• Welcome to The Audio Annex! If you have any trouble logging in or signing up, please contact 'admin - at - theaudioannex.com'. Enjoy!
  • HTTPS (secure web browser connection) has been enabled - just add "https://" to the start of the URL in your address bar, e.g. "https://theaudioannex.com/forum/"
  • Congratulations! If you're seeing this notice, it means you're connected to the new server. Go ahead and post as usual, enjoy!
  • I've just upgraded the forum software to Xenforo 2.0. Please let me know if you have any problems with it. I'm still working on installing styles... coming soon.

Roku 2 and 3 updates

I have a Roku 3 in the family room downstairs and four other roku sticks throughout the house. Yes the 3 is a little faster but other then that the sticks work just fine.
 
It has been rumored the Roku 4 will stream 4k, 2G ram, internal antenna, wifi 802.11AC support , and maybe be here around Oct (same time for Vizio's P and possible R models).
I sure hope so.
 
Do you mean internal tuner? I, like a lot of people, get pretty crappy OTA reception and I can't see a tiny antenna inside a Roku helping. Maybe if it had a tuner that I could connect a higher/better antenna to...
 
Got tired of getting up to power down/up my ROKU...trash! Bot a 3...same, returned.

Rope
 
Towen7 said:
Do you mean internal tuner? I, like a lot of people, get pretty crappy OTA reception and I can't see a tiny antenna inside a Roku helping. Maybe if it had a tuner that I could connect a higher/better antenna to...
Click to expand...
No Towen, I think just a better wifi antenna.
Rope, I think they are addressing the having to reboot issues etc.
 
I've had my Roku 3 for about a year now and have never had to reboot it. Strange maybe I got lucky. Mine works fine all the time.

Knock on wood.
 
I posted over at Yesfans thread about having to re-boot w/Netflix. Owners found you need to delete and install the Netflix app. After that no more problems.
Also the Roku 4 is suppost to have a re-set button on the front if unit freezes.
 
Rope said:
Got tired of getting up to power down/up my ROKU...trash! Bot a 3...same, returned.

Rope
Click to expand...
Rope, I've never turned mine off, I think it uses the same power as your computer on Sleep.
 
Just bought a Roku 2 after my Sony Bluray player apps kept freezing up on me. I read that the changes to the Roku 2 made it just as fast as my Roku 3 and now has the same internal chips as the Roku 3 what I lost in downgrading to the Roku 2 was the remote is now an IR instead of a RF so you do need line of sight and no headphone jack on the remote. Yep that's the only difference and its 30.00 cheaper.

Works just as fast as my Roku 3 and since my gear rack is open I didn't need RF so IR works just fine. It's in my main home theater in my great room so I didn't need a headphone jack but if I did I could just download the Roku app to my iPad and plug in my headphones and get the same effect.

What is nice is the Roku only does 720p or 1080p and since my TV is only 1080i and my DVDO scaler cannot accept a 1080p input (it can output 1080p) I just have the Roku input 720p and my scaler outputs 1080i and the picture actually looks slightly better then when I had my bluray player inputting and outputting 1080i. Strange but it does look a hair better doing it this way when it shouldn't.
 
I love the Roku platform, but the Roku 4 is a disaster. I am mostly just using the Android TV system in my Sony UHD set for now while I watch how things settle out. The whole "you can only access your content in my ecosystem if you use my device" bullshit is getting very old very fast. This is one of the reasons DRM can suck a giant bag of dicks. Want any app at all that gives you access to UltraViolet content? No Apple TV or Fire TV for you. Want Amazon Video? No Apple TV or Android TV for you (unless you have a Sony TV). Roku is the only platform that does not have this problem (unless you have iTunes or Google Play Music content). This completely blows for consumers. Part of the reason people pirate content is that they can avoid having to deal with this bullshit.
 
Haywood said:
I love the Roku platform, but the Roku 4 is a disaster. I am mostly just using the Android TV system in my Sony UHD set for now while I watch how things settle out. The whole "you can only access your content in my ecosystem if you use my device" bullshit is getting very old very fast. This is one of the reasons DRM can suck a giant bag of dicks. Want any app at all that gives you access to UltraViolet content? No Apple TV or Fire TV for you. Want Amazon Video? No Apple TV or Android TV for you (unless you have a Sony TV). Roku is the only platform that does not have this problem (unless you have iTunes or Google Play Music content). This completely blows for consumers. Part of the reason people pirate content is that they can avoid having to deal with this bullshit.
Click to expand...

