Anyway, LG wasnt interested until I made a super gimmicky way of sending videos to the tv instead of using a button. You held your phone up to the tv, and it would transfer.
This limited it to apps instead of web browsers and was less reliable. But it was slightly cooler than pressing a button.
It distracted them from the whole point of my idea though. They just wanted a cool remote control they could sell with their tvs.
I suppose you could buy 4 of them, like I (an only child) did with Nintendo 64 controllers so that my friends could always play.
Maybe they both work flawlessly - I don't know, but both seem like they could easily misfire when you intended to do something completely different with your device.
The challenge, apart from making the design intuitive, is for the devices that take part in this form of interaction to understand the intent of the user.
A great example is browsing in Safari. Scrolling, zooming, and going back/forward with gestures is far more efficient than explicitly pressing buttons to do the same actions.
But maybe some marketing folks, seeing the success of Apple, have reasoned that these gimmicks can sell products in the short-term, at least until consumers discover the problems with them.
At the end of this era of tapping and rubbing little screens with our fat, dirty fingers, we may be reminded why we had tactile interfaces to begin with. What ever happened to the PDA stylus?
With a fat finger, the ui can't look and work the same as mouse driven ui as it could with a stylus.
The market despised the stylus. I tried setting up a wireless office using tablets. No one would use the stylus and actually tried using their fingers.
Experimentation in the marketplace is not a sin. Sometimes designers cannot figure out the best solutions before shipping.
So anyway, since you never know what might eventually come out of it, I'm personally grateful for the existence of "flick to tv" gimmicks.
As long as I don't have to use them myself, of course.
Instead, they went out and developed a neat little feature that yes, has its problems, but it works and it's a little more innovative than a button-based interface.
Have the read the article? The problem is that it doesn't work, for many cases where a button would.
It's innovation in superficial design only, not in functional design.