5 ms·
At this price point, I don't think a lower price would do anything. If you charge $99, no one complains about the price. If you charge $79, do you really get
by smackfu 12y ago
At this price point, I don't think a lower price would do anything. If you charge $99, no one complains about the price. If you charge $79, do you really get any more buyers? If they could do box + controller for $99, maybe that would attract people, but a crummy controller would get a lot of bad attention in reviews.
- freehunter 12y agoIf I'm comparing side-by-side or even trying to decide if I should get rid of the player I have an get this new one, being exactly the same price does make a difference. I got my first streaming player, the Roku HD, because I was in the market for an Apple TV but didn't want to pay $99 for the Apple TV.
- pbreit 12y agoI think it's high. Amazon TV is $84 right now and has two major advantages: voice search and all the free Prime content. $99 seems high since it's the same as Apple TV and almost triple the Chromecast.
- kissickas 12y agoThis has voice search. And I assume it will support "free" Prime content: http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/amazon-finally-launches-prime-instant-video-for-android/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/amazon-finally-lau...
- pbreit 12y agoDidn't see the voice search feature mentioned. And not requiring a phone is a bug advantage.
- flavor8 12y agoYou realize that voice search means an open mic into your living room, right? Given recent intelligence/data-gathering abuses, do you really want that?