As a long-time[1] customer of Roku I am tentatively extremely pessimistic.
I have always been unhappy with Roku's decision to get involved in streaming content at all, because it could potentially cut into their service-agnostic architecture. Bad enough in my mind that they had in-platform ads instead of just charging for hardware, but way worse when they are actively competing with streaming services.
And now it looks like it has happened -- a large content provider wants to buy the company, and while I hope that they can at least notionally continue to be service-agnostic, the temptation to cheat to favor your own services will always be there an when cost cutting and belt tightening is on the table, that is surely what will happen.
[1] My order for the "Netflix Player by Roku": "CustomerID# 1162 Thank you very much for your Roku order. Your order number is 2472, placed 5/20/2008 at 10:01AM."
Ironically, I think the Apple TV is the best streaming box out there. Of course, Apple is both the manufacturer and a streamer in their own right. And they definitely privilege their own store and streaming over other services. However, everything else already sucks so much with UIs chock full of ads that Apple wins anyway. It’s awful.
> I think the Apple TV is the best streaming box out there
It definitely is.
IMO the only advantage of the Nvidia Shield is better HDMI audio passthrough but it has so many other issues. And with more recent versions of the Plex client for tvOS the lack of audio passthrough is much less of an issue than it used to be (PCM conversion used to introduce sync issues). Also the Plex app for Android TV has been getting consistently worse over the years for me. Plus all the ads Android TV added a couple of years ago. Ugh.
Some of the more exotic boxes out there to run CoreELEC have tehcnically better DV support. These might work if you only want a Plex or Kodi client but for general streaming the Apple TV is just better.
Honestly can't wait for Apple to release a new one. Hopefully with audio passthrough of more codecs.
For years it had frame rate issues. Every second or so when watching eg Netflix you would see a micro stutter if the content wasn't at 24fps (eg PAL content at 25fps). I think this was improved recently but it's been years since I've used the Shield for anything but Plex.
As for Plex I've had way too many issues to list. Networking issues, having to restart the Plex app after the device went to sleep, etc. When I switched to using Plex on the Apple TV all the issues went away.
It should be noted that I have re-pasted and cleaned the dust of my Shield a couple of times since I got it 10 years ago.
Probably one of the big issues here. It's probably still the best Android TV you can get today but that's really sad because the SoC in it came out in 2015 (with some improvements in 2019). It was probably worse than what was in Apple TV at the time and Apple refreshed it two times since then.
I held off on buying it for many years because of the chorus of people saying, "Once the Switch 2 comes out, we'll get a new one!" (the line of thinking being that the Nvidia Shield used the same custom SoC as the Switch 1).
Switch 2 is out, no new Shield in sight. And the Shield TV Pro is still $200...
I doubt it. That SOC is still overkill for video (which I believe powered the Nintendo Switch 1). I think the big issue is really a combination of the Nvidia software and just terrible Android TV.
A few reasons I'm staying positive towards Apple, despite being a streamer themselves, is that they're not large at all. They've currently remained a small, niche content provider of reasonably high-quality content. They don't seem to have the aspirations to be bigger than those on their platform. Also, they have so much increasing oversight on their App Store and decisions there, that they likely do not want to do anything that shows a preference and gains the ire of governing agencies. I'm hoping this keep them relatively neutral.
Despite becoming quite critical of Apple in many other areas, I agree with your assessment here. And hopefully they realize if they started getting so anticompetitive in this space that they start elbowing "non-Apple" streamers out of the picture on their platform, the loss would be Apple's. A streaming box that doesn't have Netflix, or that is missing another major, would be far less compelling than what it is today.
Their half-baked attempt to mix the "Apple TV" app with the entire Apple TV interface is irritating.
As is their lack of UI discipline.
I own Star Trek: TNG purchased on Apple TV.
The UX for watching an episode is scrolling through a list of the 178 episodes. That's it. That's the only experience. One list, 178 episodes in order.
This is pretty appalling from the company that used to have such a design reputation. One day of effort of one engineer could make it so much better.
This is a pretty fair comment. Their lack of ambition also has this downside. I've felt they are increasingly de-prioritizing the old iTunes business to focus on Apple TV+, which sucks because we really need a good counterbalance to Prime.
I put the Projectivy home screen on my various Android/Google TV devices, which is clean and ad-free.
A couple of older devices it "just works" on. A newer TV with Android built in requires minor adb commands to disable the return of the default home screen, but it's been working for ~6 months, including a TV software update (which my wife initiated and I was worried might turn things to their default status, but didn't).
Apple TV will be my next device if the above becomes locked out.
> I would guess most Roku users aren't using a box these days.
Sure I guess. But those devices objectively suck. the CPU and storage in "smart TVs" are so underpowered that using streaming apps on them is painfully sluggish.
For comparison, I've used the "Chromecast with Google TV" (a $50ish at its release 4k streaming stick that uses the 'Google TV', fka 'Android TV' platform) and a Sony TV on the same platform, released the same year. The Sony UI is a lot more sluggish than the Google stick device. Also tested running an SNES emulator. The Google device can easily do it, the Sony TV can't keep up even on a basic game like Super Mario World.
