stratcat96 wrote:

no, it's not viable. Streaming is a fad and just another "pie in the sky". I suggest everyone sell their Rokus (probably at a loss) and take your money and run before the market bombs out and you're stuck with a modern day laser disc player. Although, the ONE thing that could save it is a PBS channel.....

PBS... Brilliant. Well said. Bravo. I love it!!!! I couldn't have said it better.

Humm... PBS, the new Hulu.

Works for me at all hours and on the rare occasion when there's been a problem I just deal with it and remind myself that it's only TV. Then again I don't have high expectations. I grew up watching a 12 inch black and white tv with rabbit ears and all of this technology today was only a dream back then.

KennyJ wrote:

Yes. I use Verizon FIOS.

I have FIOS as well. Never had any problems with the Roku or any other streaming video device/service. It really comes down to the ISP. DSL and Cable are inferior technologies and FIOS and UVerse are the top of the line. Most people with issues probably have DSL or Cable. Not saying everyone with DSL or Cable has problems, but I have never heard of anyone with FIOS with a problem, other than something with their local home network. Just about all my friends have FIOS as well and a few of them have a ROKU, none of them have ever had problems either. If anyone out there having problems has the option of switching to FIOS or UVerse, do yourself a favor and do it. Kiss that shared neighborhood connection with your cable internet goodbye.

Really, being able to stream Netflix is the biggest reason to have a Roku. I've used a few different devices that did NF, and researched alot more. Roku probably has the easiest interface, along with its ease of operation. My Wii has NF, and even though I really like the interface and browsing options, using the wii mote is a pain. Others like the Sony only give you access to your IQ.. My WD Live Plus has an interesting Netflix app but doesn't work as well as the Roku (I dont think).

In addition to that, other channels like Hulu + and AVOD are the only ones worth it to *me* to pay anything for. Free stuff like the youtube private channel, PODTV, CDNtwo, Itunes Podcast, and even Pandora are that tasty cream cheese icing on the cake

Streaming is in its infancy, and of what's out there right now Netflix is the biggest reason to buy any unit. Down the line those choices are bound to improve though.

Yes, it is viable. It's hard to imagine that the problems <i>won't</i> be solved. Decades ago, someone once predicted that computers of the future would be the size of the Empire State Building. They didn't count on the transistor allowing you to have vastly more computing power in a much smaller space. The transistor had been invented at the time, but it was new enough that the impact it would have was not widely understood. When the automobile was invented, it was a neat toy, but many thought it would never catch on. They didn't predict the networks of roads we would build.

When I first stated going online 20 years ago, I had a 300 baud modem. Not that long ago, 256K DSL was considered fast. Now, 1 mbps internet is considered slow, and the 7 mbps that I have now is nothing to write home about. Before too long, the speeds that we consider fast today will be considered rather quaint and slow.

Internet is just a method of distributing data, just like OTA, cable and satellite. As it gets faster, live streaming will become more and more viable.

I received an Apple TV unit for an Xmas gift. It's sitting next to my Roku box connected on the same TV. Pic quality on Roku is superior (same movie!) and I've had issues with Apple loading movies. Bottom line is Roku seems to outform.

As the OP, I have been following the replies in this thread with great interest. Most of them are in the theme of "mine works fine".

My original post failed to define what I meant by "viable". What I was attempting to explore was "will it attract and keep a broad base of users ?". Most of the people on this forum appear to be fairly knowledgeable about networks and internet technology. I suspect that most of the potential users of media streaming do not share that knowledge.

The average potential user will not complain about (or even be aware of) momentary interruptions when using the internet to browse sites. Those same momentary interruptions cause much bigger problems with real time media streaming.

The biggest roadblock to broad acceptance seems to be that there are too many entities involved in getting the media to the user. If the average user has a problem who does he/she call?

the content originator?
the ISP?
the router manufacturer?
the streaming player manufacturer?
the TV manufacturer?

I know several "average" users who are Netflix IW users: My mother-in-law, my wife's aunt and uncle, and several friends of mine who are not techies.

MY guess is that most users don't have any problems.

I know several "average" users who are Netflix IW users: My mother-in-law, my wife's aunt and uncle, and several friends of mine who are not techies.

MY guess is that most users don't have any problems.

KennyJ wrote:

I know several "average" users who are Netflix IW users: My mother-in-law, my wife's aunt and uncle, and several friends of mine who are not techies.

MY guess is that most users don't have any problems.

Right, and generally the types of people who post on internet forums are going to have a bit more knowledge about such things, so we're a skewed demographic here.

I've heard it said before that "average" users have more generic setups, and therefore don't have a lot of the problems those of us with more complex network arrangements might run into. I bet there's some truth there.

As I've said in a similar thread, the cat's out of the bag, consumers who have had a taste of an amazingly broad menu of choices available with instant gratification aren't going to go back to planning their viewing in advance. Further, downloading stores of anticipated viewing is inherently more consumptive than downloading only what you actually view.

The internet will get better. It is not just video that needs steady, sustained network speed, but also VOIP telecom, which is similarly frustrating to support sometimes today but most certainly is not going away.

Of course real time streaming media is viable. But you may need to improve some links in your broadband chain to make it so for you.
I have a very good cable broadband pipeline and I have two Roku Player hooked directly to my router via ethernet cables.
I have no trouble with live streaming and during the summer live streaming baseball games are a big part of what I watch.

ddevonb wrote:

Of course real time streaming media is viable. But you may need to improve some links in your broadband chain to make it so for you.
I have a very good cable broadband pipeline and I have two Roku Player hooked directly to my router via ethernet cables.
I have no trouble with live streaming and during the summer live streaming baseball games are a big part of what I watch.

Are they in HD?