Is it missing YouTube? Also, if it easy to buy newly released movies like you can with iTunes on the Apple TV?
Amazon Fire TV
161–170 of 400 posts
Re: Amazon Fire TV
#162This is pretty much what Google TV should have been all along, but Google cares too much about web search and not enough about what people actually want to do on a TV - watch shows and play games. The gaming aspect of this will make it a winner. OUYA's big problem is that it didn't do streaming and was a bit clunky. Amazon has a big game library and just needs controller support. As a parent, a $100 streaming box and…
The gaming part won't do anything, in France each internet provider give a box exactly like this one, with TV and games. Guess what, nobody play the games. The people that play games in front of their TV are gamers that want AAA experience.
I feel like that last part is an assumption. That's like saying people who want more out of their phones only want to do e-mail.
I have been aching for a large library of easy and casual games I can share with my wife forever. She doesn't care about the AAA games and I'm willing to give those up if it means we can play together.
Also, the standards for games these days is really low. I see children playing total crap all the time. Gone are the days you beg your mom to spend $60 buying you one game where upon you had to spend the next 6 months playing it before you would get another one. Parents will buy a game on their phone and hand it to their kid like its the pacifier of the 21st century.
Re: Amazon Fire TV
#163They're studying the mistakes of others, and paying attention to user reviews of competing products, so they can solve real pain points: > During its presentation, Amazon said that it has been paying close attention to the complaints of customers who have been using the other companies' devices through Amazon—namely that search is difficult, performance is laggy, and the ecosystems are closed—in order to build its ow…
That's pretty funny, as a long-time Roku user. The search couldn't be easier, whether you're inside a specific app, or using the cross platform search feature. Performance is snappier than these services on a desktop browser, and the ecosystem is as open as anyone could want.
As a long-time Roku user I curse ours almost every day. Performance is slower than every other device we own (except the Chromecast). They constantly "reset" themselves while trying to navigate through the Netflix and Amazon listings. Videos will just sporadically stop playing or run into constant buffering issues. There are no parental controls. They didn't support DLNA until a few months ago.
Re: Amazon Fire TV
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes and no. Chromecast requires you having another device to use with it. Grabbing my phone, opening the Netflix app, choosing to Chromecast, searching for a show, hitting play then waiting ~30 seconds for the Chromecast to actually play is not a good user experience. I use my Roku almost exclusively now.
> Chromecast requires you having another device to use with it. So does the Fire TV. The remote control is still a device you have to have in hand. And, personally, I'd take using my phone or tablet instead anyday. It's gotten to the point that I think any device that uses its own proprietary remote control with physical buttons is a failure in UI design.
The remote is shared, though. It sits on the table. If my smartphone is the remote then no-one can use it when I'm not at home. So instead you have to set up every smartphone as a remote. And what about children? Do you want them to use your smartphone?
A cheap, disposable remote is no bad thing.
Re: Amazon Fire TV
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
I actually find it much easier to search or browse for content using my tablet or phone, then choose to throw it up on the TV via Chromecast, as opposed to searching for content using a remote like on a Roku or my Xbox. It just seems easier for me to do this in my hand than ten feet away, especially when I have to try to enter text into a TV interface.
I found Chromecast OK when I was using it by myself, but sharing it is a problem. It's difficult to have two or more people crowded around a smartphone screen deciding what to watch. The big screen interface works much, much better. Even that aside, my girlfriend doesn't want to use my phone to navigate, so she has to install Netflix on her phone too. And set up the user account there. Multiply that by every service…
I agree... I really like the Chromecast most of the time. Browsing for content on the phone or tablet is much easier than via a remote sometimes.
But there are other times when I wish there were another option available as well.
Re: Amazon Fire TV
#166Cant wait to jailbreak this and run xbmc on it.
Re: Amazon Fire TV
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't knock it until you tried it. The graphics for games like Bard's Tale and many others are pretty damn good on mobile devices. We all have great mobile gaming experiences, wouldn't it be awesome if you could share that with anyone you had over on a big screen? You may expect a "crazy immersive experience" but I would venture a guess that you are not the casual mobile gamer.