And then of course, on the other end of the spectrum, the Apple TV exists, which specs-wise can easily play 3D racing games at a fine framerate.
Agreed. I currently have a “Roku TV” that is hooked up to another Roku device, because the one built into it is so slow and outdated as to be almost unusable. The $29 (on sale) Roku stick I hooked up to it works fine. Getting a built-in Roku IMHO is a false economy, the built-in thing will almost certainly go to crap before the TV itself does.
Maybe it is just the devices I have, but I've had the higher end 4K-capable Roku boxes before I eventually got all Roku TVs. I would say the experience with my Roku TVs (TCL, Phillips, and Sharp) has been the best. Nothing slow about them.
I don't try to do anything like run a console emulator on them though. Just watching streaming channels and YouTube TV.
I wish I could come back and ask you how they perform after a couple more years of "software updates" from the app providers. Considering, too, that they will also be vibe-coding them from here on out.
IDK about the specs on yours, but even things like bloated sizes of apps themselves on disk can become a problem. What happens when the OS and the apps inevitably go up in size such that the 8GB or whatever TCL has decided to give you cannot hold the OS, Netflix, Disney+, and HBO at the same time? They don't just let you stay on old versions anymore, either.
I have a 10 year old 4k Roku TV that works a good as new. The Roku app API is severely limited. The upside of that is that it discourages webdev bloat.
Interesting. Honestly I had never considered that angle. Given that they really ought not to need anything but simple navigation of lists and grids to build a streaming app that is actually usable and fast, not whatever the Youtube App (330MB) and Netflix (183MB) are wasting my phone's space on... now I'm wondering if this forced parsimony imposed on the developers could be a reason to give Roku a try again. I admit it's been over a decade since I used a Roku regularly.
With Roku built in as well as whatever ad pipeline(s) the TV manufacturer wants. These days my AppleTV is allowed to talk to the internet. My television is not.
I have a Samsung TV that I intentionally didn’t connect to the Internet for that reason. I occasionally get an annoying pop-up randomly, encouraging me to connect it to Wi-Fi.
> Especially because you can get TVs with Roku built-in.
Except in that case don't you have to give the TVs themselves Internet access? Do you trust any TV with such access nowadays given all the tomfoolery with surveillance that most OEMs do?
Especially because you can get TVs with Roku built-in.
I believe there are TVs that come with AppleTV built-in. I'm not in the market, so I haven't looked, but I suspect they're not the bargain basement Wal-Mart sets.
Eh those TVs are a dubious value proposition. I grabbed one and wound up returning it because it won't even let you use the TV as a damned TV without connecting it to the internet and creating a roku account so they can track you.
My Roku TV (that hasn't been turned on in years, but was left plugged in for years...) literally tries to reach out every minute to home servers. Before u plugging it, I had blocked it's DNS, and was blown away at how frequently it tries to phone home. Easily the noisiest device on my home network.
Why is it better than the Google TV (new Chromecast). We’ve bought every iteration of these and had no issues whatsoever with them. I don’t notice advertising unless it’s within Prime streams.
The latest Google TV even has an Ethernet port on it which was a welcome addition. Their approach to the universal remote is also great for simple TV setups even with a soundbar involved s long as you use the ARC hdmi port.
I don't like anything Apple, I had an awful experience with MacOS (the laptop was great), iPhones and their 12 finger gestures (again, terrible software) aren't for me.
WiFi and worsening slowness woes with the Google TV/Chromecast pushed me into buying an Apple TV, and it is the single Apple product that I would glowingly recommend; that's saying something coming from an Apple hater. It is truly a fantastic product.
Yep, Apple TV has long been my preferred streaming box. I put one on every TV and don't connect the TV to the network. Plex and YouTube are probably my top apps and while YouTube is maddening (just horrible UI/UX), I find Plex to be mostly enjoyable or at least reliable and unsurprising.
YouTube is probably the single biggest upside that an HTPC has over an Apple TV. (And any other streaming device.)
For anything from youtube I actually care about watching on a TV, I'll download with yt-dlp and put on my Plex server - it's less friction than dealing with youtube on the TV itself.
If the box where I can’t set up a third party player to do the ‘replay last 5 seconds with subtitles on’ because it’s all locked down is the best then I don’t want to know what the worst is, I’ll just keep using LibreElec. At least if LibreElec does something I don’t like Claude can fix it.
The Apple TV (hardware) can do what you're asking using a voice command "What did he/she say". It's possible it no longer works in every app because services insist on writing their own players that don't work as well as the player provided by Apple TV.
I use LibreElec on a Raspberry Pi 4, though it doubtless also works well on a Pi 5 (and the cheapest one with 1 GB of RAM is probably plenty).
