Hey Apple: I don't want to talk to my TV
Nick Bilton's post in Bits last week -- about Siri being the technology that would power a bona fide Apple television -- troubled me.
It's not that I'm attached to my remotes. I have three and I'm always losing them. It's just that I don't need another thing in my house to talk to. That's what my wife and three kids are for. Even my two cats are starved for attention -- I should be talking to them more than my TV.
And how would this really work? I'm sitting on the couch with my wife. She's reading a book. I'm talking to the TV. So my wife has to listen to me talking to the TV, PLUS the TV itself? Uh-huh. I can tell you: that ain't happening.
Does anyone appreciate how hugely annoying it will be to live in a house where someone is talking to their TV? And what if you want to flip the channel to a program that you don't want your mom upstairs to know you're watching?
There are too many things to worry about here!
Another point: many of us work all day talking to people. We spend hours on the phone, in interviews and meetings. The last thing I want to do at night is to demand my vocal chords talk to the Apple boob tube.
I understand that Siri is cool technology and I do see it's potential in a range of devices. And I'm sure there will be many people who really do want to talk to their TVs. I just won't want to hang out with them in their living rooms.
I just hope Apple gives us other ways to control it, too, i.e. a regular remote, or an iPad/iPhone interface. Pretty please, Apple?
This is an archived version of the technology blog. For updated coverage, see the current baltTech location: baltimoresun.com/balttech
Comments
This is a very ignorant article. The writer uses very out there point to bash a upcoming apple product. Why wouldn't you want to talk to your tv? Just tell it to switch to whatever your favorite channel is and it does. Tell it you want to play Playstation and it automaticly switches inputs. Tell your iTV that you feel like watching a movie with Tom Hanks and it finds all that are playing. The writer is making it seem like he is having to have a conversation with the tv, not just give it a short command. I never leave comments on these things but I just had to for the simple fact of how pointless this article was
Posted by: John | October 30, 2011 4:39 PM
I don't understand the panic. When remote controls came around they didn't do away with the controls on our TVs; even decades later. It's honestly more natural to presume the same will happen with a voice control feature and that it will just be an additional button on a full function remote. I think that is just common sense. And why presume stupidity from a company that has a track record of making well thought out products that aim to simplify the lives of the technically challenged?
Posted by: techangelist | October 30, 2011 4:49 PM
This entire subject has no basis in fact, NONE. People took one passage in Steve's bio and built this whole Siri enabled TV story. These same people ignore the passage where Steve see's Siri at work for the FIRST time this past August at the board meeting where he tenders his resignation as CEO.
In short there is no Siri enabled TV and that was not the "cracked it" interface Steve was talking about!
People need to READ the book!
Posted by: NotTellingYou | October 31, 2011 10:15 AM
You may not want to talk to your TV, but with 4 remotes that get lost on an hourly basis because my five kids won't put them back I will be happy to say:
"Please change the channel to Dr. Who."
So that I don't miss the opening of the show because the Cable Remote has fallen behind the couch again.
Posted by: John Gibson | October 31, 2011 10:54 AM
Wow a new low. Commenting on the travesty of a product that only exists in the realm of gossip columns. Bravo!
Posted by: M Duran | October 31, 2011 10:58 AM
It would be extremely surprising if you couldn't use a remote as well or instead of voice, as Apple think a lot about access for people with a handicap. The article must have been written when the "journalist" realized that he had forgotten to write anything that day: In haste and with little to no substance...
Posted by: Fredrik Haan | October 31, 2011 11:04 AM
"Hey Apple: I don't want to talk to my TV"
... Then don't talk to your TV (even though it talks to you ;-)
Your TV is just an appliance, so don't expect it to answer you.
Also, Apple is just a company, so when you say "Hey, Apple" don't expect it to answer you either. ;-)
Posted by: ViewRoyal | October 31, 2011 1:16 PM
It's a bit premature to begin criticizing Apple regarding a product that:
1) Doesn't exist.
2) Hasn't even been announced.
3) Is based on the assumption of voice control.
But as long as you are in la la land where anything goes, let's for a moment assume a voice controlled TV.
How much more annoying is it to hear a voice instruction, than to endure the dialog and soundtrack of whatever show is currently being watched. It's not like voice commands will be impinging on a background of dead silence.
Furthermore, while voice control might be an option (even the preferred option) the hand-held remote will still be available. I expect that one would at the very least use the remote to activate voice control (muting the TV) when a command was being issued. In fact, the remote would probably contain the microphone.
But again, one should not assume that Steve Jobs great breakthrough for television was necessarily going to be voice control.
Posted by: Brett | October 31, 2011 7:29 PM