Generally, I steer clear of predictions. That said, this one feels different—I’m confident enough to stake my reputation on it. Here’s why: part of it is already unfolding. So let me walk you through the evidence backing my call.

For those unfamiliar with the industry, today’s radio broadcasters operate in an increasingly competitive landscape that spans nationally and globally. I can search for nearly any station online and stream it within moments, no matter where it’s located. With sufficient time and resources, many stations could conceivably dismantle their transmission towers and shift entirely to internet-based broadcasting.

I pause and consider television, wondering: why couldn’t the same approach apply? We could eliminate transmission towers across the nation, and potentially around the globe.

Consider this possibility: no more television sets, just a computer connected to the world through the internet—perhaps even via satellite. Imagine the freedom from cable bills and service contracts alike. Naturally, you would still have an internet bill.

Will there be a charge for this from the stations? Consider this carefully. Would you pay a dime to listen to station A when station B offers identical programming for a nickel? Perhaps station C provides it for two cents—or free of charge.

So nobody will buy a TV anymore—just a computer. With AI built in, you can simply talk to it and stream your shows right on the screen.

My TV recently malfunctioned—or more precisely, partially failed. Although I can still feed it an HDMI signal and enjoy regular viewing, streaming internet programs present a different experience altogether. Compared to traditional network and local station broadcasts, these offerings simply aren’t equivalent. While I haven’t fully investigated the reasons behind this disparity, I remain confident that this limitation won’t persist indefinitely.

I ordered a converter, and it performs excellently. I connect it to the antenna and then to the HDMI port. It brings back memories of the 1960s through 1990s, when dedicated audiophiles invested in component audio systems. We purchased a tuner, an amplifier, a turntable, and a tape deck. Enthusiasts often owned dual turntables for record playback. Premium speaker systems regularly commanded five or six hundred dollars.

After purchasing a tuner, I discovered an impressive upgrade for my TV setup. Originally, my television demanded an amplified antenna to operate effectively. Now, this compact device delivers pristine picture quality through a standard indoor antenna alone—eliminating the amplifier requirement entirely. Beyond that, the included remote proves far more intuitive than my previous one. For just $35, this tuner spared me from replacing my TV with a lower-quality picture.

Reflecting on my experience, I’ve concluded that I’ll never need another television. Should I start fresh, I’d pursue a component-based system instead—acquiring a tuner, monitor, and antenna separately. Not only would this setup outperform a smart TV, but it would also cost considerably less. Moreover, if any component requires replacement, I could simply swap out that individual piece rather than purchasing an entirely new television.

If I decide to get cable, the basic monitor should work even better. Most monitors don’t need remotes anyway, so there’s no risk of interference with cable remote controls.