It does great with local [networked] media and that's all I use it for. There's a million plugins for other things, some dating back to the XBMC days on the OG Xbox 20+ years ago, that others may find utility in... but for regular commercialized streaming I just use a $25 Chromecast and that does the business well-enough.
(LibreElec has a huge advantage to me that most people probably don't care about: My AV receiver sounds brilliant and was once very expensive [~$4,500], but it's rather old and it chokes on HDMI signals higher than 1080i. It is also unable to decode things like Dolby Digital Plus, TrueHD, and DTS-HD.
This would make the receiver a non-starter for post-Blu-Ray film soundtracks, except the Pi4 has two HDMI outputs. It is a no-effort built-in for LibreElec to use one of these outputs for video, while the other one is dedicated to high-res multichannel PCM audio.
In this way: The video system gets whatever video signals it wants, while the audio system is just fed PCM audio and doesn't have to struggle with any of that more-modern business at all. Everything is very happy with this arrangement.)
A cheap Android TV box. Between lack of proper hardware acceleration for 4K/Dolby Vision decoding and lack of sleep(!) support, I would never recommend that hardware, the ones that are actually recommended by the community are RP5 ($$$) and especially Intel Nx00 (N100 etc.) which are actually the gold standard of mainline(-ish in case of RPi) codec and hardware support.
Unironically, the best streaming box out there is a PC where you can hook up ad block and stream content from independent content providers like Dropout and Nebula using their web-based UI.
We seem to have an economic cycle of enshittification => piracy => people realizing they've over enshittified => goto 10. We were in phase 3 a few years ago, now we're in phase 1 and it's an insane race to the bottom.
I certainly wouldn't mind being able to block ads on the Apple TV for certain services (by which I mean YouTube), but for services which aren't as aggressively terrible as ad-supported YouTube is, I'm generally fine just making the choice between paying a higher price to go ad-free or putting up with ads. I know some folks are absolutely against all ads no matter what no exceptions, but I'm okay with the notion of "you pay for this by watching ads" if they don't abuse their end of the bargain (by which I mean YouTube).
Also, I watch Nebula on my Apple TV pretty frequently, and Dropout's available there, too.
Yeah, I am not dead set against advertising in all its forms[1] but I think the balance of advertising and experience quality to price has swung way out of alignment. There are numerous streaming platforms that all price by subscription to take a small chip out of your luxury cash. For most households one or two platforms (which would probably be somewhere near 25 USD) is the reasonable budget and the costs just don't make sense for the quality of content (and the fact that you still get ads in a lot of cases). I support ad-subsidized content for wide accessibility, but the greed has gotten out of hand and the product, if you do pay through the nose, doesn't match that price point.
1. Personally, I find it incredibly disruptive but I had ADHD so it tends to break my immersion in the media but I understand that I'm an edge case and I'll always need a more complex solution.
I use a projector as an output device (though there are plenty of TVs (just maybe not the newest ones) that still will take an input cable and blindly pass through the contents) as well as having a little wireless mini-keyboard the size of a remote with a touchpad on it and a wireless any-surface mouse that I use to control it from the couch. I genuinely don't think most people would find that interaction disagreeable and it provides a very familiar UX that you can even trivially replace or get multiple of since it's literally just a mini wireless keyboard and mouse which cost you all of maybe 30 USD.
I will conceded that windows is a real advantage though since enshittification has driven other environment applications to become rare or unmaintained. Though I haven't invested real time into seeing what options might be available as unified platform solutions in other envs - like maybe the work Valve put into proton allows you to sneak your way into good media support?
Why is that ironic? This is exactly what you should expect, unless you feel very strongly about sideloading apps or installing different operating systems. Or if you love ads.
Some apps on the apple tv still have ads on the pause screen (covering the content I may have wanted to pause to see, a terrible UX choice). It can't be entirely avoided.
It can if you avoid a dedicated device and just hook a desktop up to your TV. It's a one time cost to set up a host you control and that seems to be getting more and more worth it.
Is there a solution for audio and video downscaling when accessing content via the browser in a linux htpc setup?
I don't think any of the big streaming content providers have native apps on linux and no browser can pass through audio bitstreams to HDMI. Video quality is limited as well.
Having a dedicated streaming box is better in this regard
The only issue with Apple TV is they still can't figure out a good remote. I feel like I need to hold my breath and be very intentional with my swipes so when I'm e.g. swiping up/down to get to a menu where I can turn on subtitles I don't accidentally swipe left or right, sending me scrubbing 17 minutes forward.
Either touch is a bad input mechanism for controlling your TV, or Apple hasn't figured it out.
The only issue with Apple TV is they still can't figure out a good remote. I feel like I need to hold my breath and be very intentional with my swipes so when I'm e.g. swiping up/down to get to a menu where I can turn on subtitles I don't accidentally swipe left or right, sending me scrubbing 17 minutes forward.
Didn't Apple replace that remote with a proper clicky remote like five years ago?
Sort of. It's an improvement but it still have major issues. The biggest being the goddamn search button on the side that you hit 50% of the time you pick up or set down the remote, that can't be disabled, and that yanks you straight out of whatever you're viewing.
