If you already have an "unlimited" plan, there is no additional monthly expense. However, you must have at least an "unlimited" plan to get the service.
Since we already have an unlimited plan, we would just need to purchase the $99 device and be done with it. I will likely do this. We love watching InstantView movies on my wife's 24" iMac (via Fusion, unfortunately) It would be great to have this for the living room. We would cancel digital cable and make up the price in 2 months!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
I could be wrong, but I'm under the impression that you buy the $99 box, then pay $8.99/month for this service, in addition to your "unlimited" rentals plan. Their web site mentions that instant view choices would 'not interfere' with your DVD rental plan.
one of the biggest problems I see is Netflix's EXTREMELY small catalog of movies in the view instantly. There are probably 10 or so movies released in 2008, and those are fairly crappy. They do not have movies I want to see. Just crap.
That being said, I watch at least 4 a week. They are so so, but some are suprisingly good, like "Meet Reed Fish." But the biggest problems is their searching. You can't simply view by date released, or title and when you start to scroll through the screens, the same movies show up on subsequent screens, making it seem like there are more movies than there are, but it's just cluttered.
If they want to compete with the Apple TV (or anyone else that spent a day at Industrial Design Camp), can they at least make something that doesn't look like a big pile of shit that was run over by a Peterbilt then pissed on by a group of Hell's Angels then vomited on by the psych ward from the insane asylum?
Geezus, with products having nearly the same performance characteristics as every other product, the one distinguishing feature is ID. (Netflix, that stands for Industrial Design, since it's obvious nobody at your company knows what that means.) I know Roku designed this little pygmy-loooking toaster-with-TV-outputs, but I'm sure Netflix could have at least said, "Hey, make it look a little better than my gangrene-inflicted paraplegic sister's vagina."
What a friggin' joke. I like the device, I am a Netflix subscriber, I love the Watch It Now feature, but I'm not buying this thing simply because it LOOKS LIKE SHIT. Of all the beautiful devices I have in my A-V rack, the aesthetic (or lack of) on this wretched contraption would collectively bring the look of my entire living room down to the pit of ugly-hell this mutant box inhabits.
Drama queen? (wait, that much is obvious). It's a 5 inch black box. Let me look over my A/V equipment. Black and silver...which would look worse with it: this little 5 inch black box or Apple's 11 inch white AppleTV? Hmm, I'll have to ponder that for a while.
(If I were to say, "If you can't say something constructive instead of over the top BS, could you please just STFU!" would that be considered a personal attack?)
Seriously, if there was ever a cheap wannabe knockoff - this is it.
#1: Higher wireless speeds do not offer you a faster connection to the internet, DUH. However, N offers the advantage over b/g in that if you a copying a file from your networked computer say, to your wireless device, it will be a hell of a lot faster via N (or wired, obviously).
#2: This thing is a very very strong example of what the PC world is plagued by: A LACK OF ANY DESIGN WHATSOEVER. Ugly is being nice when talking about this thing. Sure, I'm sure it functions. But like the rest of the world (hopefully) I want something that works, and looks good - in fact - I want something that addresses both! Which is why I shop at Apple.
LOL @ guys caring what it looks like. You are acting like a bunch of metrosexual women. Atleast if you buy it you guys can watch all those gay shows that im sure you like.
Seriously if your that insecure in your manhood just put that damn thing out of site, there is no need to prominently display it in your living room.
Movie selection is the the key I hear it ain't that great ... but assuming it is decent and if you rent 30 movies a month at apple (not HD) the cost is $90.
If you rent 30 movies on the ugly box the cost is under $10.
So ... no joke ... just hide it behind the entertainment center.
If they want to compete with the Apple TV (or anyone else that spent a day at Industrial Design Camp), can they at least make something that doesn't look like a big pile of shit that was run over by a Peterbilt then pissed on by a group of Hell's Angels then vomited on by the psych ward from the insane asylum?
Geezus, with products having nearly the same performance characteristics as every other product, the one distinguishing feature is ID. (Netflix, that stands for Industrial Design, since it's obvious nobody at your company knows what that means.) I know Roku designed this little pygmy-loooking toaster-with-TV-outputs, but I'm sure Netflix could have at least said, "Hey, make it look a little better than my gangrene-inflicted paraplegic sister's vagina."
