5 ms·

TV manufacturers have mostly chosen to create and maintain their own ecosystems. This is actually a declining trend. LG and Samsung do but Moore's law has gott

TV manufacturers have mostly chosen to create and maintain their own ecosystems. This is actually a declining trend. LG and Samsung do but Moore's law has gotten it to a point where Android TV and, in fact Roku's platform are becoming much more prevalent on TVs, particularly some of the newer lower end devices. There's a large cost to maintaining your own HTML based platform (which is what most 3rd parties are) and the HTML platforms pretty radically under-perform these days. Android TV could win but much like the US cable operators the large CE providers aren't too excited about getting so closely tied to Google. Roku's continued independence is cool in a space where there is so much consolidation, and attractive to some CE manufacturers.

BikiniPrince 6y ago
It’s too bad Android Tv application quality is atrocious. Applications like Hulu have huge swaths of the library that simply won’t play and it crashes. Couple this with a lack of application support and it is quite disappointing. The pled support was the last straw which led me to attach a roku to the television.
- MaxBarraclough 6y ago
  In my experience, poor/incomplete applications are something you have to keep an eye out for regardless of what platform you're dealing with. I've seen audio stutter on a smart TV running the Netflix streaming app, and similar stutter on a network-enabled Blu-Ray player running the Amazon Video streaming app. I've seen 4K playback cause occasional stuttering in the Amazon Video app on a smart TV. Disney+ group playback is currently unsupported on PS4, but is supported on Xbox One. A few years ago, the PS3 Netflix app supported 1080p, whereas the Xbox 360 Netflix app only supported 720p. I've also seen the Xbox One YouTube app insist on playing a video at 720p or lower, despite that Roku will play it at 1080p (perhaps an issue with only a certain codec being available at that quality?). I've seen a paid video service with an iPhone app with completely broken Chromecast support (they fixed it a few weeks after I filed a bug report).
vagrantJin 6y ago
> There's a large cost to maintaining your own HTML based platform (which is what most 3rd parties are) and the HTML platforms pretty radically under-perform these days. I'm struggling to understand the claim made by this statement. Maybe I missed something? What does HTML have to do with serving video over the wire? Underperforming on which metrics? What's the time value of "these days"?
- Mindwipe 6y ago
  Most smart TV platforms that aren't Android TV or Tizen explicitly are HTML5 based, in that their UI is HTML5 based. But smart TV platforms are never write once run anywhere - remote control button patterns, OS weirdness and shoestring amounts of RAM mean you've got to do whole suites of testing and bespoke code for at best every manufacturer, and in practice every set. LG is the only one that could be said to have sufficient marketshare to justify that investment for any but the largest VOD providers now. The revenue generated from those platforms once rights holders are paid is a fraction of what it costs to maintain them simply through testing overhead. Android TV and Tizen's marketshare has increased rapidly over the last few (read three-ish) years, and when you often need to account for international rollout or repurposing in your cost analysis it's even stronger (Roku has zero marketshare outside of the US, many large cable companies outside of the US have Android TV based set-top boxes with multiple million installations). This generally also applies to browser based streaming, with the added bonus that is where a bunch of piracy comes from.
etempleton 6y ago
AppleTV, AndroidTV, FireTV, Roku, WebOS, Tizen, Comcast X1, ATT TV, Xbox, PlayStation, etc—the space is incredibly fractured. Outside of the TVs with Roku built in I wonder how many people will buy Roku devices in the future. It will be hard for Roku to continue to compete if they have say, 10-20 percent market share. I use a Roku now, but I don’t think I will in the future. My tv is older, so no built in apps. Roku was a cheap way to add that functionality without a big box. With that said, I am regularly disappointed with the performance of Roku especially with Plex. I am considering an Apple TV because I know IOS devices work well with Plex and there is a more robust app ecosystem available.
- Mindwipe 6y ago
  Roku is also going to have problems with their marketshare being so North America focused when platforms increasingly need their stack to either work internationally or at least be trivially repurposed for international. Globally Roku's marketshare is nowhere near 10 - 20%.
  - bthazos 6y ago
    The Roku's inability to display non-latin characters is what soured my enthusiasm for them. If it turns out that it's a trivial problem that is easily addressed once it's time to target international growth I will become bitter.
- bmlzootown 6y ago
  Not to even mention that Brightscript, the proprietary language running the device, can be a nightmare at times. I've encountered so many quirks/issues that just don't exist/happen on other platforms like AndroidTV/tvOS. The entire smart-tv space is definitely fractured, and trying to develop for so many platforms all at once can be frustrating, especially when you're doing so in your spare time. Thankfully, at least in my case, I've had someone more experienced step in recently to help with a side-project on AndroidTV, but I digress. Honestly, if I had a dongle for my Chromecast that supported ethernet, and I weren't too lazy to order one, I wouldn't really use the Roku anymore. With the removal of the Twitch channel, Spectrum channel, and others, I'm becoming more and more disenchanted with the platform.
nvrspyx 6y ago
My TV has Roku built-in and it’s extremely frustrating. It’s super slow, it uses some surround sound virtualization (or something) for the stereo speakers with no option to turn it off despite being terrible (you can barely hear speech, but music and effects are extremely loud), the remote has shortcut buttons for things I don’t even use (google play and sling), there’s advertisements every time I turn on my tv and on the screensaver, the TV options are inaccessible in half the apps I use, etc. Despite how much I dislike Google, I’ve resorted to using a Chromecast because it’s quicker, less of a hassle, and gives me the option of forcing stereo audio instead of the faux surround sound. I can also use JustWatch on my phone, tap the service that a movie/show is on, and directly open the corresponding app to cast from. It’s also nice being able to type directly on my phone instead of using the Roku remote, especially since many of the available Roku apps don’t support keyboard input from the mobile Roku remote app. Finally, I like that I can cast directly from my computer as well. I also have an Apple TV, but its touchpad remote is annoying and it provides less value for me since I’ve moved away from Macs.
- ameen 6y ago
  Chromecast video quality is atrocious though. I have a Chromecast Ultra on my Roku TV (TCL 6-series QLED) considered to be a mid-range panel and has decent color accuracy, but on Chromecast all of it is out the window, the same video on the YouTube TV (native app) on Roku is so much better looking and accurate. Not sure who’s to blame here.
  - nvrspyx 6y ago
    That's interesting because what I forgot to mention is that while I have a 4K TV, it seems that the Roku apps refuse to play anything at a 4K resolution. The Chromecast Ultra seems to output 4K just fine. I haven't noticed any differences in color though, so I can't speak to that. Maybe the HDMI input has different picture settings set than the base Roku? I'm sure you've tried that though, so I don't know.
  - katbyte 6y ago
    Getting devices and tvs to play nice can be a pain for any given set - I don’t have a roku but comparing builtin YouTube/Netflix on a 4K hdr Sony oled with chrome cast and Apple TV they were all about the same with built in performing the best (optimized for the tv I presume) - apple tv with infuse using Emby as a library was best Chrome cast is also greatly affected by what your casting with, VLC, Videostream, chrome can all produce very different results depending on the content

