51–60 of 407 posts
Edit: I did not realize that the base YouTube app was specifically mentioned in the article, alongside YTTV. That's surprising and is a bigger deal than I'd thought before.
The competitive landscape for what is turning out to be the next evolution of in-home video content delivery is just making me realize that the content is not worth the hassle. I'm not going to replace a $100/mo CATV subscription with 10 (or even 5) $10/mo individual subscriptions, where I have to constantly remember which service provides a particular show. I'm not going to have multiple dongles and devices to watch…
If that's not an option, cancelling/pausing subscriptions should work fine. Once you've watched everything on NF, cancel/pause that and get a HBO Max or something.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My thoughts exactly. This seems particularly stupid to do while regulators are circling them. Someone at Google is asleep at the wheel.
Right, well, that's great if you favor Google being untouched by regulators. Personally, I favor Google being broken up by services where they dominate market share. Search and video would split. And probably, Android would split.
Assuming Google doesn't want to be broken up, poking the bear with publicly anti-competitive behavior seems like a bad choice.
This whole situation really feels like Google has their head stuck up their ass. People are just as likely to leave Roku, as they are to leave YouTube TV. Their subscriber numbers can't be strong enough to justify such idiotic behavior. To me, this sounds like a middle manager gone rogue, and no one higher up has stepped in yet and said "Ok, you shot your shot, but Roku called your bluff, you've taken this way too fa…
I don't really buy the compression algorithm thing either - surely they make more off of ads than the savings that would be generated from better compression.
pretty sure this is just hardball over revenue sharing, data sharing, and technical requirements...
I get this situation is different since YouTube is looking for concessions on functionality, but I find it hard to defend Roku with their triple-dipping scheme. They charge for the device (I paid over $100 for my 4k HDR box), then they display massive ads covering 50% of the screen, then they want a cut of revenue from content providers as well. Roku burned through a lot of goodwill with their customers during the HB…
From the original blog of Roku "First, Google continues to interfere with Roku’s independent search results, requiring that we preference YouTube over other content providers" "Second, Google discriminates against Roku by demanding search, voice, and data features that they do not insist on from other streaming platforms." I would be much more comfortable if the headline says, "Google made unreasonable demands on Rok…
Could we get a moderator to change the title to say YouTube TV instead of YouTube? The dispute between Roku and Google has nothing to do with the latter, and is confusing to readers. Edit: I did not realize that the base YouTube app was specifically mentioned in the article, alongside YTTV. That's surprising and is a bigger deal than I'd thought before.
From the original blog of Roku "First, Google continues to interfere with Roku’s independent search results, requiring that we preference YouTube over other content providers" "Second, Google discriminates against Roku by demanding search, voice, and data features that they do not insist on from other streaming platforms." I would be much more comfortable if the headline says, "Google made unreasonable demands on Rok…
And yet > To be clear, we have never, as they have alleged, made any requests to access user data or interfere with search results. This claim is baseless and false. So one of them (but most likely both of them) are being dishonest in their PR plays to get the other side to give in to demands. https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/update-our-youtube-tv-m...
The Roku blog doesn't load for me because I have javascript disabled. But the axios article states:
> asking Roku to create a dedicated search results row for YouTube within the Roku smart TV interface
The YouTube blog hasn't denied that at all. In fact it practically confirms it:
> Our agreements with partners have technical requirements to ensure a high quality experience on YouTube.
Hah, a "high quality" experience indeed. Except, it's not quite "on youtube" since it's more "on Roku".
The youtube blog also states:
> Roku requested exceptions that would break the YouTube experience and limit our ability to update YouTube in order to fix issues or add new features.
Let users update their YouTube app through Roku app store instead of some shitty auto-update crap that lets Google shovel shit down Roku users.
This whole situation really feels like Google has their head stuck up their ass. People are just as likely to leave Roku, as they are to leave YouTube TV. Their subscriber numbers can't be strong enough to justify such idiotic behavior. To me, this sounds like a middle manager gone rogue, and no one higher up has stepped in yet and said "Ok, you shot your shot, but Roku called your bluff, you've taken this way too fa…
It's doubly weird, because YouTube TV is literally just a side project -- There's at least a 50% chance Google just totally shuts down YouTube TV within the next five years. (Like they already did with Google Play Music, and Google Play Movies + TV once before). Google's going to war with Roku over something that Google doesn't care about at all (it's one minor ancillary line of business to them), but is Roku's main…
In most other companies, everything else being equal: someone higher up would have already stepped in and said "YouTube TV isn't worth it, you need to end this, you're sullying the corporate brand." But that's not really how Google operates; at least, not yet.