Too expensive. Had a real chance of gaining a foothold and making Prime much more appealing by pricing it closer to the Chromecast and either free or discounted to prime members but it has a lot of features that its target demo (less techy people who don't have a box) won't really use and due to that it has a Price double the Roku stick and around the price of AppleTV/Roku3
Could be, I have a Roku 2 XS from almost 3 years ago now, it's very reliable, but sometimes does a restart watching Hulu Plus stuff. This box though might make a pretty nice replacement, and considering it's the same price as an AppleTV, which would have been my other option, I might give it a shot.
Chromecast requires a computer or a phone, or a tablet to work, which is a huge nonstarter for so many people, it's an ultra-niche product in an already very small niche market.
Sure as we progress into the future the niche will grow to become the dominant method of receiving media but for now something requiring a separate device to work compared to one that comes with a remote will be a huge leg-up for Roku/AppleTV/FireTV.
Chromecast requires a computer or a phone, or a tablet to work, which is a huge nonstarter for so many people, it's an ultra-niche product in an already very small niche market.
I wouldn't say the Chromecast is a niche product. Apparently sales have been so huge since it's European launch, it's been considered by many stores as the one of the biggest sellers they have had in years. Niche products don't usually generate mass sales.
As for requiring a smart phone or tablet to use, pretty much everyone has one of these already - ok, we could say the granny across the road doesn't, but then it could be said that anyone who wants to stream HD TV across the Internet already has a smart phone or tablet.
And finally, the tablet especially, makes the ultimate remote for such things. It is so easy to search (virtual keyboard) or browse (swiping across a touch screen) when compared to clicking a remote a thousand times.
Don't get me wrong. I also love a good old fashioned remote, but sometimes a tablet is just better. Today for instance, my wife wanted to see a specific thing, in a certain programme. I have a pile of devices in our home where we could fire up the BBC iPlayer, from a PS4 to Now TV, Smart TV to Chromecast, and plenty more in between, yet for this occasion, the fastest and easiest way was via my iPad and AirPlay. If we were in the room with the Chromecast, I would have probably chosen that.
But... If we were to sit down and fire up W1A, I would probably use the Smart TV or Now TV app.
The thing is, Chromecast is not niche. At £30 a pop, in a couple of years every third person you will meet will have one, whether for their main TV or the spare one in the kitchen or bedroom.
Will I get one of these things from Amazon? Of course I will. From what I understand, it has the fastest start-up time for any device - instantaneous, well for Amazon content as it preloads as soon as you view the poster page. I gotta own that.
More than anything else, this will really shake things up at Apple and Roku who are the main competitors here (price range and usage). The Apple TV is starting to look really dated these days. If it didn't have that amazing thing called AirPlay, well, let's just see how they respond...
The whole category is a niche for the current time, right now most people get their television through cable or satellite in the United States, I don't know the numbers but I'd guess the same in the UK from Sky and cable. As we move into the future of course this market will explode but for now, having something like the Chromecast while inexpensive requires the additional step of having an extra device to start the streams, while the others have an included remote. Chromecast is selling well because it's very inexpensive, that's it. It's not anymore useful than the others, it's not revolutionary yet, but the main reason is that it lacks the apps the others have especially Roku.
The whole category is a niche for the current time, right now most people get their television through cable or satellite in the United States, I don't know the numbers but I'd guess the same in the UK from Sky and cable. As we move into the future of course this market will explode but for now, having something like the Chromecast while inexpensive requires the additional step of having an extra device to start the streams, while the others have an included remote. Chromecast is selling well because it's very inexpensive, that's it. It's not anymore useful than the others, it's not revolutionary yet, but the main reason is that it lacks the apps the others have especially Roku.
I agree with ya Steve the chromecast is a streamer & the roku is a proper STB with dedicated apps & a remote! ... No contest for most folk! ;-)
surprised they are allowing you to watch netflix through this box, what with them having their own lovefilm service, you would have thought they would want netflix as far away from it as possible
surprised they are allowing you to watch netflix through this box, what with them having their own lovefilm service, you would have thought they would want netflix as far away from it as possible
I'll never understand this argument because ya still forking out upto £100 for the KindleFireTV STB ... Amazon are making a profit on the hardware! ;-) ... so why shouldn't u be able 2 use netflix?
(Same in regards to Sky blocking Amazon Prime on the Roku device!)
Streaming set-top boxes are to my mind a transition technology. Roku seems to have acknowledged this as well and there are two TVs coming out this year that have Roku built into them. I can't see it being too long before TVs have Chromecast built in as well. As we transition from 'dumb' TVs to 'smart' TVs then the STB market will dwindle.
Having said that, here's the counter argument - will there come a time when we want to control ourselves how we get our content and not have it dictated by a TV we only replace every 7 years, and therefore the market for 'dumb' TVs takes off again?
I'll never understand this argument because ya still forking out upto £100 for the KindleFireTV STB ... Amazon are making a profit on the hardware! ;-) ... so why shouldn't u be able 2 use netflix?