The latest remote at least has directional buttons, and I think you can disable the touch part entirely. Might be worth looking into, I think you can buy it separately and it works with most if not all Apple TV's.
ever since tvOS came out (and by extension, the app store) they've really leapfrogged every other streaming box. I would have thought android-based boxes like Nvidia's shieldtv would have won here (and created a casual gaming platform) but I was dead wrong.
i worked on a roku tv app once upon a time... and their OS couldn't even draw circle primitives. frustrating.
You might have missed the memo, but Roku's main business has been advertising for quite a while. It is just shrouded in streaming and platforms. But it is advertising nevertheless.
Being a platform, Roku benefits from advertising 3 ways - by running its own ads in some apps and on home screen; by exercising carriage rights on 3p apps that show ads (getting a cut as a platform); and by building and selling audiences for targeting.
For all I know, Fox has zero interest in platforms or technology. But they are fairly sophisticated when it comes to adtech and this is purely an adtech play.
Roku hasn't been 'agnostic' since RokuTV or the Roku Channel, or whatever-the-fuck it's called. I watch with a GoogleTV device, connected to my Roku television through HDMI. A few months ago I started seeing these weird popups, saying something like, "I see you're watching 'The Goonies'. Why not watch on RokuTV?" It was bizarre, and a little creepy considering I wasn't using the Roku platform at all. As it turned out, Roku added a 'feature' for doing content recommendations. I disabled that 'feature', but it was still weird, like, "These guys are watching what I'm watching, even when I'm not on their platform!"
Smart TVs are always monitoring what you’re watching by taking screenshots and processing them. This is a known thing for at least several years now. The only safe way to use a smart TV is to never connect it to the network, and use another streaming device. That separate device will spy on you too, but at least you’re making the choice.
Ironically, I think the Apple TV is the best streaming box out there. Apple is both the manufacturer and a streamer in their own right. And they definitely privilege their own store and streaming over other services. However, everything else already sucks so much with UIs full of ads that Apple wins anyway. It’s awful.
My other concern is the highly partisan nature of the Fox company.
This isn’t a content company that caters to viewers across the political spectrum or purely focuses on entertainment first, this is a company that almost exclusively runs right-leaning political media outlets.
Your Roku already has advertisements and other content nudges on the Home Screen, and now those are going to be very one-sided and potentially politically motivated.
> Roku's decision to get involved in streaming content at all
As I recall, it was originally a Netflix product that was spun out due to its potential to cause a conflict of interest in their main business. They didn't want devices like Chromecast and AppleTV to see Netflix as a competitor, and be reluctant to bundle the Netflix streaming app on their devices.
Recently got a Google Smart TV for the first time, instead of Roku, and I hate it so much. Roku interestingly I think folded in ads in the most non-obtrusive way (except for the full screen ads which I think were quickly abandoned). But Google Smart TV is a completely intentional bid for sticky integration that fosters Google dependence (google login, google telemetry tracking what you watch inside of other apps, other streamers are google apps), which is not how I want to experience my streaming. It's also slow and sometimes glitchy. I had never had a TV capable of crashing before.
Roku at least felt non-evil or non-evil adjacent in its notional neutrality.
Interesting, I've got a Sony Google TV and it's been the best smart TV experience I've had in a long time. Prior to that was Samsung TVs and a Roku TV (forget which manufacturer) and they all had massive decay in performance over time.
There is a setting on my Google TV (I think it is 'Disable Personalization' or similar) that gets rid of most of the ad-space and turns the home screen into just a list of apps that I actually have installed.
It is easy to sideload apps like SmartTubeNext, and the Plex client works well, so that covers 100% of my needs.
Google and Apple seem like the best competition and they do have streaming services, although Google's is just their bad YouTube tv thing and very ignorable. I'm not sure Amazon is even in the running now.
The Nvidia shield used to be a decent streaming box?
They (ETA nvidia shield) added ads many years ago. Really left a bitter taste in my mouth after paying for an ad-free "premium" device to have them shoved out there.
horsawlarway is correct regarding the nvidia shield. I'm not sure how much is nvidia, and how much is google in the "they". I kinda blame nvidia more than google (if I bought a google device I would expect google ads as part of the purchase), but it's hard for me to say. "they" the people who actually own the streaming device (nvidia shield) I "purchased" updated the software and added a lot of ads.
The ads showed up when the launcher got a major redesign, and the Google TV (or whatever they call it this week) launcher is a Google product. I seem to remember that nVidia delayed shipping the new enshittified version for quite a long time, so I'm pretty confident Google gets the blame here.
I'll also echo my general disappointment with the direction of these devices. A decade ago, they were one of the best streaming devices you could buy.
then a couple years back it was "there's a new discover tab, filled with ads! Don't you love it?"
then it was "not enough people are viewing the discover tab, so we're merging the discover tab with the home tab! Don't you love it?"
