Your Digital Media Has Never Looked So Good

 
dellsweig
Posts: 419
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 10:03 am
Location: Campbell Hall NY

Re: Google TV - Fall 2010...

Fri May 21, 2010 10:57 am

ffffffrabbit wrote:
there is a MIPS port of android available for FREE which will work just fine on the Roku hardware.



Where?


I had posted the links - I think in the dev forum a couple weeks ago - let me look

look here

http://www.androidos.in/2009/08/android ... eased.html

http://www.rt-rk.com/news/98-porting-android-to-mips
Going where the wind don't blow so strange
 
vmps
Posts: 758
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 7:48 am

Re: Google TV - Fall 2010...

Fri May 21, 2010 11:38 am

ffffffrabbit wrote:
Where?

In his mind.
 
kelly.j.anderson
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 8:46 am
Contact:

Re: Google TV - Fall 2010...

Fri May 21, 2010 12:00 pm

Or to save on postage the next Roku box could use an Intell Atom chip instead of MIPS. Strange that they would choose MIPS instead of some x86 based chip to begin with. The embedded industry has clearly been moving away from the MIPS architecture at least for the higher powered devices. For years the makers of X86 based chips have been working hard to shrink them for mobile and embedded applications reducing power consumption and heat production. Many Atom based devices run with no ventilation for hours on tiny batteries, based on the Roku's size, wall based power source and ventilation, MIPS is really a poor choice. Clearly the choice was one of economics but I do not believe that the current boxes strike the proper balance between feature and cost, which produced a short term gain but will, unless there is a high power release in the wings, will result in a long term loss.
 
dellsweig
Posts: 419
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 10:03 am
Location: Campbell Hall NY

Re: Google TV - Fall 2010...

Fri May 21, 2010 12:26 pm

kelly.j.anderson wrote:
Or to save on postage the next Roku box could use an Intell Atom chip instead of MIPS. Strange that they would choose MIPS instead of some x86 based chip to begin with. The embedded industry has clearly been moving away from the MIPS architecture at least for the higher powered devices. For years the makers of X86 based chips have been working hard to shrink them for mobile and embedded applications reducing power consumption and heat production. Many Atom based devices run with no ventilation for hours on tiny batteries, based on the Roku's size, wall based power source and ventilation, MIPS is really a poor choice. Clearly the choice was one of economics but I do not believe that the current boxes strike the proper balance between feature and cost, which produced a short term gain but will, unless there is a high power release in the wings, will result in a long term loss.

well put.. I completly agree that the atom would be the way to go in the future.. You have to think the basic hardware design was done with cost as the primary factor and availability of hardware (when it was designed) as another consideration.

My point on the use of Android is not because I like - or even own an android based device. My point is that in the VERY near future, there will be set top boxes and TV integrations with all the eye-candy and features of Android. Roku's tired looking UI and limited API as well as its content line-up will not be able to compete. We already own Roku boxes - we are not the market - but think of what the Roku interface looks like side by side with an android based device....

I do understand navigation is an issue but Android does not require a keyboard any more than the Roku UI requires a keyboard.

The Roku development team already has a compelte MIPS Linux build environment (the current box runs embedded Linux) with all the tool chains and drivers for the hardware. It would be a simple matter to complie the FREE android source and as Roku already knows the boot loader CFE format - boot it onto a Roku box.

I have been around modding of cable boxes, routers, cable modems, etc and seen how easy it is to do (in the right hands). I remember coming across some circuit board shots of the RokuHD and there are indeed JTAG header points on the board as well as serial console outputs.

If nothing else place yourself in the future consumer role - rememeber that side by side example.....
Going where the wind don't blow so strange
 
scyber
Posts: 1326
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 8:51 am

Re: Google TV - Fall 2010...

Fri May 21, 2010 12:32 pm

kelly.j.anderson wrote:
Or to save on postage the next Roku box could use an Intell Atom chip instead of MIPS. Strange that they would choose MIPS instead of some x86 based chip to begin with. The embedded industry has clearly been moving away from the MIPS architecture at least for the higher powered devices. For years the makers of X86 based chips have been working hard to shrink them for mobile and embedded applications reducing power consumption and heat production. Many Atom based devices run with no ventilation for hours on tiny batteries, based on the Roku's size, wall based power source and ventilation, MIPS is really a poor choice. Clearly the choice was one of economics but I do not believe that the current boxes strike the proper balance between feature and cost, which produced a short term gain but will, unless there is a high power release in the wings, will result in a long term loss.


The choice was most likely a combination cost and the technology available at the time. Remember the roku box was announced in May of '08, but the box was originally designed in '07. At that time Intel's low powered Atom line didn't even exists.
 
kelly.j.anderson
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 8:46 am
Contact:

Re: Google TV - Fall 2010...