(Same in regards to Sky blocking Amazon Prime on the Roku device!)
I wouldn't think Amazon are making any real money on the device. They don't on any of the Kindle line. Their money is made on the ongoing services so letting Netflix on the device can be counter productive.
But if they want to transition people from Netflix to Amazon then they need to have Netflix on board. I suspect as a featured launch partner Netflix (as well as Hulu) are probally paying Amazon something and both may also be paying the 30% fee for every sub taken out directly on the device that's common on the Subscription apps on the Kindle Fire.
Its slightly different with Roku, Amazons streaming has no significant foothold in the UK so Roku doesn't need it to sell devices. NowTV have a lot of cards up their sleeve in terms of content deals but don't have a foothold yet. With the price of NowTV (with Movies, TV and Sport being 3 seperate packages) they come across as fairly poor value compared to others so by restricting the ability for many to directly compare it helps then hook people into their service. I'm pretty sure if Netflix wasn't already on the device before NowTV was even considered it would have been locked out too just as it is on the NowTV Box.
Will be interesting if/when the FireTV launches here mind you as Amazon can block NowTV back which will either lead to a stalemate or if Sky are blocking Amazon on the Roku may force them to drop the objection
Streaming set-top boxes are to my mind a transition technology. Roku seems to have acknowledged this as well and there are two TVs coming out this year that have Roku built into them. I can't see it being too long before TVs have Chromecast built in as well. As we transition from 'dumb' TVs to 'smart' TVs then the STB market will dwindle.
Having said that, here's the counter argument - will there come a time when we want to control ourselves how we get our content and not have it dictated by a TV we only replace every 7 years, and therefore the market for 'dumb' TVs takes off again?
Rokus move into providing the software inside TV's is a mistake imho. Most of the SmartTV platforms in the TV's and Bluray players aren't bad but the problem is the hardware reaches a point where it can't handle the upgrades so it becomes slower until they stop supporting it. And you aren't going to go out and buy a new TV or BD player every few years but a new settop box/stick especially if its one under £50 you may very well.
Chromecast is perhaps the only platform that might get away with it. Its a receiver and that's pretty much it so as long as the protocol doesn't change it should be able to last much longer without an upgrade
Streaming set-top boxes are to my mind a transition technology. Roku seems to have acknowledged this as well and there are two TVs coming out this year that have Roku built into them. I can't see it being too long before TVs have Chromecast built in as well. As we transition from 'dumb' TVs to 'smart' TVs then the STB market will dwindle.
Having said that, here's the counter argument - will there come a time when we want to control ourselves how we get our content and not have it dictated by a TV we only replace every 7 years, and therefore the market for 'dumb' TVs takes off again?
Every 7 years? then it is time to replace my TV then. Nah, I don't think so. It is still working fine and with the PS3 connected it works well for netflix and DVDs/blue-rays and to be honest that is all it is used for.
The only problem I have with it is that it uses a bit more power than newer TV sets. None of these devices, Apple TV, Roku, chomecast or this new fire Tv does anything for me. But I can see why some people may want one of them.
I wouldn't think Amazon are making any real money on the device. They don't on any of the Kindle line. Their money is made on the ongoing services so letting Netflix on the device can be counter productive.
But if they want to transition people from Netflix to Amazon then they need to have Netflix on board. I suspect as a featured launch partner Netflix (as well as Hulu) are probally paying Amazon something and both may also be paying the 30% fee for every sub taken out directly on the device that's common on the Subscription apps on the Kindle Fire.
Its slightly different with Roku, Amazons streaming has no significant foothold in the UK so Roku doesn't need it to sell devices. NowTV have a lot of cards up their sleeve in terms of content deals but don't have a foothold yet. With the price of NowTV (with Movies, TV and Sport being 3 seperate packages) they come across as fairly poor value compared to others so by restricting the ability for many to directly compare it helps then hook people into their service. I'm pretty sure if Netflix wasn't already on the device before NowTV was even considered it would have been locked out too just as it is on the NowTV Box.
Will be interesting if/when the FireTV launches here mind you as Amazon can block NowTV back which will either lead to a stalemate or if Sky are blocking Amazon on the Roku may force them to drop the objection
I've gotta admit I'm shocked they make no profit on hardware! (especially when ya consider the older model kindle readers / tablets will naturally become cheaper to manufacture with age) ... but I understand they'll get the vast majority of their profit from the Online Store! ... I've bought 100s of books since I started using kindle devices about 2+ years ago!
& I agree netflix wouldn't be on the roku if sky had their way! ... Hope amazon blocks nowtv & plays em @ their own game! :cool:
(If I bought a KindleFireTV now from Amazon.com do ya think it would work OR should I wait for a uk release?)
