Netflix $99 Set Top Player from Roku

[Pyrrho]

I wrote an editorial about the box (which I ordered) over at AV Rant. To be honest, I cannot believe some of the push-back on this product. This is a HUGE development in the industry.

Netflix has around 8.25 million subscribers. That number is either going to double in two years, or Blockbuster will offer something similar and both subscriber numbers will grow. I'm happy either way so long as they continue to improve and innovate.

The Editorial: http://www.avrant.com/?p=295

For everyone who does not have a great internet connection, this new Netflix thing is nothing at all. So I would not expect that it will have as much impact as you might think.

Also, in your article, you state:

One, the downloads are already basically full DVD quality if your Internet connection speeds and hardware (router, cabling, wireless network, etc) can support it.

I'm sorry, but 2.0 audio is not basically full DVD quality. It might be for some discs, but not for any recent Hollywood film.

And as for the hardware being HD capable, that does not mean that they will ever actually offer HD, or that one could view it even if they did, given the tremendous bandwidth it would almost certainly require. And we also do not know how long they will continue to provide the service at a reasonable cost. Just because you can get it for $9/month now, that does not mean anything about what it will cost a year or two from now.

Years ago, I signed on for something called "NetZero", where one bought the software to use with their system, and then one's Internet connection was free thereafter. After a while, they stopped offering that to new customers, and they started limiting usage to those of us who got in on the free service. It got to the point where I simply abandoned my account with them because it was no longer of much use. The same could happen with this new thing from Netflix; only time will tell.

Please don't take what I am saying the wrong way; this may be as great a thing as you are making it out to be. I am not convinced that it is or will be what we all hope it to be, but I find the idea intriguing enough, and the 30 day money back guarantee acceptable enough, that I am going to try it out and have already ordered a unit. I have, in the past, been more or less happy with Netflix (though I preferred, when I lived close enough to them to get rentals fast, GreenCine, as they had a more diverse collection of DVDs). So I think it is worth trying, since I already have a qualifying account with them, and have an excellent Internet connection. But if I don't get DVD quality, or near DVD quality, I will be quick to call them liars for claiming it is.

 

[Phil Taylor]

I've used the Watch Now service and although the movie selection is less than impressive they do have quite a library of TV show full season offerings. I've been re-watching Season 1 of 30 Rock and the quality is VERY good on my very fast AT&T DSL Pro connection.

One complaint I have is that it only works with IE and is no-go with Firefox (which I use exclusively - you couldn't pay me enough to use IE for web browsing) so a workaround I use is to open a window from "My Computer" and enter the Netflix url in the address window and it works fine.

 

[Josuah]

I don't see why they can't fix the licensing issues... what's keeping them from just limiting the number of "copies" of a movie from being downloaded/streamed simultaneously? would that be any different from them buying, say, 1000 copies of something and renting those out?

The law doesn't work that way. The first-sale doctrine, which happens to be a U.S. thing BTW, says you can buy something and then rent it out. Don't need to do anything special. But that only applies for physical goods, and you cannot buy a book and then format switch it (say scan it to PDF) and then rent out the book in that different format. First-sale doctrine for digital goods was sort of tested when someone attempted to sell their iTunes music purchases, but since they had to sell their entire account, it wasn't exactly the same thing. And it was never tested in court as far as I know.

There's also a legal ruling that puts a distance on how far away you can deliver a movie, so that you can't stick a DVD in your player at home and run a really long cable to show it in your neighbor's house. So that's why you couldn't just buy 1000 DVDs and 1000 DVD players and digitize the output to send over the Internet. (And you'd have to train monkeys to insert/eject the discs as people requested, like the old telephone operators.)

Does this particular player have any sort of a hard drive?

No, it doesn't contain a hard drive.

No doubt - my expectations aren't for HD at that price, but at what price do they offer HD and what's their solution for my HDTV?

The box currently being sold will support HD once Netflix has movies available for streaming in HD and has HDMI output right now so you can connect it to your HDTV already. As mentioned earlier, you'll need the bandwidth for HD but I think cable usually has really high bandwidth available, like 20Mbps.

 

[AverageJoe]

I received the Roku player yesterday, and it's pretty impressive. Not in appearance (a plain black box about the size of a stack of 3 or 4 CD jewel cases), but the setup, connection options, and performance are all amazing - at least to me.