---
They're still decent hardware for a streaming device (although somewhat dated at this point), but now you have to go out of your way to make the software not shitty.
Removing the stock launcher helps a lot, but requires ADB access. (easy enough, and [insert llm of choice] can both generate a minimal replacement launcher and install it for you for about $10 worth of tokens, so technical users are fine, but I can't really recommend them to non-technical family anymore.)
Are there solid existing launchers that can be swapped in? Changing the launcher is one of the first things I do when I get a new Pixel phone and highly recommend it, but I don't really want to have to maintain a vibe coded one.
I've used Projectivy for years on every Google TV stick I own (Google/Onn). Works perfectly with full customization/zero ads on the free version and has a workaround to take over the Home navigation to bypass the built-in launcher without ADB or rooting. I chip in for the premium version to help out the dev since I get so much value out of it but the freemium features are mostly just cosmetic and the free version has everything you need.
At this point if I'm dealing with that level of hassle I'm much happier running linux on a computer. The value add of these devices was plug and play, and if it's not that why bother.
ADB is rarely actually a requirement unless you really want to do it the "right" way and fully remove the launcher.
I always use a custom launcher (Projectivy) on my Google TV devices, lately typically the $20 Onn stick and intercept the Home navigation to open the launcher either using the option built into Projectivy or with a free app from the Play Store/Fdroid.
Takes <5 minutes to setup everything once and then I basically forget the native Google TV launcher exists. Pretty much unbeatable value for a $20 ad-free Jellyfin/Plex/Kodi/Stremio setup. YMMV with different models but I also had no issues remapping the remote buttons from Netflix/etc to my own apps (including the "Free TV" button to launch Stremio which I always enjoy).
Also (somewhat ironically) the best smart TV OS to look for on cheap/subsidized TVs is built-in Google TV. Since they can easily be configured as 100% "dumb" on startup without any ads/nags/etc (it's the first question you're asked). The TV never hits Wifi to update and the remote/menus just do normal TV stuff without any "smart" features. Otherwise, it's luck of the draw how miserable/impossible the manufacturer makes avoiding Wifi/updates.
(Or you could do the same process installing the custom launcher on the TV's built-in Googe TV, but then you're at the mercy of the CPU/RAM the OEM included in BoM some # of years ago and lose the clean seperation between dumb TV/replaceable stick).
$20 Onn stick + $199 "smart" Google TV in dumb mode goes really far these days for a locally hosted setup without ads/annoyances.
Look into the TiVo Stream 4K. It’s an Android box but has been very reliable for me. Tivo does force some quirks so I used ADB to disable core services and the default launcher has ads so I switched to Projectivy launcher.
You can go to Walmart and buy a streaming box that is a Raspberry pi-sized board with custom Android installed and the package claims it has 700+ channels. But it just is an overlay for pirate streaming sites.
That's the spirit of the age here in America, no? When so many of our leading public figures are hyper-wealthy individuals who are where they're via various sorts of shuffling costs onto others and pocketing profits, is it any surprise when the public seeks to do the same?
It's ultimately utterly destructive, of course. Wish I had a good solution.
Ah, the choice content providers made a few years back that put us all in this situation to begin with - throw constant ads at us for marginal revenue.
Uh, it's a complete false dichotomy? There is literally no reason you need to participate in a botnet to stream content for free.
That's ... not a thing. Those sticks just glom on to free software maintained by other hardworking unpaid devs to steal residential IPs from unsuspecting buyers drawn to the "all-in-one" pitch for their sketchy VPNs and/or botnets. Then, eventually whatever API keys/endpoints they stole for streaming stop working and all you're left with is the botnet part of the deal.
This is like saying the included porn malware you got bundled with uTorrent from the first sponsored link on Google is a price worth paying to access The Pirate Bay and stick it to Netflix, lol.
Why earth would anyone voluntarily advocate for that/defend the malware authors instead of just downloading qBitorrent from Github like a normal person?!
You absolutely don't have to and I'd encourage people not to (I personally advocate for just using a desktop/pc that you have control over to make the experience more palatable. But I disagree with framing that solution as one where the customer is solely involved in making a bad decision. The old version of Roku, and even streaming sites within recent memory, offered a significantly less enshittified product.
The botnet you bring into your home is only an option people are willing to consider because of how poor the UX has gotten. It's disingenuous to frame this situation as a cavalier abrogation of duty at the sole discretion of the selfish consumer. The malware laiden set top box is a terrible solution, but it being even in the realm of consideration is due to how incredibly terrible set top boxes and streaming platforms have become. In the 2010s torrenting was something of an archaic habit done mostly by those with a strong idealogical bent - gone were the days of everyone installing napster or kazaa to have any access to digitized music that they could actually listen to without a binder of CDs.
Excessive enshittification brought on by the selfish actions of corporations is what is bringing these options back to the table for the mainstream. The consumer should be better and shouldn't bring a malware laden box into their home - but the platforms should also be better and offer reasonable pricing for their value and experience.
