> On Tuesday night, Sony took the wraps off its “Internet TV” line of products which integrate [Google TV](http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2010/10/google-tv-to-finally-get-tv-right-in-the-online-video-age.ars "Ars Technica: Google TV may finally get TV right in the online video age") software. The good news, at least for those considering an HDTV with integrated Google TV, is that the pricing is much lower than [previously rumored](http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2010/10/google-tv-launch-hardware-to-be-expensive-clunky.ars "Ars Technica: Google TV launch hardware looks to be expensive, clunky"). However, the set-top box with integrated Blu-ray player is still a little on the pricey side.
via [arstechnica.com](http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2010/10/sony-announces-internet-tv-hdtvs-blu-ray-player-with-google-tv.ars)
Many people are focusing on mocking that ridiculous remote control, suggesting that people don’t want to complicate their lives with a computer for a TV. They are all correct, of course, but my bigger concern is that integrating Google TV into a TV or a Blu-ray player will make it far easier for Google to claim more market share than they actually have.
When someone buys the Logitech Revue units, Google can rightfully claim it as a sale for Google TV. When someone buys a TV that happens to have Google TV integrated, is that a TV sale, or a Google TV sale? How do we know whether the user ever intends to use the Google TV part?
It’s a smart strategy for Google, but I fear it will lead people to false impressions.
