Reviews of Android TV launcher after Google added ads to the homescreen(play.google.com)
play.google.com
Reviews of Android TV launcher after Google added ads to the homescreen
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.tvlauncher&showAllReviews=true
506 comments
Uninstalling didn't seem to work for me after reboot. If that doesn't work for you, try disabling it:
1. Install your new launcher through play store. (I used the Basic Launcher as well).
2. Settings -> Device Preferences -> About. Scroll to "Build" and click on it until it pops up that you are a developer (it will give you a countdown)
3. Settings -> Device Preferences -> Developer options (this was just unlocked in step 2) -> Network debugging (this will let you use adb)
4. Install adb (platform tools) on your computer.
5. adb connect <ip address of your shield>
6. adb shell pm disable-user --user 0 com.google.android.tvlauncher
7. adb shell reboot
Should find yourself in the launcher you installed Note, I also stopped the google launcher (cleared data/reset defaults)/tested the new launcher in the middle. So if these steps don't seem to work, before doing step 5 try doing those and then retry.
1. Install your new launcher through play store. (I used the Basic Launcher as well).
2. Settings -> Device Preferences -> About. Scroll to "Build" and click on it until it pops up that you are a developer (it will give you a countdown)
3. Settings -> Device Preferences -> Developer options (this was just unlocked in step 2) -> Network debugging (this will let you use adb)
4. Install adb (platform tools) on your computer.
5. adb connect <ip address of your shield>
6. adb shell pm disable-user --user 0 com.google.android.tvlauncher
7. adb shell reboot
Should find yourself in the launcher you installed Note, I also stopped the google launcher (cleared data/reset defaults)/tested the new launcher in the middle. So if these steps don't seem to work, before doing step 5 try doing those and then retry.
You're a lifesaver. Wasn't able to get the 3rd party launcher going by default. Thanks!
This has been infuriating. It's even more pushy now that I do not log into a Google Account on the Nvidia Shield because it requires giving Nvidia full account access.
I have a Google notification that I cannot dismiss and 3 buttons on my App menu that all take me to the Play Store that I cannot remove. I'm livid.
This should be illegal and I'm frankly worried about Google's future if this is the kind of shit that they need to pull to continue to profit. Some of the brightest sw eng's around yet they do this shit rather than innovate. Lazy
I have a Google notification that I cannot dismiss and 3 buttons on my App menu that all take me to the Play Store that I cannot remove. I'm livid.
This should be illegal and I'm frankly worried about Google's future if this is the kind of shit that they need to pull to continue to profit. Some of the brightest sw eng's around yet they do this shit rather than innovate. Lazy
>I manged to remove them...you go to All apps..scroll down to "Show system apps"...Android TV Home...Force stop... Uninstall updates => You will have old Home Screen
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/shield-tv/9/4579...
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/shield-tv/9/4579...
I looked through this thread when searching for a workaround but this method didn't work for me (2019 Shield TV Pro), I had to swap the launcher.
Uninstalling the update also didn't work for me using my 2015 Shield.
This worked for me at first now I have the new UI no matter what state the actual app is in
Wouldn't that mean you had an insecure device?
I'm really tired of companies hiding behind "security" when it comes to ruining my experience every time I get an update.
If they want me to be secure, package essential security updates into seperate downloads.
If they want me to be secure, package essential security updates into seperate downloads.
I consider updates that break workflow or violate privacy to be security risks in themselves.
The big issue with major OS updates for me is that the security updates are bundled with the feature updates. That's why updating Android on my old phone stopped being feasable, when the increased performance requirements caused it to remain persistently hot and unresponsive.
Not just the security updates, but also things like APIs that prevent some applications from being compatible. Still, I have to wonder how much of a tradeoff would be possible when all the code is managed together, and the security and feature updates would be interwoven in the same repo. There is only so much manpower available to keep maintaining every version of each update.
Not just the security updates, but also things like APIs that prevent some applications from being compatible. Still, I have to wonder how much of a tradeoff would be possible when all the code is managed together, and the security and feature updates would be interwoven in the same repo. There is only so much manpower available to keep maintaining every version of each update.
New in iOS 14/15:
> Software Updates
> iOS now offers a choice between two software update versions in the Settings app. You can update to the latest version of iOS 15 as soon as it’s released for the latest features and most complete set of security updates. Or continue on iOS 14 and still get important security updates until you’re ready to upgrade to the next major version.
https://www.apple.com/ios/ios-15-preview/features/
> Software Updates
> iOS now offers a choice between two software update versions in the Settings app. You can update to the latest version of iOS 15 as soon as it’s released for the latest features and most complete set of security updates. Or continue on iOS 14 and still get important security updates until you’re ready to upgrade to the next major version.
https://www.apple.com/ios/ios-15-preview/features/
To be clear Android the operating system offers targeted security updates. The device manufactures prefers to package them with feature updates. I guess it doesn’t matter for users.
Aren't many core components now taken care of by the Google Play Services library that's updated separately to avoid carriers and manufacturers from delaying critical security updates because they need to package and test these with all their bloatware crap?
Play services do not get just security updates, that’s true. It’s pretty hard to not have that up to date on an Android phone anyway.
Are you afraid of someone remotely pushing an update that pushes ads disguised as content to your device?
> Wouldn't that mean you had an insecure device?
So you mean ads are increasing security ?
So you mean ads are increasing security ?
Not automatically.
So many updates these days have nothing to do with security, just with "feautes" nobody asked for apart from random product manager who needs his paycheck.
So many updates these days have nothing to do with security, just with "feautes" nobody asked for apart from random product manager who needs his paycheck.
Everything's a tradeoff.
Ads are bad behavior they are protecting themselves from.
It's just the home screen so it shouldn't be that much of a security hole. If it were the OS it'd be a bigger concern.
At first, I thought nVidia had done this, and I was cursing their name. After some searching, I discovered this is actually the stock launcher from Google instead.
nVidia should absolutely get ahead of this to preserve their own reputation.
nVidia should absolutely get ahead of this to preserve their own reputation.
That's Nvidia's choice to use default launcher. It's not like Google does not allow their partners to adapt OS. I agree about blaming Google first, but it's device from Nvidia, customer will not research where each particular application or part came from. If battery will blow up, nobody will blame some nameless chinese factory.
I absolutely blame Nvidia for this. I fully expect ads on my $25 Fire Stick. It's part of the bargain with Amazon. There is no way there should be ads on a $150-200 device, especially when they have been added in well after purchase.
Regardless of where they choose to lay blame, if Nvidia doesn't fix this I am done with their devices when it's time to replace them.
Regardless of where they choose to lay blame, if Nvidia doesn't fix this I am done with their devices when it's time to replace them.
My $2000 top of the line Samsung tv is filled with ads. I assume LGs running android tv also got hit. Those TVs go up $3700 for their largest consumer OlED panel.
There have been complaints about these Google Launcher ads with Sony TVs for months. It's the reason why I didn't update to Android 9 and disabled all automatic updates.
Sony's "smart" TVs all come with Android TV (now called Google TV). Their top of the line OLED TV Sony Z9J starts at $8,000 in 75" and costs $10,000 in 85".
Sony's "smart" TVs all come with Android TV (now called Google TV). Their top of the line OLED TV Sony Z9J starts at $8,000 in 75" and costs $10,000 in 85".
LG TV don't run Android TV. They run WebOS. So they probably have not been getting those ads.
You mean, they should put in their own adds as well ? ;-)
(I mean, their reputation in some circless is AFAIK quite bad - 500+ MB drivers requiring registration on windows, lack of cooperation on Linux drivers, nerfing of some of their GPUs for shady reasons, attempts to buy ARM, etc.)
(I mean, their reputation in some circless is AFAIK quite bad - 500+ MB drivers requiring registration on windows, lack of cooperation on Linux drivers, nerfing of some of their GPUs for shady reasons, attempts to buy ARM, etc.)
Do you know of any Android TV / smart tv box which has a USB port?
I am currently building a magic mirror like smart map. Basically, the goal is to have a big touchscreen with Google maps or Google earth running.
For touch screen support I bought a cheap USB infrared frame. I have tested it with the USB C port of my Android phone and it works well, but I have sadly not found any Android TV box which has an USB port.
I am currently building a magic mirror like smart map. Basically, the goal is to have a big touchscreen with Google maps or Google earth running.
For touch screen support I bought a cheap USB infrared frame. I have tested it with the USB C port of my Android phone and it works well, but I have sadly not found any Android TV box which has an USB port.
I used to put Xibo on crappy boxes like this one here for work. They never had the same internals, even if I used the same supplier. They usually thought they were a phone when you dug into their software.
https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/marketplace/electronics-photogra...
https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/marketplace/electronics-photogra...
I believe many that use usb for power, like Google's, are real ports that can be split with a hub.
That's correct. The Chromecast w/ Google TV works with the same USB-C hub I use with my MacBook Pro and Nintendo Switch.
Oh wow, that is news to me. That would be what I'm looking for! Thanks
The very first one, ADT-1, does have a USB port. I have one, but it's a prototype kind of thing and Google never really sold these to the general public. I got mine at Google I/O. That said, you could probably find them on ebay.
> Do you know of any Android TV / smart tv box which has a USB port?
Build your own with a Raspberry Pi. The new ones pack quite some heat in terms of performance.
Build your own with a Raspberry Pi. The new ones pack quite some heat in terms of performance.
Unfortunately I don't think Android is officially available for the Raspberry Pi.. But what I did to test my frame was installing Android x86 on a NUC. The reason why I want Android is because the Google Maps and Google Earth apps there already provide the touch experience I want.
I think the new nvidia stick has a USB port if you disassemble it a tiny bit.
Check out the formuler boxes, the gtv is android certified
Anyone try LineageOS on a Shield? I'm guessing everything is missing. I'm not sure if that's bad, but I'd missing being able to Chromecast to it.
I was really disappointed to find the same problems with tvOS having moved from a pair of Shields.
The ads hadn’t rolled out yet on Shield when I moved over but for some reason I just assumed Apple wouldn’t be shilling ads at me constantly for services I don’t have, or trying to sell me content I already have access to.
More fool me. Fire TV is worse, but I’ve heard Roku is much the same.
The Smart TV ecosystem is rot all over.
The ads hadn’t rolled out yet on Shield when I moved over but for some reason I just assumed Apple wouldn’t be shilling ads at me constantly for services I don’t have, or trying to sell me content I already have access to.
More fool me. Fire TV is worse, but I’ve heard Roku is much the same.
The Smart TV ecosystem is rot all over.
Can you be more specific? I have multiple Apple TV STBs and don't see what you're describing.
They’re probably talking about the Apple TV App on tvOS, which searches services you don’t necessarily have. You can get rid of it though, so I don’t know what the big deal is.
You can get rid of it - for now. That's what the whole thread is about: there weren't ads until there were.
Years ago, the App Store also used to not show ads.
Years ago, the App Store also used to not show ads.
Exactly - it’s identical to the problem in this thread.
Google TV launcher == Apple TV app on tvOS
You can remove the Google TV launcher but with it huge amounts of device functionality (including search). Same as for the TV app.
Literally zero difference other than the customary Apple free pass they always get.
Google TV launcher == Apple TV app on tvOS
You can remove the Google TV launcher but with it huge amounts of device functionality (including search). Same as for the TV app.
Literally zero difference other than the customary Apple free pass they always get.
On Roku, not sure of the others, standard router-level adblock worked.
I am hopeful that now that the FTC has a pro-consumer Chair that some of these anti-consumer acts will be curtailed.
I would also argue that some of these bad acts could be considered to be false / deceptive trade practices under the various state laws (in the U.S. at least). For example, some people would never have bought a FireTV cube for streaming video if Amazon had revealed that they would be adding advertisements to the consumer's video-viewing experience.
But: how much incentive is there for individuals to file a small claims suit against Amazon for a $79 device? Generally speaking you might get treble damages but not much more unless you've had actual damages.
And although class action suits are frustrating and should be "fixed" so that those harmed get the bulk of the proceeds (i.e. it's not okay that consumers receive discount coupons or $10 checks while plaintiff's counsel receives a disproportionally huge payday) this is one thing we've lost by generally not allowing class actions.
David v. Goliath is not as effective as 15,000 Davids v. Goliath.
Not to even mention the mandatory arbitration imposed on consumers (which do sometimes carve out the ability to file in small claims court).
We have cultivated, or at least allowed, a very anti-consumer bias to take hold in U.S. law.
I would also argue that some of these bad acts could be considered to be false / deceptive trade practices under the various state laws (in the U.S. at least). For example, some people would never have bought a FireTV cube for streaming video if Amazon had revealed that they would be adding advertisements to the consumer's video-viewing experience.
But: how much incentive is there for individuals to file a small claims suit against Amazon for a $79 device? Generally speaking you might get treble damages but not much more unless you've had actual damages.
And although class action suits are frustrating and should be "fixed" so that those harmed get the bulk of the proceeds (i.e. it's not okay that consumers receive discount coupons or $10 checks while plaintiff's counsel receives a disproportionally huge payday) this is one thing we've lost by generally not allowing class actions.
David v. Goliath is not as effective as 15,000 Davids v. Goliath.
Not to even mention the mandatory arbitration imposed on consumers (which do sometimes carve out the ability to file in small claims court).
We have cultivated, or at least allowed, a very anti-consumer bias to take hold in U.S. law.
The worst part is that google is abusing its power to limit people choices. They are enforcing terms on their phone partners that if they want Android (their only choice), they have to not use Fire OS or other Android forks on any device they make. You can read more here - https://www.protocol.com/google-android-amazon-fire-tv
The fact that they use the monopoly power on the phone to force Manufacturers to use Android TV is insane to me. The fact that they then quickly made the experience extremely anti consumer is a playbook monopoly play.
The fact that they use the monopoly power on the phone to force Manufacturers to use Android TV is insane to me. The fact that they then quickly made the experience extremely anti consumer is a playbook monopoly play.
> mandatory arbitration
Actually, mandatory arbitration can massively backfire, and the ad change seems like a compelling case.
Example: https://www.vox.com/2020/2/12/21133486/doordash-workers-10-m...
Actually, mandatory arbitration can massively backfire, and the ad change seems like a compelling case.
Example: https://www.vox.com/2020/2/12/21133486/doordash-workers-10-m...
Yes -- thanks for pointing this out.
Unfortunately I have seen recently some arbitration clauses now include language saying, for example, that arbitration costs will be shared equally(!) or otherwise limiting their use by consumers.
However, the more that these mandatory arbitration clauses limit consumer rights the more likely that they will be found to be unenforceable. This is one reason that you'll often find that contracts with mandatory arbitration will have a clause specifying that in the event the arbitration clause is unenforceable that the rest of the agreement still stands.
The MegaCorps add this clause because they know that they are pushing the boundaries of what will be allowed by the courts.
Historically arbitration was intended to be a solution for parties of comparable bargaining power (e.g. MegaCorpABC vs MegaCorpXYZ) but instead are increasingly used by MegaCorp vs LittleConsumer.
Does anybody in the U.S. have a credit card that doesn't impose mandatory arbitration? Not that I've seen.
This is a topic that deserves much more news coverage. Most consumers have no clue how mandatory arbitration is being used against them.
And that's before we even consider their more egregious use in, for example, employment agreements as was the case in the article you've shared.
Unfortunately I have seen recently some arbitration clauses now include language saying, for example, that arbitration costs will be shared equally(!) or otherwise limiting their use by consumers.
However, the more that these mandatory arbitration clauses limit consumer rights the more likely that they will be found to be unenforceable. This is one reason that you'll often find that contracts with mandatory arbitration will have a clause specifying that in the event the arbitration clause is unenforceable that the rest of the agreement still stands.
The MegaCorps add this clause because they know that they are pushing the boundaries of what will be allowed by the courts.
Historically arbitration was intended to be a solution for parties of comparable bargaining power (e.g. MegaCorpABC vs MegaCorpXYZ) but instead are increasingly used by MegaCorp vs LittleConsumer.
Does anybody in the U.S. have a credit card that doesn't impose mandatory arbitration? Not that I've seen.
This is a topic that deserves much more news coverage. Most consumers have no clue how mandatory arbitration is being used against them.
And that's before we even consider their more egregious use in, for example, employment agreements as was the case in the article you've shared.
I bought a FireStick 4k to connect to my monitor since most services won't steam 4k to the PC. Have been very disappointed that the whole experience seems to be geared around promoting content instead of allowing me to interact with the content I HAVE ALREADY PAID FOR.
> And although class action suits are frustrating and should be "fixed" so that those harmed get the bulk of the proceeds (i.e. it's not okay that consumers receive discount coupons or $10 checks while plaintiff's counsel receives a disproportionally huge payday)
I don't understand why most people have a problem with this. It's the company that sold you the $79 product that cheated you. Be upset with them.
Personally, I don't care if I get $0 out of a class action lawsuit. I've already been cheated out of my money, so my main concern is punishing the company that ripped me off so they don't do it again.
Class action lawyers get a lot of hate, but those firms are fronting a ton of money and taking a ton of (monetary) risk by litigating on behalf of the class. They deserve a big reward when they win.
If you want to change the system, impose MASSIVE penalties on the companies that are cheating consumers. Make them pay 3-5x the going rate for the plaintiff's lawyers PLUS 100% refunds to all the customers that got ripped off.
Then the shenanigans will stop.
I don't understand why most people have a problem with this. It's the company that sold you the $79 product that cheated you. Be upset with them.