Or you buy a non-scammy Onn stick for $20-$30 from Walmart instead, install a launcher like Projectivy/ATV Launcher Pro from Play Store (or Aurora/F-Droid), and either choose your streaming app subscriptions ... or remove them all and install Stremio/Kodi/Plex/Jellyfin etc for your own preferred "alternative" streaming sources via Usenet/Debrid/Torrents/etc.
Not really. Apple TV seems to be the closest ive found to not being riddled with ads though. the home screen doesn't have ads at all, the closest which exists is the "top shelf" feature when you hover over the Apple TV app, and that can be turned off in settings. But it has some other issues
I do a lot of my streaming with Apple TV, but the worst parts about the Apple TV app are in my opinion are:
- Too many promos of other shows before watching a show. This is often for shows I've already watched and am watching. Apple knows which shows I watch. It shouldn't need to give me promos for shows I've watched or am actively watching.
- Poor UX for "Play Next Episode" functionality. If I just finished an episode of a show and I click to watch the next episode, I don't need to see the recap of the previous episode or the intro.
- Speaking of intro, when you click to skip, it usually leaves you somewhere between 5 and 10 seconds from the end of the into, not actually after it.
My one gripe is that I sometimes get notifications on my AppleTV that there is an offer for 3 months free of Apple’s streaming service. I didn’t even know the AppleTV had notifications before this. I hope insidious tactics like that end when Tim Cook steps down. While it’s better than full-on ads, like most others have, it still makes the experience feel cheap (in a bad way).
I'm pretty happy with AppleTV except for the walled garden. I want to run Kodi. I do run it via XCode and a dev account but because of the app restrictions it's a 2nd class experience. Looked for alternatives like Jellyfin but the only ones on the app store all appear to spy on what you view.
I'm not totally tracking what you're saying, Jellyfin isn't exactly Kodi, it's more like Plex, and Jellyfin does have an app in beta for AppleTV but the best way (arguably) to experience Jellyfin, Emby or possibly even Plex on any Apple product is the Infuse app.
I’ve been a Plex user since the early days. I currently run it on a Synology NAS in a container, using the Plex app on the AppleTV as my primary client device. I tried setting up a Jellyfin container a few months ago as I’ve been concerned about the direction of Plex. It went poorly.
I have a fairly large library, which Plex never seemed to care about. Jellyfin choked. It took forever to go through it all, and I seem to remember questioning of it was working; it wasn’t clear. Plex on the other hand makes it pretty entertaining to watch covers flip over as the metadata is loaded in to see the progress. Then every app I tried on the AppleTV also seemed to have trouble. The one that worked best had to create its own local cache of everything, which required I spend hours browsing to every screen and waiting before it became reasonably smooth. After that, the layout was still pretty strange. I think it would have worked just as well to point it at a file share. Actually playing videos was hit and miss in every app I tried.
I’m still using Plex. If I need to move to Jellyfin at some point, I feel like I’ll need to build a server with a lot more power than Plex requires. Of course that’s just a theory… a theory that will be expensive to test.
For all the fanfare Jellyfin gets online, I expected it to be better. It made me question how honest the people pushing it are. But maybe they have small libraries or only tested it with 5 movies for the review. I don’t think that’s a real-world experience.
> For all the fanfare Jellyfin gets online, I expected it to be better. It made me question how honest the people pushing it are. But maybe they have small libraries or only tested it with 5 movies for the review. I don’t think that’s a real-world experience.
I don't love crapping on open source software, but I had the same experience recently - installed Jellyfin because I wanted to test hardware-accelerated AV1 transcoding, and the whole app experience felt rough compared to Plex. The UI/UX really needs some TLC.
The software is probably fine for what it is. I mostly meant to crap on those pushing it and claiming it’s better than Plex, when, a least for large libraries, it isn’t. It’s important people have the right expectations going in.
Plex has almost a decade of development on Jellyfin, and Plex itself was born as an OS X fork for XBMC, so it got a big head start from open source itself.
Got a 7-year old QNAP NAS recently and wanted to try Jellyfin. Installed, running, indexing... 6 hours later NAS is no longer reachable. Nothing worked so had to hard reboot. Afterwards the Jellyfin service wouldn't start anymore. Installed Plex (via app store) and 2 weeks later everything is indexed and streams to multiple devices, though I did have to google a few times to fix things related to crashing while transcoding and playing subtitles. It was literally 2 toggles in the UI. The only irksome thing is it doesn't let me play audio files (which could be related to the crappy built-in Plex app on the cheap projector). I also wish there was a way to disable all the (paid) cloud offerings, I want it to be LAN-only.
To be fair, Jellyfin page doesn't list my NAS as being supported, so I had to "manually" install it (a couple commands and clicks).
Jellyfin's worst aspect is the opinionated file structure. You have to set up folders the way it wants, and then the resulting UI browser is what-you-see-is-what-you-get. Pretty sure it's done this way for automated metadata discovery.
Ideally, this would be designed in two parts: separate the file structure from the metadata discovery mechanism.