Lately, my satisfaction level with new devices is inversely proportional to the size of the manual. If I ever get a new A/V toy that works perfectly out of the box with no manual at all (and such obvious operation that it never needs one), I'll have reached nirvana. This thing is pretty close. I got it set up in about ten minutes using their one page instruction sheet with no surprises - Well OK, it's a pretty BIG page, but that's because of all the pictures.

Basically, I connected an HDMI cable to the TV and power to the Roku, went through the on-screen prompts to get it connected to my wireless router, logged on to the Netflix site on my PC to activate the box, and in a couple minutes it was ready to play whatever movie was in my Netflix Instant Queue.

Instant Queue? I'd never used that feature before. Until now, when I wanted to watch an Instant movie on the HTPC, I just picked out a title and selected PLAY. So... I went to the PC and loaded a few movies into the Instant Queue, and when I went back to the TV they had appeared as selections on the screen. When I picked one with the remote, it loaded for about 20 seconds and started playing.

I don't know why I was expecting some sort of browser to select movies directly from Netflix, but I never really gave it much thought when I ordered the box. It's not a big deal to use a PC to populate the Instant Queue with several titles, and then pick from them when I want to watch one (you don't need to watch them in queue order - you can pick any of the shows on the Roku on-screen list), but I'll keep using a PC in the theater room so I can "channel surf" through the available movies.

Picture and sound quality on the half-dozen shows I've watched (on a 50" plasma) are about the same as premium channels (HBO, Showtime, etc.) on cable, and a little better than SD channels on Dish Network.

I've tried it on the network both wired and wireless, and since the performance is equal, I just kept it on wireless. Also, no picture difference between component and HDMI.

Very handy service. I'll probably get another Roku for the bedroom.

 

[gus6464]

I received the Roku player yesterday, and it's pretty impressive. Not in appearance (a plain black box about the size of a stack of 3 or 4 CD jewel cases), but the setup, connection options, and performance are all amazing - at least to me.

Lately, my satisfaction level with new devices is inversely proportional to the size of the manual. If I ever get a new A/V toy that works perfectly out of the box with no manual at all (and such obvious operation that it never needs one), I'll have reached nirvana. This thing is pretty close. I got it set up in about ten minutes using their one page instruction sheet with no surprises - Well OK, it's a pretty BIG page, but that's because of all the pictures.

Basically, I connected an HDMI cable to the TV and power to the Roku, went through the on-screen prompts to get it connected to my wireless router, logged on to the Netflix site on my PC to activate the box, and in a couple minutes it was ready to play whatever movie was in my Netflix Instant Queue.

Instant Queue? I'd never used that feature before. Until now, when I wanted to watch an Instant movie on the HTPC, I just picked out a title and selected PLAY. So... I went to the PC and loaded a few movies into the Instant Queue, and when I went back to the TV they had appeared as selections on the screen. When I picked one with the remote, it loaded for about 20 seconds and started playing.

I don't know why I was expecting some sort of browser to select movies directly from Netflix, but I never really gave it much thought when I ordered the box. It's not a big deal to use a PC to populate the Instant Queue with several titles, and then pick from them when I want to watch one (you don't need to watch them in queue order - you can pick any of the shows on the Roku on-screen list), but I'll keep using a PC in the theater room so I can "channel surf" through the available movies.

Picture and sound quality on the half-dozen shows I've watched (on a 50" plasma) are about the same as premium channels (HBO, Showtime, etc.) on cable, and a little better than SD channels on Dish Network.

I've tried it on the network both wired and wireless, and since the performance is equal, I just kept it on wireless. Also, no picture difference between component and HDMI.

Very handy service. I'll probably get another Roku for the bedroom.

Damn you are lucky. I got an email from Roku today saying demand for the unit has skyrocketed so they cant ship mine out until next week. But from reading your review it wont be long until I order another one for the bedroom. My wife loves to catch up on TV shows on DVD when she goes to bed so this will make her happy.

 

[Audioholics]

Received on Saturday:

Dear Clint,

Thank you for ordering The Netflix Player by Roku. Your order has been received and will be shipped as soon as possible.

Interest in the Player has exceeded our expectations and as such, we are experiencing some delays in shipping. We expect your order to ship next week. Please be assured that your credit card will not be charged until we ship your order.

