NPD: "Smart TVs" barely used for Internet features

In the past couple of years, we have seen TV companies release new "smart TVs" that add WiFi and Ethernet ports that allow these TVs to connect to a home Internet network. These TVs have tons of features such as web browsers, Facebook apps, games and more. Google has been trying to push its Google TV OS to TV and set-top makers for the past couple of years, with limited success.

Today, the NPD Group released the results of a new survey and they don't look good for "smart TVs". They show that the only really popular feature of these televisions is being able to watch video from streaming video services such as Netflix and Hulu Plus. The survey shows that close to 60 smart TV owners use them for this feature.

After that, the results show much less use for any other feature. Streaming services like Pandora is used about 15 percent by smart TV owners and web browsing on the TV is only done by 10 percent of those owners. Other Internet features such as shopping, using Facebook or playing games are in the single digits in the survey results.

The message is clear; aside from watching Netflix and (maybe) Pandora; TV owners have little interest in using their big screen TV as an Internet portal, even when given the option to do so. NPD states:

To counter this, OEMs and retailers need to focus less on new innovation in this space and more on simplification of the user experience and messaging if they want to drive additional, and new, behaviors on the TV.

Source: NPD | Image via NPD

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

The current top 10 most downloaded free Windows 8 apps are ...

Next Story

Ad network impressions shows iPad dominates, Surface has work to do


Commenting is disabled on this article.

First off if/when apple bring out there own TV itll probably rediculously expensive for the so called "innovations"

the MAIN reason why ppl dont surf the net and watch all these videos on TV and do facebook etc is because its like a 32-55" TV in the main living room as a focal point, no privacy whatsoever from anyone sitting there or walking around. Main reason.... DONE!!

I'm not surprised.

Due to poor implementation. They are usually very slow to load. The Interface both physical and visual are not up to the task. And No support for video overlay and-or passthrough. Video! don't get me started... try finding a camera that you can be sure will work with your TV. In stead of just making most PC USB web cams work with TV, they usually have an hard to find one off Camera specially designed for the TV and it is over priced. Another Market ripe for Apple to swoop in and just do the things these companies are too stupid to do right. All the technologies are there to make it work smooth... no one is willing to go the extra mile and make sure they work in concert! Sad.

The only time I'd use a "smart" TV is a set up like the one I have.

I have a large LCD tv, with a home theater system, and a media center PC running PLEX.

With PLEX, I can browse my personal movies, tv shows, music, and even browse YouTube, Spotify, and other shows like The Daily Show or South Park.

...Needless to say, I only watch live tv about 5% of the time.

As far as Facebook or apps like that, that's what I have my iPhone or my Surface RT for.

"Smart TVs" barely do video on demand and music sort of decently, this is totally expected since their experiences are not built around anything else. Also, nobody wants twitter on TVs, we just want augmented video experiences, context/immersive entertainment, and local social sharing (aka "let me show you this funny Youtube video" with friends and family).

Smart TVs are all about *sometime* connectivity - very few owners of them will use them as outright replacements for PCs, or even portables (including tablets, slates, etc.). My Mom just picked up a Samsung smart TV - she also has a desktop (Windows 7 Ultimate x64) and a legacy laptop (Gateway Solo 600 running Windows XP). She will be using the smart TV for Facebook connectivity and to watch streaming video (from my own desktop in the basement) - for everything else, she will use her existing desktop and laptop. (I bought a same-size Sony HDTV - like her Samsung, it's an LED LCD, but lacks - deliberately - any *smart* features; if I need Internet connectivity, I'll simply connect my existing desktop tower to the TV, as it supports HDMI.) It makes a lot more sense to connect a PC supporting HDMI as opposed to paying the premium for a *smart* TV, especially since they are around the same price if you go the refurbished route (notebook OR legacy laptop).

Almost everyone who would be interested in one of these TV's would already own pc(s) games console(s) cameras for both, some even come with built in mics, smartphones etc... I'm with the majority here, (so far) I don't understand the need to have a TV that does all that (and not very well neither from what I've read about them)

i have a samsung smart tv, i got it purely for the picture, the 3D and internet enabled parts were entirely a bonus.

The 3D has impressed me, the images are razor sharp and it doesn't strain the eyes that much.

The internet side has not impressed me much, the apps are laggy and just generally annoyng to use. I recently done an update for all of the UK streaming apps such as ITV player, iPlayer etc.. and they are still really slow, i don't understand why they didn't give the TV's more RAM/Processing power, the experience is poor.

I would agree w/ comments about about how the internet apps are slow and laggy at trying to use, not to mention not worth the extra $200 premium for the 'SMART' features.

When I bought my TV, I made sure to not get the SMART version, b/c I wasn't going to pay $100-200 more for crappy apps.

You can get an Xbox for that much that does way more, or you can get a Roku for $60 that pretty much covers most of the functionality (Netflix streaming) and the interface is way more smoother.

That's pretty much my usage. Netflix>Slacker, occasionally YouTube with friends over.

Now, if the TV came with full blown Android, and I could use a BT keyboard and mouse with it, that would definitely change.

I own several SMART TV's at my house.

I just use the network connection for firmware updates and DLNA (watching stuff from my File Server at home) .

Most (if not 99%) of the so SMART functions are worthless.

Why would I in my right mind, spend minutes typing using the control "Firefox version history" or "Last conan episode about the baby screaming vagina", it's nut's. Sure I could add a keyboard, but don't I own an iPhone, or notebook's or desktop's?

Why would I use my TV for net, when I have multiple devices around or a few meters away that do it 10x better?

Yes, that's why an Apple TV (Native, no more box's) would rock this market, although I'm more interested on the offerings the competition will then have!

I would love to use the TV for like Browsing Youtube and stuff but with the rubbish typing and slow bulky applications it's not been worth it.

So basically, people buy a brand new TV . . . to watch TV on.

In other news, the Pope is Catholic, Elvis Presley is dead, and bears s**t in the woods.

The only thing I would find useful on a TV is WiFi for direct streaming. Everything else is like uhh I have a tablet, desktop and laptop I can just use those...oh wait and I have a smartphone.

Sounds logical.

I haven't seen the presentation of these other text heavy apps on a smartTV but if it's anything like IE10 on xbox, it's no wonder people keep those activities for their phones/tablets/pcs.