I personally want a file structure managed by the OS. Let me make folders and nested subfolders to whatever structure I prefer.
Then make the metadata discovery slightly more manual. Click a media file, click a hypothetical "add metadata" button, and then a simple search box with "is this your movie?" and click apply to import metadata from a search result. easy peasy.
The UI is clearly meant to resemble a typical media app but falls short if the end user prefers, for example, foobar2000's UI.
I'm OK with structuring file layouts however it wants. I'm even OK with giving Jellyfin a whole directory tree full of symlinks that are organized exactly how it desires, and then automating its ongoing maintenance.
The thing I'm not OK with about Jellyfin is that the common answer for remote access involves setting up a reverse proxy or a VPN or some other darned thing that I will never be able to talk my mom into configuring her Roku to be able to use.
Yeah that's the Number 1 issue I have with Jellyfin.
It seems to be tolerating whatever semi-organized structure I give it until it just faceplants on some specific show and I have to tediously reorganize the directory structure/names and manual refresh until the metadata lines up correctly.
I like that I don't feel I'm about to be rugpulled on Jellyfin and the client is pretty solid for me but the library scanning is pretty aggravating at times.
I really like the remote. It has mute and volume and like swiping on the top rather than clicking.
I like that it’s aluminum, doesn’t take batteries, and is bluetooth (or at least doesn’t require line of site). It’s the longest lasting of any remote in my house.
You’re probably thinking of earlier versions that were different.
Services are really never safe. Or at best, they should be considered temporary. If you like what they provide, know that what they provide could become worse and/or more expensive. This is the likeliest scenario.
At best, you should use services on a temporary basis and never allow yourself to get entrenched. Once you're locked in, you are part of the product to be sold to advertisers. The "install base" that is used as leverage for these sorts of shenanigans.
I have been reading these threads where people are patching firmware with AI. I am wondering if there is a way to fix some of the privacy issues on Roku tvs given this deal.
I have never seen a mergre like this not lead to anything but a money grab. They will no doubt remove things like PlutoTV, which is free, and substitutte it with more subscription apps and more data collection
Begin? I haven’t heard anything positive about Roku in 10 years or so. They had to race to the bottom to compete with Amazon and Google. And maybe they mostly survived til now, but all I hear is complaints about ads.
Nah. I have a Roku 3 stick and a brand-new $700 projector with Google TV. The Roku 3 is light-years ahead in terms of speed and UI ergonomics over the Google machine. And both are better than the smart TVs I've used.
But I fear this need means this time is ending, and we'll only be left with crap.
I used various Rokus for.. I dunno, must have been at least 10 years. Switched to the Apple TV last year because Roku keeps adding more and more ads to their devices.
The Apple TV is much nicer than any Roku I've used. Performance and reliability are excellent, and ads are minimal. Only for Apple's streaming service, only when that app is selected, and no audio.
I think the complaint about ads is mostly a knee-jerk reaction by certain online communities. The ads are not particularly obnoxious - they are always off to the side and don't interfere in navigation in any way.
Furthermore, I'm on a Roku looking for content and the ads highlight content. It's not that different than seeing posters on the way to a movie theater.
On my Roku the ads aren't just off to the side. When I go to the home screen there are now "recommended" shows above and below my channels, and they are initially selected, so I have to scroll down past them to get to my actual channels.
They routinely override the user-defined navigation to include whatever new content they are pushing. It was sold as an appliance without ads or subscription. Now it has become an ads platform that the user has less and less control over.
my household and extended family has been running on roku for literally over a decade, in multiple countries, and not one person has complained. all of us, myself included, are perfectly happy with it
I’d be shocked if the Jellyfin App survives this. Plex probably will, as a for-profit company it has the war chest to buy placement/attention/app approval. But i prefer jellyfin because it doesnt try to sell me anything or tell me what to watch.
I was also super-early Roku customer, but frankly I have been mostly disappointed with Roku for the past year or so.
The hardware on the top tier devices doesn't seem to keep up. Interacting with it is slower and more laggy than it originally was.
They've tried to keep them unobtrusive, which I appreciate, but the mere existence of ads is disappointing. I almost give the Roku City ads a pass, because frankly that's clever, and mirrors the real world enough that it seems logical to me -- but ads in menus is grating.
CEC has been super flaky with the latest revisions as well, so for the past couple of weeks I've been relegated to using either the Roku remote or my phone instead of my TV's remote.
I'm a big fan of waiting to see before prejudging, but I can't imagine anything gets better post-acquisition, and I was already on my way out the door. I guess I'm buying an Apple TV now? Are there any other recommendations? I haven't kept up with the space at all, so if anyone has suggestions I am super happy to receive them.
The lagginess is a puzzle to me; one big selling point of the Roku (vs. e.g. the Amazon Fire Stick) is that it is so much more responsive, but newer models have been getting worse instead of better.