Personally, I don't care if I get $0 out of a class action lawsuit. I've already been cheated out of my money, so my main concern is punishing the company that ripped me off so they don't do it again.
Class action lawyers get a lot of hate, but those firms are fronting a ton of money and taking a ton of (monetary) risk by litigating on behalf of the class. They deserve a big reward when they win.
If you want to change the system, impose MASSIVE penalties on the companies that are cheating consumers. Make them pay 3-5x the going rate for the plaintiff's lawyers PLUS 100% refunds to all the customers that got ripped off.
Then the shenanigans will stop.
there's nothing wrong with ads on stuff like this; televisions aren't sacred ground.
There's nothing wrong with it, if you are told about this up front and it's part of your purchasing calculation.
Retroactively adding ads to an ad-free device after the customer has purchased it, sometimes buying it specifically to avoid competing devices with ads, is inexcusable bullshit.
Retroactively adding ads to an ad-free device after the customer has purchased it, sometimes buying it specifically to avoid competing devices with ads, is inexcusable bullshit.
If you subscribe to cable/satellite television, you expect there to be advertising. I'm not certain, but i suspect the agreement you sign while signing up for cable or streaming services, would include some sort of advertising clause.
Ie, u less a service explicitly promotes am ad-free experience, there should be no expectations of such.
Ie, u less a service explicitly promotes am ad-free experience, there should be no expectations of such.
I guess I can come to your house tomorrow and paint some ads on the walls, or were you promised an ad free experience?
How about their car’s infotainment system? Can we start showing them ads when stopped at a light or were they promised an ad free experience there as well?
[deleted]
This isn't about a service, it's about devices. The Google TV launcher is the de-facto UI for Android TV devices (like my Nexus Player, which is...7 YEARS OLD and now gets ads) and Google/Android TV-powered TVs, which are made by a bunch of different manufacturers. While my Nexus Player is rooted and I could theoretically install a different launcher, many of these TVs can't be modified. So if you purchased a TV thinking that it's smart capabilities were like a dumb OS UI into services like Netflix or Hulu (which may or may not have ads in their service agreement, as you point out), now they're getting pushed Amazon Fire-esque ads that prioritize spending money with Google from the UI over the services that you want to use.
There is a huge problem with selling something and then making it worse after people buy it.
Super wrong. Google sold one product then removed functionality after sale. That's very illegal.
A good parallel is the recent Peloton Treadmill update (as a result of the CPSC suit). You used to be able to use the treadmill without video content, it worked as a treadmill; you only had to pay for a subscription if you wanted Peloton content on the screen. This seems fairly obvious to anyone buying the device, and makes sense. I buy a treadmill, I can use the treadmill forever, but if i want content, I pay a monthly fee.
When they push a software update that makes the treadmill unusable without the subscription, now you're tied to not only paying for the service (at whatever price they decide that week), but you're also tied to the company itself continuing to exist and OFFER content.
A bunch of lawsuits have been filed, I'm sure it'll be reverted to 'the way it was' soon. (I honestly believe it was a largely clumsy move in trying to quickly tie a PIN code to the software to keep kids/unauthorized users from turning it on).
But it's a parallel here. My Google TV device might show ads on the TV network, but you pay for the device to not get ads on the home screen like the awful Fire Stick I have. (every time you hit 'play' to try to unpause a program, you are actually hitting 'play' on the terrible ad they gave you).
When they push a software update that makes the treadmill unusable without the subscription, now you're tied to not only paying for the service (at whatever price they decide that week), but you're also tied to the company itself continuing to exist and OFFER content.
A bunch of lawsuits have been filed, I'm sure it'll be reverted to 'the way it was' soon. (I honestly believe it was a largely clumsy move in trying to quickly tie a PIN code to the software to keep kids/unauthorized users from turning it on).
But it's a parallel here. My Google TV device might show ads on the TV network, but you pay for the device to not get ads on the home screen like the awful Fire Stick I have. (every time you hit 'play' to try to unpause a program, you are actually hitting 'play' on the terrible ad they gave you).
A lot of "innovation" in consumer tech is really just turning previously-standalone devices into subscription platforms and/or billboards. I'm sure the engineers who build these are proud of their contributions to society.
This is a bad take on Peloton. Peloton made it subscription only because the default user experience had bad design in that treadmills can be pin locked only if the customer is subscribed. In order to compensate for the bad design peloton has offered 3 months of subscription for free and has promised to add the pin lock feature to non subscribers soon.
Not that I agree with anything Peloton has done in this situation, but you make it sound much worse than it already is.
Not that I agree with anything Peloton has done in this situation, but you make it sound much worse than it already is.
How is it a bad take on Peloton? If anything, your comment is more critical ("default user experience had bad design"). It seems clear to me that they'll end up replacing it with a pin lock that works even without a subscription, but it was probably easier to quickly implement in existing code that required a subscription. And, now that I re-read your comment, you say the same thing -- "has promised to add the pin lock feature to non subscribers soon".
I don't see how a single word of my comment makes it sound much worse than it is. I pointed out what they did as a result of CPSC, and indicated that they'll likely reverse course, which you confirmed.
I'm not super well-versed in how it works at the moment. I've got a Tread, but can't use it due to knee surgery, so I've been watching the CPSC uproar / PIN requirement from afar, and generally think it's pretty silly.
I don't see how a single word of my comment makes it sound much worse than it is. I pointed out what they did as a result of CPSC, and indicated that they'll likely reverse course, which you confirmed.
I'm not super well-versed in how it works at the moment. I've got a Tread, but can't use it due to knee surgery, so I've been watching the CPSC uproar / PIN requirement from afar, and generally think it's pretty silly.
If I know about it, then yes. Like Amazon putting ads on their Kindle lock screens unless you pay an extra $20.
I bought my Shield as a premium device, not expecting the launcher to change substantially - much less to put ads on the screen.
I bought my Shield as a premium device, not expecting the launcher to change substantially - much less to put ads on the screen.
Nothing wrong. But I and many others have migrated away from google products because of actions like this.
The constant bombardment of expectations that you'll spend more money is normalized, but it is not ok.
Of course it is not. We shall have ads, microfones and cameras everywhere.
I hate to be that guy, but this is exactly why I happily paid for an Apple TV. Yes, it’s $100 more than basic streaming sticks, but I have never had to worry about ads suddenly appearing after an update. This whole space is a race to the bottom with sticks being sold at or below cost because you are the product. For example, Vizio revealing in their first quarterly report as a public company that they get nearly as much revenue from selling ads and viewer usage data than from selling physical televisions.
https://www.engadget.com/vizio-q1-earnings-inscape-013937337...
A smooth, clean ad-free experience is certainly worth the extra price if you can afford it.
https://www.engadget.com/vizio-q1-earnings-inscape-013937337...
A smooth, clean ad-free experience is certainly worth the extra price if you can afford it.
>> but I have never had to worry about ads suddenly appearing after an update
The problem is that Android TV users used to think the exact same thing. It's even said in the reviews explicitly by some people. I don't and I won't trust a corporation, be it Apple or Google, to not do something in a future update - if it works fine right now then unfortunately that has to be good enough.
The problem is that Android TV users used to think the exact same thing. It's even said in the reviews explicitly by some people. I don't and I won't trust a corporation, be it Apple or Google, to not do something in a future update - if it works fine right now then unfortunately that has to be good enough.
Not all companies are equal.
Some make money by selling things so they have an incentive to keep happy customers. Some companies don’t.
Some make money by selling things so they have an incentive to keep happy customers. Some companies don’t.
Of course. But companies change all the time - today Apple is very privacy focused and we can reasonably say they wouldn't do such a thing. Can you absolutely guarantee that they won't in 2 years? In 5? in 10? What if the CEO changes and they think that ad-derived value is the best thing ever?
Like, this isn't meant to be a post against Apple btw. Just that I don't see a point in saying "company X did a bad thing, that's why I buy company Y, they would never do this!" - they don't right now, that's what counts. But for the future? Who knows.
Like, this isn't meant to be a post against Apple btw. Just that I don't see a point in saying "company X did a bad thing, that's why I buy company Y, they would never do this!" - they don't right now, that's what counts. But for the future? Who knows.
We have to make reasonable assumptions when making purchasing decisions. Just because something could happen does not make it a likely thing to happen and assuming that any company is equally likely to start serving advertisements on their devices is unreasonable and foolish.
While people may not have had the foresight to know that Google would be adding advertisements to their tv box, the behavior itself isn't unexpected given that Google is an advertising company. For Apple the behavior is both unexpected and disincentivized by the brand they've built for themselves.
I could die tomorrow but living my life under that impression would be foolish.
While people may not have had the foresight to know that Google would be adding advertisements to their tv box, the behavior itself isn't unexpected given that Google is an advertising company. For Apple the behavior is both unexpected and disincentivized by the brand they've built for themselves.
I could die tomorrow but living my life under that impression would be foolish.
Apple subjects its users to entirely different type of abuse: purposeful incompatibility and vendor lock-in on every imaginable level from cable connectors to keyboard layouts. You always have to go all in to their ecosystem and pay a 50% premium on everything just for the Apple logo.
I guess it's a choice of if you want to bend over at the checkout or at home when you have started using the product.
I guess it's a choice of if you want to bend over at the checkout or at home when you have started using the product.
> Apple subjects its users to entirely different type of abuse: purposeful incompatibility and vendor lock-in on every imaginable level from cable connectors to keyboard layouts.
By cable connectors I'm assuming you are mostly referring to the lightning connector, which came before USB-C was an option. I actually still think it's a better connector than USB-C, but the advantages of adopting USB-C at this point heavily outweigh the merits of keeping it. Still, Apple doesn't shy away from adopting new standards that it thinks it's better. They famously ditched their own serial connector (ADB) for USB in the iMac.
I have no clue what you meany by keyboard layout or how Apple in any way locks someone into a specific keyboard layout.
> You always have to go all in to their ecosystem
Why do you have to go all in on their ecosystem again? There are plenty of people with airpods or an iPad without any other Apple device and are perfectly happy with just that. Apple puts a lot of effort into creating an attractive ecosystem because their business is in selling hardware.
> pay a 50% premium on everything just for the Apple logo.
... And for the software, the ecosystem, the hardware, and a lot of other factors. I find it extremely weird that you say this in the same sentence that you mention the ecosystem. Beyond that, it's not even true? What devices cost 50% more when compared against comparable options from other manufacturers?
> I guess it's a choice of if you want to bend over at the checkout or at home when you have started using the product.
You're making of choice of paying for higher quality hardware that isn't subsidized or lower quality hardware that is. The biggest slap in the face here is for people that bought premium Android TV devices like the Nvidia Shield and still have to put up with this bullshit from Google.
By cable connectors I'm assuming you are mostly referring to the lightning connector, which came before USB-C was an option. I actually still think it's a better connector than USB-C, but the advantages of adopting USB-C at this point heavily outweigh the merits of keeping it. Still, Apple doesn't shy away from adopting new standards that it thinks it's better. They famously ditched their own serial connector (ADB) for USB in the iMac.
I have no clue what you meany by keyboard layout or how Apple in any way locks someone into a specific keyboard layout.
> You always have to go all in to their ecosystem
Why do you have to go all in on their ecosystem again? There are plenty of people with airpods or an iPad without any other Apple device and are perfectly happy with just that. Apple puts a lot of effort into creating an attractive ecosystem because their business is in selling hardware.
> pay a 50% premium on everything just for the Apple logo.
... And for the software, the ecosystem, the hardware, and a lot of other factors. I find it extremely weird that you say this in the same sentence that you mention the ecosystem. Beyond that, it's not even true? What devices cost 50% more when compared against comparable options from other manufacturers?
> I guess it's a choice of if you want to bend over at the checkout or at home when you have started using the product.
You're making of choice of paying for higher quality hardware that isn't subsidized or lower quality hardware that is. The biggest slap in the face here is for people that bought premium Android TV devices like the Nvidia Shield and still have to put up with this bullshit from Google.
The future is uncertain, that is life. But while a company is privacy focussed, reward that behaviour so they (or their new competitors for when they stop supporting privacy it) know people vote with wallets.
Of course I can’t guarantee it, no one can.
But it’s more likely if a company’s business model doesn’t involve ads vs does.
Past performance doesn’t guarantee future performance, but it’s the best we got.
But it’s more likely if a company’s business model doesn’t involve ads vs does.
Past performance doesn’t guarantee future performance, but it’s the best we got.
To paraphrase: "Some people commit crimes, there is nothing stopping other people committing crimes in the future; therefore everyone is a criminal."
U2.
I recently bought my first Apple TV after dumping our Virgin Media cable box. I still have an ancient 1080p LG smart TV that that the smart features are effectively unusable on. I’ll never buy a smart TV again if I can help it.
I’ve always used my PS4 for streaming services but the bloody thing was so loud. I’ve replaced the PS4 with a PS5 but it doesn’t have the national broadcaster’s crappy app and we wanted to keep access to these channels.
I’ve been pleasantly surprised by the Apple TV. It surfaces shows across my streaming apps without pushing TV+ in your face. It integrates beautifully with the Apple ecosystem, I can ask Siri on any device to play $show on Disney+ in the living room and it just works.
I’ve heard how bad the old remote was but the new one is really nice. I’ve paired my dualshock 4 controller to it for Apple Arcade and it works great.
The Apple TV is a device that doesn’t get much attention but I think it’s really impressive.
I’ve always used my PS4 for streaming services but the bloody thing was so loud. I’ve replaced the PS4 with a PS5 but it doesn’t have the national broadcaster’s crappy app and we wanted to keep access to these channels.
I’ve been pleasantly surprised by the Apple TV. It surfaces shows across my streaming apps without pushing TV+ in your face. It integrates beautifully with the Apple ecosystem, I can ask Siri on any device to play $show on Disney+ in the living room and it just works.
I’ve heard how bad the old remote was but the new one is really nice. I’ve paired my dualshock 4 controller to it for Apple Arcade and it works great.
The Apple TV is a device that doesn’t get much attention but I think it’s really impressive.
Yeah, Apple products have a reputation as “luxury” products, but the value is solid. For instance, with few exceptions, their phones receive updates for at least 6 years after release. Cheap android phones will be lucky to see 2 and even Samsung only does like 4 (and that’s recent… before it was 3). The iPhone 4S was updated for 93 months, almost 8 years.
I generally prefer more open ecosystems, but Apple has built a pretty strong reputation for not just being an ad company and for making solid products that are supported much longer than competitor devices.
I generally prefer more open ecosystems, but Apple has built a pretty strong reputation for not just being an ad company and for making solid products that are supported much longer than competitor devices.
Also all manufacturers which are not tracking Google's updates in a monthly interval are essentially worthless from a security perspective. Nobody needs to care about the latest Android version, which is only bringing marginal improvements amyway.
A correction - the article says Visio makes almost as much profits on ads and data ($38M) as hardware ($48M). In my view, the surprising thing here is how little money the hardware business makes. TVs are a low-margin product, so the revenues there are certainly higher. Visio sold 7 million TVs last year, and TVs last some years, so I’d estimate they have an install base of tens of millions and are making about $1 per TV per year in ads and data, which is obviously less than a TV costs. My takeaway is that this is a terrible business to be in, given that a leading brand is making so little per TV.
You can't really compare headline profits without seeing the full breakdown of revenue and expenses that led to those results.
For example Visio's hardware side could be reinvesting vast sums of revenue back into TV R&D. Or they could have invested in upstream component manufacturers. Maybe they spent a large amount on recruiting new staff. All those expenses are deducted before profit.
Meanwhile the ad division might have made no investments for the future and took the tax-inefficient choice to show a large profit instead.
For example Visio's hardware side could be reinvesting vast sums of revenue back into TV R&D. Or they could have invested in upstream component manufacturers. Maybe they spent a large amount on recruiting new staff. All those expenses are deducted before profit.
Meanwhile the ad division might have made no investments for the future and took the tax-inefficient choice to show a large profit instead.
Yeah sadly the Nvidia Shield is in the same ballpark when it comes down to the price. I have both an Apple TV 4K and an Nvidia Shield. I bought the shield when Apple had no 4K device as an alternative to get 4K HDR on Netflix. But I decided to shell out money again for an AppleTV 4K because they offered better support for HDR in movies and the general support to adopt features like Dolby Athmos is way faster on Apple. With Nvidia one had to be lucky to be in a partnership group as they were with the HDR adoption on Netflix. My PS4 was not able to play the content in HDR at the time since the Netflix app needed and update. It took nearly 6 more month.
I didn’t update the shield in quite some time as most new features are of no interest to me. And from the looks of it that won’t happen anytime soon. It’s worse enough that google did the same with the YouTube app …
I didn’t update the shield in quite some time as most new features are of no interest to me. And from the looks of it that won’t happen anytime soon. It’s worse enough that google did the same with the YouTube app …
I just realized that android tv and Nvidia shield experience are two different things. So it did and auto update. Bloody …
I hate to be that guy (no I don't) but this is why I just plugged one of the spare outputs on my PC into the TV with a 20ft HDMI extension cable and use a bluetooth keyboard/mouse to open movies from the living room.
That’s really a solo person solution. Anyone with a family in the house will need better, and anyone with family elsewhere can’t exactly recommend such a kludge without opening up a ton of support issues.
In that case just get a cheap computer (that's all these set top boxes are anyway) to keep in the living room.
Can you sideload? Is there NewPipe? Pass. No ads but no choice. It solves one issue but creates another.