BikiniPrince 6y ago

It’s too bad Android Tv application quality is atrocious. Applications like Hulu have huge swaths of the library that simply won’t play and it crashes. Couple this with a lack of application support and it is quite disappointing. The pled support was the last straw which led me to attach a roku to the television.

MaxBarraclough 6y ago
In my experience, poor/incomplete applications are something you have to keep an eye out for regardless of what platform you're dealing with. I've seen audio stutter on a smart TV running the Netflix streaming app, and similar stutter on a network-enabled Blu-Ray player running the Amazon Video streaming app. I've seen 4K playback cause occasional stuttering in the Amazon Video app on a smart TV. Disney+ group playback is currently unsupported on PS4, but is supported on Xbox One. A few years ago, the PS3 Netflix app supported 1080p, whereas the Xbox 360 Netflix app only supported 720p. I've also seen the Xbox One YouTube app insist on playing a video at 720p or lower, despite that Roku will play it at 1080p (perhaps an issue with only a certain codec being available at that quality?). I've seen a paid video service with an iPhone app with completely broken Chromecast support (they fixed it a few weeks after I filed a bug report).

vagrantJin 6y ago

> There's a large cost to maintaining your own HTML based platform (which is what most 3rd parties are) and the HTML platforms pretty radically under-perform these days. I'm struggling to understand the claim made by this statement. Maybe I missed something? What does HTML have to do with serving video over the wire? Underperforming on which metrics? What's the time value of "these days"?