What a friggin' joke. I like the device, I am a Netflix subscriber, I love the Watch It Now feature, but I'm not buying this thing simply because it LOOKS LIKE SHIT. Of all the beautiful devices I have in my A-V rack, the aesthetic (or lack of) on this wretched contraption would collectively bring the look of my entire living room down to the pit of ugly-hell this mutant box inhabits.
I know where you're coming from, but I'd say it's stunningly mediocre in design rather than "shit"
I know where you're coming from, but I'd say it's stunningly mediocre in design rather than "shit"
Indeed. And that's hardly surprising given that it costs only $99.99.
I don't really know what they were thinking with that logo badge and huge power (?) button. If the badge was just the word "roku" without that purple box around it and the power button was smaller, and round, and mounted middle-left rather than bottom-left of the faceplate (with the power indicator next to it, or in the centre of the button itself), the whole thing would be significantly less ugly.
Anyway, the looks really should come a distant second to the actual functionality of the box. And given that the only thing this box does is play streaming files off Netflix, I've got to say it's a pretty "meh" product.
LOL @ guys caring what it looks like. You are acting like a bunch of metrosexual women. Atleast if you buy it you guys can watch all those gay shows that im sure you like.
Seriously if your that insecure in your manhood just put that damn thing out of site, there is no need to prominently display it in your living room.
Hey I'm sorry but sharp edges are a "no no" I'm not spending all this money on mani and pedis and cuticle treatments only to get my fingers scratched up beyond beautification by this boorish box
My guess, yeah. the studios have probably cut a short term deal at a favorable rate to get a player in the market that isn't Apple. Either that or NetFlix is willing to lose a lot of money to get this thing going.
When I was talking about subsidizing, I was talking about the cost to create the digitized movie content. Why does Netflix have all of this studio approved content, and Apple does not?
one of the biggest problems I see is Netflix's EXTREMELY small catalog of movies in the view instantly. There are probably 10 or so movies released in 2008, and those are fairly crappy. They do not have movies I want to see. Just crap.
That being said, I watch at least 4 a week. They are so so, but some are suprisingly good, like "Meet Reed Fish." But the biggest problems is their searching. You can't simply view by date released, or title and when you start to scroll through the screens, the same movies show up on subsequent screens, making it seem like there are more movies than there are, but it's just cluttered.
You have to consider also that Netflix does NOT offer HD content. On the Roku site they say that the box will play HD once it becomes available.
That's pretty enthusiastic. Shouldn't you have tried one before going "whole hog" like that? Roku is pretty reputable but I wouldn't want to buy multiples of any new product without one trying out first.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevetim
Movie selection is the the key I hear it ain't that great ... but assuming it is decent and if you rent 30 movies a month at apple (not HD) the cost is $90.
If you rent 30 movies on the ugly box the cost is under $10.
So ... no joke ... just hide it behind the entertainment center.
Personally, I think the reaction to the appearance is either sarcastic or excessively melodramatic. Home theater devices generally aren't all that sharp looking unless you pay extra, even then, some of the high end stuff wasn't designed to look special. AppleTV looks nice, but it continues the drift away from devices that can stack nicely, and it matches nothing that would go in a HT cabinet. I think it's just best to have a smoked door plate.
I don't know how well putting the Roku in the back would work with the remote. I didn't see anything that said it was a RF remote.
I appreciate good industrial design as much as the next person, but consider that quality (example number one: YouTube) is not always the deciding factor. Convenience and cost are more often than not.
Yah, if your logo is just text then you want to try to make it somewhat nice. Like the HDMI text on the back.
I was looking at it again and it may be that they've combined the logo with an over-sized "window" for the IR remote control. It's still a very bad move. A separate round IR window aligned with my already suggested round power button would look much better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
What did netflix do? Nickle and dime Roku to eliminate any design costs?
I think they must have. I've got a SoundBridge and that's a rather nice looking bit of kit.
Yah, if your logo is just text then you want to try to make it somewhat nice. Like the HDMI text on the back.
I have a replayTv and it sure isn't this ugly and the SoundBridge isn't horrible.
SoundBridge is a more expensive device that only does audio.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
I appreciate good industrial design as much as the next person, but consider that quality (example number one: YouTube) is not always the deciding factor. Convenience and cost are more often than not.
It looks like they are trying to do something different from their previous products.
If they want to compete with the Apple TV (or anyone else that spent a day at Industrial Design Camp), can they at least make something that doesn't look like a big pile of shit that was run over by a Peterbilt then pissed on by a group of Hell's Angels then vomited on by the psych ward from the insane asylum?
Geezus, with products having nearly the same performance characteristics as every other product, the one distinguishing feature is ID. (Netflix, that stands for Industrial Design, since it's obvious nobody at your company knows what that means.) I know Roku designed this little pygmy-loooking toaster-with-TV-outputs, but I'm sure Netflix could have at least said, "Hey, make it look a little better than my gangrene-inflicted paraplegic sister's vagina."
What a friggin' joke. I like the device, I am a Netflix subscriber, I love the Watch It Now feature, but I'm not buying this thing simply because it LOOKS LIKE SHIT. Of all the beautiful devices I have in my A-V rack, the aesthetic (or lack of) on this wretched contraption would collectively bring the look of my entire living room down to the pit of ugly-hell this mutant box inhabits.
Fortunately, a person like you probably has a beautiful computer monitor and beautiful speakers with which you can enjoy Netflix's watch-it-now feature. Normal people don't care what the thing looks like. The beauty of this product is that it's not beautiful. Apple TV only works with wide screen TVs. Netflix's offering is more practical and inclusive.
(I, for one, won't be buying an HDTV until about a year after the broadcast conversion.)
That's a plus. Additionally, I believe Netflix subscribers tend to be of the movie-buff variety, which means that older movies are desired. Certainly not everyone feels this way; I think, however, that this device will be a selling point for Netflix in their acquisition of watch-it-now licensing for new features.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I don't think this is directly sponsored by the studios. This is Netflix being a good company, doing what it takes to stay alive while groups like Apple move into their territory. Netflix will sink or swim on this. I think they'll swim.
Personally--as a Netflix subscriber--I really like this. I've never understood who ATV was for. I own a Mac and just bought XP in part so I could enjoy watch-it-now on Netflix (and use decent personal finance software). This product will spare others in situations similar to mine that expense (and possibly help Apple to the extent that people avoid Windows as a result of their Roku purchase).
Also, as another person who bought Apple in the $60-range, I'm very much pro-apple. I happen to hope that their success lies in the future of the Mac and iPhone--not so much the entertainment industry. Apple wants to be the Microsoft of media and I'm not sure that's a good thing.
One more thing: I agree it's a plus to get movies from an existing queue. This will let people who don't even own a computer to use Netflix. There are lots of people who use libraries for their internet and entertainment needs. These people might want to get this thing and an internet connection and watch more movies--forget the computer.
Anyone who doesn't think the lack of 802.11n is a major issue for this box has never streamed video over both. 802.11n is barely fast enough to stream video effectively in my house. Especially if one or more of the three other computers on the network is downloading something over wireless while I'm watching something. It would suck if the centerpiece of my home entertainment system became useless every time I was downloading some updates for my other computers.
You have to look that the max throughput as shared with every other wireless device in the house. That includes other computers, iPhones, etc. The pipe gets too small very quickly. That's why I don't even use wireless for the Apple TV anymore; I plug it into the Airport directly via Ethernet.
Considering that this box has no hard drive, unless you have the luxury of being able to hard wire it into your network via Ethernet, the experience of using it will be severely hampered. Major, major shortcoming. Other than that, it seems like a good thing. Although, as many have pointed out here, the selection of current/recent movies is even weaker than Apple's.
I love Netflix for video rentals. However, the streaming video does not buffer and as such, it freezes and stutters despite my 7Mbps connection - making it useless. If people purchase this hardware and get the same results, there will be mass returns. Also, it's only 480P which is DVD quality, but if you have a big screen, it won't look nearly as good as your DVD's that are up-converted with your player.