Yeah i agree, s-tube and newpipe are really great and you’d never get that on an apple tv.
Would’ve gone for an apple tv otherwise
Would’ve gone for an apple tv otherwise
Same. If Apple opened up their devices I'd switch everything over in a heartbeat.
I totally agree. I can't imagine paying the price of a premium laptop for a phone without newpipe.
Indeed. It's hard to sympathize with people upset about ads when they bought a platform made by an ad company. The outcome was obvious here.
This is pretty unsympathetic, and tacitly assumes that everyone has an understanding of the tech ecosystem.
The majority of people on the planet have phones running an OS made by the same ad company, and they'd be rightfully pissed if their home screens were suddenly was dominated by ads.
I bought a Sony TV, not a Google one. I would have expected Sony to disallow this somehow.
As far as I understand Googles Play Store comes with a viral license that forces preferential treatment for Google services on all Android devices made by a manufacturer unless they are sold in a country where that kind of anti competitive behavior is not tolerated. Basically Sonys choice is let Google rape its customers or kill all its Android based products over night.
I didn't realize nVidia was an ad company. Their business model sure has changed.
Apple products are luxury items for the vast majority of people in the world.
You know what else can give you a smooth, ad-free experience and freedom? Any cheap mini-pc with Kodi installed.
Yeah, but can it do that out-of-the-box with zero effort for the rest of my family? Sadly, no.
Futzing with Kodi updates, patches, updates to the OS, drivers, etc is all way too much to be considered ’smooth’ for most.
Futzing with Kodi updates, patches, updates to the OS, drivers, etc is all way too much to be considered ’smooth’ for most.
We've got a RPi running https://osmc.tv/ (based around Kodi) - other than pressing yes to install updates every so often it hasn't needed touching. There might even be an auto update at 1am type option.
It only gets used for local media + radio, twitch and youtube streams though - I don't know about other services.
It only gets used for local media + radio, twitch and youtube streams though - I don't know about other services.
Oh, yes, the old America's motto: "Give me convenience or give me death!"
Joking aside, there is not much futzing around to do if you just go with LibreElec, and you can even buy pre-installed boxes nowadays.
Joking aside, there is not much futzing around to do if you just go with LibreElec, and you can even buy pre-installed boxes nowadays.
Does it support Full HD (at least) streaming from Netfilx and / or Prime?
My setup is like GP's, ie I play the videos on the computer, but what bothers me personally is that I have to boot windows to get the high quality streaming.
I've looked specifically at Kodi maybe a year ago and it didn't seem to support this. I'm OK with tinkering if I know it's actually possible to get this working.
My setup is like GP's, ie I play the videos on the computer, but what bothers me personally is that I have to boot windows to get the high quality streaming.
I've looked specifically at Kodi maybe a year ago and it didn't seem to support this. I'm OK with tinkering if I know it's actually possible to get this working.
The only service I subscribe to is njalla VPN, which I can then use to download any movie or TV show I want, in whatever quality I want and I get to keep it for as long as I want... can't get any smoother than that.
I'm not that big of a movie / tv show fan, I mostly watch while eating or when winding down for the day, so I rarely look for something specific. I'm very happy with Prime Video's offer, which is basically free for me, since I had already subscribed to Amazon Prime for regular shopping.
For my use, this is much less friction than any searching and waiting around for torrents or whatever to download.
There's also the discoverability factor. Not following current movies / shows, I don't necessarily know what shows exist. So browsing through random lists and then checking if they're available to download from enough people that it won't take a week is way too much work when all I want is to mindlessly watch something right now.
For my use, this is much less friction than any searching and waiting around for torrents or whatever to download.
There's also the discoverability factor. Not following current movies / shows, I don't necessarily know what shows exist. So browsing through random lists and then checking if they're available to download from enough people that it won't take a week is way too much work when all I want is to mindlessly watch something right now.
Kodi has add-ons (e.g Quasar or Elementum) that provide this ability to browse popular/new movie shows and lets you download a torrent and watch it as a stream. Your waiting time depends only on how many seeders are available, which means that popular files are basically instant.
Apple TV is ad free so long as you don’t count the un-dismissable 1p promos for Apple TV+ trials and Apple Arcade trials.
The Nvidia Shield Pro is more expensive than the Apple TV...
Unfortunately Apple TV remotes are a nightmare to use. The touch UX is an absolute pain.
On the Apple TV 2021 4K's remote you can disable the touch and just use the buttons, like I have done. Works a treat.
Use your phone as the remote. I agree the ones they ship are dreadful.
The new one is great - your complaint is an old one.
Yep. But can we expect everyone to spend $$$ to upgrade their Apple TV boxes for this or can we be allowed to complain a little when we bought the old device for Christmas last year?
PS: I don't actually complain :-) I'm a recent convert and compared to Chromecast I find Apple TV a massive upgrade.
PS: I don't actually complain :-) I'm a recent convert and compared to Chromecast I find Apple TV a massive upgrade.
Just use the TV remote and hdmi cec.
The 2nd generation Siri remote adds click support back in again.
I think this would be a great time for Apple to release an actual TV. I know of no major TV brand that doesn't employ some kind of tracking or advertisement. Even LG has devolved into that pit.
I love my Apple TV but the Shield is my go to player simply for the audio passthrough of audio formats such as TrueHD and DTS-HD which last time I checked are not supported by the Apple TV!
Yea I have Apple everything except for this one Shield Pro because the audio quality (esp Atmos) is clearly better than AppleTV. Even my wife who really doesn’t care about audio notices.
Apple TV shows Apple TV+ ads on the homescreen. The big difference is that Android TV lets you replace the launcher entirely, while Apple TV leaves you to Apple's whims.
The one thing I like about Google's now many-years obsolete "do no evil" slogan is that it shows how it is impossible for companies to not eventually become "evil" once that's their only open easy revenue stream.
Without debating what "evil" really means in this context, in the early days of a company there are plenty of ways to grow without being actively user hostile. Once those avenues are thoroughly maxed out, any company that is basically only measured by growth (i.e. every public company) will have to slide more and more into things that only boost revenue to the detriment of users.
I mean, this change is so blatantly abusive and user hostile, and something that never would have been greenlit in, say, the 00s, just shows how far Google has decayed.
Without debating what "evil" really means in this context, in the early days of a company there are plenty of ways to grow without being actively user hostile. Once those avenues are thoroughly maxed out, any company that is basically only measured by growth (i.e. every public company) will have to slide more and more into things that only boost revenue to the detriment of users.
I mean, this change is so blatantly abusive and user hostile, and something that never would have been greenlit in, say, the 00s, just shows how far Google has decayed.
This assumes being evil is free. Google, Facebook etc are trading long term value for short term gains.
DuckDuckGo users are funding ddg’s growth and R&D which makes it a better product over time. Google essentially converted some minimal short term gains into an existential threat. Assuming they become widely known as the worse search engine it’s extremely difficult to regain users.
Facebook bought out several competitors, but Facebook.com for example has serious issues with younger demographics. At this point any platform they don’t buy risks killing the company.
DuckDuckGo users are funding ddg’s growth and R&D which makes it a better product over time. Google essentially converted some minimal short term gains into an existential threat. Assuming they become widely known as the worse search engine it’s extremely difficult to regain users.
Facebook bought out several competitors, but Facebook.com for example has serious issues with younger demographics. At this point any platform they don’t buy risks killing the company.
> Once those avenues are thoroughly maxed out, any company that is basically only measured by growth […] will have to slide more and more into things that only boost revenue to the detriment of users.
In this case, the law or regulation is supposed to step in. The problem is that the law pretty much stopped advancing when it comes to the digital world, at least when it benefits the consumer.
In this case, the law or regulation is supposed to step in. The problem is that the law pretty much stopped advancing when it comes to the digital world, at least when it benefits the consumer.
The law is advancing at it's usual pace. Some highlights include the Magna Carta in 1215, the Constitution in 1787, the Emancipation in 1863, the 19th Amendment in 1920, the Civil Rights Act of 1964...if anything, progress is happening more quickly now than ever.
It's just that culture/society/law change far slower than technology. Most US Senators are over 65, with associated world-views and educations more than half a century old. A quarter century ago, neither smart TVs, targeted ads, nor Google itself existed.
Children today are warned about Internet tracking tools, privacy management, they're aware of the creepy omnipresent big brother nature of tech, perhaps in 2080 Congress will be ready to address these issues.
It's just that culture/society/law change far slower than technology. Most US Senators are over 65, with associated world-views and educations more than half a century old. A quarter century ago, neither smart TVs, targeted ads, nor Google itself existed.
Children today are warned about Internet tracking tools, privacy management, they're aware of the creepy omnipresent big brother nature of tech, perhaps in 2080 Congress will be ready to address these issues.
> it is impossible for companies to not eventually become "evil" once that's their only open easy revenue stream.
Google doesn’t lack revenue streams, it just wants to maximise all of them ans make new ones. It’s the constant desire for growth and the mantra that ‘standing still is going baxkwards’ that I find repulsive.
Google doesn’t lack revenue streams, it just wants to maximise all of them ans make new ones. It’s the constant desire for growth and the mantra that ‘standing still is going baxkwards’ that I find repulsive.
Another one of Google’s tenets that have been forgotten is focus on the user. First it meant just focus on the user, then it became well we are focusing on the user when we do deceptive ads because then they get other services for free, then it was completely forgotten.
I think there was a time when Apple was screwing up for a while and just making things shittier with new releases that Android actually was better. That time is now gone.
Edit: the iPhone keyboard really hates swearing though.
I think there was a time when Apple was screwing up for a while and just making things shittier with new releases that Android actually was better. That time is now gone.
Edit: the iPhone keyboard really hates swearing though.
> Edit: the iPhone keyboard really hates swearing though.
Lack of 3rd party keyboards was one of the things that kept me from using iPhones for a long time but these days I wonder why do anyone keep the original one?
Lack of 3rd party keyboards was one of the things that kept me from using iPhones for a long time but these days I wonder why do anyone keep the original one?
I was stupid,just switched and the new one is a lot better. How come the stock keyboard is so much worse?
Thanks for the tip! Which one do you use BTW?
Thanks for the tip! Which one do you use BTW?
If history has taught us anything: this will blow over in a few weeks or months and everyone will get used to it in the end. The small percentage of users who (sometimes only temporarily) stop using the service is offset by the new income and the majority of users do not care.
If history taught us anything it’s that people will move to less friction platform. I was long time Google, but over the last few years I’ve almost migrated completely to Apple. I know a lot of developers in my field (video games) that have done the same. Google is using its size and reach to fill my products with ads. I’m not an ad id and I want to be treated as such. Also, why is android such a bad development platform? Android is the worst part of mobile development and I’m glad I left it for good.
I remember when moving to Linux in 2010 (then Mac) being surprised that:
- There were practically no ads, and especially no ads with easy traps such as “You have a virus, install this to remove it”.
- There were no OEM drivers, and thus no Askbar, the 404 pages were really 404s, and the Search on Google bar really went to Google.com. That was new for me, coming from Windows.
- If there were ads, on Mac, they were for higher-class products, not fast food.
People joke about the 20% to 100% higher cost of Apple products, but being away from the grandma/noobs ecosystem has no price. Corollary: Grandmas and noobs endure an obnoxious OS experience, because advertisers know that a lot of them will click on traps like “Error 404. Enter your credit card to view content” (or, today, “Want in on the Bitcoin experience?”).
- There were practically no ads, and especially no ads with easy traps such as “You have a virus, install this to remove it”.
- There were no OEM drivers, and thus no Askbar, the 404 pages were really 404s, and the Search on Google bar really went to Google.com. That was new for me, coming from Windows.
- If there were ads, on Mac, they were for higher-class products, not fast food.
People joke about the 20% to 100% higher cost of Apple products, but being away from the grandma/noobs ecosystem has no price. Corollary: Grandmas and noobs endure an obnoxious OS experience, because advertisers know that a lot of them will click on traps like “Error 404. Enter your credit card to view content” (or, today, “Want in on the Bitcoin experience?”).
Same here, although my reasons were a bit more mixed.
My wife and I went from flagship Android phones (latest and greatest Samsung or Sonys) to mid-range iPhones (XR) over the last few years and it feels like a massive improvement.
I'm not going back anytime soon and next week two more of my kids are getting (refurbished) iPhone 8 to replace their aging Samsung Galaxy S7 and Huawei <something I can't remember>.
My wife and I went from flagship Android phones (latest and greatest Samsung or Sonys) to mid-range iPhones (XR) over the last few years and it feels like a massive improvement.
I'm not going back anytime soon and next week two more of my kids are getting (refurbished) iPhone 8 to replace their aging Samsung Galaxy S7 and Huawei <something I can't remember>.
I'd love to move to Apple, but muscle memory is a real PITA. I just can't seem to overcome that obstacle, no matter how small. I always seem to find my way back to 'good old' Android/Windows. It's almost like an abusive relationship.
tvOS has the same problem I’m afraid.
Which problem? Because there aren't ads on the home screen, or even in the Apple TV app (other than promos for TV shows, but that's like...why you're there).
You’re wrong and they’re ads.
If I’m on the home screen and I want to search across apps (a core feature) I’m routed through the TV app, which will try to make me buy new services or pay fees to watch content I already have access to on Netflix.
It will also mix in banners for shows/movies I don’t have access to without paying additional fees, and doesn’t allow a way to disable this.
This is exactly the problem people are having with the new Google TV app.
Don’t want Google ads? Cool, uninstall the Google TV launcher and remove massive amounts of functionality you already paid for (including universal search) and crack on with a terrible experience.
Don’t want Apple ads? Cool, move the TV app to your junk folder and remove massive amounts of functionality you already paid for (including universal search) and crack on with a terrible experience.
Even Prime video has a free to me button.
The ATV is not a subsidised device, this is shameless gouging and Apple again get a pass on here that other companies are (rightly) dragged for just because they’re Apple.
If I’m on the home screen and I want to search across apps (a core feature) I’m routed through the TV app, which will try to make me buy new services or pay fees to watch content I already have access to on Netflix.
It will also mix in banners for shows/movies I don’t have access to without paying additional fees, and doesn’t allow a way to disable this.
This is exactly the problem people are having with the new Google TV app.
Don’t want Google ads? Cool, uninstall the Google TV launcher and remove massive amounts of functionality you already paid for (including universal search) and crack on with a terrible experience.
Don’t want Apple ads? Cool, move the TV app to your junk folder and remove massive amounts of functionality you already paid for (including universal search) and crack on with a terrible experience.
Even Prime video has a free to me button.
The ATV is not a subsidised device, this is shameless gouging and Apple again get a pass on here that other companies are (rightly) dragged for just because they’re Apple.
You’re wrong and confused on the Apple TV. There were is a home bar on tvOS, apps in this bar directly represent the ads you’ll see. If you highlight tv then you get ads for shows in that app. Likewise, highlighting the App Store shows ads for popular apps and services. You can remove any of these apps from that bar.
False.
Others in this thread have already spoken about getting ads for Peacock, Disney+ and Hulu even though they don’t have the services installed, let alone in the app bar.
Today I tried to continue watching a show I’ve been watching for a month and Apple wanted me to pay money just because it’s on Netflix. No mention whatsoever that it’s on Netflix or even a banner to read “content from other services may not appear in this app”.
Sure I can check Netflix separately, but that means that if I want to use the most popular streaming service in the world on this device reliably then I no longer have a universal search feature.
It’s crazy that the experience is this bad and no-one is willing to point it out.
Others in this thread have already spoken about getting ads for Peacock, Disney+ and Hulu even though they don’t have the services installed, let alone in the app bar.
Today I tried to continue watching a show I’ve been watching for a month and Apple wanted me to pay money just because it’s on Netflix. No mention whatsoever that it’s on Netflix or even a banner to read “content from other services may not appear in this app”.
Sure I can check Netflix separately, but that means that if I want to use the most popular streaming service in the world on this device reliably then I no longer have a universal search feature.
It’s crazy that the experience is this bad and no-one is willing to point it out.
I don’t have this experience and I’ve pointed out you can tailor your experience in tvOS. Ads are pulled from the app highlighted. If you put apps on the home bar that aren’t the tv app, App Store, iTunes, iMovie, etc you won’t get ads. How is that so hard to understand?
Please see posts above and elsewhere in the thread.
Services are advertised regardless of what’s in the App Bar.
Shows are advertised on services that aren’t even installed, even if they’re on Netflix and Netflix is installed.
Movies that are on Netflix are shown as iTunes rentals for additional fees, with no message to the user that they can watch it on Netflix.
I asked if you know of a toggle to switch these of, I’ve been unable to find anything to suggest such an option exists either on my device or via Google.
I like a lot of what they make, but tvOS is just bad in it’s current state.
Services are advertised regardless of what’s in the App Bar.
Shows are advertised on services that aren’t even installed, even if they’re on Netflix and Netflix is installed.
Movies that are on Netflix are shown as iTunes rentals for additional fees, with no message to the user that they can watch it on Netflix.
I asked if you know of a toggle to switch these of, I’ve been unable to find anything to suggest such an option exists either on my device or via Google.
I like a lot of what they make, but tvOS is just bad in it’s current state.
And that’s a feature that makes sense promote tv shows on your tv device. Most/all of the promoted shows are from apps already installed. Like the Disney+ Promo for Raya. I already had Disney+, so it was more of a hey watch this new content you’re already paying for.