Mindwipe 6y ago
Most smart TV platforms that aren't Android TV or Tizen explicitly are HTML5 based, in that their UI is HTML5 based. But smart TV platforms are never write once run anywhere - remote control button patterns, OS weirdness and shoestring amounts of RAM mean you've got to do whole suites of testing and bespoke code for at best every manufacturer, and in practice every set. LG is the only one that could be said to have sufficient marketshare to justify that investment for any but the largest VOD providers now. The revenue generated from those platforms once rights holders are paid is a fraction of what it costs to maintain them simply through testing overhead. Android TV and Tizen's marketshare has increased rapidly over the last few (read three-ish) years, and when you often need to account for international rollout or repurposing in your cost analysis it's even stronger (Roku has zero marketshare outside of the US, many large cable companies outside of the US have Android TV based set-top boxes with multiple million installations). This generally also applies to browser based streaming, with the added bonus that is where a bunch of piracy comes from.

etempleton 6y ago

AppleTV, AndroidTV, FireTV, Roku, WebOS, Tizen, Comcast X1, ATT TV, Xbox, PlayStation, etc—the space is incredibly fractured. Outside of the TVs with Roku built in I wonder how many people will buy Roku devices in the future. It will be hard for Roku to continue to compete if they have say, 10-20 percent market share. I use a Roku now, but I don’t think I will in the future. My tv is older, so no built in apps. Roku was a cheap way to add that functionality without a big box. With that said, I am regularly disappointed with the performance of Roku especially with Plex. I am considering an Apple TV because I know IOS devices work well with Plex and there is a more robust app ecosystem available.

Mindwipe 6y ago
Roku is also going to have problems with their marketshare being so North America focused when platforms increasingly need their stack to either work internationally or at least be trivially repurposed for international. Globally Roku's marketshare is nowhere near 10 - 20%.
- bthazos 6y ago
  The Roku's inability to display non-latin characters is what soured my enthusiasm for them. If it turns out that it's a trivial problem that is easily addressed once it's time to target international growth I will become bitter.
bmlzootown 6y ago
Not to even mention that Brightscript, the proprietary language running the device, can be a nightmare at times. I've encountered so many quirks/issues that just don't exist/happen on other platforms like AndroidTV/tvOS. The entire smart-tv space is definitely fractured, and trying to develop for so many platforms all at once can be frustrating, especially when you're doing so in your spare time. Thankfully, at least in my case, I've had someone more experienced step in recently to help with a side-project on AndroidTV, but I digress. Honestly, if I had a dongle for my Chromecast that supported ethernet, and I weren't too lazy to order one, I wouldn't really use the Roku anymore. With the removal of the Twitch channel, Spectrum channel, and others, I'm becoming more and more disenchanted with the platform.

nvrspyx 6y ago

My TV has Roku built-in and it’s extremely frustrating. It’s super slow, it uses some surround sound virtualization (or something) for the stereo speakers with no option to turn it off despite being terrible (you can barely hear speech, but music and effects are extremely loud), the remote has shortcut buttons for things I don’t even use (google play and sling), there’s advertisements every time I turn on my tv and on the screensaver, the TV options are inaccessible in half the apps I use, etc. Despite how much I dislike Google, I’ve resorted to using a Chromecast because it’s quicker, less of a hassle, and gives me the option of forcing stereo audio instead of the faux surround sound. I can also use JustWatch on my phone, tap the service that a movie/show is on, and directly open the corresponding app to cast from. It’s also nice being able to type directly on my phone instead of using the Roku remote, especially since many of the available Roku apps don’t support keyboard input from the mobile Roku remote app. Finally, I like that I can cast directly from my computer as well. I also have an Apple TV, but its touchpad remote is annoying and it provides less value for me since I’ve moved away from Macs.

ameen 6y ago
Chromecast video quality is atrocious though. I have a Chromecast Ultra on my Roku TV (TCL 6-series QLED) considered to be a mid-range panel and has decent color accuracy, but on Chromecast all of it is out the window, the same video on the YouTube TV (native app) on Roku is so much better looking and accurate. Not sure who’s to blame here.
- nvrspyx 6y ago
  That's interesting because what I forgot to mention is that while I have a 4K TV, it seems that the Roku apps refuse to play anything at a 4K resolution. The Chromecast Ultra seems to output 4K just fine. I haven't noticed any differences in color though, so I can't speak to that. Maybe the HDMI input has different picture settings set than the base Roku? I'm sure you've tried that though, so I don't know.
- katbyte 6y ago
  Getting devices and tvs to play nice can be a pain for any given set - I don’t have a roku but comparing builtin YouTube/Netflix on a 4K hdr Sony oled with chrome cast and Apple TV they were all about the same with built in performing the best (optimized for the tv I presume) - apple tv with infuse using Emby as a library was best Chrome cast is also greatly affected by what your casting with, VLC, Videostream, chrome can all produce very different results depending on the content