Fri May 21, 2010 12:57 pm

scyber wrote:
The choice was most likely a combination cost and the technology available at the time. Remember the roku box was announced in May of '08, but the box was originally designed in '07. At that time Intel's low powered Atom line didn't even exists.


Actually in 2007 Apple released the iPhone using the Samsung 32-bit RISC ARM 1176JZ(F)-S v1.0, an x86 instruction set based chip, so the technology was there at the time. Although that chip would have easily been too expensive its larger and more power hungry brethren would not have been too expensive and would have worked perfectly in the Roku form factor. As a matter of fact in the form factor of the device there were/are quite a wide variety of x86 chips that could/could have powered the device cheaply. What was missing was not technology but insight, which I am not going rag on too heavily as Apple seems to have been the only company with that particular insight in 2007; but with 2 years of development time since then, in the face of what little bitty smart phones could do, not having the insight to do more and capitalize on the market they have all ready developed is disappointing.
 
ffffffrabbit
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 6:34 am
Location: Ashland, WI
Contact:

Re: Google TV - Fall 2010...

Fri May 21, 2010 1:02 pm

Sounds to me like Roku - not HP should have bought PalmOS.
ffffffrabbit

follow the white rabbit
 
bananaslug79
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:20 pm

Re: Google TV - Fall 2010...

Fri May 21, 2010 1:18 pm

I'm very excited about Google TV. It occurred to me in thinking about what Google is trying to do here, our issues with TV content and Internet content and getting them to converge is exactly the problem. Why were DVRs invented? Too much advertising on TV. Why were HTPCs invented? Too much scattered content. Both of these solutions are too expensive and too complex for most people (even gadgeters like ourselves; I like good technology that is simple) and Google has a chance here to combat both of those issues if the content owners play ball. With it integrated into TV sets, you have the possibility of losing the entire complexity of an HTPC and the entire need for a DVR since you can get the content how you want it.

I haven't bought a new TV in over six years. If Google can pull this off, I will most certainly look into a set with GTV (even selling my soul to Sony if I have to, curse them).
 
vmps
Posts: 758
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 7:48 am

Re: Google TV - Fall 2010...

Fri May 21, 2010 4:31 pm

kelly.j.anderson wrote:
scyber wrote:
The choice was most likely a combination cost and the technology available at the time. Remember the roku box was announced in May of '08, but the box was originally designed in '07. At that time Intel's low powered Atom line didn't even exists.


Actually in 2007 Apple released the iPhone using the Samsung 32-bit RISC ARM 1176JZ(F)-S v1.0, an x86 instruction set based chip, so the technology was there at the time. Although that chip would have easily been too expensive its larger and more power hungry brethren would not have been too expensive and would have worked perfectly in the Roku form factor. As a matter of fact in the form factor of the device there were/are quite a wide variety of x86 chips that could/could have powered the device cheaply. What was missing was not technology but insight, which I am not going rag on too heavily as Apple seems to have been the only company with that particular insight in 2007; but with 2 years of development time since then, in the face of what little bitty smart phones could do, not having the insight to do more and capitalize on the market they have all ready developed is disappointing.

ARM is a completely different architecture and instruction set than x86. It competes with MIPS in the embedded market (and is currently eating MIPSs lunch because of the multiple competetive solutions which integrate a video coprocessor with the ARM core). ARM is at the heart of all the iphones and android devices you see (with the exception of the plug-in android tv's, which are likely to have atom because power isn't an issue). I've got an ARM device that does 1080p over HDMI while the CPU draws somewhere around a watt--no x86 can come close to that. (The Atom CPU draws 2-13W depending on the model, and the support chipset draws quite a bit more--the ARM is fully integrated and includes cpu, graphics, memory controller, storage controller, etc.; again, this only matters for the portable devices and is mostly irrelevant for things that plug in.)

As a side note, even the atom requires hardware video acceleration to do HD video reliably--but it can do a lot more in software. The need to get video into very strict formats for the hardware decoder is likely the reason the roku's format support is so limited.
Last edited by vmps on Fri May 21, 2010 4:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
vmps
Posts: 758
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 7:48 am

Re: Google TV - Fall 2010...

Fri May 21, 2010 4:33 pm

dellsweig wrote:
My point on the use of Android is not because I like - or even own an android based device.

That explains a lot. I both own devices which run android os, am somewhat familiar with porting it to new devices, and am very familiar with linux os-level development. You're asking for something that makes no sense.
 
jcmolet
Posts: 2154
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:11 pm
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ

Re: Google TV - Fall 2010...

