$100 Roku Netflix Player Targets Apple TV

Binge notes CNet coverage of the Netflix Player by Roku, which it calls "bare-bones." Less than 10% of Netfilx's catalog is available for the Instant Viewing option. Three more Netflix players are said to be due for release by the end of the year. The Roku is "...the first product that allows subscribers to have movies and TV shows from the service's Instant Viewing feature (aka 'Watch Now') to be streamed directly to their TV screen... With the release of the Netflix Player, subscribers need only have a wired or wireless broadband connection to access the entire Instant Viewing catalog through their TV."

I wonder what is inside...

I hit the FCC to see if I could get internal shots of this widget, no luck, alas. Interestingly, though, their earlier Soundbridge product appears to be based on a BlackFin DSP core(read, supported by ucLinux). This thing could kick ass as a homebrew STB if the internals are reasonably friendly. That goes double if somebody can get a mythTV frontend running on one.

If anybody knows anthing about the internals, do tell.

I don't know about the internals, but...

May I point you to the Roku Photobridge [rokulabs.com] forums, where a bunch of abandoned users hang out.

Oh, the Roku Photobridge was a great machine back in 2005. It's main purpose was to view pictures from you digital camera at HD resolutions and to play MP3's, but it didn't take long for people to realize that everything you needed to upconvert DVD-quality movies (stored on your network) to HD was there. Or even to play HD video pulled from your TiVo or MythTV. Almost.

They promised a better video player... But never delivered...

They promised a faster connection for HD... But never delivered...

They promised to open up the firmware... But never delivered...

They promised an update to make subtitles and DTS possible (they weren't even going to do it, just stop the accidental prevention of these things by the third-party developers)... They never delivered.

People waited years for these features, which were always "just around the corner".

Basically, once the SoundBridge took off, they just completely abandoned their small but faithful user group. The group wasn't even asking for much, just the source code so they could figure out how to make their own updates and how to interface with the hardware themselves.

But, I got tired of the lack of DTS support, the sound stuttering which got progressively worse, etc. My DirecTV DVR and PS3 now cover all the features that it did and do it much better.

I would be very hesitant to buy things from Roku with the track record they have established. If the "Netflix player" doesn't take off, you might be the next owner of an abandoned product.

Re:

This is a very cheap box that can stream HD media over a network.

Where did you get that from? The article goes out of its way to mention that it won't deliver HD-quality content.

Re:I wonder what is inside...

The Future Netflix is planning HD streaming, and this box will support it. When Netflix gets HD streaming content, they'll update the box by firmware to support HD resolutions at higher bitrates of 4-6mbps, including 5.1 surround (everything is stereo now). The menus will also be upgraded to HD res, too. In the future, the Roku-branded box will be upgraded to accept non-Netflix content, too. (And btw, the update on the Mac client situation is that they're just trying to sort out the DRM issues, or lack of a suitable system they can stream to Macs on.)

http://gizmodo.com/389698/first-netflix-streaming-box-review-100-and-unlimited-downloads [gizmodo.com]

Re:I wonder what is inside...

The service won't deliver HD; because bandwidth costs Netflix money(and nothing short of a tape of the entire comcast board of directors sodomizing orphans will get an American household broadband fast enough to stream HD over, in any case), the hardware itself is said to be HD capable, with just software updates, at least at at modest bitrates, and it has HDMI and so forth.

Re:

According to a different review [gizmodo.com]:
"Netflix is planning HD streaming, and this box will support it. When Netflix gets HD streaming content, they'll update the box by firmware to support HD resolutions at higher bitrates of 4-6mbps, including 5.1 surround"

Cheap enough to try

I certainly hope for more out of these type devices in the future, but I can certainly say I'm interested. If nothing else it's a cheap piece of hardware that (hopefully!) just works and adds a benefit to my subscription. Plus without the FIOS TV options and lackluster cable options I've loved Netflix or e-hits ever since I started using those types of services. I'm also glad to see that some people at least are trying to move forward with ideas like this.

