Luigi Benedicenti

Luigi Benedicenti — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 15:26:18 +0000

Although I see no obstacles from a technical point of view, I think that the economics of convergence have not made sense yet, even in the US market which is relatively advanced. Until I see a business model that works bilaterally (provider, customer) for delivered content I will remain skeptical.

I liken the “new” crop of remote controls (remember the Palm remote control by the way?) to smartphones in the mobile phone arena. So in terms of market penetration, confidence in the product, and customer friendliness, I think standard remotes are here to stay for a lot longer, excluding enthusiasts and early adopters of course.

By: Michael Wolf

Michael Wolf — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 04:10:48 +0000

@Dave – no doubt, the TV use-cases will change. However – I am not entirely sold on the fact the intelligence will be in the TV itself. I am a big believer the display’s main purpose is presenting stunning visuals – but it doesn’t have to be where the processing/compute, decode, or even the network inflow is for content.

That said, I think we’ll see alot more networked TVs that connect to much more advanced remotes. I think your are right on about life-cycles of TVs – much longer – but the newest networking/convergence service (or even great service provider based service) will likely come from a box (or a card if, say, Cablecard or something like it really did ever take off, though it looks to me like that is unlikely at this point).

While LCD is the big technology now, I think the CE industry is going to try and push us into a new upgrade cycle with OLED and/or 3D. Will it work – we’ll see. But if it does, these nice new screens will be sold of the stunning picture, not because of an Internet widget.

By: texasyellowdog

texasyellowdog — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 04:15:29 +0000

Will this be delayed by a war between zigbee and z-wave? Will consumer electronics (tv, av receiver, cable box) people ever get it?
Look at the zigbee members. Where’s Denon? Where’s Oknyo?

By: Dave Bullock

Dave Bullock — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 18:55:16 +0000

^^^No question – the real driver for change here is that the TV screen is broadening in it’s use case – and I think it’s going to have a pretty dramatic effect on the consumer purchase cycles for both TVs and remotes.^^^
In almost every home, the TV screen is the *best and biggest* screen in the house, and eventually nearly all things digital are going to be consumed there. This introduces a really broad range of use cases for the screen – from watching TV, surfing the net, playing games, video communication, etc etc. This can’t be facilitated very well with a fixed-button remote – so i think the movement will be towards open interfaced touch-screen remotes that can quickly re-configure buttons and real-estate to accomadate the use-case that the screen is being utilized in.
A second effect of this will be that once consumers have an internet equipped TV, they’ll hang onto the TV for a long period of time, but buy incrementally better remote control devices in relatively quick succession. This is a model that could fit our friends in Cupertino very well.