Comments
Since we already have an unlimited plan, we would just need to purchase the $99 device and be done with it. I will likely do this. We love watching InstantView movies on my wife's 24" iMac (via Fusion, unfortunately) It would be great to have this for the living room. We would cancel digital cable and make up the price in 2 months!
I could be wrong, but I'm under the impression that you buy the $99 box, then pay $8.99/month for this service, in addition to your "unlimited" rentals plan. Their web site mentions that instant view choices would 'not interfere' with your DVD rental plan.
That being said, I watch at least 4 a week. They are so so, but some are suprisingly good, like "Meet Reed Fish." But the biggest problems is their searching. You can't simply view by date released, or title and when you start to scroll through the screens, the same movies show up on subsequent screens, making it seem like there are more movies than there are, but it's just cluttered.
802.11b is plenty fast for streaming from the internet because your internet service into the house is slower than 802.11b anyway.
My experiments with b is that it does not work. Lots of crapping out. You need n.
If they want to compete with the Apple TV (or anyone else that spent a day at Industrial Design Camp), can they at least make something that doesn't look like a big pile of shit that was run over by a Peterbilt then pissed on by a group of Hell's Angels then vomited on by the psych ward from the insane asylum?
Geezus, with products having nearly the same performance characteristics as every other product, the one distinguishing feature is ID. (Netflix, that stands for Industrial Design, since it's obvious nobody at your company knows what that means.) I know Roku designed this little pygmy-loooking toaster-with-TV-outputs, but I'm sure Netflix could have at least said, "Hey, make it look a little better than my gangrene-inflicted paraplegic sister's vagina."
What a friggin' joke. I like the device, I am a Netflix subscriber, I love the Watch It Now feature, but I'm not buying this thing simply because it LOOKS LIKE SHIT. Of all the beautiful devices I have in my A-V rack, the aesthetic (or lack of) on this wretched contraption would collectively bring the look of my entire living room down to the pit of ugly-hell this mutant box inhabits.
Drama queen? (wait, that much is obvious). It's a 5 inch black box. Let me look over my A/V equipment. Black and silver...which would look worse with it: this little 5 inch black box or Apple's 11 inch white AppleTV? Hmm, I'll have to ponder that for a while.
(If I were to say, "If you can't say something constructive instead of over the top BS, could you please just STFU!" would that be considered a personal attack?)
Seriously, if there was ever a cheap wannabe knockoff - this is it.
#1: Higher wireless speeds do not offer you a faster connection to the internet, DUH. However, N offers the advantage over b/g in that if you a copying a file from your networked computer say, to your wireless device, it will be a hell of a lot faster via N (or wired, obviously).
#2: This thing is a very very strong example of what the PC world is plagued by: A LACK OF ANY DESIGN WHATSOEVER. Ugly is being nice when talking about this thing. Sure, I'm sure it functions. But like the rest of the world (hopefully) I want something that works, and looks good - in fact - I want something that addresses both! Which is why I shop at Apple.
#3: I'm serious - is this thing really a joke?
Seriously if your that insecure in your manhood just put that damn thing out of site, there is no need to prominently display it in your living room.
#3: I'm serious - is this thing really a joke?
Movie selection is the the key I hear it ain't that great ... but assuming it is decent and if you rent 30 movies a month at apple (not HD) the cost is $90.
If you rent 30 movies on the ugly box the cost is under $10.
So ... no joke ... just hide it behind the entertainment center.
If they want to compete with the Apple TV (or anyone else that spent a day at Industrial Design Camp), can they at least make something that doesn't look like a big pile of shit that was run over by a Peterbilt then pissed on by a group of Hell's Angels then vomited on by the psych ward from the insane asylum?
Geezus, with products having nearly the same performance characteristics as every other product, the one distinguishing feature is ID. (Netflix, that stands for Industrial Design, since it's obvious nobody at your company knows what that means.) I know Roku designed this little pygmy-loooking toaster-with-TV-outputs, but I'm sure Netflix could have at least said, "Hey, make it look a little better than my gangrene-inflicted paraplegic sister's vagina."