Once your order ships, you will receive a confirmation email from FedEx that will include tracking information. If you have any questions, feel free to call us at 888-600-ROKU (888-600-7658).

Thanks again for your support,

The Team at Roku

 

[jcPanny]

Netflix box feedback

Joe,
Nice feedback on the new netflix box.
What type of bandwith do you have on your internet connection?
Cable?
High speed DSL?
basic DSL?

Just curious because this effects the resolution of the netflix instant viewing.

 

[AverageJoe]

I've got a cable modem with 3 Mbps service. I may upgrade to 5 or 10 sometime, but the Roku shows 4 out of 4 bars for quality if the other computers are off. I'm using a wireless router, but the PCs and HD DVD is hard-wired to it with cat5, while the Roku is a wireless connection. I get 3/4 if I'm on-line on one (or two) of the PC's. I've never seen less than 3 bars (well, "dots") .

On the 50" TV, picture quality at 3/4 is acceptable for casual viewing of old movies, TV shows, etc., but 4/4 is needed for the sharpness and detail I want for good movie viewing. I'm curious if there is a difference in PQ compared to the HTPC, but I still haven't tried it with the projector in the theater room.

 

[yettitheman]

Ironically, the only thing I can't watch are 1080p encoded videos I've download which the 2.8Ghz P4 processor can't smoothly decode. I'm sure there's some format it can handle, but all the ones I've tried are encoded in various formats it stutters on. It's just slightly too slow to handle them

Sorry for your frustration, but also thank you for confirming my theory that my 2.6 P4 won't handle 1080P. It's got some power, but not enough for 1080p.
Even my 1800+ A64 with a gig of ram and a 6600 GT can hiccup every once and a while.

 

[jinjuku]

Sorry for your frustration, but also thank you for confirming my theory that my 2.6 P4 won't handle 1080P. It's got some power, but not enough for 1080p.
Even my 1800+ A64 with a gig of ram and a 6600 GT can hiccup every once and a while.

You would need a Radeon 1950 (I believe) or better card to do GPU decoded H264. Then your CPU wouldn't be an issue. 1080P decode will be fine.

I do believe that their are AGP versions of the Radeon 2400HD out there.

 

[emorphien]

You would need a Radeon 1950 (I believe) or better card to do GPU decoded H264. Then your CPU wouldn't be an issue. 1080P decode will be fine.

I do believe that their are AGP versions of the Radeon 2400HD out there.

That's probably correct. If the video card were new enough your CPU wouldn't have to do the heavy lifting as long as the encoding is supported by your GPU. My old desktop/HTPC is running an X800XL which does not have any such codec support I believe.

 

[Pyrrho]

My Roku box arrived last week, and I have used it for several days before writing my comments about it, because I wanted enough experience with it to be able to say something useful.

First of all, it is extremely convenient to be able to put a bunch of movies and old TV shows in one's queue, and then go to one's TV and select what one wants to watch. There is even a brief description of the show that one can see on one's TV. After making the selection, there is a pause while the choice is loaded (typically, about a third or half of a minute of waiting). Then one watches. It can be paused, and one can move within a show, but it is not fast forward and rewind; it jumps to different points in the show, and then one must wait again for it to load to that point. Not ideal, but good enough.

I have fairly consistently gotten four circles of quality (the highest rating) with my connection, though it is possible to get less, or to have one's show interrupted if one also does something with one's computer at the same time. I find it best to shut off my computer while viewing shows, because I have my computer set to auto-update some things, and that means it may take some of my bandwidth while I am watching something.

The service is convenient and easy. Now for the bad parts:

