On 10/18/2011 13:11, Warp wrote:
>    A TV may not be the optimal platform for surfing the web because of
> several reasons. For one, surfing the web is most convenient with a mouse
> and keyboard, or a touchscreen. Surfing the web with a remote control is
> not very convenient, to say the least.

While true, it's also the case that I can use my phone to surf the web on 
the TV, which is also cool. Especially since my phone has a real (almost) 
keyboard on it. Or I can plug in a USB keyboard or bluetooth keyboard.

I wouldn't want to use it all the time, but if I wanted to show something on 
a 46" screen, it's hard to beat it. :-)

>    Also, a TV is usually far from the user. Even if it's a big TV and has
> a high resolution (ie. is a HD TV), it may still be difficult to read the
> smallest text in web pages. Usually devices used to surf the web (such as
> computers, laptops, tablets, cellphones) are held close for a reason.

Actually, I've found quite the opposite. Wait until you need reading glasses 
to say a 46" screen six feet away is harder than a 21" screen two feet away. ;-)

>    Thirdly, surfing the web requires a computer. A computer requires
> additional electricity (on top of what the display itself requires),
> which seems a waste, especially in the modern world economic situation,
> not to talk about the climate.

The TV already has a computer in it, to process the HDMI and all that other 
stuff. And if you want to surf the web, then you need the screen *and* the 
computer. And the screen could (if so designed) turn off the parts of the 
computation devices that aren't being used for rendering when you're indeed 
not using them. There's probably not much extra hardware involved if you 
want the motion improvement, the play-from-a-USB-stick, the DLNA, etc. I 
don't imagine they had to add more memory for webkit than they did for 
youtube, for example.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   How come I never get only one kudo?

Post a reply to this message