The last time I used Apple TV I was disappointed, and since they are a streaming provider themselves I expect this to get worse rather than better. Even very basic UI things like "what block in the UI is the cursor currently selected" are painful, and the navigation flow mirrors the navigation flow of the Apple TV app on Roku, which is already pretty bad -- navigating the a series page from a single episode is a tortuous multi-step process that involves getting the incantations exactly right or being reverted back to the main screen and losing all context.
The moat here is mostly just having widespread and maintained support for streaming services, which is a question of scale; that's why so many "Smart" TVs get stale after a year or so while Roku stays fresh. In 2008 I paid (in 2008 dollars) $99 for the Roku. The price now is much lower but I would probably be willing to pay that amount for a fresh device that is performant and agnostic to streaming services and no ads (including those remote buttons) and has a straightforward UI.
Thanks for the response. As a lifetime Plex passer, I am inured to having to re-learn the navigation UI with every new release, so that part can't be too bad.
But yes, I would be thrilled to just pay $250-300 for a hardware device that just did quickly did what it was supposed to do and didn't look too ugly in doing it.
"Welcome to the "Roku-tech" mailing list" ... "Tue, Dec 2, 2003, 10:48 AM"
Not sure how I ended up on the mailing list a month before their product was released. There must've been buzz about it for a few months before release.
Well, color me impressed -- my understanding was that Roku was formed as a spinoff from Netflix around the release of their first streaming player. This is sort of confirmed by the Roku wikipedia article, which does not, for example, mention the HD1000 at all!
I guess Wood founded Roku but it was basically semi-defunct when we went to work for Netflix, and then the "spinoff" was basically letting Wood poach his team from Netflix over to his existing company to staff up and sell the first streaming device.
No different than a tech platform expanding into content. Like YouTube, Amazon and Apple. I understand your complaint, but those two worlds are intertwined beyond redemption now.
There is the long standing problem that if you build a road for others, and others get unfathomably rich using that road, you end up looking pretty dumb.
In fact it used to be that we recognized the usefulness of roads and banded together to fund roads that are specifically there for others to use. Somehow the same is unthinkable for virtual roads.
> Bad enough in my mind that they had in-platform ads instead of just charging for hardware
I mean, of course they did. If you were running a company and had to choose between a one-time relatively small fee vs a life time of near constant ad driven income per user, which would you choose?
Obviously preferences vary, but I would prefer to accumulate the goodwill rather than the ad fees. I'm not a saint and I would probably try to have some sort of "buy the roku streamer v7, now with <some new feature that I don't backport>".
In the end the tradeoff is pretty rough; judging by alternatives, keeping the cost of the stick low requires that they do the ad thing. I say that I would pay more for an ad-free version but I never went out there and bought the nvidia shield for example even though I'm told it's a good experience.
You have to realize that you are not in the same financial situation as the vast majority of people (based on the hoity-toity nature that HN readers are all well paid). The vast majority of people just accept ads as part of life and do not care one bit about the evils of the adTech world. If they are able to get a service essentially for free or at least a significant discount, they don't mind ads. Most people don't even notice them. If an ad free paid for service was the only option, I'd suggest that a lot of the user numbers would drop.
I'm a weird person in that I'm not anti-ads, but I am anti-adTech. Commercials on OTA broadcasts are good times to get up and get a refill, go to the restroom, are just hit the mute button. The days of DVRs were glorious as well as you could just fast forward through the ad breaks. Streaming platforms are the absolute best thing that ever happened to adTech. They cannot be skipped. That guarantees to the ad buyer that they will get their air time which helps adTech push ad buy rates.
The money made from advertising is not to be dismissed. It can be very significant to bottom lines, just ask Vizio* where they make more money on data than they do from the hardware sold used to collect that data.
A lot of average people will also pirate if it's cheap and the UI is good. There was a pretty brisk business selling cheap hacked firetv sticks to people for that
That would be ballsy. I could see a rebranded PopcornTime as a monthly subscription platform that gain some attraction. However, I'd imagine that majority would be from lawyers. For a country that doesn't give a damn about IP laws, this might be an interesting start up
Ah yes of course, the ad-based business models are just charity towards those worse off. Is that what FAANG developers tell themselves to sleep at night?
The problem with the companies run by people who want to accumulate goodwill is that they will always be outcompeted by companies run by shithead assholes making number go up, because empirical evidence is that not enough consumers give a shit about goodwill to make it a real competitive advantage.
I have always been unhappy with Roku's decision to get involved in streaming content at all, because it could potentially cut into their service-agnostic architecture. Bad enough in my mind that they had in-platform ads instead of just charging for hardware, but way worse when they are actively competing with streaming services.
And now it looks like it has happened -- a large content provider wants to buy the company, and while I hope that they can at least notionally continue to be service-agnostic, the temptation to cheat to favor your own services will always be there an when cost cutting and belt tightening is on the table, that is surely what will happen.
[1] My order for the "Netflix Player by Roku": "CustomerID# 1162 Thank you very much for your Roku order. Your order number is 2472, placed 5/20/2008 at 10:01AM."