Does the casual mobile gamer want their casual mobile game on a giant screen? Isn't part of the allure of mobile games that they are private, games that you play in your hand? Why would someone want these broadcast to a giant screen? Does that add any enjoyment? To me, the Wii U was a failure in this regard. They tried to marry the "fun game in my hand" with the "fun game on the big screen" and the result was a messy…
Possibly. Some games won't cross over well, or at all. For instance, Fruit Ninja wouldn't work. Angry Birds would. Tap Tap Revenge or whatever wouldn't. Etc.
One thing to keep in mind is mobile is a form factor, but no longer a "platform." In this case, the platform is Android. There are plenty of game types that would cross over well. Even better if you could sync state between platforms for a seamless anywhere experience. Imagine playing FFVII on your phone, and then when you get home pick up a PS2 like controller and continue playing that same game on your HDTV?
I think the biggest hurtle is the fact that consumers already have similar devices, and at $99 its not like the FireTV is a no-brainer. If they timed it right, and people are "rolling over" to the next set of devices?
Re: Amazon Fire TV
#168This is pretty much what Google TV should have been all along, but Google cares too much about web search and not enough about what people actually want to do on a TV - watch shows and play games. The gaming aspect of this will make it a winner. OUYA's big problem is that it didn't do streaming and was a bit clunky. Amazon has a big game library and just needs controller support. As a parent, a $100 streaming box and…
If you look back at the timetable, Google realized the Chromecast was a better direction then Google TV and but all efforts into Chromecast. That's why I'm really disappointed Amazon choose to create yet another platform for companies to develop apps and games for instead of building on one already in place. Games work just fine on my phone and tablet. So does searching for content. I say that as a parent that has been doing a lot of Netflix->Chromecast streaming of kids shows & movies lately. I would like to buy some of the content that Amazon has and Netflix does not without plunking down $99 more and another boz to manage and another ecosystem.
Re: Amazon Fire TV
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
Blatantly false. I have a Sony Blu Ray player that has Amazon Instant Video on it and I use it along with Hulu and Netflix. If this thing played Blu Rays, I could dump my DVD player, my XBOX 360 (my wife and I mostly only play casual games or Wii, this seems like a good fit), and my reliance on other gaming consoles. Amazon wants all roads to lead back to Amazon. This strategy is clear. They have their Instant Video…
There are hundreds of devices out there capable of playing Amazon Video, they can't because Amazon either doesn't allow it (Android devices that aren't their branding) or charges a fee/device (ie. $1/Roku). They want Vendor lock in, not in the sense that your data isn't portable, but that you rely on only their services. They do this by slowly pushing you onto more of their specific hardware and bundling more service…
I've never been charged a fee for using Amazon Video on our Rokus. What are you referring to?
Re: Amazon Fire TV
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed, I own a roku and a chromecast, there is literally nothing here that makes me regret either, and nothing that would make me choose the Fire TV over AppleTV if I did want to be tied closer to one ecosystem. I guess I'm bummed that it means it's unlikely the prime video interface will get any better on Roku, but Prime Instant video quality is already so much worse for me then any other source it's not that big a…
> and nothing that would make me choose the Fire TV over AppleTV if I did want to be tied closer to one ecosystem. Well, Amazon is at least available on a variety of platforms whereas iTunes is only on Apple devices -- and will always only be available on Apple devices.
Um what? These restrictions are everywhere, just a little different across platforms.
For example
- All iTunes content is available on Mac, Windows & iOS devices, and all downloaded music is playable on all devices that support AAC. Apple doesn't offer a pure streaming service (AppleTV masquerades as one) so you're stuck with iOS, Windows, and Mac for purchased video content.
- Google Play content can be streamed to any device with an app or modern browser (Linux requires Flash hacks), but can only be downloaded to Android devices. You can't download a movie to play offline on your PC, Mac or iOS device.
- Amazon Instant Video is streamable to any device (Linux requires flash hacks) EXCEPT 3rd party Androids -- Amazon requires you to buy THEIR Android Kindle devices. Downloadable/offline content is only available on Windows.
- Netflix is streamable to any device with an app (Linux requires silverlight hacks). There is no downloadable content.