1. Even though I generally get their highest quality, it is not as good as DVD. In fact, the resolution is so bad, I have set the box to 4:3 aspect ratio so that widescreen films are shown with black bars all the way around. If I set the Roku to 16:9, the picture is much bigger, but the quality is so poor that I find it unwatchable. I have a 42" screen, and I sit about 8' from it. This is the same as having a 50" screen and sitting about 10' from it, or a 32" screen and sitting about 6' from it. See: http://www.carltonbale.com/2006/11/1080p-does-matter/
   and
   http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/assets/download/0602_tech_talk2_large.jpg
   Basically, if you are someone who has purchased a Blu-Ray player because DVD is not good enough for you, you should totally forget about this, as this is very noticeably inferior to DVD. Don't even think about how much lower resolution it is from real HD.
2. There is no power button on the unit, so it typically is left on all the time, wasting power. I hate to think about how much power will be wasted if this catches on with many people. Perhaps Netflix or Roku has investments in power companies, because with this kind of wastefulness, more power plants may be needed if it becomes popular.
3. This is the leading edge, also known as the bleeding edge, which is deserved in this case. Supposedly, when one updates one's cue, the change for the Roku box is immediate. This was the case for the first few days, but not anymore. To get it to load up new selections when it fails to automatically load, one must unplug the Roku and plug it back in to get it to restart. So, because of this, and the lack of a power switch issue, I now plug mine into this, with my TV plugged into the control outlet, so power is off to it when my TV is off, and it automatically comes on whenever my TV is on. This requires me to wait longer to use the box, but it forces the unit to load up the latest changes to my list whenever I turn on my TV.
4. You need a good Internet connection; my advice is to look at what Netflix says, and do not bother with this at all if you do not have at least what they say is needed for good quality. Even their best quality is not great.
5. The sound is only 2.0 on everything I have seen, even though the originals of some are 5.1.
6. There are very few extras that can be downloaded. This is not a big deal to me, but it may matter to some of you.

In my opinion, the only people who should consider this are people for whom ALL of the below apply:

1. Can live with less than DVD quality picture and sound.
2. Already have a great Internet connection.
3. Want to pay $9/month (or more) for the Netflix DVD rental program and this service.

Really, if I had not already had a great Internet connection and already was renting DVDs from Netflix, I would have been quite displeased with this (because it isn't worth what it is costing me for my Internet connection and Netflix rental). As it is, I am barely satisfied, and will still order the DVD whenever I want good picture quality or multichannel sound. If it were actually DVD quality, I would be absolutely thrilled with it. But it is absolutely not as good as a decently mastered DVD. The only DVDs I have seen with such poor picture quality are ones purchased from a dollar store that are off brand, poorly mastered, and from poor prints. The quality is not the worst I have ever seen, though, and it has the basic virtues of a digital SD broadcast. Just not the picture quality of a very good digital SD broadcast. Given all the talk around here touting the virtues of Blu-Ray, it is surprising that people here think this is a good service. HD is making my DVDs hard enough to watch, but DVDs are incredibly clear compared with this.

 

[jfkebk1]

Upscaling Video

Would the Netflix streaming benefit from A/V recievers like the Yamahan RX-V863 that offer "Analog video (480i or 480p) upscaling to full HD 1080p" ?

 

[Audioholics]

The picture won't get much better than it is, so those receivers merely benefit when your display's scaler isn't as good as the receivers. In a word: No.

I'm testing my Roku box this week... My first impressions are still good, but only because I view this as a simple $99 add-on for people already using Netflix and high speed Internet...

 

[Pyrrho]

Would the Netflix streaming benefit from A/V recievers like the Yamahan RX-V863 that offer "Analog video (480i or 480p) upscaling to full HD 1080p" ?

That would depend upon several things, including the abilities of your TV. If you have a HDTV that accepts SD sources (and I don't know of any that don't), whenever a signal is input that is not the same as the screen resolution, it will always scale whatever input it accepts to whatever resolution the screen has. Different TVs do this better than others, and it may be that your TV is better than your receiver, or it could be that your receiver is better than your TV at this. Or (and this is what makes life troublesome), it might be that your TV is better at upconverting from some formats, and your receiver might be better at upconverting from other formats. In any case, since we are talking about upconverting a source that is inferior to DVD, you should expect the results to be inferior to upconverting your DVDs.

Also, the Netflix box has a HDMI output, so it can output the digital signal without conversion to analog. Since I only use the HDMI output, I have no idea what its component video output is like. If you have an HDTV, using the component video output will necessitate a conversion of the digital signal to analog in the Roku box and then at some later point (in either your receiver, your HDTV, or a separate video processor) it will have to be reconverted to digital. I doubt that that will be a good thing, but how well it will all work would depend upon the exact equipment involved. And, as I already stated, since we are talking about upconverting a source that is inferior to DVD, you should expect the results to be inferior to upconverting your DVDs.

