Roku tells customers it is unable to strike a deal with YouTube • Hacker News Board

Re: Roku tells customers it is unable to strike a deal with YouTube

#151

Post by supernovae » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 4:20 PM UTC

inetknght wrote: post #144

pkulak wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't say this for everyone, but a tech consumer has to know that just over $100 does not cover the cost of the hardware. It's got to come from somewhere else. I'm usually not much of an Apple fan, but I just switched to the Apple TV and am really liking it. It certainly seems like charging 2x the price for the hardware removes a lot of the incentive to do all the scammy stuff Ruku is involved in; though I guess I…

> a tech consumer has to know that just over $100 does not cover the cost of the hardware. Nonsense. A raspberry pi costs far less and is, arguably, just as capable.

If it was just as capable, then people would buy Raspberry Pi's.

The problem isn't hardware capability, it's the ecosystem on top of it. Pi doesn't have a robust tv platform and app market system that is built around a remote control. Sure, you can run plex on it but even plex has long abandoned its streaming app platform and decided to roll its own TV service instead... Part of me wishes that Plex would have stuck with it but i guess they realized the Streaming TV problem isn't a software or hardware problem to begin with...

Re: Roku tells customers it is unable to strike a deal with YouTube

#152

Post by MisterBastahrd » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 4:20 PM UTC

antasvara wrote: post #115

inetknght wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That blog doesn't address the statements made by Roku. 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…

Note: this isn't meant to defend Google, because their practices are shady and by no means good. What I find interesting here is that Roku is using business practices similar to Apple and nobody seems to have a problem with it. If I told you that an app store was limiting the types of apps you could add to your device while also controlling the update process, lots of HN readers would call that out. As far as I'm awa…

Most platform providers have a certification process for apps on their platforms to ensure that they don't have stability or data issues.

Apple does it. Sony does it. Microsoft does it. And if Google isn't doing it with their own app store, then that raises a lot of questions about Google's commitment to quality software.

Re: Roku tells customers it is unable to strike a deal with YouTube

#153

Post by ethbr0 » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 4:21 PM UTC

inetknght wrote: post #143

ZoomerCretin wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably doesn’t work on ie6, either.

Probably doesn't work on your bathroom scale. It might work on your coffee pot though.

Depends on whether you have javascript enabled on your coffee pot.

I prefer to use java with mine, though I've heard there's a javascript-compatible language that might target your use case.

Re: Roku tells customers it is unable to strike a deal with YouTube

#154

Post by rkeene2 » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 4:21 PM UTC

antasvara wrote: post #115

inetknght wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That blog doesn't address the statements made by Roku. 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…

Note: this isn't meant to defend Google, because their practices are shady and by no means good. What I find interesting here is that Roku is using business practices similar to Apple and nobody seems to have a problem with it. If I told you that an app store was limiting the types of apps you could add to your device while also controlling the update process, lots of HN readers would call that out. As far as I'm awa…

There's a few differences when compared to Apple:

They will host your app and let others install it with a private code for free (you don't have to pay to become a developer, and you don't have to pay to use unapproved apps, nor periodically reinstall them, and unapproved apps get treated the same as other apps, and can be auto-updated, etc).

You can (unless this has changed in the past few years since I wrote a Roku app) sideload apps onto your own devices without Roku's involvement.

Developing for a Roku device doesn't require buying anything -- you probably want to buy a Roku to test it out on, but that's not a requirement.

These differences make the proposition much different.

Google doesn't need Roku's permission for writing YouTube unless they want some kind of special treatment outside the published APIs. This part is similar to Apple, where the platform owner can withhold some features from some people.

Re: Roku tells customers it is unable to strike a deal with YouTube

#155

Post by yoyohello13 » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 4:21 PM UTC

brk wrote: post #39

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…

Sounds like there is room for a service that aggregates all your streaming services into a single portal. They could even include services you don't want into a 'bundle' for 'free'. Then they could work with ISPs to bundle their content aggregation service with internet for one convenient price.