I only have Hulu installed, and it's the only paid streaming service I use. I'm getting ads for peakcock and disney+ too.
Is the App Store, iTunes, iMovie, or tv+ highlighted? Because that’s how ads work on Apple tv
This ^^
Why am I getting ads for services I don’t have, and why can’t I switch them off if I want to?
Why am I getting ads for services I don’t have, and why can’t I switch them off if I want to?
With ads that I can easily go into settings to turn off?
That’s the problem people are upset about is this is forced upon you with zero realistic alternatives. Apple puts it into the settings whereas you have to use adb to forcefully swap the launcher. That’s a pretty bog difference c
That’s the problem people are upset about is this is forced upon you with zero realistic alternatives. Apple puts it into the settings whereas you have to use adb to forcefully swap the launcher. That’s a pretty bog difference c
Where can I switch ATV ads off in the settings?
I also assumed it would be there, but unless I’m missing it, the option to disable those ads doesn’t exist.
I also assumed it would be there, but unless I’m missing it, the option to disable those ads doesn’t exist.
I use tvOS everyday and it’s not the same.
Previously, I bought Pixel devices with confidence in Google's stewardship and taste. Now that Google has injected ads into a $200 device I bought a year ago, I can only assume that all Google products will eventually have ads. Why would I ever buy another pixel phone? $699+ for a phone that will some day have ads on its home screen? No thanks.
Nova Launcher has always been good. However, that still leaves Android Settings.
> this will blow over in a few weeks or months and everyone will get used to it in the end.
After seeing screen after screen of one-star reviews, I'm not sure this one will just blow over. People are very, very unhappy with the update.
After seeing screen after screen of one-star reviews, I'm not sure this one will just blow over. People are very, very unhappy with the update.
It's a bit skewed since it's a default system installed app and people generally aren't going to rate it unless they are unhappy but hopefully it doesn't blow over. I agree that there are a lot of people who are unhappy (including myself).
History teaches us that HN readers are generally quite caring of these sort of intrusions into their previous "just right" setups and don't tend to just let it ride.
Yep, 16 new libreelec installs will appear, and thousands of google tvs will be sold in the meantime.
That is kind of a twist on the old "nobody ever got fired for using IBM" idea regarding marketplace saturation: "nobody ever complained about Google"?
I mean.. honestly, if I had to set up some "media device" for a relative, I'd pick google over anything else... usually it just works, it's simple, if something doesn't work, "it's googles fault", if something isn't supported, again, googles fault. ...basically same as with IBM.
At home... libreelec. +importing ipvt playlists... +epg, which gets banned by the telco, and then reappears somewhere else. +subtitle services. +this and that plugin.
At home... libreelec. +importing ipvt playlists... +epg, which gets banned by the telco, and then reappears somewhere else. +subtitle services. +this and that plugin.
[deleted]
Keyword “HN Readers”, not users. I’d be surprised if even 1% of all Android TV users were HN Readers.
> I’d be surprised if even 1% of all Android TV users were HN Readers.
Remove some magnitudes, and then some more.
Remove some magnitudes, and then some more.
That misconstrues my comment: I believe that HN readers (and users) care about topics like this over the long haul and don't tend to just let intrusions like Google's slide by without opprobrium. Thus, to me, the parent comment doesn't wash.
Or, as Google is simply dialing it to 10 now, it will then dial this down to 5 post reactions and people will be okay with this eventually, unfortunately.
When instead it should not have been done at the first place.
When instead it should not have been done at the first place.
As is with everything like the uproar Facebook as had with their changes. They even admit it with "we will not apply these changes for now" becauae they know it will die out.
That's why we need alternatives.
That's why we need alternatives.
They will ratchet, small step at a time. Not sure how the rope snapping will look like...
It's not a service like a subscription. It's the driver for a suite of hardware products that Google intentionally broke after the return window.
I have a Shield TV and I really despise this change. I bought a device that did NOT show ads on the home screen, now it does. How is that not... it just should NOT be allowed.
Show me ads in YouTube, show me ads in whatever other app, but not my home screen. There's a difference. The home screen is MINE, not Google's.
Show me ads in YouTube, show me ads in whatever other app, but not my home screen. There's a difference. The home screen is MINE, not Google's.
Google will chock this up to "staying" competitive. The Fire TV and Samsung Smart TVs have had ads on the menu for a while now. Ads on the home screen takes it further. If this was nipped in the bud, it would not have made it this far.
People are slowly realizing these commissions don't care about consumers, just making it seem they do.
People are slowly realizing these commissions don't care about consumers, just making it seem they do.
> The home screen is MINE, not Google's.
Android is owned by Alphabet (or Google if you prefer) and you decided to buy a device that runs their OS with their services that are not open source. You probably didn't even pay for the OS. What makes you think it is yours?
Android is owned by Alphabet (or Google if you prefer) and you decided to buy a device that runs their OS with their services that are not open source. You probably didn't even pay for the OS. What makes you think it is yours?
TIL I should create my own operating system from scratch if I don't want advertisements on my smart television.
And people wonder why Congress wants to break up FAANG
And people wonder why Congress wants to break up FAANG
> What makes you think it is yours?
That we paid for it in the store?
Nowhere did it say "free OS included" so it is entirely reasonable to think that some of the price was for the included OS and software at the time which has now been substantially degraded.
That we paid for it in the store?
Nowhere did it say "free OS included" so it is entirely reasonable to think that some of the price was for the included OS and software at the time which has now been substantially degraded.
Where does the "ad invasion" end?
Smart toasters that force you to watch ads before getting your toast in the morning?
Smart windows that display ads that block your view of your backyard?
Smart paints that display ads on your bedroom walls?
Smart shower-heads that play jingles as you wash yourself?
Smart brain implants that directly induce subconscious desire to buy certain products and services?
Is there some kind of limit at which we value the right to personal privacy and the right to peace-of-mind over the right to advertise?
Smart toasters that force you to watch ads before getting your toast in the morning?
Smart windows that display ads that block your view of your backyard?
Smart paints that display ads on your bedroom walls?
Smart shower-heads that play jingles as you wash yourself?
Smart brain implants that directly induce subconscious desire to buy certain products and services?
Is there some kind of limit at which we value the right to personal privacy and the right to peace-of-mind over the right to advertise?
- "Smart" alarm clock requires micropayment to use snooze.
And they say:
"Why not? We indicated in the TOS (on page 4) our ability to 'modify the program as needed to better support our customers or our services.'
"Also please note that our TOS, which incorporates our Privacy Policy, allows us to sell your wake-up time to third parties in real-time.
"And before you say you never agreed to our TOS, we say you did when you plugged the SuperSmartestAlarm into a power outlet (as clearly indicated on page 22 of the aforementioned TOS, which can be conveniently viewed in a 6" x 2" frame with vertical and horizontal scrollbars)."
[Since this is too close to the truth to be obvious satire: no, this is not happening AFAIK (right now).]
And they say:
"Why not? We indicated in the TOS (on page 4) our ability to 'modify the program as needed to better support our customers or our services.'
"Also please note that our TOS, which incorporates our Privacy Policy, allows us to sell your wake-up time to third parties in real-time.
"And before you say you never agreed to our TOS, we say you did when you plugged the SuperSmartestAlarm into a power outlet (as clearly indicated on page 22 of the aforementioned TOS, which can be conveniently viewed in a 6" x 2" frame with vertical and horizontal scrollbars)."
[Since this is too close to the truth to be obvious satire: no, this is not happening AFAIK (right now).]
They wouldn't need to bury that in the TOS; they'd make it a feature: "Our innovative pay-to-snooze feature helps you get up earlier by penalizing you for hitting the snooze button"
That's already a feature on some smartphone alarms. However, it requires opt-in and usual payment verification - if I want to spend my money on snooze, and specifically authorize this, there's no problem at all.
A quick search found this article in the marketing press:
https://martechseries.com/mts-insights/guest-authors/why-ref...
It's from 2018, and no progress has been mad on this wonderous world for ad-subsidized fridges that I know of. Still, it's clear people are thinking along these lines.
And I remain adamant that any appliance I own like this must not have wifi or bluetooth functionality. After my TV started showing ads when I switched inputs, I'm done giving these people an inch.
https://martechseries.com/mts-insights/guest-authors/why-ref...
It's from 2018, and no progress has been mad on this wonderous world for ad-subsidized fridges that I know of. Still, it's clear people are thinking along these lines.
And I remain adamant that any appliance I own like this must not have wifi or bluetooth functionality. After my TV started showing ads when I switched inputs, I'm done giving these people an inch.
Maybe not at home, but this was just at HN frontpage: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27636773
Amazon devices give wifi to each others even if they belong to the neighbor. Next posh thing will be Faraday enclosures for fridges.
There has to be a point where so many things are so heavily encumbered with ads that that there isn't actually a product left to sell any more, it's just a material vehicle for delivering more adverts. And things don't work well because all they're designed for is displaying ads. And the ads themselves are just ads for more ads.
And the wealthy will get their peace of mind as they buy out of the system while continuing to preside over and profit from it. It's just going to become another thing that poor people have to live with; subservience to the corporate overlords.
And the wealthy will get their peace of mind as they buy out of the system while continuing to preside over and profit from it. It's just going to become another thing that poor people have to live with; subservience to the corporate overlords.
There was one startup that I met a few years ago that focused on enabling IoT on 'dumb' devices. Their first product some sort of plug for ceiling fans that allowed people to turn on & off / control the ceiling fan with their smartphone. The product also required a $5/month subscription service.
I remember asking the CEO why would someone pay $5/month just to control their fan and he basically responded that the idea seems ludicrous and this point in time, but eventually people will catch on, and then he made an allusion to Microsoft Office and how that it's becoming a subscription product despite initially being one-off purchase 15 years ago.
I remember asking the CEO why would someone pay $5/month just to control their fan and he basically responded that the idea seems ludicrous and this point in time, but eventually people will catch on, and then he made an allusion to Microsoft Office and how that it's becoming a subscription product despite initially being one-off purchase 15 years ago.
I think you're overestimating the degree to which useless subscriptions are sustainable. I just moved and am about to purchase something identical to what you're describing[1], and it's a one-time purchase, as expected.
[1] https://sensibo.com/?device=m&campaignID=12697870451
[1] https://sensibo.com/?device=m&campaignID=12697870451
If it has a cloud dependency, you can be confident that the system it controls will probably outlive the service's free lifetime.
If you're willing to do some technical work, there is fantastic open source tooling in this space. Then you'll have a setup that isn't affected by the business desires or financial problems of others. As a bonus, you get better latency over lan.
https://tasmota.github.io/docs/Tasmota-IR/#sending-irhvac-co...
If you're willing to do some technical work, there is fantastic open source tooling in this space. Then you'll have a setup that isn't affected by the business desires or financial problems of others. As a bonus, you get better latency over lan.
https://tasmota.github.io/docs/Tasmota-IR/#sending-irhvac-co...
Oh agreed, I haven't yet purchased the unit because it's on my todo list to look into options that don't have external deps. Historically, I have a strong preference for removing unnecessary servers in favor of using dynamic DNS with a device on my home network.
My only point was that even this server-based system is already selling without a subscription, and as you point out, the off-ramp to a system with no cloud dependency is pretty clear for those who want to avoid subscriptions (or dependencies in general).
Thanks for the pointer!
My only point was that even this server-based system is already selling without a subscription, and as you point out, the off-ramp to a system with no cloud dependency is pretty clear for those who want to avoid subscriptions (or dependencies in general).
Thanks for the pointer!
Are you sure it will stay a one-time purchase?
Given the post topic, your confidence seems ironic.
In a few years' time, you might start seeing ads in the associated app...
I think you've misunderstood both my comment and the one I was responding to. Neither of us mentioned ads?
I was pointing out that even the parent comment's very example of a slow slide towards universal subscriptions that add no value didn't hold. It was framed as "I have inside knowledge of this nascent product category and its capture by useless subscriptions", while in reality this is already a market category that exists without any such issues.
This bizarre wild-eyed fearmongering about insane, lose-lose, somehow-inescapable business models is HN's version of QAnon.
I was pointing out that even the parent comment's very example of a slow slide towards universal subscriptions that add no value didn't hold. It was framed as "I have inside knowledge of this nascent product category and its capture by useless subscriptions", while in reality this is already a market category that exists without any such issues.
This bizarre wild-eyed fearmongering about insane, lose-lose, somehow-inescapable business models is HN's version of QAnon.
Isn't the answer to just buy a product explicitly marketed as ad-free? I used to watch enough YouTube that it was worth it for me to pay $10/mo to disable ads (and stream music). It never occurred to me that I was owed as a human right limitless free content with no implicit or explicit cost.
Similarly, if ads partially fund a toaster, just....pay more for the toaster without ads? The expansion of ads to every product category doesn't warrant the assumption that it will _consume_ every product category, leaving no ad-free alternatives.
Similarly, if ads partially fund a toaster, just....pay more for the toaster without ads? The expansion of ads to every product category doesn't warrant the assumption that it will _consume_ every product category, leaving no ad-free alternatives.
Except no ad-free service remains ad-free forever. Sooner or later, subscriber growth slows down, and the standard playbook to continue to grow revenue is:
(a) introduce new products that require additional subscriptions (but eventually the company runs out of new products to introduce),
(b) raise subscription fees a tiny little bit every year (but there's a limit to how much any company can do that without angering customers too much), and
(c) break existing ad-free plans into new tiers of service, some or all of which have... ads.
(a) introduce new products that require additional subscriptions (but eventually the company runs out of new products to introduce),
(b) raise subscription fees a tiny little bit every year (but there's a limit to how much any company can do that without angering customers too much), and
(c) break existing ad-free plans into new tiers of service, some or all of which have... ads.
> Except no ad-free service remains ad-free forever.
None of the examples you gave (toasters, windows, paint, and shower-heads) are services. I used YouTube (a service) as an example, because we're not in a world where products are overrun with ads the way services are, but my point was that even the service market has started to offer alternatives to ads.
The idea that the market will bear every product getting service-ized but somehow not offer any ad-free versions is nonsensical, at least in the steady state.
None of the examples you gave (toasters, windows, paint, and shower-heads) are services. I used YouTube (a service) as an example, because we're not in a world where products are overrun with ads the way services are, but my point was that even the service market has started to offer alternatives to ads.
The idea that the market will bear every product getting service-ized but somehow not offer any ad-free versions is nonsensical, at least in the steady state.
YouTube has tons of product placement withim videos themself so ad-free service you pais dor barely remove half od the ads.
Aside from not being true in general (none of the videos I watch have product placement/sponsorships), this is completely irrelevant. We're discussing the YouTube content delivery service, not the manner in which the content is funded, in exactly the same way that "the movies you're watching already have product placement" would be completely irrelevant to the discussion on this thread about ads in the interface through which you watch the movie.
Tangential, but you reminded me of it: it's truly fascinating how incredibly brain-damaging discussion of ads seem to be. Every single thread I've ever read on the topic is full of non sequiturs, nonsensical analogues, glaring logical inconsistencies, etc. The only other topic I can think of that makes people similarly insane is airlines (cf my "why should I pay taxes" uncle complaining about airlines no longer requiring other passengers to pay for transporting his suitcases).
Tangential, but you reminded me of it: it's truly fascinating how incredibly brain-damaging discussion of ads seem to be. Every single thread I've ever read on the topic is full of non sequiturs, nonsensical analogues, glaring logical inconsistencies, etc. The only other topic I can think of that makes people similarly insane is airlines (cf my "why should I pay taxes" uncle complaining about airlines no longer requiring other passengers to pay for transporting his suitcases).
That's great, until they stop making the ad free version. It's like TVs, there are no high end ad free TVs now.
Interesting, I did some quick Googling and was able to find a good handful of 2020 models with no ads, but none for 2021. I'll take your word for it that they don't exist, but the fact that this is the first year where that appears to be the case is not strong evidence to me that this is the steady-state of the TV market.
You make a good point that it might not be the steady state of the display market, but I think it is for the majority of TVs today.
As alternatives, you can buy commercial displays that are effectively TVs (with HDMI in), however they lag in specs and lack some features. You can also buy hospitality versions of TVs as 'dumb' TVs for a similar price, but these also tend to have lower specs. You can buy large format computer monitors (55" is about the highest I've seen) but they are substantially more expensive (roughly 3x more expensive) and typically use DisplayPort instead of HDMI.
I only learned about the options because I'm looking to replace my 2013 Plasma TV that has a power supply problem.
As alternatives, you can buy commercial displays that are effectively TVs (with HDMI in), however they lag in specs and lack some features. You can also buy hospitality versions of TVs as 'dumb' TVs for a similar price, but these also tend to have lower specs. You can buy large format computer monitors (55" is about the highest I've seen) but they are substantially more expensive (roughly 3x more expensive) and typically use DisplayPort instead of HDMI.
I only learned about the options because I'm looking to replace my 2013 Plasma TV that has a power supply problem.
Good to know, thanks. I was actually going to buy a TV a couple of weeks ago, but ended up deciding to make my large monitor do double-duty instead of stuffing another screen into my "cozy" new place in Manhattan. It's good to know that I dodged a bullet: it's easy enough for me to avoid ads that when I do come across them, I find them pretty jarring.
It will never end so long as consumers will keep buying the products. In other words, it will never end, period.
> Smart toasters that force you to watch ads before getting your toast in the morning?
Adverts scorched into your toast. I sort of want this.
