Amazon announces $39 Fire TV Stick to compete with Google Chromecast

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 68
    mazda 3smazda 3s Posts: 1,607member
    pscooter63 wrote: »
    Landfill stuffing?

    I should know by now that there is no middle ground when it comes to non-Apple products here. They're either great or a piece of s**t :rolleyes:
  • Reply 42 of 68
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pazuzu View Post



    As a prime member I'm in. No brainer.

     

    my ipad already beams prime content to my apple tv, and i dont have to switch inputs or do anything, and my existing remote controls it. only downside is the audio stream. so not worth the hassle of another input/activity mode for the amount of time i want to use Prime over netflix or itunes.

  • Reply 43 of 68
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by pazuzu View Post



    This is perfect for vacationing be it AirBnb, hotel or visiting friends or whatever. Smart.

     

    sounds like a lot of hassle while on vacation -- bring a TV dongle, and a remote, and futz w/ inputs, on someone else's tv? why do that when i can just flip open my ipad and zone out before bed to something meaningless?

  • Reply 44 of 68
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    You are a 1%

     

    Apple is concerned about the 99%


     

    indeed. im a tech nerd and run a Plex server, but even i didnt know devices could stream .ISO files. no way in hell apple is solutioning for that outlier use case.

  • Reply 45 of 68
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rob53 View Post

     

    $2/day for any single channel (I know ESPN has a ton of specialized channels) is too much for me but I do like the idea of unhooking channels from cable/satellite and letting people pay for what they want without having to also have a cable/satellite subscription. Hopefully this is coming soon with the recent announcements but I'd hope for something less than streaming Netflix, or around $4-$5/month per channel.


     

    Well, if you'd like to get the ball rolling, here's some thoughts for some state or municipality if they have the guts to say/do to the providers (Comcast, Charter etc), greatly simplified, but you get the idea-

    1) Separate into a stand alone company to provide internet service (ie cable wire installations etc). Provide the price for internet access only, subject to review (ie you are a freak'n utility).

    2) Separate company that offer content packages. And these two services shall not meet (ie no bundling to internet). They shall be not tied to each other in any manner.

    3) Other provider(s) may shall have equal access to use this 'pipeline'. (competition, what a concept)

    4) All these companies shall post all 'the regular' prices in an easy to view manner. Make clear all 'special' prices and when they expire.

     

    And if you want to be a real rabble rouser, try this one on  - any sports event using any ounce of public money (stadium, parking etc, ie its a 'public event') shall allow any person attending that event the right to record and re-broadcast the event... real time! Whoo- hoo that would ruffle some feathers.

  • Reply 46 of 68
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post





    $19 is almost the bottom.



    That's why it's still a race ;-)

  • Reply 47 of 68
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,316member
    Bought a chromecast, then returned it. Wasn't even worth the $39 or whatever that I paid. Can't even stream photos from your damn device.
  • Reply 48 of 68
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post





    $19 is almost the bottom.



    When they throw one in with a TV purchase, that's the bottom.

  • Reply 49 of 68
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

    I like how it’s competing with Chromecast and not Apple TV.

     

    They know they don’t even remotely have a real solution here, so they’re going with what they figure they can beat.


     

    They already compete with Apple TV with Amazon Fire TV:

     

    http://www.amazon.com/Fire-TV-streaming-media-player/dp/B00CX5P8FC

     

    In most instances research takes only 1-2 minutes.

  • Reply 50 of 68
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by the-movie-times View Post

     

    After months of waiting for an new apple TV (we are an apple household), I finally ended up buying an Amz Fire TV box a couple of months ago, and I'm really happy with it. The main advantage it had over other similar devices is that it has support for XBMC without having to jailbreak it (being an android box). XBMC is the media center software I use on all my TVs.

    With the ability to run XBMC on the same box/device as what I use to stream netflix, I get the best of both worlds. 

     

    It sounds like this dongle will also allow you to run XBMC. If that's the case, I can replace the laptop I have connected to my main tv and use this $20 device as the netflix/XBMC/WatchDisney/WatchESPN device. 

     

    Apple needs to update the apple TV and provide easier local support for your movie library (support playing .iso files). (or let me install XBMC without having to jailbreak it).


     

    just import your files into iTunes. the end. 

    I always make sure the stuff I get or rip is in MP4 format; or use handbrake to re-encode. its really not a big deal, for me at least.

