Hardware, software, integration in home theater, hard drive, wireless technology, new release content and overall usability makes Apple TV the clear winner when compared with the ROKU.
HOWEVER, the one area and possibly the most important where the Roku clearly wins for most users is the NetFlix/Roku subscription plan..
Apple Tv NEEDS an all you can view montly flat rate plan to effectively compete with Netflix and Blockbuster online services.
I have an Apple TV, and I love it.. But quite honestly, I think $4.99 for a 24 hour HD rental is to steep a price for me to cancel my Netlix membership which allows me unlimited rentals (3 at a time) for $15 a month..
I rent an occasional HD title from Apple TV, but I'd be broke if I paid $4.99 for the amount of movies (Blu-Ray and standard DVD) I view with my Netflix subscription.
$229 is a very fair price for Apple TV, even compared to the $99 ROKU box.. But yeah, iTunes needs a subscription plan if it really wants to win big in the downloadable content war. I think it will remain a niche product until this happens.
As far as the ATV, it's just an extension of iTunes, and iTunes has a terrible selection of movies, so I don't see how Apple could complain at the moment. As far Netflx, I've only rented DVD's, and it was awesome - streaming video be damned, Apple's movie rental prices be damned.
I'd rather hook up a Mini to large TV, that waste time with either of these offerings, but that's me.
Another key difference between the Netflix and Apple TV download services is the available content. While Netflix offers more movies, most are older movies from the Netflix back catalogue. Apple's list of offerings is still in its growing phase, but includes many more recent releases.
I'd rather hook up a Mini to large TV, that waste time with either of these offerings, but that's me.
The main problem with the mini is even if you rent directly from iTunes, you can not download HD content without an Apple TV. Direct iTunes rentals are only in SD.
I think that the Roku device looks like a reasonable solution for a number of people, with an elegant lack of complexity. Ugly duckling, yes... but nice and simple.
Personally, I think the hard drive is overrated on the Apple TV (failure rates?)-- but it is a shame it can't cache content to a flash drive to support at least 4-5 movies being local. I picture the ISPs killing this business model pretty quickly, as it will add to bandwith usage during already peak periods. With chaching, they could have pushed much of the load to off-peak periods.
The extra $100 for a 16GB flash drive soldered into the thing would seem like a good investment to make it more of a long-term solution.
As for looks, My appleTV just sits in a notch in the back of the flatscreen. Tilted just right, I can still use the remote without a problem. Make it hidden and who cares what it looks like... just don't let it overheat with a hard drive that can't go into energy savings mode.
It may not be a beauty contest, but c'mon, if it's sitting out in your living room in plain view, some consideration for aesthetics should be given the design. aTV wins hands down there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by guinness
I'd rather hook up a Mini to large TV, that waste time with either of these offerings, but that's me.
AMEN. Wish I'd thought of that route before plunking down for the aTV.
Hardware, software, integration in home theater, hard drive, wireless technology, new release content and overall usability makes Apple TV the clear winner when compared with the ROKU.
HOWEVER, the one area and possibly the most important where the Roku clearly wins for most users is the NetFlix/Roku subscription plan..
Apple Tv NEEDS an all you can view montly flat rate plan to effectively compete with Netflix and Blockbuster online services.
I have an Apple TV, and I love it.. But quite honestly, I think $4.99 for a 24 hour HD rental is to steep a price for me to cancel my Netlix membership which allows me unlimited rentals (3 at a time) for $15 a month..
I rent an occasional HD title from Apple TV, but I'd be broke if I paid $4.99 for the amount of movies (Blu-Ray and standard DVD) I view with my Netflix subscription.
$229 is a very fair price for Apple TV, even compared to the $99 ROKU box.. But yeah, iTunes needs a subscription plan if it really wants to win big in the downloadable content war. I think it will remain a niche product until this happens.
Wow, you summed up EXACTLY what I wanted to say!
Really the Apple TV is an amazing piece of hardware, though it fails when it comes to pricing. $2 a pop for non HD TV shows, buying the DVD box set is cheaper and if you hunt you could probably get the BD box set for the same price!
$5 for an HD rental, my local store charges ~$2.50 (old movies are a $1 and yes these are DVDs) and they have to have physical media that can run out and have an actual building to up keep.
Why can't Apple take out the cable guys, $40-$60 a month for unlimited TV shows and Movies all in 720p and 5.1 surround. Now THAT I would rush out to get and replace my cable with!
