5 ms·

It seems odd that just like the Fire TV they have tech as the number one item to try to sell you on the product "Powerful performance—4x the storage and 2x the

• gdulli 12y ago
  Above the hardware specs on the page it says "Fire TV Stick connects to your TV's HDMI port. It's an easy way to enjoy Netflix, Amazon Instant Video, Hulu Plus, YouTube.com, music, and much more" in a bold font and has the logos of 10 entertainment services.
• saurik 12y ago
  I also find it interesting that they point out "4x the storage and 2x the memory of Chromecast" in multiple places (it is the first feature listed at the very top, it is later on in the body text, and they made a special graphic for it along the side) but don't actually say how much storage or how much memory the device has until you get to the technical specs and comparison charts at the bottom, as it really doesn't matter... I own two Chromecasts: I have no clue how much storage or memory the thing has, and I am not certain why I'd care as the device is designed for streaming content, not storing stuff :/.
  • Someone1234 12y ago
    It is worth noting that while a Chromecast doesn't store stuff (aside from maybe cache), the Amazon stick will need to (e.g. games). So they need to tell you so you know how many games you can install from their app store. For the Chromecast it is irrelevant.
    • saurik 12y ago
      But they don't tell you: that's my point; it is only in the fine print way below that they have the actual size... for most of the article it is just "4x as large".
• sisk 12y ago
  Anecdotally—noting I'm probably not the typical consumer—the fact that they mentioned the specs is a big plus for me. I travel with a Roku Streaming Stick (plus a small travel router) as it's a great way to use Plex and others from a hotel room. The one problem, however, is that the Roku feels sluggish and underpowered (minutes to boot, minutes to open netflix, etc). If Amazon's stick avoids that problem, I'll be getting one.
  • proexploit 12y ago
    Out of curiosity, why don't you get a Chromecast or why doesn't it meet your needs?
    • sisk 12y ago
      I have a Chromecast as well and—prior to purchasing the Roku—used that when I traveled. The reason I replaced it was because of the purpose it was designed to serve and how I was using it. A Chromecast is a remote viewport, not generally a consumer (save for Chrome and a handful of mobile apps). Take, for example, when I used Plex. I'd have my machine as the Plex server, my phone as the Plex consumer / controller, and the Chromecast as the viewport. All three would be on a private network served up from my travel router, disconnected from the WAN (hotel internet paranoia). All three of my internet-connected devices were required to make this setup work. edit Just remembered the requirement that the LAN be connected to the internet to use a Chromecast. When I'm streaming from Plex, I don't need to be on the internet. Getting connected just so I could then use Plex felt like an unnecessary hurdle. end edit Contrast that with the Roku which is not only the viewport but also the consumer / controller. It freed up my phone to remain on the cellular network. I could pass out watching a movie and not have to worry about missing "important" late night notifications / emails. The alternative was to stream my screen to the Chromecast, but I found that to have tons of lag / frame-skipping. Admittedly, it's a very particular concern. <g>
    • bpicolo 12y ago
      I have a Chromecast currently, biggest issue for me is that it doesn't support 5 GHz (which matters a lot in a crowded city like San Francisco.) My 2.4 GHz signal is awful. The remote is a nice addition, assuming the UI is good. Using Chromecast with services like Netflix is sometimes pretty painful (Not always clear how to change the episode you're watching, if it's even possible. Unclear how to turn the dang thing off so it isn't just on some show, etc)
• vph 12y ago
  Products like this do not have the burden of a trailblazer like the Chromecast. When the Chromecast was introduced, they must explain elaborately what it does. For this Amazon product, simply saying "4x storage 2x memory more than Chromecast" is sufficient in explaining what it does. People immediately know that it does what the Chromecast does. There's no confusion about that. Furthermore, it's also implying that it's better than the Chromecast. So, while that first line didn't entertain you, for many people, it says and implies a lot.
  • allwein 12y ago
    Having no idea what a Chromecast is (other than it has something to do with Google Chrome), this tells me nothing. And if I have no idea, then I guarantee none of my extended family has even the first clue.
    • jmelloy 12y ago
      I have a Chromecast sitting at my house that we won in a contest, and we haven't bothered to pull it out of the box because nobody can tell me what it does beyond "Less functional AirPlay for Chrome."
      • nkozyra 12y ago
        Nobody can tell you it's an insanely simple network media interface?
• vph 12y ago
  Products like this do not have the burden of a trailblazer like the Chromecast. When the Chromecast was introduced, they must explain elaborately what it does. For this Amazon product, simply saying "4x storage 2x memory more than Chromecast" is sufficient in explaining what it does. People immediately know that it does what the Chromecast does. There's no confusion about that. Furthermore, it's also implying that it's better than the Chromecast. So, while that first line didn't entertain you, for many people, it says a lot.