![]() ![]() Replay, TiVo, WebTV, most of the standalone boxes had faded by that point, and Roku, from the bones of Replay, quickly became the place to have "channels" separate from a cable or YouTube/Metacafe/Dailymotion/Vimeo controlling platform etc. Chromecast, Intel WiDi/Miracast, and other tech that tried to become a remote display, and the myriad of tv boxes that faded out or got commoditized (a zillion tv boxes running android). Within a very short period, Roku expanded well beyond that, as it was the only small box and soon stick with an OS, vs. Can't blame them, but it feels like this short term money grab of making media and forcing higher fees for access is the first step on the path to being the next Tivo or WebTV. They were the player without a bias, providing open access to the TV screen to any tiny niche media player. ![]() All those tiny partners and apps on the Roku catalog couldn't offset the fact that what the family wanted to see either wasn't on Roku, or was on some corporate gamesmanship countdown.Īnd it's so disappointing. Removing, or threatening to remove, top players for whatever intention does not engender trust.Įvery TV in my house had a Roku a year ago. The real question is whether Roku provides access to the partners each person wants. If we look at top streaming players Roku has had a dispute with, they've almost collected the whole set!Īnd do consumers benefit from access to 300 "screen savers" but no HBO Max or other service they've paid for but cannot access on Roku? (Note: the HBO dispute was resolved and is now fully supported on Roku, but during its launch, was not available on Roku) Roku wants us to think so, but my family simply says "Let's just get a Google or Fire stick". ![]() You don't mention the current disputes with YouTube and Amazon. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |