Roku 2 vs. Roku 3

Moderators: RokuDouglas, RokuShawnS, RokuKen, RokuRyan, RokuJamesL

Re: Roku 2 vs. Roku 3

Postby mikeyts » Fri Mar 22, 2013 9:46 pm

The Netflix player's stream start has definitely sped up. Once I play one thing then subsequent starts are happening in 2 seconds; I've never seen anything start streams that fast other than the PS3. (I noticed this while watching a bunch of trailers for Netflix's upcoming new series Hemlock Grove).
User avatar
mikeyts
 
Posts: 1514
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 1:59 pm

Re: Roku 2 vs. Roku 3

Postby tobarefeet » Sat Mar 23, 2013 6:58 am

At this point I still can't see any reason to upgrade my 4 month old Roku 2 HD Angry Birds to the Roku 3. WIthin a month or two i'll get the same Ui. A few second faster load isn't worth it for me to shell out $99. For people new to Roku or using first gen it seems like a no brainer to get the Roku 3.
tobarefeet
 
Posts: 450
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 6:30 am

Re: Roku 2 vs. Roku 3

Postby njweb » Sat Mar 23, 2013 7:05 am

Mark12547 wrote:
mkiker2089 wrote:I haven't had any luck with Example Short in weeks. When it does play it doesn't ramp up in quality. I think it's become too popular. I'm kind of surprised the haven't pulled it even.


I bet Netflix doesn't have to pay rental on it! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


I think there are different versions of that clip that behave differently. Or they changed it (from an audio perspective) since I now get high-pitched test tones (in some versions of Example Short).
Even different streaming devices seem to act differently in terms of displaying the bitrate of not displaying it and in terms of playing the test tones or no audio / other audio.

I am glad they have it since I was able to determine that my supposed latest generation BDT220 player's wifi connectivity at long range was horrible even when I did finally get it to connect for a little while (compared to any other wifi device in the same location, including my old BDT210).
Bought a network switch and gave up on getting wifi to work on the BDT220 from that distance since I will use the Roku 99% of the time for streaming and had the option to do a wired (ethernet) connection.
The wireless adapter's transmit power must be poor because it receives my router's signal loud and clear (4 bars out of 5, dropping to 3 at rare times) yet still can't connect reliably most of the time.
Three Roku 3 units (March 2013)
njweb
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2013 1:34 pm

Re: Roku 2 vs. Roku 3

Postby kc8pql » Sat Mar 23, 2013 7:46 am

njweb wrote:I think there are different versions of that clip that behave differently. Or they changed it (from an audio perspective) since I now get high-pitched test tones (in some versions of Example Short).
Even different streaming devices seem to act differently in terms of displaying the bitrate of not displaying it and in terms of playing the test tones or no audio / other audio.

Different devices use different streams, so that's quite possible.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
No, I don't work for Roku.
OTA Antenna, "Netflix Player" N1000X, XDS 2100X (premature death by lightning)
Roku2 XD 3050X, Roku2 XS 3100R
User avatar
kc8pql
** Valued Community Member **
 
Posts: 8127
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 3:54 pm
Location: US

Re: Roku 2 vs. Roku 3

Postby mkiker2089 » Sat Mar 23, 2013 8:25 am

It depends on which audio track you use. My roku is set to stereo so I get normal audio. My ps3 plays digital so does the test sweep. I still can't get it to play at all now. It says it's unavailable.
-Marshall-

Nun sacciu, nun vidi, nun ceru e si ceru durmiv.
I know nothing, I see nothing, I wasn't there,
and if I was there, I was asleep.
mkiker2089
 
Posts: 2803
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 9:03 pm

Re: Roku 2 vs. Roku 3

Postby kc8pql » Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:23 am

It was working for me the first of the week, for the first time in a while, but when I tried yesterday I got the unavailable message again.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
No, I don't work for Roku.
OTA Antenna, "Netflix Player" N1000X, XDS 2100X (premature death by lightning)
Roku2 XD 3050X, Roku2 XS 3100R
User avatar
kc8pql
** Valued Community Member **
 
Posts: 8127
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 3:54 pm
Location: US

Re: Roku 2 vs. Roku 3

Postby JuliusSudderth » Thu Apr 11, 2013 10:38 am

I have a roku1 and roku2,does anyone know if the roku3 will work off a phones moble hot spot? I could never get the the r1 or r2 to accept it...ie all three dots never turned green. I was forced to go with time warner Internet instead of using my phone as a sorce
JuliusSudderth
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2013 10:31 am

Re: Roku 2 vs. Roku 3

Postby LeeHB » Thu Apr 11, 2013 5:29 pm

The Roku3 is missing one critical function: There is NO analog audio output from the Roku3, so if you're into listening to something like Pandora and like to keep your TV off, you are S.O.L. with the Roku3....the only audio available comes thru the HDMI connector. The older Roku2's do mostly have analog audio outputs..which work just fine.
LeeHB
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:35 am

Re: Roku 2 vs. Roku 3

Postby johninFL » Thu Apr 11, 2013 6:38 pm

Brother i feeeel your pain! I have a R 2XS and use its analog A/V output everyday.The only time i use the HDMI connection is when i'm watching something in HD or has DD5.1/DD+ audio.I also have other A/V equipment that's analog only and can't be replaced. IMHO Roku shouldn't have dropped the analog output. :(

The thing that really ticks me off,is that this whole crummy business of dropping analog for HDMI 'only' A/V equipment,is that it is being caused 100% by Hollywood and their never ending unholy crusade against piracy,and for no other reason. :twisted:
johninFL
 
Posts: 399
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:05 am
Location: Florida

Re: Roku 2 vs. Roku 3

Postby villandra » Mon Jul 29, 2013 5:01 pm

You know, I don't have a single TV younger than 18 years old, so I really could care less about high definition or whatever. I DID have one only five years old, which died, which is hardly surprising in a newer TV, and it wasn't high definition either. Perhaps one day when I have visitors from whatever planet this technology is from, they'll care, and if they do, they're out of luck.