Really the Apple TV is an amazing piece of hardware, though it fails when it comes to pricing. $2 a pop for non HD TV shows, buying the DVD box set is cheaper and if you hunt you could probably get the BD box set for the same price!
$5 for an HD rental, my local store charges ~$2.50 (old movies are a $1 and yes these are DVDs) and they have to have physical media that can run out and have an actual building to up keep.
Why can't Apple take out the cable guys, $40-$60 a month for unlimited TV shows and Movies all in 720p and 5.1 surround. Now THAT I would rush out to get and replace my cable with!
Apple doesn't own the content. I'm sure that Apple would be overjoyed to give you the prices and selection that you want, but the content providers aren't playing ball.
does the Roku have all released seasons of the Simpsons, Futurama, the Office, Family Guy, and South Park available for instant viewing like my AppleTV does?
Thats enough for me to decide which is of more utility. I own the DVDs of the above mentioned media but its a total PITA trying to find the dics a given episode is on, put it in the machine, wait for it to spin up, navigate the menus etc. Handbrake I cant quit you
Hardware, software, integration in home theater, hard drive, wireless technology, new release content and overall usability makes Apple TV the clear winner when compared with the ROKU.
Apple Tv NEEDS an all you can view montly flat rate plan to effectively compete with Netflix and Blockbuster online services.
I have an Apple TV, and I love it.. But quite honestly, I think $4.99 for a 24 hour HD rental is to steep a price for me to cancel my Netlix membership which allows me unlimited rentals (3 at a time) for $15 a month..
$229 is a very fair price for Apple TV, even compared to the $99 ROKU box.. But yeah, iTunes needs a subscription plan if it really wants to win big in the downloadable content war. I think it will remain a niche product until this happens.
Very true, the flat rate-option would be highly appreciated.
I would love to have movie rentals available in Europe. I definitely see some potential here, the prices shouldn?t be converted directly to Euros, 5 Euros for one HD movie is simply too expensive. 2 Euros for SD movies, 3 for HD and I am sold...! As the service expands into different countries, a language selection would also be quite convenient.
AppleTV?s look is far superior to the Roku box, without any doubt. And yes, it matters if you plan on using it in your living room.
Apple doesn't own the content. I'm sure that Apple would be overjoyed to give you the prices and selection that you want, but the content providers aren't playing ball.
Yes of course I understand that, but you see Netflix has all these movies (mind you pretty poor ones) for $10 a month plus some discs in the mail.
It is totally possible for Apple to hit within that price range, and it seems the music studios love the whole subscription thing and DRM so it makes sense.
Also a totally free ad-supported version would be pretty sweet, like Hulu except better video quality.
These movie studies can't be making much off my $1 DVD rentals.
This is the approach Apple should have taken with the Apple TV: make a device that does one thing and does it well. I hope this unit is more successful than the Apple TV and it teaches them a lesson.
AppleTV is unfortunately nothing more than a conduit to buying media from iTunes and not much more -basically a jukebox to keep putting money in Apple's pocket- no wonder it hasn't taken off. If it weren't for Handbrake it would be useless for me. Oh well maybe Take3 will give us more than options to purchase and rent from iTunes.
It may not be a beauty contest, but c'mon, if it's sitting out in your living room in plain view, some consideration for aesthetics should be given the design. aTV wins hands down there.
Are you for real? Apple has come up with some stunning designs but the the Apple TV is hardly one of them. A thing of beauty-NOT- and it is as hot as a warming plate even when off. It looks like a sushi plate. Why is that more attractive than an black box? I swear some of the posts here are simply preposterous to say the least!
Hopefully Apple will consider lowering the price of AppleTV now that it is a constant stream of income instead a just a hardware.
That's my hope too. If they had lowered it to $199 instead of $229 last MacWorld then I would have bought one more easily. Now, my price point is $149. The hardware for the AppleTV has not changed since it was intro'd a year and a half ago. They added the option for a 160Gb drive but that's it. Apple's profits on those are a bit fat and they can afford to drop the price down a bit more for volume sake.
As for looks, My appleTV just sits in a notch in the back of the flatscreen. Tilted just right, I can still use the remote without a problem. Make it hidden and who cares what it looks like... just don't let it overheat with a hard drive that can't go into energy savings mode.
I had to put mine on a non-heat conducive wood block as to not have a thermal meltdown in my NYC apartment. All that energy that is constantly being expended - is this product even Green friendly? I swear I could melt a cheese tuna melt on it.