What a friggin' joke. I like the device, I am a Netflix subscriber, I love the Watch It Now feature, but I'm not buying this thing simply because it LOOKS LIKE SHIT. Of all the beautiful devices I have in my A-V rack, the aesthetic (or lack of) on this wretched contraption would collectively bring the look of my entire living room down to the pit of ugly-hell this mutant box inhabits.
I know where you're coming from, but I'd say it's stunningly mediocre in design rather than "shit"
I know where you're coming from, but I'd say it's stunningly mediocre in design rather than "shit"
Indeed. And that's hardly surprising given that it costs only $99.99.
I don't really know what they were thinking with that logo badge and huge power (?) button. If the badge was just the word "roku" without that purple box around it and the power button was smaller, and round, and mounted middle-left rather than bottom-left of the faceplate (with the power indicator next to it, or in the centre of the button itself), the whole thing would be significantly less ugly.
Anyway, the looks really should come a distant second to the actual functionality of the box. And given that the only thing this box does is play streaming files off Netflix, I've got to say it's a pretty "meh" product.
LOL @ guys caring what it looks like. You are acting like a bunch of metrosexual women. Atleast if you buy it you guys can watch all those gay shows that im sure you like.
Seriously if your that insecure in your manhood just put that damn thing out of site, there is no need to prominently display it in your living room.
Hey I'm sorry but sharp edges are a "no no" I'm not spending all this money on mani and pedis and cuticle treatments only to get my fingers scratched up beyond beautification by this boorish box
My guess, yeah. the studios have probably cut a short term deal at a favorable rate to get a player in the market that isn't Apple. Either that or NetFlix is willing to lose a lot of money to get this thing going.
When I was talking about subsidizing, I was talking about the cost to create the digitized movie content. Why does Netflix have all of this studio approved content, and Apple does not?
one of the biggest problems I see is Netflix's EXTREMELY small catalog of movies in the view instantly. There are probably 10 or so movies released in 2008, and those are fairly crappy. They do not have movies I want to see. Just crap.
That being said, I watch at least 4 a week. They are so so, but some are suprisingly good, like "Meet Reed Fish." But the biggest problems is their searching. You can't simply view by date released, or title and when you start to scroll through the screens, the same movies show up on subsequent screens, making it seem like there are more movies than there are, but it's just cluttered.
You have to consider also that Netflix does NOT offer HD content. On the Roku site they say that the box will play HD once it becomes available.
If the badge was just the word "roku" without that purple box around it.
Yah, if your logo is just text then you want to try to make it somewhat nice. Like the HDMI text on the back.
I have a replayTv and it sure isn't this ugly and the SoundBridge isn't horrible.
What did netflix do? Nickle and dime Roku to eliminate any design costs?
http://www.roku.com/products_soundbridge_photos.php
Just ordered 4 of these for family members.
That's pretty enthusiastic. Shouldn't you have tried one before going "whole hog" like that? Roku is pretty reputable but I wouldn't want to buy multiples of any new product without one trying out first.
Movie selection is the the key I hear it ain't that great ... but assuming it is decent and if you rent 30 movies a month at apple (not HD) the cost is $90.
If you rent 30 movies on the ugly box the cost is under $10.
So ... no joke ... just hide it behind the entertainment center.
Personally, I think the reaction to the appearance is either sarcastic or excessively melodramatic. Home theater devices generally aren't all that sharp looking unless you pay extra, even then, some of the high end stuff wasn't designed to look special. AppleTV looks nice, but it continues the drift away from devices that can stack nicely, and it matches nothing that would go in a HT cabinet. I think it's just best to have a smoked door plate.
I don't know how well putting the Roku in the back would work with the remote. I didn't see anything that said it was a RF remote.
Yah, if your logo is just text then you want to try to make it somewhat nice. Like the HDMI text on the back.
I have a replayTv and it sure isn't this ugly and the SoundBridge isn't horrible.
What did netflix do? Nickle and dime Roku to eliminate any design costs?
http://www.roku.com/products_soundbridge_photos.php
I appreciate good industrial design as much as the next person, but consider that quality (example number one: YouTube) is not always the deciding factor. Convenience and cost are more often than not.
