and contractural aspects to the process
tonyrich wrote:If you are happy to buy harware or software that does a job then it fails and all you get is a "no comment" response then stay on your planet because i and a lot of other customers are clearly not happy.
basilisk wrote:tonyrich wrote:Maybe you didn't read Roku Mike's response. Here, let me post it for you again:
"As has been posted elsewhere several times, we are actively working on iTunes 7 compatibility. However, there are both technical and contractural aspects to the process, and this affects the rate at which progress can be made. Progress, though, does continue to be made."
That looks like a comment to me... maybe Roku should pull a random date out of a hat, maybe a year from now? Would that satisfy you? Probably not...
mr rusty wrote:and contractural aspects to the process
I think everyone looking at iTunes should take a step back and look at the product itself - ITS GREAT.
mr rusty wrote:Personally I couldn't care less if SB never works directly with iT again. I'd rather see Roku's R&D going into other things like FF-RW
FF-RW. Why would you ever want to do that? Just accept the fact that you need to listen to the entire song. When you listen to the entire song it works great!
any_junk wrote:To me, as I wrote before, it seems to just be the silly argument of not providing product information prior to release. Sometimes it makes sense but in this case it is just well... silly.
S80_UK wrote:If Roku do not make a statement, other than the coments that they already have - that they are in talks, that they are looking at the problem - then they do not undermine their own case against Apple.
S80_UK wrote:And why would you not consider running Firefly? It does not require any great skill to install or use (unless you have files distributed across a network for example).
any_junk wrote:Every software project has a time line. If they are coding it they must have a release number so the designers can check it into a specific branch for the testers. A release number has a product release date (even if it is Q4 2006). Either Roku has this on their road map with a release associated or they are just thinking about it.
To me, as I wrote before, it seems to just be the silly argument of not providing product information prior to release. Sometimes it makes sense but in this case it is just well... silly.
It seems to me that people in this forum feel they need to protect Roku. I don't understand why. We are all customers. If Roku makes any one of us unhappy we should all support each other. Roku has plenty of employees to protect the company line.
basilisk wrote:The attitude from some is "I don't care why iTunes 7 doesn't work with the Roku, just promise me a date as to when it will be fixed". That's a terrible attitude to have, especially when this isn't Roku's fault at all.
The only mistake Roku made, IMHO, is not stating on the box a specifc version of iTunes that they will support. Then none of you would have an argument to make. Maybe they will start doing this after Apple shafted them this time around...
Marecek wrote:Tonyrich is right !
3) When my clients have issues with what I do for them, even if its not my fault, I try to help. By accepting my money, Roku became responsible to me. Roku, you need to accept your responsibility and act.
As it stands, you not only will not see any more money from me, but you will have to return the money you already got. Meanwhile, I'll see whether the NoSoundBridge will do as a chewing toy for my dog.
any_junk wrote:If they can't do that, which may be the case given their negotiations with Apple, they can at least say that. So far I have seen nothing but the regular 'we are working on it'.
RokuMike wrote:there are both technical and contractural aspects to the process, and this affects the rate at which progress can be made.