That's my hope too. If they had lowered it to $199 instead of $229 last MacWorld then I would have bought one more easily. Now, my price point is $149. The hardware for the AppleTV has not changed since it was intro'd a year and a half ago. They added the option for a 160Gb drive but that's it. Apple's profits on those are a bit fat and they can afford to drop the price down a bit more for volume sake.
Dropping the price even more without giving it more functionality will only fuel the consumer suspicion that it's a bomb.
Comments
HOWEVER, the one area and possibly the most important where the Roku clearly wins for most users is the NetFlix/Roku subscription plan..
Apple Tv NEEDS an all you can view montly flat rate plan to effectively compete with Netflix and Blockbuster online services.
I have an Apple TV, and I love it.. But quite honestly, I think $4.99 for a 24 hour HD rental is to steep a price for me to cancel my Netlix membership which allows me unlimited rentals (3 at a time) for $15 a month..
I rent an occasional HD title from Apple TV, but I'd be broke if I paid $4.99 for the amount of movies (Blu-Ray and standard DVD) I view with my Netflix subscription.
$229 is a very fair price for Apple TV, even compared to the $99 ROKU box.. But yeah, iTunes needs a subscription plan if it really wants to win big in the downloadable content war. I think it will remain a niche product until this happens.
It's not a beauty contest.
As far as the ATV, it's just an extension of iTunes, and iTunes has a terrible selection of movies, so I don't see how Apple could complain at the moment. As far Netflx, I've only rented DVD's, and it was awesome - streaming video be damned, Apple's movie rental prices be damned.
I'd rather hook up a Mini to large TV, that waste time with either of these offerings, but that's me.
It's a black box, that streams videos.
I'd rather hook up a Mini to large TV, that waste time with either of these offerings, but that's me.
The main problem with the mini is even if you rent directly from iTunes, you can not download HD content without an Apple TV. Direct iTunes rentals are only in SD.
Personally, I think the hard drive is overrated on the Apple TV (failure rates?)-- but it is a shame it can't cache content to a flash drive to support at least 4-5 movies being local. I picture the ISPs killing this business model pretty quickly, as it will add to bandwith usage during already peak periods. With chaching, they could have pushed much of the load to off-peak periods.
The extra $100 for a 16GB flash drive soldered into the thing would seem like a good investment to make it more of a long-term solution.
As for looks, My appleTV just sits in a notch in the back of the flatscreen. Tilted just right, I can still use the remote without a problem. Make it hidden and who cares what it looks like... just don't let it overheat with a hard drive that can't go into energy savings mode.
It's a black box, that streams videos.
It's not a beauty contest.
It may not be a beauty contest, but c'mon, if it's sitting out in your living room in plain view, some consideration for aesthetics should be given the design. aTV wins hands down there.
I'd rather hook up a Mini to large TV, that waste time with either of these offerings, but that's me.
AMEN. Wish I'd thought of that route before plunking down for the aTV.
Hardware, software, integration in home theater, hard drive, wireless technology, new release content and overall usability makes Apple TV the clear winner when compared with the ROKU.
HOWEVER, the one area and possibly the most important where the Roku clearly wins for most users is the NetFlix/Roku subscription plan..
Apple Tv NEEDS an all you can view montly flat rate plan to effectively compete with Netflix and Blockbuster online services.
I have an Apple TV, and I love it.. But quite honestly, I think $4.99 for a 24 hour HD rental is to steep a price for me to cancel my Netlix membership which allows me unlimited rentals (3 at a time) for $15 a month..
I rent an occasional HD title from Apple TV, but I'd be broke if I paid $4.99 for the amount of movies (Blu-Ray and standard DVD) I view with my Netflix subscription.
$229 is a very fair price for Apple TV, even compared to the $99 ROKU box.. But yeah, iTunes needs a subscription plan if it really wants to win big in the downloadable content war. I think it will remain a niche product until this happens.
Wow, you summed up EXACTLY what I wanted to say!
Really the Apple TV is an amazing piece of hardware, though it fails when it comes to pricing. $2 a pop for non HD TV shows, buying the DVD box set is cheaper and if you hunt you could probably get the BD box set for the same price!
$5 for an HD rental, my local store charges ~$2.50 (old movies are a $1 and yes these are DVDs) and they have to have physical media that can run out and have an actual building to up keep.
Why can't Apple take out the cable guys, $40-$60 a month for unlimited TV shows and Movies all in 720p and 5.1 surround. Now THAT I would rush out to get and replace my cable with!
