Amazon Fire TV • Hacker News Board

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#251

Post by tehwebguy » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 6:23 PM UTC

saturdaysaint wrote: post #207

sosborn wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Constantly? http://us.playstation.com/support/systemupdates/ps3/history/

Compared to any other device I use, PS3 updates are unusually intrusive. Almost nothing seems to be done automatically, so I'll end up with 5 minutes of downloading update apps and system updates before I can do what I intended to do when I sat down. Oh, and the updates are often "required", meaning you're prevented from even running your out of date app. I'm hopeful that they fixed most of these issues for the PS4 (…

Agreed - the worst are the ones that just tell you to update but don't provide a button to take you to the update option.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#252

Post by angryasian » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 6:25 PM UTC

JonFish85 wrote: post #147

alttab wrote: post #121

Earlier 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…

have you ever tried playing regular games with virtual controls and buttons on a touch screen. Your fingers slide all over the place. For most titles it borders on unusable. The amount of touch focused titles are actually small in comparison.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#253

Post by jpatel3 » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 6:26 PM UTC

Just another Roku, Google TV, Apple TV

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#254

Post by ambler0 » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 6:28 PM UTC

downandout wrote: post #220

ambler0 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I haven't really had a problem with it.

To the people saying they haven't had a problem with it: Have you ever tried to play an action game via mirroring on Apple TV? The lag is short enough that it might be acceptable for turn based games, but playing, e.g. Real Racing (which I have) is a terrible experience.

This is an AirPlay issue, right? For example, when I go to pause a song that is being AirPlayed to my Airport Express, there is a noticable delay before the song stops playing.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#255

Post by baggachipz » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 6:28 PM UTC

Zelphyr wrote: post #229

ChuckMcM wrote: post #204

I am kind of surprised the Roku manages to stay independent in all the 'tv' efforts. They have a really nice player and now a nice 'stick' player. Also a pretty easy to use SDK. So why re-build all or much of that for a proprietary box? Any thoughts on that strategy?

Roku, as I understand it, derives their revenue from hardware sales. So they have such an incentive to get you to upgrade hardware that they will actually take away content[1] in an effort to force you to do so. My guess is Amazon is doing the opposite. They're probably practically giving away the hardware in hopes they'll realize more profits on the content you buy. And a device like this is just a small piece of a…

Tut tut, brightscript ;)

I looked into writing for Roku, cracked open some docs, and that was the end of that.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#256

Post by keehun » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 6:32 PM UTC

matt_heimer wrote: post #196

keehun wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree that this will become a winner. No one wants to play crappy games on their TV, and Amazon can't become a winner with the small population of people who do.

Wrong audience, this is everything my Roku is but better. Better UI, better performance. Plus apps and maybe some games with a real controller. It is everything an OUYA is but better. And miracast support too.

This reminds me of phones before the iPhone. Yeah, "better" UI, bigger keyboards, more color, .1 more megapixel camera... Iterative stuff.

Someone or some company is going to have to completely shatter our imaginations of this market. Until then, good luck getting any massive success.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#257

Post by baggachipz » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 6:32 PM UTC

johne20 wrote: post #39

This device plus antenna input for over-the-air local HD channels combined with simple dvr functionality would be the ultimate cord-cutting device.

You mean like this?: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mohu/mohu-channels-pers...

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#258

Post by Touche » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 6:35 PM UTC

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…

Thanks for making your point clear.

I don't see any evidence that they are going to abandon other devices. The Kindle Fire didn't stop them from releasing an iPad app for Amazon Video, for example.

In reality the number of platforms they need to target is fairly small. There is the iOS world, there is Android, Roku, and HTML5. The vast majority of TV and blu-ray player apps are the same HTML5 app.

I would be concerned if Fire TV and Kindle Fire became too popular that they might abandon/neglect the other apps, but that's not likely to happen.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#259

Post by muyuu » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 6:36 PM UTC

Pxtl wrote: post #156

bitcrusher wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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? Over 100 million Nintendo Wii consoles were sold. Now, we can bicker about how many of those buyers were into casual games or not, but regardless: The market exists.

The market exists for Nintendo games, not for shitty consoles with the same games you can play in your phone.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#260

Post by eshvk » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 6:37 PM UTC

So 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.