My first big-screen HDTV was marketed as a "monitor" - they couldn't call it a "TV" since it didn't have a built-in tuner, which in 2001 cost in the range of $500 and up. Today, digital tuners are cheap and are built into pretty much any TV designed for the living room. Although I've had to part with my first HDTV, I have not parted with the "monitor" mentality.
The TV displays a signal, plain and simple. The source of the signal and the computing power required to process it is something that changes. I prefer to have a relatively media-feature-poor TV, which I am not going to be replacing regularly, and spend the money on external signal-receiving-and-processing boxes (roku, bluray, xbox, ASTC tuner, WD media box, etc.) that can be easily swapped out and upgraded. Also note that the premiums you pay for these media features correlate to the value of the item. If you're asked to pay a $150 premium for a TV with built-in memory for DLNA streaming and only a $50 premium for a blu-ray player with this functionality, as is often the case, the decision is a no-brainer. My point is that, even if you're paying the same premium on both devices, it makes sense to have it built into the blu-ray player, which is cheaper and easily upgradable in a year or two when the media feature are so much more advanced, vs. being stuck with 2010 technology built into your TV for the life of the TV.