Wow, you summed up EXACTLY what I wanted to say!
Really the Apple TV is an amazing piece of hardware, though it fails when it comes to pricing. $2 a pop for non HD TV shows, buying the DVD box set is cheaper and if you hunt you could probably get the BD box set for the same price!
$5 for an HD rental, my local store charges ~$2.50 (old movies are a $1 and yes these are DVDs) and they have to have physical media that can run out and have an actual building to up keep.
Why can't Apple take out the cable guys, $40-$60 a month for unlimited TV shows and Movies all in 720p and 5.1 surround. Now THAT I would rush out to get and replace my cable with!
Apple doesn't own the content. I'm sure that Apple would be overjoyed to give you the prices and selection that you want, but the content providers aren't playing ball.
Right now Apple holds the BEST position to get real movies pumped into consumers homes....
Thats enough for me to decide which is of more utility. I own the DVDs of the above mentioned media but its a total PITA trying to find the dics a given episode is on, put it in the machine, wait for it to spin up, navigate the menus etc. Handbrake I cant quit you
Hardware, software, integration in home theater, hard drive, wireless technology, new release content and overall usability makes Apple TV the clear winner when compared with the ROKU.
Apple Tv NEEDS an all you can view montly flat rate plan to effectively compete with Netflix and Blockbuster online services.
I have an Apple TV, and I love it.. But quite honestly, I think $4.99 for a 24 hour HD rental is to steep a price for me to cancel my Netlix membership which allows me unlimited rentals (3 at a time) for $15 a month..
$229 is a very fair price for Apple TV, even compared to the $99 ROKU box.. But yeah, iTunes needs a subscription plan if it really wants to win big in the downloadable content war. I think it will remain a niche product until this happens.
Very true, the flat rate-option would be highly appreciated.
I would love to have movie rentals available in Europe. I definitely see some potential here, the prices shouldn?t be converted directly to Euros, 5 Euros for one HD movie is simply too expensive. 2 Euros for SD movies, 3 for HD and I am sold...! As the service expands into different countries, a language selection would also be quite convenient.
AppleTV?s look is far superior to the Roku box, without any doubt. And yes, it matters if you plan on using it in your living room.
Apple doesn't own the content. I'm sure that Apple would be overjoyed to give you the prices and selection that you want, but the content providers aren't playing ball.
Yes of course I understand that, but you see Netflix has all these movies (mind you pretty poor ones) for $10 a month plus some discs in the mail.
It is totally possible for Apple to hit within that price range, and it seems the music studios love the whole subscription thing and DRM so it makes sense.
Also a totally free ad-supported version would be pretty sweet, like Hulu except better video quality.
These movie studies can't be making much off my $1 DVD rentals.
It may not be a beauty contest, but c'mon, if it's sitting out in your living room in plain view, some consideration for aesthetics should be given the design. aTV wins hands down there.
Are you for real? Apple has come up with some stunning designs but the the Apple TV is hardly one of them. A thing of beauty-NOT- and it is as hot as a warming plate even when off. It looks like a sushi plate. Why is that more attractive than an black box? I swear some of the posts here are simply preposterous to say the least!
Hopefully Apple will consider lowering the price of AppleTV now that it is a constant stream of income instead a just a hardware.
That's my hope too. If they had lowered it to $199 instead of $229 last MacWorld then I would have bought one more easily. Now, my price point is $149. The hardware for the AppleTV has not changed since it was intro'd a year and a half ago. They added the option for a 160Gb drive but that's it. Apple's profits on those are a bit fat and they can afford to drop the price down a bit more for volume sake.
.
As for looks, My appleTV just sits in a notch in the back of the flatscreen. Tilted just right, I can still use the remote without a problem. Make it hidden and who cares what it looks like... just don't let it overheat with a hard drive that can't go into energy savings mode.
I had to put mine on a non-heat conducive wood block as to not have a thermal meltdown in my NYC apartment. All that energy that is constantly being expended - is this product even Green friendly? I swear I could melt a cheese tuna melt on it.
That's my hope too. If they had lowered it to $199 instead of $229 last MacWorld then I would have bought one more easily. Now, my price point is $149. The hardware for the AppleTV has not changed since it was intro'd a year and a half ago. They added the option for a 160Gb drive but that's it. Apple's profits on those are a bit fat and they can afford to drop the price down a bit more for volume sake.
Dropping the price even more without giving it more functionality will only fuel the consumer suspicion that it's a bomb.