There is an article in the WSJ today that talks about people cutting the cable cord and going with internet-based TV. Makes sense to me. But today it requires you have both a TV and another device that hooks up to the TV (Roku, Mac Mini, Mediacenter PC, etc).
I expect that eventually TV will be delivered over IP and that the cable companies will have a diminished role (although they will have a broadband business). The question is, what is the motivator. Is Internet TV going to be better or going to be cheaper?
I think the driver will be that it is cheaper. You can’t make TV better. It is already great. It must be since people spend hundreds of hours a month watching it! If money is not object, you can create an amazing TV experience in your house with HD cable service (or FIOS) and a Tivo. But its expensive.
What we need is a Internet TV combined with something like Boxee built in. The TV experience would not initially be better, but it would be cheaper. The TV could even cost an extra $50 if it allowed the buyer to avoid subscribing to cable and only buy broadband.
Between Hulu and YouTube, there is sufficient free content, and if you want premium content on a pay-per-view basis, there is Amazon Unbox (which my dream TV would have built in).
Apple could do this product. They do have an Apple TV product, but the funny thing is that it actually does not include a TV. And it lacks Hulu (but has YouTube).
In my mind the way you get this done is by putting the technology into a bargain LCD TV, like Vizio. Price-conscious buyers already look to that Brand to save a buck and so they will like the idea of saving $700 bucks a year with an Internet TV.