 

[gus6464]

I got my Roku box today and have watched a movie and some TV shows on it and have found it to be very good. On my connection I get 4 bars quality (max) and that's with 2 PCs, 2 laptops, PS3, and Wii on the internet as well. It was a breeze to set up and the menu is very easy to navigate. I will mostly be using it to watch TV shows and old movies so the quality doesn't bother me one bit. I get my new movies on BD from netflix anyway so I don't understand why people complain about the quality. For $99 it was well worth it and will probably be getting another one for the bedroom.

 

[AverageJoe]

...My first impressions are still good, but only because I view this as a simple $99 add-on for people already using Netflix and high speed Internet...

I agree. I have Dishnet for basic channel viewing and HD, Cable TV for modem and premium movie services, DVD/Blu-ray/HD DVD players for quality viewing in the theater room, and an off-air antenna in case everything else fails , and this device still fills a niche not covered by anything else: Impulse selection from thousands of titles and viewing with no trip to the store ar waiting for the mail.

Some of the selections I've watched are things I would never buy or even rent, and sometimes I don't even finish watching them, but that's part of the appeal. Sort of a no-risk preview of films I know nothing about but might be worth watching. If not, I've only wasted a few minutes to find out.

Perfect for those days when there are two hundred and "57 channels and nothin' on".

 

[Pyrrho]

I got my Roku box today and have watched a movie and some TV shows on it and have found it to be very good. On my connection I get 4 bars quality (max) and that's with 2 PCs, 2 laptops, PS3, and Wii on the internet as well. It was a breeze to set up and the menu is very easy to navigate. I will mostly be using it to watch TV shows and old movies so the quality doesn't bother me one bit. I get my new movies on BD from netflix anyway so I don't understand why people complain about the quality. For $99 it was well worth it and will probably be getting another one for the bedroom.

We are opposite on one point only: If BD is worth bothering about, then obviously picture quality matters. This box currently provides a picture inferior to DVD. What I don't understand is why you don't complain about the picture quality. If this is good enough, obviously BD is totally unnecessary and a waste of money. The only reason to upgrade from DVD to BD is for picture and sound quality, and if this box is good enough for you, then DVD is better at both picture and sound than you require.

Also, old movies on 35mm film that have been decently stored are capable of containing more resolution than BD is capable of delivering, so I don't understand why so many people say that they are fine with low resolution copies of them, but want higher resolution copies of more recent films (many of which are also on 35mm film). If picture quality matters to you with a film made in the past year, why do you not care about picture quality with a film made 70 years ago? Such films, if well made and properly stored, are capable of providing an amazing picture. If you get the chance, you might want to go to a theater to see the restored version of the Wizard of Oz from 1939. I did so, and I can tell you that the picture quality is comparable with films made today. (In fact, I think it looks better than most films today, but that is unimportant to the present discussion.) I have also seen less than ideal prints of some old Hitchcock films, and they were a revelation, as I had only seen them on TV, VHS, and DVD before. Truly, you are missing out on a great deal of detail on old films if you settle for low resolution copies. And if you are willing to view copies of them in which much of the detail has been discarded, why do you feel differently about more recent films?

 

[Pyrrho]

...

Some of the selections I've watched are things I would never buy or even rent, and sometimes I don't even finish watching them, but that's part of the appeal. Sort of a no-risk preview of films I know nothing about but might be worth watching. If not, I've only wasted a few minutes to find out.

...

Yes, it is good for that. And that gives it a great deal of appeal. It is, however, unfortunate that the picture and sound is no better than it is. We are currently at a point where the AVERAGE person has DVD quality picture, but this is unfortunately a step backward in quality from what the average person now enjoys. Never mind a comparison with actual HD.

 

[gus6464]

We are opposite on one point only: If BD is worth bothering about, then obviously picture quality matters. This box currently provides a picture inferior to DVD. What I don't understand is why you don't complain about the picture quality. If this is good enough, obviously BD is totally unnecessary and a waste of money. The only reason to upgrade from DVD to BD is for picture and sound quality, and if this box is good enough for you, then DVD is better at both picture and sound than you require.

Because not all the stuff I want to watch is on BD and sometimes I don't feel like waiting for the DVD to come in the mail. Especially when I don't even know if the film or show is going to be any good yet I have to waste a space on the queue which could have been occupied by a BD I actually want to see.