BUT! This has always happened and isn't unique to streaming media. Cable companies would get "exclusive" content, regions would have events blacked, and so on. I don't see it as a hugely different thing with Streaming, other than the differences are more obvious.

I see it simply, if you want something that is only available on a certain platform, then you have to pay to be on that platform. If it isn't worth paying for, then you don't get to have that content. Very simple. Why anyone would think they deserve access to content just because it exists and they are already paying for different content elsewhere is beyond me. I mean, if you want to see original content from Amazon, Hulu, Netflix, YouTube, or Apple, then you have to pay each of them for that content AND it is possible that one device may not be able to access all of it.

We don't have any inherent right to access content just because we want it.

But, I do completely get your point. Content creators would make loads more money if this wasn't going on. But, the device makers and service operators are convinced they can guarantee more customers by having unique access to content which is not offered elsewhere.


But seriously, why do we think we deserve entertainment just because it exists? It isn't that important and it doesn't exist without a business model.
 
Flint said:
Haywood said:
I love the Roku platform, but the Roku 4 is a disaster. I am mostly just using the Android TV system in my Sony UHD set for now while I watch how things settle out. The whole "you can only access your content in my ecosystem if you use my device" bullshit is getting very old very fast. This is one of the reasons DRM can suck a giant bag of dicks. Want any app at all that gives you access to UltraViolet content? No Apple TV or Fire TV for you. Want Amazon Video? No Apple TV or Android TV for you (unless you have a Sony TV). Roku is the only platform that does not have this problem (unless you have iTunes or Google Play Music content). This completely blows for consumers. Part of the reason people pirate content is that they can avoid having to deal with this bullshit.
Click to expand...

BUT! This has always happened and isn't unique to streaming media. Cable companies would get "exclusive" content, regions would have events blacked, and so on. I don't see it as a hugely different thing with Streaming, other than the differences are more obvious.

I see it simply, if you want something that is only available on a certain platform, then you have to pay to be on that platform. If it isn't worth paying for, then you don't get to have that content. Very simple. Why anyone would think they deserve access to content just because it exists and they are already paying for different content elsewhere is beyond me. I mean, if you want to see original content from Amazon, Hulu, Netflix, YouTube, or Apple, then you have to pay each of them for that content AND it is possible that one device may not be able to access all of it.

We don't have any inherent right to access content just because we want it.

But, I do completely get your point. Content creators would make loads more money if this wasn't going on. But, the device makers and service operators are convinced they can guarantee more customers by having unique access to content which is not offered elsewhere.


But seriously, why do we think we deserve entertainment just because it exists? It isn't that important and it doesn't exist without a business model.
Click to expand...

It aggravates me to no end that I have to buy multiple mostly redundant devices to access all of the content that I am actually paying for. This is my point. Companies are actually encouraging piracy by making things so damned difficult for people who are paying for content. Even if piracy cost exactly the same amount of money, many people would still do it just to get around all these asinine restrictions. I am not claiming that these restrictions are immoral. I am claiming that they are bad business and that pissing off your customer base on an ongoing basis by forcing them to buy shit they don't want or need in order to access content that they paid for has consequences.
 
I get that it is frustrating, but I completely disagree that this issue is any possible reason to justify piracy.

I just don't understand why any content is worth getting riled up over.
 
I am talking about what really happens, not having an academic discourse on the ethics of it. When companies make it hard to pay for content in a world of easy piracy, they do nothing but lose business.
 
Forget about piracy. Amazon video gets no business from me apart from Prime, because they refuse to support UV. Sure, that is their decision and I'm sure they have their reasons. It is my business to not buy ownership based content from businesses that do not support UV.
 
Amazon losses a lot of my subscription based business by not allowing UV apps on Fire TV and by not fully spring other platforms.
 
