Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon Fire TV

amazon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 400 posts

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#371

Post by 72deluxe »

lovemenot wrote: post #355
WoodenChair wrote: post #45

I'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 integrated with e-commerce could be the killer feature. Imagine saying "OK Amazon buy those shoes" that are currently displayed on your TV. One or two more steps to confirm the transaction orally and it's on its way. You've already got Prime and you trust that you'll get a competitive price from Amazon. So why not just buy right away?

That's a really great idea. Sadly I can see it being dangerous when the cat sits on the remote and my wife says "I would love to buy these shoes" and we get an Amazon box turn up.

Not dangerous for Amazon, just dangerous to me!

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#372

Post by 72deluxe »

scottm01 wrote: post #76
swanson wrote: post #32

The side-by-side comparison with Roku/AppleTV actually looks pretty bad for Amazon Fire TV... Same price, the only differences are that the Fire TV has voice search (don't care), a bunch of technical specs that the layperson doesn't care about, and a bunch of games (don't care). It's missing the checkbox for HBO GO (deal breaker for me personally). I was expecting something like a monthly subscription for all-you-can…

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…

What's the prices for films on Apple TV? Can anyone enlighten me? When I last looked on iTunes, they wanted me to pay the equivalent of the price of DVD for a compressed download that I couldn't necessarily keep.

I'm in the UK. Is there some sort of subscription capability for a flat monthly fee? (Easier to budget for you see)

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#373

Post by com2kid »

dublinben wrote: post #65
mkempe wrote: post #28

They'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.

Seriously? There is a lag moving between characters. Typing is painful. The UI is horrible.

I am getting ready to dump a good $500 on a brand new setup just to replace my Roku because it is so bloody painful to use.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#374

Post by 72deluxe »

parasubvert wrote: post #248
Touche wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You are claiming that Amazon is on a wide variety of platforms and that's a reason to choose their ecosystem over Apple which encourages the purchase of an Apple device. Correct, can't wait for the counter argument. > I don't agree. Great, here it comes... And then the rest of the post is about how the lock-in strategy is more profitable. Not sure if that's true or not, but doesn't have anything to do with my argum…

This thread is about the introduction of the Fire TV, a strategy where Amazon is introducing their own device because the approach you laud, of supporting every device under the sun has FAILED to garner significant market share. I spoke about profitability and the ecosystem because this shit matters and will affect your assumptions. Case in point: Microsoft and PlaysForSure, which they eventually undermined by pushin…

They binned support for my 2011 LG TV. Yes, it really is only 3 years old.

To say sorry, they sent me a Bluray drive that would stream so I can't complain really. It is just a fact that with a renting subscription service, they can end it and change it any time they want without much warning, and you're stuck. I probably need to get out of the mindset that they're going to be loyal with you after you're loyal with them. There isn't any loyalty with a subscription service (I get a month's film viewing when I pay for the month so I get what I pay for).

This appears to be the problems of subscription services, and to some extent cloud services, particularly those from Google and Ubuntu (goodbye One!). Apple seems to be better as their MobileMe system has been going forever.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#375

Post by fpgeek »

jessaustin wrote: post #326
jggonz wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to upgrade your router. I was using a cheapo D-Link router when I first got my ChromeCast and the connection was awful. Range to laptops and devices was terrible and the connection always dropped. I bought an ASUS router for $150 and life is incredibly easier. I can stream HD content from 40-50ft away across 3 bedrooms without any issues.

I'm confused: are you talking about wifi range (presumably fixable by using a WAP that's better than the one built into your router) or the bandwidth of the router itself? Only asking because ISTM a decent WAP is much cheaper than $150...

It's not necessarily bandwidth or range. Some of it can just be the quality of the router implementation. I remember having lots of trouble with a Chromecast (discovery issues, losing connections and other issues) and I couldn't figure out what was going on, especially since I had a brand-spanking new high-power access point.

But I wasn't using my new access point as a router. For unrelated reasons, I replaced the 10+ year-old router with something newer and the Chromecast started working flawlessly even though I hadn't changed anything on the wireless side.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#376

Post by 72deluxe »

rednukleus wrote: post #365
alexeisadeski3 wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suspect many already have at least one Airplay capable device.

I suspect a majority of people don't.

I think only people with Apple devices buy Apple TVs. If they don't, I can see it being far less useful.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#377

Post by 72deluxe »

spinchange wrote: post #217
untog wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know, I have a Chromecast. They still need to set up those apps on their phone. They need to log in to Netflix, Amazon Instant, etc. etc. even if they never watch content on their phone.

You log into those apps once when you install them on your device. How difficult is it to install an app one time? Amazon Instant doesn't have an app that works with Chromecast that I'm aware of.

Do you want a child with unrestricted Internet access on a mobile device?

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#378

Post by 72deluxe »

alttab wrote: post #103
jauer wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but not on non-Amazon Android.

Interesting. I went to look it up because I thought you were wrong. You can get the Amazon Appstore on non-Amazon android devices, but it seems you are correct about AIV. Wonder if its a DRM issue, or other hardware security issue for Android devices.

I wondered if it was security but the banking apps don't have a problem with being installed...

I suspect it's to attempt to railroad people into buying the Fire range of Android-based devices. Not for me thanks! Why do I need another Android device?

Mind you, if the Lovefilm "By Post" application is anything to go by, Amazon can't find any decent Android developers in the world to employ because that piece of software is dreadful. Truly truly dreadful. Buggy, crashy, laggy, all three. They decided to not use native lists but use some weird HTML system; look at the licenses on that app. It's rubbish.

So, either railroading or they can't find decent developers to write a video streaming app. After all, BBC iPlayer uses Air I think. That was never a painfree experience on Android.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#379

Post by 72deluxe »

duked wrote: post #25

I was an early Ouya backer and was really really disappointed I sold it (like 1 month after I received it. This Amazon Fire TV may be what the Ouya was supposed to be, I mean I know it's more seen as a Roku/Apple TV competitor but for me if it runs Android then I can use it as a decent Emulation machine (RetroArch etc... ) I will buy one for sure

Why did you sell it?

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#380

Post by 72deluxe »

benlm wrote: post #282
aresant wrote: post #20

I think this represents the first device to support Amazon streaming in 1080p - as far as I know Roku etc are still limited to 720p?

It's not actually clear whether Amazon Instant Video will stream at 1080p for any/all HD material, or if the device just supports 1080p for other services like Netflix. Does anyone know?

I have Amazon Instant Video on a Sony Bluray and it is 1080p.

Out of interest, it's not really instant. The application could be swifter to respond.

Post reply on HN