Yah, if your logo is just text then you want to try to make it somewhat nice. Like the HDMI text on the back.
I was looking at it again and it may be that they've combined the logo with an over-sized "window" for the IR remote control. It's still a very bad move. A separate round IR window aligned with my already suggested round power button would look much better.
What did netflix do? Nickle and dime Roku to eliminate any design costs?
I think they must have. I've got a SoundBridge and that's a rather nice looking bit of kit.
Yah, if your logo is just text then you want to try to make it somewhat nice. Like the HDMI text on the back.
I have a replayTv and it sure isn't this ugly and the SoundBridge isn't horrible.
SoundBridge is a more expensive device that only does audio.
I appreciate good industrial design as much as the next person, but consider that quality (example number one: YouTube) is not always the deciding factor. Convenience and cost are more often than not.
It looks like they are trying to do something different from their previous products.
If they want to compete with the Apple TV (or anyone else that spent a day at Industrial Design Camp), can they at least make something that doesn't look like a big pile of shit that was run over by a Peterbilt then pissed on by a group of Hell's Angels then vomited on by the psych ward from the insane asylum?
Geezus, with products having nearly the same performance characteristics as every other product, the one distinguishing feature is ID. (Netflix, that stands for Industrial Design, since it's obvious nobody at your company knows what that means.) I know Roku designed this little pygmy-loooking toaster-with-TV-outputs, but I'm sure Netflix could have at least said, "Hey, make it look a little better than my gangrene-inflicted paraplegic sister's vagina."
What a friggin' joke. I like the device, I am a Netflix subscriber, I love the Watch It Now feature, but I'm not buying this thing simply because it LOOKS LIKE SHIT. Of all the beautiful devices I have in my A-V rack, the aesthetic (or lack of) on this wretched contraption would collectively bring the look of my entire living room down to the pit of ugly-hell this mutant box inhabits.
Fortunately, a person like you probably has a beautiful computer monitor and beautiful speakers with which you can enjoy Netflix's watch-it-now feature. Normal people don't care what the thing looks like. The beauty of this product is that it's not beautiful. Apple TV only works with wide screen TVs. Netflix's offering is more practical and inclusive.
(I, for one, won't be buying an HDTV until about a year after the broadcast conversion.)
That's a plus. Additionally, I believe Netflix subscribers tend to be of the movie-buff variety, which means that older movies are desired. Certainly not everyone feels this way; I think, however, that this device will be a selling point for Netflix in their acquisition of watch-it-now licensing for new features.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I don't think this is directly sponsored by the studios. This is Netflix being a good company, doing what it takes to stay alive while groups like Apple move into their territory. Netflix will sink or swim on this. I think they'll swim.
Personally--as a Netflix subscriber--I really like this. I've never understood who ATV was for. I own a Mac and just bought XP in part so I could enjoy watch-it-now on Netflix (and use decent personal finance software). This product will spare others in situations similar to mine that expense (and possibly help Apple to the extent that people avoid Windows as a result of their Roku purchase).
Also, as another person who bought Apple in the $60-range, I'm very much pro-apple. I happen to hope that their success lies in the future of the Mac and iPhone--not so much the entertainment industry. Apple wants to be the Microsoft of media and I'm not sure that's a good thing.
One more thing: I agree it's a plus to get movies from an existing queue. This will let people who don't even own a computer to use Netflix. There are lots of people who use libraries for their internet and entertainment needs. These people might want to get this thing and an internet connection and watch more movies--forget the computer.
You have to look that the max throughput as shared with every other wireless device in the house. That includes other computers, iPhones, etc. The pipe gets too small very quickly. That's why I don't even use wireless for the Apple TV anymore; I plug it into the Airport directly via Ethernet.
Considering that this box has no hard drive, unless you have the luxury of being able to hard wire it into your network via Ethernet, the experience of using it will be severely hampered. Major, major shortcoming. Other than that, it seems like a good thing. Although, as many have pointed out here, the selection of current/recent movies is even weaker than Apple's.