Sat May 22, 2010 4:45 pm

Roku's response regarding GoogleTV:

"I think we are intrigued like the next person on this announcement. There's been a lot of talk about how this is going to kill off stand alone devices like Roku or aggregators like Boxee, but it seems to me that price will play a big role in this and also the fact that this platform and the devices being created are geared towards combining linear TV (from your cable or satellite provider) with Over the Top content. In that regard, the competition is TiVo or Sezmi or Zillion TV or the cable MSOs that are also attempting to converge both.

We feel we still sit in a great spot. One that delivers an incredible amount of premium content to the TV for an incredibly low price and while we are still complimentary to cable/satellite today, we are adding more and more content including live sports, music, movies and TV shows, etc. that are making our platform competitive in this space. A rising tide raises all ships and Google is creating awareness in the market for devices and services that delivery content streamed over IP to the TV. Now it's on us to execute and make sure our message is out there for customers."

Brian Jaquet, Director, Corporate Communications



I think this sentence from the latter part of the statement could turn out to be very true. I don't see Roku and Google as direct competitors and it could be that the emergence of GoogleTV could actually help Roku.

"A rising tide raises all ships and Google is creating awareness in the market for devices and services that delivery content streamed over IP to the TV."
 
Crow550
** Valued Community Member **
Posts: 2154
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 11:36 am

Re: Google TV - Fall 2010...

Sat May 22, 2010 8:36 pm

I find the Google TV video to be interesting as it acts like no Internet based TV devices exist for watching content on the TV. LOL!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diTpeYoqAhc

*FACEPALM*
 
dellsweig
Posts: 419
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 10:03 am
Location: Campbell Hall NY

Re: Google TV - Fall 2010...

Tue May 25, 2010 9:35 am

jcmolet wrote:
Roku's response regarding GoogleTV:

"I think we are intrigued like the next person on this announcement. There's been a lot of talk about how this is going to kill off stand alone devices like Roku or aggregators like Boxee, but it seems to me that price will play a big role in this and also the fact that this platform and the devices being created are geared towards combining linear TV (from your cable or satellite provider) with Over the Top content. In that regard, the competition is TiVo or Sezmi or Zillion TV or the cable MSOs that are also attempting to converge both.

We feel we still sit in a great spot. One that delivers an incredible amount of premium content to the TV for an incredibly low price and while we are still complimentary to cable/satellite today, we are adding more and more content including live sports, music, movies and TV shows, etc. that are making our platform competitive in this space. A rising tide raises all ships and Google is creating awareness in the market for devices and services that delivery content streamed over IP to the TV. Now it's on us to execute and make sure our message is out there for customers."

Brian Jaquet, Director, Corporate Communications



I think this sentence from the latter part of the statement could turn out to be very true. I don't see Roku and Google as direct competitors and it could be that the emergence of GoogleTV could actually help Roku.

"A rising tide raises all ships and Google is creating awareness in the market for devices and services that delivery content streamed over IP to the TV."


http://gizmodo.com/5547278/boxee-is-wor ... ndroid-app
Going where the wind don't blow so strange
 
unclebob
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 8:45 pm
Location: las vegas nv
Contact:

Re: Google TV - Fall 2010...

Thu May 27, 2010 3:28 pm

I'd like to see the Roku video player work with Google TV. The Roku box would probably need to provide the Logitech hardware something like an RSS feed of its available programming.

The only trouble with this approach is that programmers might come to view Roku as a middleman that needs eliminating.

Even with a couple years head-start, I'm afraid Roku hasn't a sufficient moat to protect it from something of Google's size.
 
jcmolet
Posts: 2154
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:11 pm
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ

Re: Google TV - Fall 2010...

Thu May 27, 2010 3:44 pm

unclebob wrote:
Even with a couple years head-start, I'm afraid Roku hasn't a sufficient moat to protect it from something of Google's size.


A couple of thoughts. First, I don't really see them as being direct competitors. GoogleTV seems to be more focused on integrating itself with cable/satellite companies and providing users the ability to search and play content from the web or their cable/satellite provider. Conversely, at least the way I see it, Roku is more of an alternative to cable; in the way it delivers content, offers more niche programming and the way it offers content (a la carte vice subscription based). Second, while Roku certainly does not possess the clout or size of Google, they have achieved a pretty significant user base, in excess of 1,000,000 by most estimates. In the time it takes GoogleTV, Boxee, Popbox and any other service/device to actually be released and evaluated by the market, that number will only grow.

Of course we haven't seen GoogleTV (or the price) yet, so we really don't know how compelling it will really be. My guess is that the two will be able to co-exist quite nicely.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 guests