KMKYWAP
Posts: 1,769
Comments
Too expensive. Had a real chance of gaining a foothold and making Prime much more appealing by pricing it closer to the Chromecast and either free or discounted to prime members but it has a lot of features that its target demo (less techy people who don't have a box) won't really use and due to that it has a Price double the Roku stick and around the price of AppleTV/Roku3
Sure as we progress into the future the niche will grow to become the dominant method of receiving media but for now something requiring a separate device to work compared to one that comes with a remote will be a huge leg-up for Roku/AppleTV/FireTV.
I wouldn't say the Chromecast is a niche product. Apparently sales have been so huge since it's European launch, it's been considered by many stores as the one of the biggest sellers they have had in years. Niche products don't usually generate mass sales.
As for requiring a smart phone or tablet to use, pretty much everyone has one of these already - ok, we could say the granny across the road doesn't, but then it could be said that anyone who wants to stream HD TV across the Internet already has a smart phone or tablet.
And finally, the tablet especially, makes the ultimate remote for such things. It is so easy to search (virtual keyboard) or browse (swiping across a touch screen) when compared to clicking a remote a thousand times.
Don't get me wrong. I also love a good old fashioned remote, but sometimes a tablet is just better. Today for instance, my wife wanted to see a specific thing, in a certain programme. I have a pile of devices in our home where we could fire up the BBC iPlayer, from a PS4 to Now TV, Smart TV to Chromecast, and plenty more in between, yet for this occasion, the fastest and easiest way was via my iPad and AirPlay. If we were in the room with the Chromecast, I would have probably chosen that.
But... If we were to sit down and fire up W1A, I would probably use the Smart TV or Now TV app.
The thing is, Chromecast is not niche. At £30 a pop, in a couple of years every third person you will meet will have one, whether for their main TV or the spare one in the kitchen or bedroom.
Will I get one of these things from Amazon? Of course I will. From what I understand, it has the fastest start-up time for any device - instantaneous, well for Amazon content as it preloads as soon as you view the poster page. I gotta own that.
More than anything else, this will really shake things up at Apple and Roku who are the main competitors here (price range and usage). The Apple TV is starting to look really dated these days. If it didn't have that amazing thing called AirPlay, well, let's just see how they respond...
I agree with ya Steve the chromecast is a streamer & the roku is a proper STB with dedicated apps & a remote! ... No contest for most folk! ;-)
I'll never understand this argument because ya still forking out upto £100 for the KindleFireTV STB ... Amazon are making a profit on the hardware! ;-) ... so why shouldn't u be able 2 use netflix?
(Same in regards to Sky blocking Amazon Prime on the Roku device!)
Having said that, here's the counter argument - will there come a time when we want to control ourselves how we get our content and not have it dictated by a TV we only replace every 7 years, and therefore the market for 'dumb' TVs takes off again?
I wouldn't think Amazon are making any real money on the device. They don't on any of the Kindle line. Their money is made on the ongoing services so letting Netflix on the device can be counter productive.
But if they want to transition people from Netflix to Amazon then they need to have Netflix on board. I suspect as a featured launch partner Netflix (as well as Hulu) are probally paying Amazon something and both may also be paying the 30% fee for every sub taken out directly on the device that's common on the Subscription apps on the Kindle Fire.
Its slightly different with Roku, Amazons streaming has no significant foothold in the UK so Roku doesn't need it to sell devices. NowTV have a lot of cards up their sleeve in terms of content deals but don't have a foothold yet. With the price of NowTV (with Movies, TV and Sport being 3 seperate packages) they come across as fairly poor value compared to others so by restricting the ability for many to directly compare it helps then hook people into their service. I'm pretty sure if Netflix wasn't already on the device before NowTV was even considered it would have been locked out too just as it is on the NowTV Box.
Will be interesting if/when the FireTV launches here mind you as Amazon can block NowTV back which will either lead to a stalemate or if Sky are blocking Amazon on the Roku may force them to drop the objection
Rokus move into providing the software inside TV's is a mistake imho. Most of the SmartTV platforms in the TV's and Bluray players aren't bad but the problem is the hardware reaches a point where it can't handle the upgrades so it becomes slower until they stop supporting it. And you aren't going to go out and buy a new TV or BD player every few years but a new settop box/stick especially if its one under £50 you may very well.
Chromecast is perhaps the only platform that might get away with it. Its a receiver and that's pretty much it so as long as the protocol doesn't change it should be able to last much longer without an upgrade
Every 7 years? then it is time to replace my TV then. Nah, I don't think so. It is still working fine and with the PS3 connected it works well for netflix and DVDs/blue-rays and to be honest that is all it is used for.
The only problem I have with it is that it uses a bit more power than newer TV sets. None of these devices, Apple TV, Roku, chomecast or this new fire Tv does anything for me. But I can see why some people may want one of them.
I've gotta admit I'm shocked they make no profit on hardware!
& I agree netflix wouldn't be on the roku if sky had their way!
(If I bought a KindleFireTV now from Amazon.com do ya think it would work OR should I wait for a uk release?)