Skip to main content

5 Reasons Connected TV Could Flop in 2011

Jeremy Toeman has worked in the field of convergence between computers, the Internet and TV for more than 10 years. He is a founding partner of Stage Two, a consumer technology product experience firm in San Francisco, and can be found blogging at
Forget Google TV scrapping CES, the biggest challenge smart televisions face in 2011 is overcoming customers’ FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt).
Up until the early 2000s, buying a new TV was easy. The bigger the screen, the better the television. Sure, some televisions had more bells and better whistles, but in the era of standard definition and cathode ray tubes, bigger was better.
When high definition flat screens became affordable in the middle of the last decade, consumers still felt pretty comfortable buying a new television. With the exception of 720p vs. 1080p and LCD vs. plasma (and a few other little things), there was not a lot of FUD for consumers. People understood (for the most part) the technology they were getting and the value it provided them. They also more or less understood the product life cycle their television provided them.
Now enter smart TVs and 3-D TVs. To the industry, these devices represent an opportunity to upsell consumers with added benefits and features. But to consumers, these connected televisions also introduce planned obsolescence into television life cycles. Planned obsolescence is a concept where companies sell products with a limited lifespan or functionality to encourage repeat purchases and upgrades. The result? Consumers are staying away from new TV. Instead of getting excited for new features, they are getting scared. To quote a recent industry article: “Despite all the hype, 3-D sets haven’t been a runaway success, and Internet-capable ones haven’t fared much better.”
Why is this happening? Sure, a slow economy is one reason, but there are others that are more concerning to television makers and the consumer electronics industry as a whole. It’s my opinion that FUD is a major factor in 3-D TV failure as well. Consumers’ questions include: Do I need more glasses? Does it work with my Blu-ray? Will all titles be compatible?

1. The Internet on TV Sounds Confusing

For average consumers, the thought of hooking up the Internet to their television set sounds confusing. Many wonder what they will have to do to make a smart TV work with their existing home theater setup. People understand a cable box and an AV receiver – sort of (hence the “input one” problem that plagues the industry). Adding the Internet into that equation is off-putting for many people who just want to watch Top Chef. Emphasizing ease of use and simple connectivity should be a main concern for television manufacturers in 2011.

2. The Internet on TV Is Confusing

Most Internet TVs have a poor user interface and force users to confront awkward technology questions (for example, are you using WEP or WPA?). These are issues users don’t enjoy resolving. Conjoining home networking with the home theater just doesn’t sound like fun to consumers. They want to watch their new television without a call to tech support, and that is understandable. Delivering products that are simple to set up and easy to use should be a main concern for television manufacturers. Just because there’s a “pretty” new user interface with humongous buttons to click on and an up/down/left/right interface doesn’t make it a great user experience.

3. Fear of Obsolescence

Before smart TVs arrived, a TV was just a TV. Now a TV is an app store and a browser and so much more. Users will worry that the Internet TV they purchase this year will be outdated in six months. That kind of product cycle is fine for a phone, but it makes less sense for a large TV. Add in turf wars between Apple, Google and others and you have an unstable, rapidly iterating media landscape that most consumers fear to enter. To catch on, new televisions need to demonstrate staying power and reassure consumers that they will still work well in 2015.

4. Customer Support Concerns

Something we’ve all learned through PCs is the incredible ability to “pass the buck” on customer support problems introduced by high tech products. For example, when you can’t get a video game to play right on your laptop, and you call Dell, its support staff will probably tell you it’s a problem with NVIDIA’s drivers, and they tell you it’s actually Microsoft’s fault, and if they even return your call or e-mail, they tell you it’s really EA’s problem, who of course sends you back to Dell (all just to play a video game!).
That’s a long-winded example, but consumers are unfortunately used to that type of service, and nobody likes the idea of calling Samsung’s support people and having them tell you it’s a problem with your Netgear router, who in turn point the finger at your Comcast Internet provider, and they turn you over to Netflix, who sends you back to Samsung (all just to watch a movie!).

5. Poorly Defined Value Proposition

As I wrote in my last Mashable post, most smart TVs are being touted for their technology rather than the benefits they provide people. Instead of telling people that the weather app is on their TV (a feature), the industry should emphasize the personal weather forecasts smart TVs generate that are tailored for individual needs (a benefit). For the average consumer, Facebook on TV sounds like a lot of work (“Where will I type? Do I still “Like” stuff? Does FarmVille work? What else do I need to do?”). Putting Twitteron the television sounds like it is a lot of work. Anything that involves a mouse and a keyboard seems — and is — onerous to the living room context. The value proposition for smart TVs has to be the effortless delivery of content in ways that mirror the ease of standard TV experience.
If smart televisions want to catch on, manufacturers and advertisers must communicate their ease of use, benefits and staying power to overcome consumer fears. Manufacturers must make it crystal clear that smart TVs are a safe, long-term investment that will work in a landscape of changing technologies and content services.


Popular posts from this blog

Top 5 Women Who Impacted Technology in 2010

Katie Stanton, International Strategist for Twitter Katie Stanton has impressively long names of companies in her resume. They include the White House, Google Inc, and her latest addition is Twitter. Her remit is working on Twitter’s international strategy and her experience in social media will be a key asset to the company. Katie has a history of working in technology, and her knowledge of departmental laws will help Twitter work alongside government agencies, as she’ll be spearheading the free information approach, especially after the Wikileaks incident. Stanton has been a key player in the techsphere for some time, and this extends to her private life. Following the Haiti disaster she worked with a group of engineers to create a free texting service to help those in need and she is constantly in demand as an expert in both social media and government policy.
Caterina Fake, Co-Founder of Flickr and Hunch Despite having a surname which sounds like a pseudonym for a spy (it’…

AT&T MiFi 2372 review

In the week or so that I have been testing the AT&T MiFi 2372 by Novatel Wireless, it has already saved no less than three lives. First, it saved my cable guy’s life. You see, Time Warner Cable provides the worst home Internet service I have ever experienced. I can’t even think of a close second. If providing terrible home Internet service was a sport, Time Warner Cable would be on its tenth consecutive undefeated season. Forget the fact that my upload speed is capped at 60Kbps and I’m lucky if I can get half that — it has been months since I’ve gone through a full day without at least one service interruption. Months. Unfortunately, Time Warner Cable has an exclusive contract with my building so I have no choice but to endure its abysmal service. Last week, as a Time Warner Cable technician entered my home for the sixth time in two months, I realized that this certainly would have spelled serious trouble had it not been for my trusty new back up device. Before the Mi…

facebook vs google+