Then they could make an appliance called a 'cable' box so home users can stream all these 'channels' to any device they want.

And now we are back to the 1990s.

Re: Roku tells customers it is unable to strike a deal with YouTube

#156

Post by enos_feedler » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 4:21 PM UTC

maxsilver wrote: post #48

015a wrote: post #40

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…

Actually its not true at all. There is a real and growing market for people who just want old cable packages but served over the internet (something Google knows about). They have the cash and technical chops to make the best service for this. It aligns with some other things (Stadia, Youtube, Android TV/cast) to round out a total home/living room offering. Home is core for google (hubs, cams, routers, etc) and they do well at it.

Also, the competition is faltering. SlingTV lost NBC regional sports networks in April. I now must move over to Youtube TV. I think the competition gets stronger here, including Apple getting into the space with a live TV offering at some point. Amazon probably too with its sports rights.

Youtube TV is both important for Google, but also a way they can make Roku weaker. At the end of the day, I don’t think Google, Amazon or Apple really want another strong competitor in the living room. Don’t give them youtube TV.

Re: Roku tells customers it is unable to strike a deal with YouTube

#157

Post by supernovae » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 4:22 PM UTC

NelsonMinar wrote: post #83

dtjb wrote: post #18

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…

I'm a long time Roku fan but also feel they're in the wrong here. Mostly I'm angry because I feel captive; I bought my TCL TV explicitly because it had the Roku OS. It's great! Right until it can't show the one content site I most want to see because of some stupid business argument. I feel like a sucker for paying for Roku.

The TV has roku built in, but, it's still a TV with HDMI and USB ports so you can use it with any non ROKU device you want. You're not worse off...

Re: Roku tells customers it is unable to strike a deal with YouTube

#158

Post by supernovae » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 4:23 PM UTC

nitrogen wrote: post #133

datavirtue wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK. So they are supposed to make money selling one of the most unprofitable commodities on earth...electronic hardware? The only company pulling that off is Apple...and probably just on the iPhone. I paid $400 for a huge TCL TV. It probably cost $100 just to move it around the globe. There is no money for development or the platform/service in that price.

There's no way that a container full of TVs costs $100 per TV to ship. A bit of quick ddg-ing and it looks like a 40 foot container should be less than $4000 port to port.

BOM -> Factory -> Warehouse -> Worldwide distribution -> Port of authority -> Warehouse -> Retailer/Etailer -> Customer

We're spoiled..

Re: Roku tells customers it is unable to strike a deal with YouTube

#159

Post by toast0 » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 4:24 PM UTC

jeffbee wrote: post #142

samtheprogram wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or LG WebOS is not a big enough market for Google to care about the experience to put their foot down, at that point they’d rather be on the device (and controlling other devices where it counts). This is all hearsay though and it’s unclear if Google even made such demands to Roku.

LG has 11% of the global TV market and its home electronics division revenues are 20 times larger than Roku's.

LG tvs are quite a bit more expensive than Roku boxes (Roku TVs are made and sold by other parties), so comparing revenue is not very meaningful. Also since home electronics consists of many products, and Roku has essentially a single product.

Re: Roku tells customers it is unable to strike a deal with YouTube

#160

Post by supernovae » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 4:24 PM UTC

scantron4 wrote: post #145

Gunax wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a bit sympathetic to them because that's what the market asks for. I am looking at the prices of rokus, and my guess is they are losing money on the hardware. And yes, we should have a completely free (as in speech) device. But if you actually offered it and priced it accordingly, most people would not buy it. It's dumb but it's what we consumers have voiced with our money.

amazon offers an ad free version of the kindle for $30 more. I'd love the same from Roku. But then... I bought the ad version, not for price but because it had the pretty colors and I don't like using cases on kindles anymore.

NextDNS blocks Roku's ads and tracking for me. I just get a blank square on the home page.