Adverts scorched into your toast. I sort of want this.
But your DRM encumbered butter won't spread over the scorch marks, as that would be considered to be ad-blocking tech.
Adverts specifically, or just being able to scorch any design into your toast? The later sure would be neat and novel, my nephew gets a kick out of pancakes that look like his favorite cartoon characters.
But adverts on my breakfast? Dear god please no.
But adverts on my breakfast? Dear god please no.
> Is there some kind of limit at which we value the right to personal privacy and the right to peace-of-mind over the right to advertise?
Who's "we"? The advertising companies? Then no.
Who's "we"? The advertising companies? Then no.
Smart wallet, with smart money - google know better how to spend them.
Smart condom with smart lubricant - pay as you use.
Smart pants - ads on ass, smart farts.
Smart condom with smart lubricant - pay as you use.
Smart pants - ads on ass, smart farts.
Personally, I would never buy a "smart" anything besides the phone itself.
Such a high % of the population is clinically addicted to the phone though I can't blame anyone who makes a product to cater to these addicts.
Such a high % of the population is clinically addicted to the phone though I can't blame anyone who makes a product to cater to these addicts.
Google, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook - we power their abuses with our money. Just stop buying their trash. Support open hardware, free and open source software.
People bought devices that did not show the ads. Now Google has forced those ads onto those devices. So, hindsight being 20/20, this is yet another abuse.
After a certain point, you have to start noticing patterns.
You're not wrong, but what should be the narrative to any future devices like this is:
"They change it after selling it to you for the worse, don't buy their products."
When that becomes the reputation the problem will solve itself when they stop selling them from bad reputation.
"They change it after selling it to you for the worse, don't buy their products."
When that becomes the reputation the problem will solve itself when they stop selling them from bad reputation.
It's still vandalistic destruction of property Google doesn't own. Google and their hardware partners owe refunds to all these customers.
I'm sympathetic to the idea that there are implicit expectations during a purchase that shouldn't ideally be violated. But I'm curious if you truly believe this, or if it's just hyperbole.
In this "fully my property, not a service I'm using" framework, would an update that patches a security vulnerability be "altruism"? Would refusal on Google's part to patch vulnerabilities be a completely acceptable refusal to futz with someone's property?
This is a serious question; my perspective is that "I thought I was buying unchanging property" is disingenuous unless you're similarly surprised by app updates and maintenance (let alone feature development). The expectation of these updates makes it pretty clear to me that this resembles a service more than a static product that Google has ability to "vandalize" (or responsibility to maintain).
In this "fully my property, not a service I'm using" framework, would an update that patches a security vulnerability be "altruism"? Would refusal on Google's part to patch vulnerabilities be a completely acceptable refusal to futz with someone's property?
This is a serious question; my perspective is that "I thought I was buying unchanging property" is disingenuous unless you're similarly surprised by app updates and maintenance (let alone feature development). The expectation of these updates makes it pretty clear to me that this resembles a service more than a static product that Google has ability to "vandalize" (or responsibility to maintain).
They should be legally required to supply security patches and legally required not to reduce the functionality of the device.
If they can't do that, then they need to stay out of the space.
If they can't do that, then they need to stay out of the space.
And how much billions is the marketing budget to get that narrative successful ? /s
mostly memes
Like the otter box for example: https://hackaday.com/2021/04/06/you-otter-be-able-to-stream-...
Talking specifically of TV experience the Shield has been the best streaming device on the market. Working out of the box and putting away the tinkering and manual config of the common HTPC. NVIDIA has brought updates and support to old Shield devices with the almost same support as Apple devices. It is disappointing NVIDIA does not own their own OS as Apple and Shield loyal users are affected of Google anti-consumer behaviour.
Very difficult to do when it comes to entertainment. Almost all streaming services have locked down DRM that makes running open source software very difficult.
(I know someone will say “just pirate it then!” but even putting moral obligations aside that’s still not realistic for the average viewer)
(I know someone will say “just pirate it then!” but even putting moral obligations aside that’s still not realistic for the average viewer)
I don’t believe there is any coherent moral argument against piracy in the face of such hostile tactics from media companies.
Of course there is. Pirating streaming media isn’t like stealing bread to feed your starving family, it’s entirely optional. If you don’t agree with the terms of service (i.e. DRM) then don’t use the service. Deciding on your own terms of service is just entitlement. I personally don’t care either way but you can’t say there is no argument against it.
Stealing bread actually deprives someone else of a scarce resource, but the marginal cost of making a digital copy of a TV show is ~zero. So you’re right - it is quite different. Stealing bread is much worse than copying a digital file.
Stealing bread to feed your family when the alternative is starving is not the same as watching Game of Thrones.
You both argue around the question: how does the unlicensed reproduction of media morally compare to stealing.
Argument 1: Sufficiently severe benefits should mitigate the moral fault in theft.
Argument 2: Sufficiently small damage should mitigate the moral fault in theft.
You both seem to at least implicitly agree that both is theft, which would be a traditional point of disagreement in the debate.
I commented because I think one and two might be structurally the same argument: It's a consequentialist idea of utility thresholds.
A key disagreement would be whether there are thresholds that make the quantitative difference in utility a qualitative difference. Think hunger on one side and unquantifiable small loss in profits on the other side.
Argument 1: Sufficiently severe benefits should mitigate the moral fault in theft.
Argument 2: Sufficiently small damage should mitigate the moral fault in theft.
You both seem to at least implicitly agree that both is theft, which would be a traditional point of disagreement in the debate.
I commented because I think one and two might be structurally the same argument: It's a consequentialist idea of utility thresholds.
A key disagreement would be whether there are thresholds that make the quantitative difference in utility a qualitative difference. Think hunger on one side and unquantifiable small loss in profits on the other side.
I’m actually arguing from a slightly different consequentialist position; I don’t think intellectual property law in general is socially efficient. You have to consider whether the (putative) benefit of IP-based R&D funding exceeds the loss associated with the introduction of artificial scarcity, social cost of IP enforcement, etc. For something like rocket engines or metallurgy, I would say “maybe”. For the latest Star Wars spinoff, I would say “strong no”.
Even for rocket engines or whatever, it’s not clear if the patent system is still producing acceptable returns.
Even for rocket engines or whatever, it’s not clear if the patent system is still producing acceptable returns.
Then why do public libraries exist? Reading a book is optional. Artists who make TV and movies gain nothing from google being hostile to the people trying to view their work. It’s the publishers and middlemen that are doing this.
I don’t understand the logic here. Libraries pay money for the media they lend out so how is it comparable?
You don't need a justification (like feeding your family) for something that isn't unethical in the first place.
Even if Widevine itself is not open source, there are lots of legal streaming add-ons for Kodi. For example I use Disney+, Netflix and Prime with Kodi on a Le Potato (same SoC as Amazon Fire Stick). Right now it's an old, formerly analog TV, but when I change it I will just buy a 43" monitor.
Kodi+Jellyfin is amazing, I'll never use closed source stuff on my TV again.
The new Apple TV 4K is a absolutely better than any of the high end android tv devices. I’ve been through them all (at considerable expense) and am now totally happy on the new apple tv
After a few weeks of my 3 year old Android TV having ads and having choppy animations, I bought the new Apple TV. In the last month we haven't watched anything on the base Android TV interface. Apple TV is smoother, easier to find what we want, and interfaces for HBO Max look better.
This is supporting my believe that expensive (durable) goods like TVs, cars, and appliances should have an external control hardware for their smarts that can be upgraded every few years. This would allow the good to last 10+ years without a crappy experience after the first 2 years.
This is supporting my believe that expensive (durable) goods like TVs, cars, and appliances should have an external control hardware for their smarts that can be upgraded every few years. This would allow the good to last 10+ years without a crappy experience after the first 2 years.
Cars yes please. I remember when people bought aftermarket car stereos, was great. I really dont like today's integrated entertainment, they dont work that will and in 10 years will look terrible.
I have an Apple TV and I want to like it, but the remote is utter garbage. Every time I so much as brush against it, it does some weird shit, like pause playback, go into fast forward, change the program or whatever... so then there's a mad scramble "where's that fucking remote?" as I try to figure out what appendage touched it so I can find it and undo whatever it decided to do. I'm afraid to stretch my legs or arms for fear of breaking playback.
Amazon got their remote right. Everything is an actual BUTTON and there aren't too many of them. Absolutely no complaints with that.
Amazon got their remote right. Everything is an actual BUTTON and there aren't too many of them. Absolutely no complaints with that.
I also loathed those remotes but bit the bullet and bought the new ones. Am very happy with it and haven’t experienced any of the issues with the old one.
Apple updates the remote in the most recent Apple TV model, and it’s backwards compatible and sold separately.
This $10 replacement GE remote is somehow 500x better. My Apple TV experience was dramatically improved.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01HSSAZX8
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01HSSAZX8
Argh. Some of us just hate this traditional controller design. It’s huge but the buttons are small, wiggly, there are too many and it gets dirty as hell. I’d rather use a PlayStation controller as remote, all you needs is two buttons and a directional pad anyway.
The latest version of the Apple remote has ditched the touch pad, and has buttons again.
Your cries have been heard. You want one these:
https://function101.com/pages/button-remote-for-apple-tv-hom...
https://function101.com/pages/button-remote-for-apple-tv-hom...
I tried moving my Apple TV to another room and relying upon "Chromecast with Google TV" on the main set. Not only is the device laggy, but everything just looks worse. It claims to support HDR, 4:2:2, etc, but the end result is that I immediately found the experience far inferior.
Add that the AppleTV has long had sound synchronization, now it has automatic color correction as well.
It's a very nice device. The remote was absolutely trash before -- good god I hate that remote -- but the new one looks significantly improved. And you can connect a controller to it and play a pretty wide variety of fairly decent games if you want, which is an experience that I imagine will improve over time.
Add that the AppleTV has long had sound synchronization, now it has automatic color correction as well.
It's a very nice device. The remote was absolutely trash before -- good god I hate that remote -- but the new one looks significantly improved. And you can connect a controller to it and play a pretty wide variety of fairly decent games if you want, which is an experience that I imagine will improve over time.
It's nearly perfect now that they've fixed the remote, and absolutely the device to beat at the moment.
Most of the "channel" apps are also very nice, the exception being Amazon's clunky Prime Video app. The Plex client is quite good too.
Most of the "channel" apps are also very nice, the exception being Amazon's clunky Prime Video app. The Plex client is quite good too.
> Most of the "channel" apps are also very nice, the exception being Amazon's clunky Prime Video app.
To be fair, I've not seen any other platform where Prime Video's interface isn't terrible, and that's including Fire-whatevers. Been that way for years. I guess it's working OK for them, since they don't seem inclined to fix it. In particular, they probably regard making it hard to tell whether something's free-with-Prime or pay-per-view until the moment you choose whether to play it, as a feature.
To be fair, I've not seen any other platform where Prime Video's interface isn't terrible, and that's including Fire-whatevers. Been that way for years. I guess it's working OK for them, since they don't seem inclined to fix it. In particular, they probably regard making it hard to tell whether something's free-with-Prime or pay-per-view until the moment you choose whether to play it, as a feature.
If you want an app that supports Plex/Emby/Jellyfin as well as direct network storage, Infuse is unbeatable in my opinion.
The plex client is rock solid
I bought an Nvidia Shield because the Plex client can switch the display's refresh rate to match the content (no judder for 24p content). Based on [1], it sounds like that should be possible with the Apple TV, too. Can anyone confirm if this works well?
[1] https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208288
[1] https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208288
I can't confirm with Plex specifically, but I can tell you content matching is an OS-level feature, not specific to apps. It works for the apps I've tried.
Thanks. I'm going to give the Apple TV a shot. If frame rate matching works well in other apps, it will probably be good in Plex, too.
[deleted]
Apple tv has plex?!! I'm getting one!
Basically every streaming device has a Plex app: https://www.plex.tv/apps-devices/
Would use of an Android phone have any cause for frustration with an Apple TV? I'd assume not but I've never used one.
Not really, you lose the remote app on your phone, which is useful to enter passwords, but using the voice dictation to enter a password a character at a time works surprisingly well.
You'd also not have airplay and mirroring. That might be a bigger deal for some, but for me, it's a feature I basically never use.
You'd also not have airplay and mirroring. That might be a bigger deal for some, but for me, it's a feature I basically never use.
The YouTube apps on Android and iOS support streaming to the Apple TV YouTube app, which seems to be the bulk of what my guests and I want to actually stream. If you have a local media library, or tend to want to stream your computer screen to your TV for unsupported media/sources (or for plain mirroring), lack of AirPlay might be more important to you.
You won't be able to use your phone as a remote, or to enter passwords, but other than that, there would be no frustration.
You will not be able to mirror your phone screen or cast anything from YouTube or any other cast supported app.
If it’s like the older Apple TV’s no. It comes with its own remote, the only iPhone integration is that your phone becomes an extra remote should the original be lost or broken
It works with a lot of TV remotes, I rarely use the Apple one.
No, Apple TV doesn't require any other Apple devices. It will prompt you for an iCloud account during setup, but you can create a free one or just not have one.
I guess you would not be able to stream your display to the Apple TV, and you would not be able to use your phone for keyboard input, and probably more. Just get an iPhone already!
I've been looking into getting one, but my one hangup is still the lack of audio passthrough support. I have some UHD disks that I've digitized and without passthrough, the Atmos metadata will be lost on playback.
I found this: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204069
Is there something I'm missing?
Is there something I'm missing?
Can you watch porn on that? Can you stream random online media? Really curious, I do things on my TV I don't see working in a typical apple eco system
You can AirPlay whatever you'd like from your iOS, iPadOS, or macOS device.
at least Sky in the UK explicitly block you from using airplay when the app is running. They detect airplay in use and overlay a gray box on the content. I’ve seen no work around for this and suspect it’s a sign of things to come for other broadcasters and media houses.
Which do not have porn apps either. But I can over complicate everything by streaming my safari session I guess?
I guess safari supports porn
I guess safari supports porn
You can Airplay any video content from the web, or mirror the screen.
So I use another device to browse and the TV only for watching. I get it, sounds annoying just to enjoy some porn
There’s always infuse player and plex, into which you could place whichever pornography your heart desires.
You can install VLC and enter arbitrary stream URLs to watch.
You can also use Plex to access a media server with whatever you want to put on it.
You can also use Plex to access a media server with whatever you want to put on it.
So no porn streaming at all?
Does VLC on Apple TV support all VLC codecs?
Does VLC on Apple TV support all VLC codecs?
Sorry I don't know what you specifically mean by "porn streaming" are you talking about a dedicated app for a specific streaming service?
If so, I highly doubt Apple would allow those on their platform but I've never actually checked. There are semi-sketchy IPTV clients that you can use to watch what seems to be unofficial streaming services, so perhaps those can also be used to watch what you want?
As for VLC, it's open source I encourage you to do your own research as I can't answer your codecs question with confidence.
If so, I highly doubt Apple would allow those on their platform but I've never actually checked. There are semi-sketchy IPTV clients that you can use to watch what seems to be unofficial streaming services, so perhaps those can also be used to watch what you want?
As for VLC, it's open source I encourage you to do your own research as I can't answer your codecs question with confidence.
Well if I watch porn I don't download it and watch it later, but open some place app or website and browse videos on my TV to fap to comfortably from my couch.
To be fair my question is already answered, no porn support. You need a another device to stream from.
To be fair my question is already answered, no porn support. You need a another device to stream from.
Is the Apple TV better than the Nvidia Shield? I bought one of the tubes and that thing is slick as hell.
I have the tube sitting right beside my new Apple TV right now. No comparison to me. Apple TV is smoother, voice input is way ahead, and the Dolby stuff is way better than the Nividia processing
Interesting, thanks!
How does the upscaling on apple tv compare to Nvidia shield's ai upscaling?
It appears to be quite a bit better. I had been considering upgrading my TV while on the NVIDIA, but haven't considered it since moving to the new Apple TV
At least in one user's opinion, it's superior: https://www.reddit.com/r/appletv/comments/ijjgms/apple_tv_4k...
Does it support AI-Upscale?
I recently bought a 2000€ Sony Bravia which I love, but the update adding ads is atrocious. I paid premium and still get fucking ads, it’s a nightmare!
The weirdest thing is that these ads have a political agenda, every day it’s for a new LGBT program. Every. Single. Day. Right now the three ads on the carousel are Pride on Disney+, Turn it Around on myCanal (French cable which I don’t use, I have no idea why I have ads for this one) and another LGBT documentary on France TV (same, I don’t have the app installed so no idea why I get this « recommendation »)
Edit: please don't downvote me for stating a fact, I don't emit a judgment of value here. The fact is 100% of the ads I get are flagged as LGBT, which IS weird. It's not the only subject to discuss, and not one I personally care a lot about. I could get ads for documentaries on economy, animals, food, tons of topics, but I just get LGBT. Maybe it's not your experience, but it is mine.
The weirdest thing is that these ads have a political agenda, every day it’s for a new LGBT program. Every. Single. Day. Right now the three ads on the carousel are Pride on Disney+, Turn it Around on myCanal (French cable which I don’t use, I have no idea why I have ads for this one) and another LGBT documentary on France TV (same, I don’t have the app installed so no idea why I get this « recommendation »)
Edit: please don't downvote me for stating a fact, I don't emit a judgment of value here. The fact is 100% of the ads I get are flagged as LGBT, which IS weird. It's not the only subject to discuss, and not one I personally care a lot about. I could get ads for documentaries on economy, animals, food, tons of topics, but I just get LGBT. Maybe it's not your experience, but it is mine.
