Because of smartphones, pocket TVs were never a thing.
As a kid I imagined the future as being able to hold a TV in your pocket, and flying skateboards. For the latter I guess electric scooters will have to do
No? Searching for "digital picture frame" brings up pages of results. These are popular enough because they are much cheaper than an equivalently sized tablet, e.g. a 10 inch digital picture frame details for around $150, which is less than half the price of a crappy android tablet.
Also, tablets don't really exceed 12 inches or so in size, but you can get digital picture frames as large as TVs.
I had one that had the same form factor as a gameboy. It was black, the screen had a resolution so tiny you could not really make anything out, and it was almost impossible to get a stable signal. But I loved it when I was 12 years old, because I was only allowed to watch tv for an hour every day, and nobody knew I had that tiny TV which I bought from the money I made delivering flowers.
I still have it in a box somewhere.
i had several battery operated 'pocket' tvs of various sizes... 80s/90s.. the best being the watchman...
somewhere around 2005 i saw one in a mall, used, for sale. i remember thinking it would only be valuable for a few more months as they were about to switch everything to 'digital broadcast' and it would be completely useless.
I think some of the folks in this thread might enjoy the Techmoan channel on YouTube. It's not about pocket TVs in particular, but he does review and restore old AV tech. It's a fun channel if you're into retro tech.
I disagree, the watchman and clones existed into the 2000s and were tech found in several households. Ours ended up with some of the tornado kit so we could get news broadcasts in power outages and other emergencies.
Gimmick/niche isn't an appropriate description for technology that was superceded by smartphones, even early ones.
Absolutely! (Same as playing a regular game on a Game Gear.)
I had both an AC adapter and a 12VDC car adapter for mine. Without those (considering the sorry state of rechargeables back then), the cost of batteries would've made actually using the damn thing untenable.
I know it's semantics, but if your great-gramps would time travel to today, he would ask about your pocket TV, and you would reply nah, it's a smartphone
Which is actually not smartphone, but a general purpose computer with cell internet connection that can be used for many things, one of those is actually calling.
No, because your smartphone needs internet, tv signals reach way more places, and more reliably.
Especially since broadcast tv, in America ya damn Limeys, is free, while internet is either very localized (WiFi, etc…) which may or may not be free, or wide spread (Cell phones, Satellites, etc…) which are definitely pay.
Here, in the middle of nowhere, like a town with 1500 people was the biggest thing in 20 miles or so, we got about 10-15 channels without even having the antenna outside the house, plus surrounded by forest.
We have more OTA channels, you just have to pay for them. The free channels are in shitty SD quality (you have to pay for HD) and they are only unencrypted because the government requires it (as they are used for emergency broadcasts).