As to faster wi-fi, perhaps this is an issue if one wants Ultra High Definition and whatever. My reception is fine. I would have purchased the faster one anyway, but you would have had to get to me before my family brought me a Roku 2 ++ extra everything for Christmas, and you didn't, so it'll now wait a few years - or more.
villandra
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:56 pm

Re: Roku 2 vs. Roku 3

Postby villandra » Mon Jul 29, 2013 5:06 pm

NO ANALOG OUTPUT FROM ROKU 3? You'll fix that, or you'll sell Roku 3's never! Certainly not to me, because I've ABSOLUTELY NO PLANS to buy a non-analog TV set. I get cable TV. I have a government program digital adapter, should I ever be obliged to get reception from an antenna. All my TV's are older, and guess what, Roku. THEY'RE GOING TO STAY THAT WAY.

Half the people I know who HAVE Roku's specifically want nothing to do with the fancier aspects of the digital age; none of that Cable TV, none of that AT&T, none of that NOTHING. Give us a 20 year old TV, public TV, and antenna, and a Roku; , and we're all as happy as clams. Want to keep us for customers, KEEP ANALOG OUTPUT!

You must have clean fallen off Planet Earth.
villandra
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:56 pm

Re: Roku 2 vs. Roku 3

Postby villandra » Mon Jul 29, 2013 5:09 pm

Not even my sister, who owns a $500,000 house and works as a project manager for IBM, will have a digital TV in her house. They have an old-fashioned 15 or 20 year old cabinet TV in the living room. She REFUSES to let the kids have all the latest bells and whistles! AND they have a Roku - or probably they do by now. They watch alot of Netflix and Amazon, and I've told them how happy I am with my Roku. I guess I'd better let my sister know she doesn't want no Roku 3!
villandra
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:56 pm

Re: Roku 2 vs. Roku 3

Postby thetick » Mon Jul 29, 2013 5:14 pm

Considering no one can buy a new analog TV. I think it's a good to choice to remove analog output to keep the roku3 price down. You can also buy a Roku2 now which is also 18+ years newer than your TV.
thetick
 
Posts: 806
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 4:27 pm

Re: Roku 2 vs. Roku 3

Postby Gilgamesh » Mon Jul 29, 2013 5:28 pm

villandra wrote:NO ANALOG OUTPUT FROM ROKU 3? You'll fix that, or you'll sell Roku 3's never! Certainly not to me, because I've ABSOLUTELY NO PLANS to buy a non-analog TV set. I get cable TV. I have a government program digital adapter, should I ever be obliged to get reception from an antenna. All my TV's are older, and guess what, Roku. THEY'RE GOING TO STAY THAT WAY.

Half the people I know who HAVE Roku's specifically want nothing to do with the fancier aspects of the digital age; none of that Cable TV, none of that AT&T, none of that NOTHING. Give us a 20 year old TV, public TV, and antenna, and a Roku; , and we're all as happy as clams. Want to keep us for customers, KEEP ANALOG OUTPUT!

You must have clean fallen off Planet Earth.


If you are using a Roku then you are using one of those fancy aspects of the digital age. Also, if you ever buy a new TV it will be digital and most probably HD at no lower than 720p resolution.

I really dumped on Roku when it was revealed that the analog output was completely dropped mainly because of the audio but that ship has sailed and Roku will, almost assuredly, not be producing any devices with analog output of any sort in the future.

Also almost no new set top boxes will have any analog outputs in the future. Once the current in production stock is sent to retail and sold then there will be no more analog systems produced.

You can resist the digital transition, I know I did, all you want but that will not stop the progression. To me analog audio sounds better and analog high definition looks more real but the difference is not much and definitely not going to prevent the industry from moving on to 100% digital.

And, actually, not moving toward digital, and HD for that matter, is more indicative of someone that has "clean fallen off Planet Earth" than eliminating analog output could ever be even as much as I would prefer analog audio continues.
Gilgamesh
 
Posts: 4912
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:29 am
Location: Dayton TN

Re: Roku 2 vs. Roku 3

Postby wzwor » Mon Jul 29, 2013 5:33 pm

thetick wrote:Considering no one can buy a new analog TV. I think it's a good to choice to remove analog output to keep the roku3 price down. You can also buy a Roku2 now which is also 18+ years newer than your TV.

You completely miss the advantage of the composite outputs. Yes, they are great if you have an analog set somewhere (I do), but the advantage is that you can route the red and white plugs to an HTIB or sound bar or aux in to enjoy Roku audio channels without running the big screen. This is GREEN (who cares), cuts down on the electric bill, and keeps the hours on your screen down.

That's why the R3 should have had composite/audio out.

Image

The funny thing is that the only positive distinction between the R2XS and the R3 is the speedier processor. I know all you guys get real excited about how fast you can scroll up and down the grid (until it gets laggy and you have to reboot), but the benefit of that proc should have been apps. It's the fact that apps have not taken off that relegates the R3 to Edsel status.
Last edited by wzwor on Mon Jul 29, 2013 6:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.
http://thebeersoncomcast.wordpress.com/
wzwor
 
Posts: 807
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2012 5:47 am

PreviousNext

Return to Roku Streaming Player General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bvd1022 and 18 guests