Interesting Box

An interesting little box. I wouldn't mind having one. I have Netflix (which I love) but don't use their streaming service since I'm a Mac guy. I like that they have it all ready for HD.

If I had no decent boxes, I'd buy one.

But I have a TiVo Series 3. It's a fantastic box. It can handle this kind of stuff. I really don't want another box at this point that can do this kind of stuff, that I have to switch between. I've already got my TiVo, my DVD player, and my 360. I don't need another single use box.

Netflix said they were in chats with other people to make more boxes. Having this integrated into a DVD/Blu-Ray player would be nice. I think they were thinking of letting the PS3 or 360 do this.

I'll gladly use it should it become available for my TiVo.

But again kudos to them for getting it out so fast after the announcement, charging so little ($100? No monthly fee above my current 3 disc subscription level?), and having it all ready for when they have an HD catalog.

I have too many boxes already

With a pile built of a DVD/VCR Combo, stereo system, vinyl player, over-the-air digital converter, and some old Nintendoes, I don't need another box to wire up.

I wouldn't mind hearing about Netflix escaping the Windows/IE trap. I would approve of streaming Netflix to my laptop that's running Ubuntu. Well, if the wireless card would work on it...

Pretty good deal

What do you think: is the Netflix Player a game-changing product that bests Apple TV? Or is the selection too lackluster to be worth even its $100 asking price?

Selection will improve. It may a commercial mistake to release without the full library behind it, but I think it will still find some measure of success. Either way, this is a win for customers. Something this cheap is really going to threaten the other players. For starters, the streaming quality is a non-issue for most, which makes the price difference look all the more appealing. The scant library is a downer, but again that will be fixed. The only problem I see in the system is ISP's mucking things up. They scream about taking down net neutrality to augment this sort of thing, but in the end people actually using the bandwidth they payed for will make them much angrier.

I like that netflix is jumping into the mix. Still, I would prefer the Internet not to be hijacked by video on demand when we have such an expensive cable system already available. However, I've come to the realization that video on demand is already moving forward on the net, and the best I can hope for is video on demand platform be the most customer friendly one as possible.

This is the real dawn of IPTV. Serious.

I just looked over the info at Roku's site and I think I'm finally prepared to say... This is the one we've all been waiting for.

While Roku's refreshingly good industrial and UI design looks like it should help, though, here's the real reason this is going to be huge:

I don't think I can overstate the importance of having a single monthly payment to rent a good number of movies and TV shows versus the failed model of "buying" movies that will never leave your set-top box or even the yet unproven model of renting them at $4 a pop with the remote. This is why Netflix beat Blockbuster and it's why they'll beat Apple TV.

This is the thing that will kill the DVD and cable at the same time.

What it comes down to, for now, is Netflix's significantly preferable all-you-can-eat model versus Apple TV's significantly greater selection. But the Netflix selection is only getting bigger.

This is worthless

No onboard disk cache, an absolute max bitrate of 2Mb/s, and max resolution of 480p make this box basically the worst streaming solution for early adopters. Netflix needs to resolve some more basic issue with their service before they try and make a serious run at hardware streaming end points. For instance their service autodetects your bandwidth and selects what it feels is an appropriate bitrate for your viewing w/o giving you any option cache a larger portion of the video in advance and allow a higher overall bitrate/quality. Who is the target audience for this? People with a hankering for poor quality SD movies from a large back catalog whom also own a set with HDMI inputs and a highspeed data connection? Seriously guys, try a bit harder on the RD side next time.

Re:This is worthless

Me. I'm the target audience. I don't have a HD capable television, and have no particular desire to own one until the prices come down considerably. I do have a high-speed internet connection. I have loved the fact that I can hook the s-video and stereo output from my laptop to my entertainment center and watch movies, documentaries, television shows, etc. Before you decide that the only audience worth having owns a 40"+ 1080P television, take a look around. Not everyone can drop that much cash on entertainment, and not everyone thinks it is a good idea to buy entertainment on credit. For $100, with no extra monthly fees, this quite simply enhances the service I already have (and am quite happy with). I think the R&D was right on, and they picked the perfect mix of capabilities for an initial model. Look for these to sell in huge quantities.