Haywood said:
Flint said:
Haywood said:
I love the Roku platform, but the Roku 4 is a disaster. I am mostly just using the Android TV system in my Sony UHD set for now while I watch how things settle out. The whole "you can only access your content in my ecosystem if you use my device" bullshit is getting very old very fast. This is one of the reasons DRM can suck a giant bag of dicks. Want any app at all that gives you access to UltraViolet content? No Apple TV or Fire TV for you. Want Amazon Video? No Apple TV or Android TV for you (unless you have a Sony TV). Roku is the only platform that does not have this problem (unless you have iTunes or Google Play Music content). This completely blows for consumers. Part of the reason people pirate content is that they can avoid having to deal with this bullshit.
Click to expand...

BUT! This has always happened and isn't unique to streaming media. Cable companies would get "exclusive" content, regions would have events blacked, and so on. I don't see it as a hugely different thing with Streaming, other than the differences are more obvious.

I see it simply, if you want something that is only available on a certain platform, then you have to pay to be on that platform. If it isn't worth paying for, then you don't get to have that content. Very simple. Why anyone would think they deserve access to content just because it exists and they are already paying for different content elsewhere is beyond me. I mean, if you want to see original content from Amazon, Hulu, Netflix, YouTube, or Apple, then you have to pay each of them for that content AND it is possible that one device may not be able to access all of it.

We don't have any inherent right to access content just because we want it.

But, I do completely get your point. Content creators would make loads more money if this wasn't going on. But, the device makers and service operators are convinced they can guarantee more customers by having unique access to content which is not offered elsewhere.


But seriously, why do we think we deserve entertainment just because it exists? It isn't that important and it doesn't exist without a business model.
Click to expand...

It aggravates me to no end that I have to buy multiple mostly redundant devices to access all of the content that I am actually paying for. This is my point. Companies are actually encouraging piracy by making things so damned difficult for people who are paying for content. Even if piracy cost exactly the same amount of money, many people would still do it just to get around all these asinine restrictions. I am not claiming that these restrictions are immoral. I am claiming that they are bad business and that pissing off your customer base on an ongoing basis by forcing them to buy shit they don't want or need in order to access content that they paid for has consequences.
Click to expand...
I think that the bolded statement above by Haywood should be the ralying cry behind a move by all involved to adopt, for want of a better word, a "standard" to address this very real consumer problem.

As IEEE-SA's Konstantinos Karachalios has stated in response to the question "how do standards benefit consumers?" (and using wireless technology as an example:

"Interoperability is a real benefit associated with standards. Consider it from a consumers' perspective: when you purchase a laptop, you expect that it will connect wirelessly to the internet no matter where you are.

For example, think about a time you might have been working at the office on an online document, then gone to a café and searched for convenient times for a movie playing nearby, and finally gone home to review and send emails.

Throughout the entire chain of events, not once did you have to think about which standards were being used, whether your laptop's wireless technology would work in these environments or whether there would be an issue with your computer's power supply. Interoperability of standards makes all of this - and much, much more - possible.

Standards also maintain choice for consumers, ensuring that several suppliers can supply similar but compatible products, maintaining competition and keeping prices low while offering a wider range of choices in any one category."

The same should be said about purchasing content - as Haywood is doing.

I think there is a huge opportunity here for consumers, content makers, and industry alike.

Is there a brave standards organization out there leading this one?

I hope there is.

Jeff
 
I am not disagreeing with the issue. I just get frustrated that your displeasure with having to pay multiple times to get access to all the content you desire seeing is a cause for criminal activity. I am responding out of frustration, not accusation. I struggle that we live in a world where people consider any sign of difficulty in getting what they want as a reason to steal.

When a new big movie is released, it is common that certain theater chains get access to that movie while other theater chains do not. If that happens for a movie we want to see, most of us just go to whatever theater has the movie we want. We don't complain that a show which is only available on Starz, which we don't have a subscription to, isn't also being shown on HBO, which we do have a subscription for. We don't complain that when CBS gets exclusive rights to the superbowl that we cannot also watch it on TBS. But heaven forbid our Apple TV doesn't get content that is only available on a non-Apple supported platform - that's a reason to load up Tor and download the show illegally!!!

I just get frustrated by all of this. Moreso than my frustration with having to subscribe to Hulu Plus, Amazon Prime, and Netflix in order to see about 75% of the shows I want to see. The other 25% I cannot get unless I do more spending, but dang, does that mean I have to go steal those shows? Really?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top