Originally Posted by PoshFrosh
No no no. I don't want anything built into my TV (heck, not even speakers, really). Let the TV just show images that are sent to it and that's all.
If you purchase a really decent TV for a large amount of money, you may want it to last for years and not have to purchase a new TV because some unrelated built in functionality has been added or upgraded.
This integration is all a plan by TV manufacturers to get people to buy new TVs each time they come up with some new gizmo to add (streaming, Apps, wireless HDMI, etc.)
If you have a 1080p TV, you should be able to keep that until there is a significant display related technology advancement (e.g. 4K resolution video).
Computer monitors don't have wireless connectivity built in, so why should TVs? Both are usually near the AV source more often than not.
If anything needs to be wireless, it would be the projector (since it is usually kept far away from other AV equipment), but even then, why not purchase an external box?
What if the wireless HDMI functionality built into your TV breaks... what will you do? Throw out the whole TV and buy a new one? (Reminds me of those TVs back in the day with VHS players built in).
This feature is obviously something that would appeal more to the non-AV-geek crowd, not us. (And looking at the poll confirms this).
BTW, I use BriteView's AirSyncHD ($199) to achieve this functionality and it works fine. It is small enough to not be obtrusive, and since it is external, it can be repositioned for better reception/transmission (would a wireless TV have an external antenna?)
If $200 is about what this technology costs, then I think that is too much to add to the cost of a TV.
Just my 2 cents.