Summary. Almost There...

Awesome price.
Awesome interface.
Awesome hardware.
Sucky video quality.
Sucky audio.

"Quality is not great, even at 2.2 Mbps"
"everything is stereo now"

I'll plunk down my $100 and switch to Netflix instantly when HD comes out, Bluray's win didn't last long...

"Netflix is planning HD streaming, and this box will support it. When Netflix gets HD streaming content, they'll update the box by firmware to support HD resolutions at higher bitrates of 4-6mbps, including 5.1 surround."

Is it a full Roku Box?

Roku had a really cool HD Media Player box, which was Linux based and extensible. If this thing is derived from that same platform (with hardware accelerated HD MPEG2 playback) this is a huge bargain.

If it is a closed box, which only does Netflix, it is not so interesting.

I love Netflix.

And I'd LOVE to use their instant viewing feature but I don't have a Windows machine. I have a Mac Mini and a PS3 for all movie viewing via their respective media GUIs. Why Netflix doesn't have streaming on platforms other than Windows and these new dedicated devices is beyond me. It would certainly be cheap enough to do and provide instant market share for them.

anthony wood

The cnet article missed the interesting bit - that Roku's founder (and Replay TV's as well), Anthony Wood, worked at Neflix for a while on this and then returned to Roku, and Neflix bought a stake in Roku, as reported here. [yahoo.com]

Re:er?

Because if Netflix offers more movies maybe you can ditch that evil company called Comcast and save some dough in the progress. The customer service ratings just came out and Comcast and Charter tied for last place by having the most dis-satisfied customers.

Re:er?

I'm hoping it's just licensing issues that's causing them to not be able to offer the "many more titles".

And backing up a copy of the movie would be irrelevant with this service, as you could watch it at any time, as many times as you want.

That is, if they continue to stay in business (and they likely will).

Re:backup

"Why do you need to backup rented movies? I don't get it."

I think most of us do it as a free service for Netflix, in thanks for all their convenience and great business model. If they ever lose their copies....we're there for them!!

:-)

Re:er?

How about because if you already pay for netflix, this service is entirely free.

meaning i can watch any of the "Watch it Now" movies (and TV shows) they offer simply by using this device.

And the sheer number (and its been increasing rather dramatically lately) of titles available simply dwarfs the offerings from any on demand service available.

Can you watch Dexter Season 1? Tripping the Rift Season 1, Heroes Season 1 and 2, A Fairly large number of Anime titles, a fairly large number of older movies from the 80's and 90's?

you may not want to, but some people do, and now they can without t he need to have a cable or even a satellite connection in their home.

I actually use my Vista MC with a netflix plug-in to do this all the time.

Re:er?

Not for nothing, but how is this different from the In Demand feature that's been part of Comcast for several years now? Why would I need/want this?

Selection and cost.

Though the Netflix OnDemand selection is weak and old, it's a lot larger than the free Comcast OnDemand selection. While Comcast's selection grows if you have premium channels it's still smaller than Netflix's selection.

If you already have Netflix, then once you have the device there's no extra cost. While most of Comcast's OnDemand library is free, not everything is and not everyone has Starz/HBO/Showtime. Meanwhile some of those shows are (or at least were) offered via NetFlix OnDemand.

I'ts not a must-by, but if you're a Netflix customer with a high speed connection then it's a tempting self-birthday gift.

Re:

How about... because you dont want to give a single dollar more to Comcast for their abysmal handling of their own internet traffic, and traffic shaping of selective protocols?

Anything that drives comcast out of business and destroys their line of thinki

Re:er?

Let's see... Comcast is $85 per month (Minneapolis area). Netflix is $5 per month. That is why you might need/want this.

Re:er?

This is about $9/month after an initial $100 investment. That's less than $18/month if you only use it for a year, and gives you access to 10,000 programs (including TV shows).

If Comcast even offers $18/month service, it's because your municipality wrote it into the contract and it's going to be local channels in analog only.