I had a Roku and returned it. Amzn Fire TV doesn't seem much better. I'm sticking with PS3 for now, the only thing that can stream Youtube, Netflix, Amazon Instance Video and what not.
Amazon Fire TV
311–320 of 400 posts
Re: Amazon Fire TV
#312I'm really not that impressed. This is just Apple TV for the Amazon eco-system with gaming lopped on. The majority of people don't care about the specs of their set-top box since that really doesn't affect the performance of streaming an HD video in this day and age. So the two differentiating features are: - Voice Search - Gaming Are those enough of a value proposition? Probably not to make converts. I suspect the m…
>Voice Search God yes. The level of stupidity of all the set-top boxes I've used is staggering. I sit there and use a tiny keyboard to type in B-R-E-A and get tons of hits for things nowhere close to Breaking Bad until I practically type out the whole title. I'd love to be able to just say the title and be done with it. Heaven forbid I'm ever allowed to say "Season pass, bob's burgers, new episodes only," and walk aw…
> The level of stupidity of all the set-top boxes I've used is staggering. I sit there and use a tiny keyboard to type in B-R-E-A and get tons of hits for things nowhere close to Breaking Bad until I practically type out the whole title.
I'd settle for a non-braindead mobile or desktop client, I don't even need voice. I have a Sony Blu-Ray/Internet box whose remote app on iOS is literally the same up-down-left-right pad the remote has, but you have to swipe just right to get it to register. Why not just give me the same menu options the box has, but in a reasonable mobile device metaphor? I can't tap "Services" -> "Hulu" -> "TV Shows" -> type "SNL"; I have to navigate the set-top box's menu while trying to look at my phone at the same time. Mind-bogglingly bad.
Re: Amazon Fire TV
#313Re: Amazon Fire TV
#314This 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…
It's interesting how different perspectives work: > 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. I think the gaming aspects are the worst part and are entirely useless. Who wants to casual game with an underpowered box on a giant TV screen? Goofy games are fun on a 4-7" screen b…
> Who wants to casual game with an underpowered box on a giant TV screen?
My 8 year old would eat it up. He LOVES his iPad games. If he can plan on the TV with his friends, he would be thrilled.
And I'd be fine dropping $99 for a box and < $5 for games.
Re: Amazon Fire TV
#315Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you mean "any device that isn't Amazon branded", since Android devices that aren't in the Kindle Fire family also can't watch Amazon streaming stuff. Amazon is attempting vendor lockin.
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…
It has a USB port - what's that for? Think they might add a plug-in Blu-ray drive accessory?
Re: Amazon Fire TV
#316Earlier quoted context omitted.
With screen mirroring, Apple TV offers the ability to play any game in the App Store on a TV wirelessly without having to buy a controller. That game library will likely always be larger than this one. Granted, you must have an iPhone or iPad, but I am surprised that Apple does not tout this feature more. I use it daily and it is pretty awesome.
The lag is terrible with mirroring. Apple TV won't be viable for gaming until the game is played on the box itself and there is a low-latency controller.
Not only the lag, but if you're looking at your TV screen, you can't effectively use the iPhone/iPad screen as a controller, unless it's super simple.
Re: Amazon Fire TV
#317Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's just an android sdk add-on: https://developer.amazon.com/sdk/asb/overview-gs.html that's not quite the same as a whole new platform.
It looks like it could take minimal effort to map controls to the controller or remote. This gives existing android games and developers a quick in-road to the living room.
Kinda sorta. One of the problem points for Google TV development was that its not just a simple process of adding the SDK support and throwing your app on screen. Attention has to bee paid to input interaction and how the UI displays on such a large screen, so things like margins, color choices, and touch focus support need to be addressed (which many apps don't do correctly or need adjustment).
Re: Amazon Fire TV
#318So I just bought a new TV that has Amazon Prime, Netflix, Voice search integrated into it. I don't play games. Is there any point in me getting this vs getting an Apple TV or a Chromecast? The only thing I would use an Apple TV (all computers in my house are macs) for is to screenshare wirelessly. I believe Chromecast lets me do that for specific apps.
Chromecast lets you "cast" a tab from chrome, but the performance will be subpar. Very subpar. Don't try to watch a video with that or anything. If your macs are all modern enough (sandy bridge or newer) AirPlay display mirroring/extending works pretty well. The latency is noticeable but not the end of the world if you're using it to consume content. You won't want to full screen a 1080p video in VLC though, the fram…
So if I ever want to full screen a 1080p video which is pretty all I would ever do on a Mac and a TV, I should just hook it up using HDMI?
Re: Amazon Fire TV
#319I'm really not that impressed. This is just Apple TV for the Amazon eco-system with gaming lopped on. The majority of people don't care about the specs of their set-top box since that really doesn't affect the performance of streaming an HD video in this day and age. So the two differentiating features are: - Voice Search - Gaming Are those enough of a value proposition? Probably not to make converts. I suspect the m…
> This is just Apple TV for the Amazon eco-system with gaming lopped on.
I hate the word "just". The iPad is "just" a big iPod Touch. The new feature the client wants is "just" a simple checkbox. Etc.
Not only does that single word abstract away hundreds of person-years of work; it ignores the fact that products often gain market traction despite being "just" $existingThing + $minorChange, whether by reaching a tipping point of quality and experience, or through other intangibles like ecosystem, name recognition and marketing.
I love my AppleTV (mostly), but I'm keeping an eye on this thing (hopefully its software is higher quality than the Fire tablets).
Re: Amazon Fire TV
#320Earlier quoted context omitted.
It works fine for me, and if I remember correctly the people having a problem with lag had their ATV connected via RJ-45 and switching to wifi fixed it.
That sounds completely backwards to me. You should get significantly lower latency over a LAN connection than WiFi.
They might be using the wireless network for a handshake and then bypassing the router entirely with a private network shared by the 2 devices.