Is a smart phone really comparable to the Wii U gamepad? If one of the complaints is that you could have a bigger, better screen with a tablet why even bring up smart phones?
Don't forget the Wii U has a touch screen tablet like device with buttons, not just a screen. Certainly a bigger screen in HD might be worth sacrificing the buttons but a smaller screen would be a downgrade for most people, even if it were HD and ignoring the loss of buttons.
I know smartglass works with smart phones, but why would someone choose that over full integration with a bigger, more versatile device? Obviously if you already have a 360 it's cheaper, but when the 720 comes out what's more appealing, buying a new console to use with your old phone or buying a new console that comes with a fully integrated tablet like device?
I think obviously there are advantages to the larger screen (even if it's lower res) and the inclusion of buttons that aren't on standard phones or tablets. However this thread is discussing the Netflix integration, and more generally, using of the pad as a companion for media regardless of service. So while the larger screen and especially buttons are clear advantages of some use-cases (games being obvious), where is the advantage for what was being demonstrated by Nintendo regarding media?
The Netflix capability wasn't shown to have any sort of deep, real-time integration like HBO Go or MS's video service - it was simply a controller for searching and controlling Netflix. I don't see why a smartphone is any less serviceable for what is being discussed here.
I can see the argument for standalone tablets, but I just don't see many people seriously using their smart phone as the main controller for their living room.
This is the sort of thing I've been trying to rectify in this thread. I'm not saying it's intentional, but there's a lot of hyperbole about the capabilities of the Wii U pad that don't match reality when you think about the bigger picture.
The Wii U Pad is
not a universal remote control in the conventional sense, and has limited usefulness.
1) Other than controlling the Wii U (and therefore certain apps like Netflix), the only known device it can control is a TV. And even then there doesn't appear to be any capability for deeper control of the TV beyond channel, input, and volume. The only other known feature is a channel guide for those using ATSC (or it's equivalent in your region). Essentially what your TV natively decodes OTA. There is no indication it will have customizable layouts ... because it doesn't need them since it can't control other devices.
2) It's battery life is terrible for usage as a remote. There's really no bones about it.
3) They wasted away the one advantage it would have versus conventional smartphones and tablets as a remote - they could have used some of the hard buttons for common remote tasks like volume and channel +/- but it appears they didn't since it's on the touchscreen. Obviously that could change with a software update but the fact it's not already there combined with #1 above shows how far away this (and Nintendo) is from a universal remote. This feels pretty tacked on, and even if they do start expanding the functionality does anyone really expect Nintendo to be competitive with some of the more serious RC solutions? They don't have expertise in it, and in general Nintendo doesn't have a great history in terms of multimedia functionality and utility.
So really, it's remote control aspects are only useful when you're using Wii U or basically have nothing else hooked up and just use OTA TV.