>these ads have a political agenda, every day it’s for a new LGBT program
>I don't emit a judgment of value here
It's Pride month, and today is literally the anniversary of Stonewall. Explicitly calling saying that any content even featuring LGBT people "has a political agenda" is a value judgement, implying you think the mere existence of a minority sexual identity in content is a political statement.
You wouldn't call the service advertising heterosexual romance before Valentine's day a "political statement" (and probably wouldn't think twice about it), so it's prejudicial to claim the different for LGBT content during pride.
>I don't emit a judgment of value here
It's Pride month, and today is literally the anniversary of Stonewall. Explicitly calling saying that any content even featuring LGBT people "has a political agenda" is a value judgement, implying you think the mere existence of a minority sexual identity in content is a political statement.
You wouldn't call the service advertising heterosexual romance before Valentine's day a "political statement" (and probably wouldn't think twice about it), so it's prejudicial to claim the different for LGBT content during pride.
> It's Pride month, and today is literally the anniversary of Stonewall
And not living in the US, I have no idea what Stonewall is nor that it's Pride month, nor even that Pride month is a thing (is it in France too?)
> implying you think the mere existence of a minority sexual identity in content is a political statement
No, I think recommending this and only this is a political statement.
> so it's prejudicial to claim the different for LGBT content during pride
It's literally written "LGBT" in the 1 line description of the ads I have.
And not living in the US, I have no idea what Stonewall is nor that it's Pride month, nor even that Pride month is a thing (is it in France too?)
> implying you think the mere existence of a minority sexual identity in content is a political statement
No, I think recommending this and only this is a political statement.
> so it's prejudicial to claim the different for LGBT content during pride
It's literally written "LGBT" in the 1 line description of the ads I have.
The ads are just the companies virtue signaling.
LG WebOs does the same thing. I haven’t accepted the eula and stream from my Apple TV. However, a friend of mines wife did and now he has ads everywhere on it. I don’t understand how this is so normalized?
You actively have to work in order to block ads and trackers today. Its getting harder everyday. It’s so sad we have some of our worlds best engineers working on how to send ads to people. Our priorities are whack.
You actively have to work in order to block ads and trackers today. Its getting harder everyday. It’s so sad we have some of our worlds best engineers working on how to send ads to people. Our priorities are whack.
Samsung's TV also put ads in the menu. I blocked them using Nextdns, at least that still works.
As an alternative to a different launcher you can block the domain responsible for the ads [0] in your DNS resolver. The Launcher will then fallback to less intrusive "ads" for the standard apps: YouTube, Google Play, Google Movies, etc.
I've added it to the adaway.org list [1], so it might find its way into blocklists you are already using soon.
[0] androidtvwatsonfe-pa.googleapis.com
[1] https://github.com/AdAway/adaway.github.io/pull/261
I've added it to the adaway.org list [1], so it might find its way into blocklists you are already using soon.
[0] androidtvwatsonfe-pa.googleapis.com
[1] https://github.com/AdAway/adaway.github.io/pull/261
Same approach for Samsung TVs. In fact nextdns has an option for Samsung ads explicitly so just enable that and point the TVs DNS to that. I presume this could be added to nextdns too with a custom url block.
Android TV is a surprisingly bad system anyway. Barely apps, I can access maybe 100 games from my TV. The far majority absolute, and filled, trash games. I suddenly found myself locked out of thousands of things I used to watch because the browser, if even enable-able, sucks and so many sites/services have no interest in having an app. Owning a TV still feels like a step down for me, since I was used just streaming on my computer.
Without the kodi app I would see no reason to recommend a android smart TV over any cheap TV and a small Kodi box.
Without the kodi app I would see no reason to recommend a android smart TV over any cheap TV and a small Kodi box.
My Nvidia Shield experience has been great. I can basically use it as another computing device:
- since it easily mounts external hard drives over the network, I can use it as a NAS for backing up photos from my phone via SMB.
- Likewise, the Plex server has made it easy for me to make good use of my huge library of music on my external hard drive.
- GameStream is awesome. Streaming games from my PC to my TV is trivial and is much more enjoyable than sitting at my desk.
- I don't get the complaints about the interface. It's the perfect level of intuitive for my entire family. TV on, my entertainment system + Shield switches on quickly via CEC, getting to Netflix/Amazon is trivial.
- since it easily mounts external hard drives over the network, I can use it as a NAS for backing up photos from my phone via SMB.
- Likewise, the Plex server has made it easy for me to make good use of my huge library of music on my external hard drive.
- GameStream is awesome. Streaming games from my PC to my TV is trivial and is much more enjoyable than sitting at my desk.
- I don't get the complaints about the interface. It's the perfect level of intuitive for my entire family. TV on, my entertainment system + Shield switches on quickly via CEC, getting to Netflix/Amazon is trivial.
My experience is different.
I love it especially now that I can install VPN. I can access US-version of Netflix, Disney+, etc while traveling.
I love it especially now that I can install VPN. I can access US-version of Netflix, Disney+, etc while traveling.
I am not saying smart TVs are bad. Just that android really isn't the best example. You can do this with Kodi or any alternatives too. Even my dump smart TV has VPN.
Also taking your TV put to travel definitely is a rare edge case ;P
Edit:// wait? Was that just a subtle Nord placement?
Also taking your TV put to travel definitely is a rare edge case ;P
Edit:// wait? Was that just a subtle Nord placement?
Oh I don't travel with my TV.
I'm referring to the OS in the newest Chromecast.
It's Google TV which is built on top of Android TV.
I'm referring to the OS in the newest Chromecast.
It's Google TV which is built on top of Android TV.
I think he means he can access US Netflix in hotels because I had a similar experience somewhere.
You can get pluggable Android TV which plug into HDMI ports in Hotel TVs and things like this.
Last few times I brought my laptop and HDMI cable to a hotel and it was nice. We usually go to places for outdoorsy things and in the night there's not much to do
You can get pluggable Android TV which plug into HDMI ports in Hotel TVs and things like this.
Last few times I brought my laptop and HDMI cable to a hotel and it was nice. We usually go to places for outdoorsy things and in the night there's not much to do
What apps do you need? I use mine for watching video, and the video apps (YouTube, Netflix, Hulu, Disney+, Sling, Prime Video, ESPN, etc.) work well for me.
Most stuff I/we care about is regional things. Most German TV stations run their own 'netflix' (some free, some paid) all of which someone made a Kodi app for, none for Android.
Also: - Porn (it's annoying to depend on your phone for that, and many good sites don't have push to TV yet). Kodi has those apps :)
- 'illegal streaming' which is huge in German speaking countries and legal here in Switzerland. No streaming apps on Android, plenty and more on Kodi
Also I don't count the original android YouTube app. With the amount of ads it is basically not useable.
Also: - Porn (it's annoying to depend on your phone for that, and many good sites don't have push to TV yet). Kodi has those apps :)
- 'illegal streaming' which is huge in German speaking countries and legal here in Switzerland. No streaming apps on Android, plenty and more on Kodi
Also I don't count the original android YouTube app. With the amount of ads it is basically not useable.
My parents have an Android TV and often have to reboot it to for the internet connection to work. Makes all the streaming apps a pain to use.
I don't think that's specific to android tho. I got a Xiaomi one explicitly because they have good WiFi chips. This was one of my main worries, and I never had issues so far
How do you find out which ones have good WiFi chips?
I honestly don't know. Thing is I have had Xiaomi devices before, and they are my only smart devices that do not have connection issues (for me) and work in my back garden. My new Xiaomi phone is the only of our phones that streams in hd in my backyard. So yeah just personal experience and bad experiences with things like Samsung
No wifi issues, it's connected to ethernet
The entire Android TV experience is one of constant tweaking of F-Droid, Aurora Store, and Bromite System Webview app updates with upstream adblocking, firewalling, and rooting in an attempt to stymie this sort of crap from Google and other big, bad corporations. I ditched all of that and now run Libreelec (Kodi) on a Pi4.
Who made these decisions, who worked on the implementation, who launched it?
Would they have agreed to it if they were not anonymous?
Would they have agreed on it if they were in a union?
Would they have agreed to it if they were not anonymous?
Would they have agreed on it if they were in a union?
Management, product designers, devs, everyone - including the customers whose ads you are seeing. They are all in it together, making money. Union or no union.
What are the names of the manager, product designer, engineers who worked on this?
I am speaking about the influence of anonymity in making and executing on user-hostile decisions.
I am speaking about the influence of anonymity in making and executing on user-hostile decisions.
Question to HN users: I have a dumb display attached to an nvidia shield. The Shield is nice: It's powerful enough, runs decent version of the common apps I care about (netflix, plex, youtube, spotify are the ones I use), and the remote is minimalistic and nice to use.
Let's say I want to opt out of Google for this. What the hell do I do? I do have a Windows PC attached to the TV, for gaming, but if I wanted to run the apps above they wouldn't be optimized for TV input, they'd be cumbersome to use. Attaching a Linux box isn't going to work particularly well for gaming either.
Seriously, what are the alternatives there?
Let's say I want to opt out of Google for this. What the hell do I do? I do have a Windows PC attached to the TV, for gaming, but if I wanted to run the apps above they wouldn't be optimized for TV input, they'd be cumbersome to use. Attaching a Linux box isn't going to work particularly well for gaming either.
Seriously, what are the alternatives there?
Install another TV launcher app (I like Simple TV Launcher). Once installed, use Android dev tool on a remote laptop/workstation (platform-tools, adb.exe) to remotely connect to the Shield device and disable Google TV. The command to disable Google TV launcher is something like 'adb shell pm disable-user --user 0 google.android.tv'
Once Google TV Launcher is disabled, Shield picks the next installed Launcher on your system as the default TV Launcher. Be aware that most 3rd party TV launchers aren't very configurable or polished but will launch your other apps. Maybe try a few different ones before disabling Google TV Launcher.
Once Google TV Launcher is disabled, Shield picks the next installed Launcher on your system as the default TV Launcher. Be aware that most 3rd party TV launchers aren't very configurable or polished but will launch your other apps. Maybe try a few different ones before disabling Google TV Launcher.
Thanks, I was not aware the launcher could be swapped out so easily. This seems like a decent option if I want to keep my Shield.
There's only one correct answer: https://kodi.tv/
Works fine, but it is not the most stable software. Plenty of add-ons and themes, and (probably the reason why it's popular) you can sideload some pirate TV add-ons.
Works fine, but it is not the most stable software. Plenty of add-ons and themes, and (probably the reason why it's popular) you can sideload some pirate TV add-ons.
Last I used Kodi, it was a great app for, like, DIY entertainment management but utterly useless if you are expecting to use something like Spotify or YouTube.
It has been a while though, so I might be outdated on this, but I'm guessing it's still not possible to log into spotify from it, browse the spotify library / your playlists, use device remote play from your phone to the tv, and so on. Same goes for youtube (though I do remember some useful-ish youtube plugins, they didn't go beyond logged-out browsing)
It has been a while though, so I might be outdated on this, but I'm guessing it's still not possible to log into spotify from it, browse the spotify library / your playlists, use device remote play from your phone to the tv, and so on. Same goes for youtube (though I do remember some useful-ish youtube plugins, they didn't go beyond logged-out browsing)
Logged in YouTube works fine. I use both (android and Kodi) and honestly it's not so much worse on Kodi. Plus you don't need to sideload apks to disable the current ad flood
If you have Kodi on Android, you can have "links" (I don't remember the name in Kodi, sorry) for the Spotify, Youtube, Netflix, etc Android apps within Kodi.
Pretty sure Spotify works fine. They have a fully functioning API for premium users. Netflix might be a problem though.
I have a Sony tv with Android, and I disabled or uninstalled anything google I could find. Still works perfectly. (Disclosure, I’m probably in HN’s bottom 5th percentile in tech skills)
There are some workarounds in this Nvidea thread: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/shield-tv/9/4579...
None of them perfect, but you can roll back to what you had before.
None of them perfect, but you can roll back to what you had before.
Not being snarky but an Apple TV
I briefly considered it. I've been entirely out of the Apple ecosystem so far (save for airpods). It sounds like Apple is gaining traction over time because the competition keeps getting worse and worse.
I'm frankly not sure opting into Apple is a solution to the problem at large. It might be a temporary fix, but at the end of the day you're still using a proprietary system which might decide that ads are lucrative tomorrow.
I'm frankly not sure opting into Apple is a solution to the problem at large. It might be a temporary fix, but at the end of the day you're still using a proprietary system which might decide that ads are lucrative tomorrow.
I would have gone for an Apple TV in a heartbeat if not for one, huge, problem: no support for bitstreaming audio. This means no DTS:X or Dolby Atmos in apps like Plex.
It supports Atmos (not sure about DTS:X) but the reasoning behind decoding on device is for audio mixing for things like Siri. That said, I wouldn’t have minded having a setting to let my receiver do the decoding.
I think it supports DD + Atmos, not TrueHD + Atmos.
Look for Launcher Manager Ultimate, it lets you disable Google stock launcher and rolls back the basic Android TV launcher.
you can replace launcher on shield
That's a great Ask HN question actually, as opposed to a comment here.
Apple TV?
LG WebOS has all this, except Spotify which was there but is gone now.
I just use my Windows laptop, it's pretty good. You're not limited to anyone's apps, you choose what goes on. And you're probably already used to disabling whatever dumb ads Microsoft tries to put onto your machine.
Using a Windows laptop does not solve the part of the problem where Windows is not a friendly user interface for TV use. Android TV and Apple TV are nice to use because the interface is designed around sitting at your couch and controlling it with a remote with limited inputs.
There's no such launcher on Windows that doesn't deal with the pitfalls of it being Windows. Even something like Steam's Big Picture doesn't really work very well in certain circumstances because you can be thrown out of the launcher onto the desktop unexpectedly by games it launches.
I think the only way we could see a good implementation of this is if Microsoft themselves made it. They tried doing something like this with Windows Media Center but I think that they're better positioned to try again now that streaming services are ubiquitous.
There's no such launcher on Windows that doesn't deal with the pitfalls of it being Windows. Even something like Steam's Big Picture doesn't really work very well in certain circumstances because you can be thrown out of the launcher onto the desktop unexpectedly by games it launches.
I think the only way we could see a good implementation of this is if Microsoft themselves made it. They tried doing something like this with Windows Media Center but I think that they're better positioned to try again now that streaming services are ubiquitous.
I prefer it because I can just launch whatever program I like. Don't have to rely on somebody making the right app, I can just drag an MPC-HC window over, a web browser over, a game over, photoshop over, whatever. Don't need custom integration, the TV screen is just another monitor.
Most tvs have multiple HDMI inputs, why not have your Windows PC for gaming and a Linux PC with Kodi or whatever you like.
I personally just run mpv on my Linux box plugged into my TV and connected to a DLNA media server in my home and use my Android phone as a remote with KDEConnect, I'm not a big app person. I mostly watch YouTube videos my media server auto downloads when they are available from creators I like. For my family I have Netflix.
You're right it's not as nice as using a TV remote though! I bet Kodi or Plex, etc. would be more navigable with a remote. I wonder if you can get a Bluetooth remote that connects to a PC...
I personally just run mpv on my Linux box plugged into my TV and connected to a DLNA media server in my home and use my Android phone as a remote with KDEConnect, I'm not a big app person. I mostly watch YouTube videos my media server auto downloads when they are available from creators I like. For my family I have Netflix.
You're right it's not as nice as using a TV remote though! I bet Kodi or Plex, etc. would be more navigable with a remote. I wonder if you can get a Bluetooth remote that connects to a PC...
The shield remote does use Bluetooth I believe, I haven't dug into its internals though.
I kinda imagine that a "real solution" would involve some kind of Android environment, though. Your solution works, if the user has not opted into the youtube/spotify/netflix ecosystem. If they have, it's not a real solution.
I care about my youtube account -- I pay for it, in fact. The recommendation engine is extremely good if you curate it, and I've curated it a ton. YouTube is a beast for knowledge/learning center. Spotify has a really good and extensive music library which makes "not pirating" a real option.
At the end of the day, you need a good UI that implements the features of those services. No third party is working full-time to implement these in open source, and they'd likely shut down if they did. So relying on the upstream apps somehow makes sense.
I kinda imagine that a "real solution" would involve some kind of Android environment, though. Your solution works, if the user has not opted into the youtube/spotify/netflix ecosystem. If they have, it's not a real solution.
I care about my youtube account -- I pay for it, in fact. The recommendation engine is extremely good if you curate it, and I've curated it a ton. YouTube is a beast for knowledge/learning center. Spotify has a really good and extensive music library which makes "not pirating" a real option.
At the end of the day, you need a good UI that implements the features of those services. No third party is working full-time to implement these in open source, and they'd likely shut down if they did. So relying on the upstream apps somehow makes sense.
For frustrated HN users, I have managed to remove the ads by uninstalling all updates to android home, disabling "TV core services" and "Google Play Services". You'll also need to disable automatic updates in the play store.
This won't let you sign into Google apps anymore, but most major apps work fine after a reboot.
This won't let you sign into Google apps anymore, but most major apps work fine after a reboot.
Great info - an alternative to Google Store is Aurora Store, which allows most apps to update anonymously.
I hated FireTV exactly because of the ads. Now I am using Roku comes with the TV. Roku has ad too, but not overwhelming.