  • Reply 51 of 68
    pazuzupazuzu Posts: 1,728member
    Ordered!
    Perfect for the beach house.
  • Reply 52 of 68
    anomeanome Posts: 1,451member
    Still waiting for them to make any of their content available in Australia. But I suppose that doesn't matter to them, or else they'd have done it by now.
  • Reply 53 of 68
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post



    Bought a chromecast, then returned it. Wasn't even worth the $39 or whatever that I paid. Can't even stream photos from your damn device.

     

    Yes you can. https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/photo-cast-for-chromecast/id733144626?mt=8

  • Reply 54 of 68
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,398member
    rob53 wrote: »

    True, and I have one spare port, but this device isn't going to stream my music, TV shows, or movies from my Mac and I don't care to pay Amazon to get reduced shipping on the few things I buy from them so it's redundant since I already own an AppleTV. Like I said before, I see this device as a trojan horse for Amazon, getting another device into the house to push it's Amazon Prime service(?), which in turn pushes it's Walmart-online-type store.

    I can stream music, tv shows, and movies from my Mac to my Fire TV. Of course the ones that are full of DRM that Apple refuses to license to any other party won't work.
  • Reply 55 of 68
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,614member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by John.B View Post

     

     

    Streamed ESPN is probably the holy grail.  The thing is, ESPN gets on the order of $3-$4 dollars/month for their basic channels (ESPN and ESPN2) from the cable/satellite companies for every single subscriber, regardless of whether subscribers want it or watch it.  If ESPN were to offer ala carte subscriptions, the cable and satellite companies would drop ESPN in a heartbeat, and that's where ESPN gets the majority of the revenue they use to pay for the high-dollar sports content deals from the leagues.


     

    You are correct: this is all about the economics for the content provider. This was what Steve first cracked with the music industry with iTunes and the iPod. No one wanted to pay $20 for a CD to get just the songs they wanted. Thus Napster and Pirate Bay were born; and were real threats. The music industry changed.

     

    ESPN is not actually the content creator. As you correctly point out, they have licensed the content from the leagues. Note though that MLB and NHL (and I think NBA) now all sell their content directly. Only the NFL is the holdout so far. And of course, there are other sports.

     

    But these league offerings are season pass deals. When they come available as day passes only...watch out. When ESPN or the content owners get to the point HBO GO has - that they can get more revenue and growth in revenue directly from consumers without the cable company middle man, we'll be on to something. 

  • Reply 56 of 68
    pmcdpmcd Posts: 396member
    sog35 wrote: »
    You are a 1%

    Apple is concerned about the 99%

    Add me to the 1% after 35+ years of only Apple/NeXT. 1% here, 1% there eventually adds up. Have always had Apple TV's but it really is quite uninspired at this point. Moreover the GUI has become weird. They just keep adding apps, tied to cable. Quite disappointing actually. The best part of the ATV is AirPlay and the ability to learn remotes.
  • Reply 57 of 68
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,614member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by pmcd View Post





    Add me to the 1% after 35+ years of only Apple/NeXT. 1% here, 1% there eventually adds up. Have always had Apple TV's but it really is quite uninspired at this point. Moreover the GUI has become weird. They just keep adding apps, tied to cable. Quite disappointing actually. The best part of the ATV is AirPlay and the ability to learn remotes.

    Agreed. Many observers thought the "it's been way too long" moniker of the October event was aimed directly at ATV. It seems a little long in the tooth in many aspects. I use mine and like it. But it could be better in ways that should seem obvious to AAPL.

  • Reply 58 of 68
    lukeilukei Posts: 357member
    andysol wrote: »
    Amazon is run by morons.

    Bezos is clearly a highly intelligent guy. Some of his gambles pay off. Others don't. I assume you are calling him a moron whilst reviewing your billionaire lifestyle?
  • Reply 59 of 68
    pazuzu wrote: »
    Ordered!
    Perfect for the beach house.

    I ordered two, one for the secondary TV at the house and another for our Moon lair (I would call it a base but lair sounds cooler). I'd hate to realize half way there that I forgot to bring it with, so I'll just leave it there.
  • Reply 60 of 68
    rob53 wrote: »
    Won't work for me since I route everything through my sound system. Plugging directly into the TV means I can only use the TV speakers not my surround sound system. Plus it's from Amazon and all it would be good for is ordering garbage from them.

    It has an HDMI connection. I assume that'll port it through your receiver.
Sign In or Register to comment.