In the future, maybe the only choice is no-brand Android TV box/ stick which has ads removed.
In the future, maybe the only choice is no-brand Android TV box/ stick which has ads removed.
PiHole to remove those Roku ads! I have PiHole running on a five dollar Pi Zero. Just sits on a shelf doing its thing on all devices connected to network.
PiHole and similar ad-filtering proxies are a very fragile solution. The moment Google just decides to stream ads through the same domain as the "regular" content (e.g. updates, Play Store, etc.), what exactly is the PiHole going to do?
This is not a "cat and mouse" game, like in-browser ad-blockers where the advertisers change something then the ad-blockers try to catch that. The in-browser ad-blockers have a lot more flexibility with blocking content since they are, basically, the consumer of that content.
With PiHole, there is a point in which PiHole can just DO. NOTHING. to block content. If Google TV fetches its ads/spyware from playstore.google.com (for example), and uses https, what can PiHole do?
Not even MitM, because Google will just pin the certificate. And let's not even get started on DNS-over-HTTPS...
PiHole and the like are not long-term solutions.
This is not a "cat and mouse" game, like in-browser ad-blockers where the advertisers change something then the ad-blockers try to catch that. The in-browser ad-blockers have a lot more flexibility with blocking content since they are, basically, the consumer of that content.
With PiHole, there is a point in which PiHole can just DO. NOTHING. to block content. If Google TV fetches its ads/spyware from playstore.google.com (for example), and uses https, what can PiHole do?
Not even MitM, because Google will just pin the certificate. And let's not even get started on DNS-over-HTTPS...
PiHole and the like are not long-term solutions.
> The moment Google just decides to stream ads through the same domain as the "regular" content (e.g. updates, Play Store, etc.), what exactly is the PiHole going to do?
I don’t use anything Google so your point, whilst true, doesn’t affect me. In fact I use PiHole to block Google and its tentacles from entering my network.
I don’t use anything Google so your point, whilst true, doesn’t affect me. In fact I use PiHole to block Google and its tentacles from entering my network.
> running on a five dollar Pi Zero.
While technically accurate, you also need a $10 SD card, a $3 usb cable, and a $5-10 power brick, so you’re really looking at a $25 solution here.
While technically accurate, you also need a $10 SD card, a $3 usb cable, and a $5-10 power brick, so you’re really looking at a $25 solution here.
I guess SD cards and USB cable don't count, because we all have some extra here and there?
I never use SD cards, but I have at least four of them in my drawer...
I never use SD cards, but I have at least four of them in my drawer...
I found a way to stop the ads on Roku without having to use a PiHole or other DNS filtering. Not sure if I should share it in case Roku engineers are browsing and fix my method.
I wanted to use Samsung Health app but it now only runs if I add permission to make phone calls.
They changed it under guise of adding 2-factor auth, but the small print reads that they want my phone number so that my friends can discover me.
This is just a disgrace. They should not be allowed to change phone features after purchase.
They changed it under guise of adding 2-factor auth, but the small print reads that they want my phone number so that my friends can discover me.
This is just a disgrace. They should not be allowed to change phone features after purchase.
I once asked an Alexa device in my kitchen for a unit conversion or the weather or something.
It responded as it always had, then advertised something after the response, some new Amazon feature I didn't care about.
I calmly but immediately ripped it out of the wall and spiked it hard into the tile floor, where it shattered into pieces. It went out with the garbage that day.
Vote with your eyeballs. Smash that shit to pieces and never buy anything that says Google or Android on it ever again.
It responded as it always had, then advertised something after the response, some new Amazon feature I didn't care about.
I calmly but immediately ripped it out of the wall and spiked it hard into the tile floor, where it shattered into pieces. It went out with the garbage that day.
Vote with your eyeballs. Smash that shit to pieces and never buy anything that says Google or Android on it ever again.
These days, it's difficult (almost impossible) find a dumb large TV in India. So I bought next best thing, a non-Google smart TV[1]. The UI is snappy. Soon I plan to hook it up with Apple TV.
[1] https://www.flipkart.com/philips-6600-146-cm-58-inch-ultra-h...
[1] https://www.flipkart.com/philips-6600-146-cm-58-inch-ultra-h...
Wow, great timing. I was days away from buying a Shield, but I get irrationally mad when forced to see ads. I won't now, even if there's hacky workarounds.
Side note:
Not really ads, but kinda ads. I wish Apple TV would let me hide shows they are pushing.
Not really ads, but kinda ads. I wish Apple TV would let me hide shows they are pushing.
Kinda related, but I feel similarly about Apple News+. It's a handy interface for an overview of the news, but they push subscription options. I want to be able to configure it to just not show me the pay-even-more options. And to exclude certain news outlets altogether. At best you can choose to hide a news provider, but they don't really go away -- it just shows you a black box where the story would be, along with a note that you've blocked them, and a button to show it anyway. Sigh.
I think Apple News is the only Apple made app that shows inline interest based adds.
Annoyingly they still show them even if you pay for the News+ subscription.
Annoyingly they still show them even if you pay for the News+ subscription.
Just don't use the "Apple TV" app on your Apple TV hardware?
Make the Home button go to the App screen.
https://support.apple.com/guide/tv/set-the-tv-button-atvbe77...
Make the Home button go to the App screen.
https://support.apple.com/guide/tv/set-the-tv-button-atvbe77...
Seems like a pretty strong case for a Pihole setup.
Short of network level fixes or loader swapping, is the best solution a dumb (disconnected TV) and a STB like AppleTV or Roku?
Short of network level fixes or loader swapping, is the best solution a dumb (disconnected TV) and a STB like AppleTV or Roku?
I dont think a Pi-hole would work for this, because google serves the ads from the same location as the content (the same reason pi-hole can't block youtube ads)
I use a DNS-level adblocker and was wondering what those black blocks on the home screen were supposed to be.
Should've guessed it was ads.
Should've guessed it was ads.
Wanna bet how long until they start using own API for DNS lookup? I say 2 years.
Stakes are 1 karma point.
Stakes are 1 karma point.
This reminds me of plummeting reviews after Chrome recently introduced tab groups.
I hope they revert both highly unpopular decisions.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.android.ch...
I hope they revert both highly unpopular decisions.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.android.ch...
I actually use tab groups. Have been using for a long time and really like having the ability to group tabs. What's the issue with it?
They don't have the option to open a link in a new top-level tab, you can only open links in a new tab in the current group.
[deleted]
<300 reviews out of 50+ million downloads. Not sure the big deal, people can just use other launchers and the ads are relevant. Chromecast with GTV has had this for a while and people like it because they are relevant.
Well I guess I had been putting off setting up that pi-hole for too long anyway.
I feel scared opening the web outside of my home these days. Seriously what even is that thing people used to call internet!?
In all seriousness running that pi-hole is power and hardware perfectly well spent. And you literally start saving time
In all seriousness running that pi-hole is power and hardware perfectly well spent. And you literally start saving time
This is just a gentle reminder that as long as you’re happy to buy into walled gardens, the devices you buy are not truly yours.
You’re merely in possession of them, with others allowed to set the rules.
As an AppleTV user I could be totally smug about this, but there’s nothing stopping Apple from making a similar move if they wanted to, and I wouldn’t have jack shit to say about it.
I’ve tried more open options and they all suck, but I hope one day there can come an open appliance-platform which at least is usable and supports all the latest standards. Then I might be willing to give it a try.
You’re merely in possession of them, with others allowed to set the rules.
As an AppleTV user I could be totally smug about this, but there’s nothing stopping Apple from making a similar move if they wanted to, and I wouldn’t have jack shit to say about it.
I’ve tried more open options and they all suck, but I hope one day there can come an open appliance-platform which at least is usable and supports all the latest standards. Then I might be willing to give it a try.
It's getting harder and harder to not switch to Apple for both a premium phone and a premium digital media player.
I've always had a Pixel phone, and (since 2015), the Shield TV Pro. It seems like Google is actively trying to lose. They didn't make a premium Pixel last year, and they've never made a premium digital media player. Rather than being grateful for Nvidia building the premium device they couldn't, they're actively ruining it. I get having ads on a >$50 device, but not on the $200 Shield TV.
Who's running things at Google?
I've always had a Pixel phone, and (since 2015), the Shield TV Pro. It seems like Google is actively trying to lose. They didn't make a premium Pixel last year, and they've never made a premium digital media player. Rather than being grateful for Nvidia building the premium device they couldn't, they're actively ruining it. I get having ads on a >$50 device, but not on the $200 Shield TV.
Who's running things at Google?
This reminds me of an article I read earlier this week in AdExchanger about Amazon's advertising business.
https://www.adexchanger.com/online-advertising/the-birds-eye...
The future is all about video. Brands are paying Amazon top dollar because they can link customers to ads on Fire TV. Amazon is quickly moving into non-ecommerce advertisers, which is where Google shines.
https://www.adexchanger.com/online-advertising/the-birds-eye...
The future is all about video. Brands are paying Amazon top dollar because they can link customers to ads on Fire TV. Amazon is quickly moving into non-ecommerce advertisers, which is where Google shines.
On the Nvidia shield, it's also just generally broken. Such absolutely basic easily reached things don't work.
I've never experienced such a regularly broken bit of software.
It's good enough that I prefer it over anything else I've tried bit my god I wish they'd leave features and make it work reliably.
And now ads. We just removed all app channels so my son doesn't see ads as sometimes they'd be scary. Now he can see things he won't be able to watch.
For fucks sake Google.
I've never experienced such a regularly broken bit of software.
It's good enough that I prefer it over anything else I've tried bit my god I wish they'd leave features and make it work reliably.
And now ads. We just removed all app channels so my son doesn't see ads as sometimes they'd be scary. Now he can see things he won't be able to watch.
For fucks sake Google.
Why people thought Google would suddenly stop being an advertisement company? (And pivot to what exactly overnight?) That's both in their DNA and still their overwhelming largest business. Of course don't buy a "smart" TV (that would probably be described more accurately as an "idiotic not-maintained-a-lot-IOT TV with more heavy planned obsolescence than usual"), but if you do, of course stay away from Google.
So I have a shield and have yet to check, but with the new Chromecast with Google TV there is an option in the settings to switch to Apps Mode(I'm pretty sure that's what it's called). This gives you the shield look with only your apps and zero "suggestions" (which are somehow always for shows and movies on services you don't have). I hope the shield has something similar.
I'm not sure how to edit comments on a Materialistic but I found the link for cc w/gtv:
https://support.google.com/googletv/answer/10070784?hl=en
https://support.google.com/googletv/answer/10070784?hl=en
This mode deactivates voice control which is useful for input rather than manual on screen typing.
Advertisers are ruining the internet, how can we take them down a collective peg or ten? Congress is bought and paid for on both sides of the isle, so if you wanna address issues like this, you have to fix congress first, and the two parties are too far gone to ever be correctable.
Its time for a radical shift away from party politics... if you want solutions that is.
Its time for a radical shift away from party politics... if you want solutions that is.
It's astonishing to me that anyone who bought an Android or Google-centric TV product of any kind would expect anything other than that. They exist to track you and sell you ads. Period, paragraph.
This is their business model. Accept it, or buy Apple TV plus a dumb TV (or a stupid "smart" TV with all network features permanently disabled).
Those are the only options.
This is their business model. Accept it, or buy Apple TV plus a dumb TV (or a stupid "smart" TV with all network features permanently disabled).
Those are the only options.
Sharing what I learned trying to find a dumb TV:
It appears that the two main options for 4K, non-networked TVs are 'business-grade' panels (e.g. [0]) and Sceptre[1], which are always out of stock.
I haven't bought either yet (my dumb 1080p panel was working just fine until this week,) but I am planning on upgrading soon.
[0]: https://www.sharpnecdisplays.us/products/displays
[1]: https://www.sceptre.com/
It appears that the two main options for 4K, non-networked TVs are 'business-grade' panels (e.g. [0]) and Sceptre[1], which are always out of stock.
I haven't bought either yet (my dumb 1080p panel was working just fine until this week,) but I am planning on upgrading soon.
[0]: https://www.sharpnecdisplays.us/products/displays
[1]: https://www.sceptre.com/
There have been prior threads on HN about dumb tvs with several options. The LG "Commercial Lite" (for Business) series has some non-smart options, at least in Canada. It was just a few years ago I got my 55" 4k LG dumb tv for $1000 CAD and it's great. Though the market may have changed somewhat. Good luck
People with no control over the software they run get surprised when it does something they don't like. News at 11.
Tivo started running ads in its (subscription fee) service. It only takes up a single slot in the guide, but there are 3 in every screen. I called and complained, but what can you do. I stopped using Comcast box because of the intrusive ads. I fear this will be the future of streaming interfaces.
The simplest and most productive solution is to throw away your TV as it serves no good purpose
Does anyone know if pi-hole blocks these ads or is the dns hardcoded in these?
Looks like I lucked out, my older Nvidia shield had not updated yet, it was downloaded Nvidia Experience 8.2.3 - so I just went and disabled auto-update.
Looks like I lucked out, my older Nvidia shield had not updated yet, it was downloaded Nvidia Experience 8.2.3 - so I just went and disabled auto-update.
So here is the fix for nvidia... I just did this and it works:
1. Go to Settings (the cog at the top right)
2. Click Apps
3. Click See all apps
4. Scroll to the bottom of the list - click Show system apps
5. Scroll down and click Google Play Services
6. Click Force Stop
7. Click Disable
8. Click Clear Cache
9. reboot
10. go back and uninstall google play updates
11. make sure apps are not set to auto update
1. Go to Settings (the cog at the top right)
2. Click Apps
3. Click See all apps
4. Scroll to the bottom of the list - click Show system apps
5. Scroll down and click Google Play Services
6. Click Force Stop
7. Click Disable
8. Click Clear Cache
9. reboot
10. go back and uninstall google play updates
11. make sure apps are not set to auto update
Cant be easy for Nvidia. Stock Android experience is supposedly clean and simple, and vendor specific extensions just clutter.
Now imagine their user base getting screwed over by an update they probably were only informed of.
Now imagine their user base getting screwed over by an update they probably were only informed of.
Upstream ad blocking may help, but will the screen space still be taken up?
Yes. It falls back to build in ads for standard apps like YouTube or Google Movies.
No more Nvidia shield recommendations, that's for sure.
The execs who made this decision should be punished. They won't be. But I think this has convinced me to move my mail and give up on Google.
The execs who made this decision should be punished. They won't be. But I think this has convinced me to move my mail and give up on Google.
Putting an old (5y, i5, 8gb) half broken laptop behind the TV was the best personal technical decision I've made ever.
Super easy TV and Web. Also Games (streaming) once a good kb and mouse are set.
Super easy TV and Web. Also Games (streaming) once a good kb and mouse are set.
Roku started doing this (though seems less intrusive so far than this) and its why I ditched it for an AppleTV.
My big fear is that Apple will do the same in years to come but for now it is all we have.
My big fear is that Apple will do the same in years to come but for now it is all we have.
I'm hoping they have some idea that a chunk of their obscene levels of wealth comes from attracting customers who will opt for their garden to avoid the crap providers that push ads.
They haven’t done so for 14 years. Given their posturing on privacy and their history, it stands to reason it’ll still be like this for another decade at least.
I wonder, does the hardware makers have a word to say about it ? Do they get a cut ? As I see it, it can impact sales (just look at how many times the shield is mention here)
Google is fundamentally an advertising company, that’s why I don’t use any of their services and certainly would never pay for a product from them, because this is their M.O
I bought an Nvidia Shield Pro 4k in Jan 2020.
I just got off chat with amazon UK, who have amazingly decided to process a refund for the device. I'll be buying an apple TV.
I just got off chat with amazon UK, who have amazingly decided to process a refund for the device. I'll be buying an apple TV.
What it is more disgusting are the obvious shilling that favors this ads intrusion. I invite you have a look on Reddit /r/ShieldAndroidTV/
I own a Shield and I've yet to see an ad on the home screen. I'm up to date and logged in with Google but not Nvidia.
Anyone else in Europe getting adverts?
Anyone else in Europe getting adverts?
F*ck, I just bought an expensive Android-based Sony TV.
I got one for many years, haven't seen any ads ever.
EDIT: wait, what ads are they talking about? OK, I see suggestions of Disney+ shows, and I don't have neither a subscription nor the app installed
EDIT: wait, what ads are they talking about? OK, I see suggestions of Disney+ shows, and I don't have neither a subscription nor the app installed
https://www.whathifi.com/news/old-sony-tvs-are-about-to-get-...
(I bought an X950H, as it's known in the US.)
(I bought an X950H, as it's known in the US.)
Probably because your TV isnt getting updates anymore. Great news, no ads for you. Bad news, your TV isnt being patched anymore despite being perfectly usable for another 10 years...
If you buy a product from a company where their revenue comes primarily comes from ads, you should expect to see ads on their product.
Interesting but why now? Based on the dates, this change came in April? Or did people update old reviews but keep the old timestamp?
I posted it just now bc I just came across this today (have an nvidia shield but haven't had a chance to use it in a few months)
I suggest using an old laptop or desktop and install Kodi or Plex to solve for this.
I did this for ages. It sucks. Maintenance, broken things all the time, bugs, ugh.
I just torrent stuff on my Mac now and use a USB stick to ship it to my dumb TV.
I just torrent stuff on my Mac now and use a USB stick to ship it to my dumb TV.
Dumb TV can play video from USB? That's pretty smart.
The Mac can't act as a mass storage device for the TV? That's a shame.
The Mac can't act as a mass storage device for the TV? That's a shame.
That’s all it can do. Has no internet connection on it.
I don’t want the two to meet. That’s where the hell starts.
I use this because the HDCP implementation on the TV is broken so it won’t play anything with any streaming boxes. I’m not throwing a perfectly good TV in the trash because of a copyright restriction.
I don’t want the two to meet. That’s where the hell starts.
I use this because the HDCP implementation on the TV is broken so it won’t play anything with any streaming boxes. I’m not throwing a perfectly good TV in the trash because of a copyright restriction.
I suggest a compact, fanless, low end Win10 pc with air mouse.
No ads and forget Kodi unless you happen to have a large amount of media files. Almost anything you do with Kodi as far as streaming can be done straight from the web browser.
https://www.amazon.com/Beelink-x5-Z8350-Processor-Windows10-...
No ads and forget Kodi unless you happen to have a large amount of media files. Almost anything you do with Kodi as far as streaming can be done straight from the web browser.
https://www.amazon.com/Beelink-x5-Z8350-Processor-Windows10-...
Controlling a Windows 10 desktop is literally the last I want to do from my couch when I can have a unified interface for nearly all my streaming needs that works perfectly well with a remote AND keyboard (people give Kodi a try ;)
Kodi also works surprisingly well as Android app :) sorrily way snappier than on the RPI (v4, 8gb ram I think) that was explicitly recommended from the kodi website :/
Which do we value more, speed of the UI or susceptibility to undesireable change? Libreelec (Kodi) on Pi4 skews away from the latter.
I have Kodi on my cheap android TV which performs much faster than on my pi. So I prefer that. My RPI even crashes from time to time, even thought it has active cooling. Elec just can turn into a resource hog, especially if you switch between apps often. I am just still pissed that I spent $150 on a pi with case for elec when it obviously isn't the optimal device. And want others to avoid the problem :)
As said somewhere else, calling home issues are just a question of your firewall / DNS setup
As said somewhere else, calling home issues are just a question of your firewall / DNS setup
Which version of RPI is that?
The most recent 5 months ago. So v4 I guess, the biggest that still supports 32bit Linux which afaik is the 8gb version. There was only one more expensive.
A bit more general and off topic, I'm recently growing tired of updates in general; both on my phone and on my desktop.
Has anyone been able to create a productive and safe environment where updates don't happen that often or don't affect their UX? I'd be interested to hear about such experiences.
Has anyone been able to create a productive and safe environment where updates don't happen that often or don't affect their UX? I'd be interested to hear about such experiences.
My prediction: within a week, Google will delete all the negative reviews.
i don't see any in my language but the ratings are quite telling https://i.imgur.com/PGmoD33.png
Does it help if you have ad blocker on the dns level like NextDNS ?
Any suggestions for an Ad Blocker or different Android TV launcher?
I hate the idea of ads just like any other person however how else companies profit without it or creating a paid subscription to remove ads for so
much a month/year? As I see it you pay for the product not the service.
Then sell the product with ads and let people decide if they want to buy it with them or get something else.
Don't sell someone hardware that operates seemingly without ads, then foist them on the user after-the-fact.
Don't sell someone hardware that operates seemingly without ads, then foist them on the user after-the-fact.
People paid for a $200 streaming device with a stock Android TV with basic launcher, NVIDIA failed allowing the stock Google launcher and not adding their own without ads.
people are surprised?
wait until you purchase a premium smart TV ;)
that shit should be illegal
wait until you purchase a premium smart TV ;)
that shit should be illegal
Time for Apple to start taking tvOS seriously. There is a lot of advertising revenue for Apple to capture that doesn’t involve plastering ads everywhere. Just think about live sports intermissins.
Apple is just another domineering company that takes our computing rights away. I don't want them at the helm, either.
This is great news for Apple TV. People who bought the nvidia shield, like me, were looking for a powerful device that was clean of ads.
Now there is only one left.
Now there is only one left.
Is Google anticipating going bankrupt?
Can this be disabled via Pi-Hole?
Abandoned the Google ecosystem (Android, Chromecast, etc) this spring after 5+ years for Apple. Never looked back!
Some years back, Google's then CEO Eric Schmidt openly stated that "The Google policy on a lot of things is to get right up to the creepy line and not cross it."[1]
It is also (as has been the case with numerous other tech firms) been to take other experiences, here maximal ad saturation, straight up to the pain tolerance, before (one presumes) dialing it down a bit.
(Facebook have similarly done this repeatedly with surveillance, stalking, and dark patterns, Microsoft formerly did this with licensing fee and process requirements, the latter limited by the tendency to drive users to either piracy or, vastly worse in Microsoft's view,[2] Linux or Free Software alternatives.)
The rationale is effectively the same as that captured by Jules Dupuit's 19th century observation on the miserable quality of third-class rail service:
It is not because of the several thousand francs which they would have to spend to cover the third class wagons or to upholster the benches. ... [I]t would happily sacrifice this [expense] for the sake of its popularity.
Its goal is to stop the traveler who can pay for the second class trip from going third class. It hurts the poor not because it wants them to personally suffer, but to scare the rich."[3]
My presumption is that Google are looking to pry those people who can afford a new (and presumably less-ad-saturated) device or (more likely) service off Android TV and onto their alternative offerings. I'm hoping this backfires via defections to other vendors, outright abandonment, and/or regulatory sanction. Though my expectations for all of these responses are low based on prior experience.
________________________________
Notes:
1. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/eric-schmidt-google-creepy_n_... (2010-10-4)
2. Bill Gates in 1998: "[A]s long as they’re going to steal it, we want them to steal ours. They’ll get sort of addicted, and then we’ll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade." https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2006-apr-09-fi-micro... (2009-4-6) See also Jeff Raikes "If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it ti be us rather than somebody else" https://www.informationweek.com/if-youre-going-to-steal-soft... (2007-3-12)
3. I don't have the original 1849 source, though this particular translation appears in a now-purged Inc. post by Bill Murphy Jr.: https://web.archive.org/web/20180307183620/https://www.inc.c... Based on dates and Dupuit's publication listing, this is probably found in De l’influence des peages sur 1’utilité des voies de communication.
It is also (as has been the case with numerous other tech firms) been to take other experiences, here maximal ad saturation, straight up to the pain tolerance, before (one presumes) dialing it down a bit.
(Facebook have similarly done this repeatedly with surveillance, stalking, and dark patterns, Microsoft formerly did this with licensing fee and process requirements, the latter limited by the tendency to drive users to either piracy or, vastly worse in Microsoft's view,[2] Linux or Free Software alternatives.)
The rationale is effectively the same as that captured by Jules Dupuit's 19th century observation on the miserable quality of third-class rail service:
It is not because of the several thousand francs which they would have to spend to cover the third class wagons or to upholster the benches. ... [I]t would happily sacrifice this [expense] for the sake of its popularity.
Its goal is to stop the traveler who can pay for the second class trip from going third class. It hurts the poor not because it wants them to personally suffer, but to scare the rich."[3]
My presumption is that Google are looking to pry those people who can afford a new (and presumably less-ad-saturated) device or (more likely) service off Android TV and onto their alternative offerings. I'm hoping this backfires via defections to other vendors, outright abandonment, and/or regulatory sanction. Though my expectations for all of these responses are low based on prior experience.
________________________________
Notes:
1. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/eric-schmidt-google-creepy_n_... (2010-10-4)
2. Bill Gates in 1998: "[A]s long as they’re going to steal it, we want them to steal ours. They’ll get sort of addicted, and then we’ll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade." https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2006-apr-09-fi-micro... (2009-4-6) See also Jeff Raikes "If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it ti be us rather than somebody else" https://www.informationweek.com/if-youre-going-to-steal-soft... (2007-3-12)
3. I don't have the original 1849 source, though this particular translation appears in a now-purged Inc. post by Bill Murphy Jr.: https://web.archive.org/web/20180307183620/https://www.inc.c... Based on dates and Dupuit's publication listing, this is probably found in De l’influence des peages sur 1’utilité des voies de communication.
Does this also impact Android TVs? Like Sony models, etc.
I want to know this as well. I’m considering another Sony for my next TV (I currently have a pre-Android model), but if this update affects the Sony UI, that immediately strikes them from the list.
Was deeply frustrated last year when it became clear in the US market at least that dumb TVs no longer exist, not unless one wants to pay the 4x premium for buying a gaming monitor and using it as a TV.
Decided to buy an Android TV, one that would not need a network connection on the Android side for HDMI input mode to work, and just keep a computer plugged into it. Lack of sensible remote control is annoying. But forced ads are infuriating.
Decided to buy an Android TV, one that would not need a network connection on the Android side for HDMI input mode to work, and just keep a computer plugged into it. Lack of sensible remote control is annoying. But forced ads are infuriating.
From an older comment I made:
Find the hospitality version of whatever you want from CDW (Samsung and LG do a lot of them, idk about Sony). They are designed for hotels and hospitals, and have the same picture quality but no smart stuff. An example from Samsung: https://www.cdw.com/product/samsung-678u-series-55-4k-uhd-le...
Find the hospitality version of whatever you want from CDW (Samsung and LG do a lot of them, idk about Sony). They are designed for hotels and hospitals, and have the same picture quality but no smart stuff. An example from Samsung: https://www.cdw.com/product/samsung-678u-series-55-4k-uhd-le...
Thanks for the tip
The way to combat this is not to buy products that have this and then complain about them. The companies that make them do not care, they have already gotten your money.
The way to combat this is to not buy products that have this in the first place.
edit: a lot of comments are saying that the ads were added later, after purchase. This doesn't change my opinion at all, because people still bought products that have the capability for ads to be added retroactively. That is on you.
If you don't like the option of it happening, and as this example illustrates it can clearly happen, then do not buy products that have the capability of having ads added retroactively to the product.
The way to combat this is to not buy products that have this in the first place.
edit: a lot of comments are saying that the ads were added later, after purchase. This doesn't change my opinion at all, because people still bought products that have the capability for ads to be added retroactively. That is on you.
If you don't like the option of it happening, and as this example illustrates it can clearly happen, then do not buy products that have the capability of having ads added retroactively to the product.
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.
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.
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/introd...
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/introd...
Yes, it is required by Google for Android TV devices.
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/
Lots of comments on this specific thread: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/shield-tv/9/4579...
Edit: You can see some complaints flowing in on Nvidea's forum: 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/9/4579...
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.
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.
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?
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.
'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.
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.
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.
Many people definitely predicted this outcome years ago. At the time it was dismissed with "slippery slope fallacy" etc.
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
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.
You got played. You were scammed. You are a victim of following what society told you.
Accept it and think though your next purchase.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
> 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
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
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.
Customers can and should complain here, that's like saying don't purchase any software ever? People like smart TVs for good reasons.
Yep. I’m not really looking forward to buying a hospitality or commercial version for my next TV but I fully expect that is how it will go when I tell the local electronics store that I just want a display.
It’s similar to the whole online advertising thing. I have no qualms about closing your website because of a cookie banner dark pattern or an annoying ad that makes it past my filtering. I’ll never come back either.
The problem is that the vast majority of people do not behave in this manner.
It’s similar to the whole online advertising thing. I have no qualms about closing your website because of a cookie banner dark pattern or an annoying ad that makes it past my filtering. I’ll never come back either.
The problem is that the vast majority of people do not behave in this manner.
> The problem is that the vast majority of people do not behave in this manner.
Precisely. It's why shit like this continues to happen. Because the stark reality is that most people do not care. And a large percentage of the ones that do care will still continue to buy the offending products anyway, they'll just complain about them.
Precisely. It's why shit like this continues to happen. Because the stark reality is that most people do not care. And a large percentage of the ones that do care will still continue to buy the offending products anyway, they'll just complain about them.
How do you propose people don’t buy products that have ads added to them in the future?
It's very straightforward: do not buy products that have the capability to have ads added to them retroactively.
There is zero way any of the three televisions in my house will have ads added to them unless someone physically comes into my home and replaces the television sets.
There is zero way any of the three televisions in my house will have ads added to them unless someone physically comes into my home and replaces the television sets.
I was looking for dumb tvs a little bit ago and it's quite hard to find. Every company wants to turn their hardware sale into an eternal revenue stream.
They are not hard to find at all. Sure it's more 'difficult' than searching for 'TV' on Amazon, but if you spend ten minutes doing a web search, you will find some brands.
Here's one site to get you started: https://pointerclicker.com/best-dumb-tv/
Here's one site to get you started: https://pointerclicker.com/best-dumb-tv/
Alibaba. I'm just buying what are basically big monitors. I'm paying what feels like a premium price for a screen, one power and three HDMI input - only. Lack of other BS is the premium feature.
Edit: down thread someone calls it "commercial display" - search for those.
Edit: down thread someone calls it "commercial display" - search for those.
You’re also limited to mostly LED televisions
How do you prevent someone from adding ads to the phone or computer you used to send that post?
> If you don't like the option of it happening, and as this example illustrates it can clearly happen, then do not buy products that have the capability of having ads added retroactively to the product.
So, don't buy anything capable of receiving a software update?
So, don't buy anything capable of receiving a software update?
> So, don't buy anything capable of receiving a software update?
Not quite. Don't buy anything that forces updates. Updates are obviously important for security, compatibility and a slew of other reasons. But updates which are forced on the user are no bueno.
Not quite. Don't buy anything that forces updates. Updates are obviously important for security, compatibility and a slew of other reasons. But updates which are forced on the user are no bueno.
Literally any device can force you to update, by the simple means of not letting you access the service without the latest version of their app.
> Literally any device can force you to update, by the simple means of not letting you access the service without the latest version of their app.
This is literally not true.
This is literally not true.
And if a fix for a critical vulnerability and an ad feature are both in the same update?
> And if a fix for a critical vulnerability and an ad feature are both in the same update?
Can you point to actual real-world examples where this has been the case?
I don't see the point of this stretched hypothetical. If it were to come up, then you could deal with accordingly - for instance by getting the update and then blocking the ad server somewhere upstream in your network path.
Can you point to actual real-world examples where this has been the case?
I don't see the point of this stretched hypothetical. If it were to come up, then you could deal with accordingly - for instance by getting the update and then blocking the ad server somewhere upstream in your network path.
They don't actually have to be in the same update, the security fix just has to come after the ad antifeature with no separate patches presented, only a linear series of versions. And that linear model is extremely common. Anything using the linear model that has both antifeature updates and security updates at unpredictable times is very likely to run into the “can't install the security update without accepting the antifeature” problem.
Again:
> I don't see the point of this stretched hypothetical. If it were to come up, then you could deal with accordingly - for instance by getting the update and then blocking the ad server somewhere upstream in your network path.
And then not buying that brand's products in the future. And advising others not to buy them.
> I don't see the point of this stretched hypothetical. If it were to come up, then you could deal with accordingly - for instance by getting the update and then blocking the ad server somewhere upstream in your network path.
And then not buying that brand's products in the future. And advising others not to buy them.
My point above was not about how to deal with it, but only to point in the direction of it being very very much not a “stretched hypothetical”, but a reality of a vast quantity of consumer software, including critical things that are difficult for people to replace. (My worldmodel doesn't judge your proposed counter very highly either, FWIW, but I don't feel up to arguing that part just now.)
And now you have reached the exact point these same Android TV customers have reached :)
Can you admit you are wrong now?
Can you admit you are wrong now?
I am not sure it is that stretched. Do you remember Windows 7 added telemetry, how it was added and how update descriptions became way less helpful?
> The way to combat this is not to buy products that have this...
I did!
That is the ENTIRE point.
I did!
That is the ENTIRE point.
As far as I understand the product was bought first and the ads came later with an update.
The products didn't have the ads when they bought them.
I’d love to buy a “dumb” tv. How do I do that?
I have searched far and wide last year for a dumb tv and couldn't find one. Like another said there's the Sceptre TVs, I've stumbled upon it earlier this year with this article: https://frame.work/ca/en/blog/in-defense-of-dumb-tvs
I've even started to look into buying just a big monitor and an external tv tuner.
I've even started to look into buying just a big monitor and an external tv tuner.
The words you’re looking for are “hospitality” and “commercial display”
The hospitality versions will be cheaper than commercial (commercial displays are designed to last longer with continuous operation).
The hospitality versions will be cheaper than commercial (commercial displays are designed to last longer with continuous operation).
Just buy a cheap smart one and attach a device that fully controls it via hmdi. My bedroom TV boots to Kodi and the original remote is attached as well as a small keyboard. Basically the best solution I found
I’d be worried that it was still phoning home even when I was on a different input. It’s a good solution if you have to have a smart tv though.
How would it do that? You think they’re shipping SIM cards in the TV?
IMO these problems should be solved with a firewall either way. You can never know when they start talking home.
Right! Like Nvidia Shield! wait
Ansil849(1)
Just admit you posted a bad take and move on.
1. Install a new launcher from play store (I found one called "Basic Launcher" that matches the aesthetics of the default one). This doesn't solve the problem though, because Google disabled changing the default launcher for some user hostile reason, until you delete the existing launcher.
2. Enable development mode by tapping on the build number in settings
3. Connect an adb shell to your device
4. Remove the built in launcher
5. Reboot, select basic launcher when prompted
I own a few android TV devices, have recommended them to people in the past, and won't be purchasing another. I think what happened here should be illegal and shame on whoever worked on this.