NFT: Vizio TV quality question + Amazon streaming question

Has amazon prime streaming.

Any lacking features can easily be augmented by other devices (roku, firetv, xbox, ps4 etc). In addition, the TV manufacturers have been bad about supporting their smart features long term (they are getting better). So it is likely you will need another device before getting a new TV anyway.

Focus on picture quality and reliability. A roku or firetv can always be picked up for < $100 if a "smart" feature is missing.

.

and ignore the smart features.

What is the advantage of roku vs Apple TV vs the amazon fire thing?

Is it true that Apple TV does not offer an amazon app? Is that right? We have all apple products. Would prefer Apple TV since it could just play off my iTunes library but the amazon app issue and lack of mirroring sucks.

If I just bought madden with the NFL Sunday ticket add on and plugged my laptop in via hdmi ... I'm assuming that would solve my problems right? Don't need mirroring In that circumstance.

Other than that -- is it generally accepted that Samsung is the best experience? Costco has a 46" on sale for less than 500. The vizio next to it looked good for sure, but Samsung did look better.

of your laptop. It provides HDMI feed of apps/games to your TV. Similarly Apple TV does the same thing, but it work with iTunes so you can airplay from your laptop to your TV.

If you are dowloading movies/tv then an hdmi cable to your TV is all you would need.

Basically, there are many ways to get programming on your TV and I wouldn't use the smart TV apps to do it. They are slow, and don't give the best picture quality, IMO.

Roku's are cheap hardware builds and pretty much useless compared to any of this years dual core/quad core dedicated GPU Android set top boxes running Android 4.4 and XBMC. You won't even need Netflix, Prime or Hulu with XBMC.

The Amazon Fire is actually just a restricted Android set top box that points you to Amazon to buy content.

The top of line Android XBMC boxes are actually less expensive, have more current hardware and software and you can acess all the same content for free.

In comment 11754051 pinyin said:

Quote:

The top of line Android XBMC boxes are actually less expensive, have more current hardware and software and you can acess all the same content for free.

For free... if you're willing to pirate it.

I favor the "just plug your computer into your TV" approach.

Rokus get rave reviews, and many BBIers recommend them. Its under $100 too, how much cheaper can you possibly expect something to be?

that's pretty tough to beat. But if you're really deep into the Amazon ecosystem, the new Amazon Fire box sounds like it could be a winner for you.

we have two Rokus at home and are very happy with them. In fact, we havent had cable at all since January and don't miss it.

so-called smart TVs are limited and can't be upgraded.

I had a 32" Vizio that I had for 4 years and earlier this year upgraded to a 50" -- couldn't be happier with that purchase. I envision my next TV will be a Vizio.

it's still working great. I've been waiting for it to show it's age and have some glitches so I can get a new bigger HDTV but so far it's been working as good as the day I bought it.

I loved the Roku2 the first few months I owned it. Although now I'm running into the limits the unit has hardware wise.

Not having alot of memory kills any chance to keep downloading apps\channels on the device, especially games.

Also since I downloaded Roku's new Youtube channel, I've been getting memory issue and glitching of the Roku during watching programming and at random times it just restarting. I removed the Youtube channel which I really liked using and that resolved the problem but again the hardware limitation of the Roku is keeping me from using that Youtube channel that I really liked.

The Roku is plug and play whereas the Android boxes are not. If you're going by pure processing/memory resources, some of those Android boxes are going to win (and they'll be more flexible since you can install your own software). None of them will beat the ease of installation of the Roku.

By 'free' I don't know if he necessarily meant the content (seems like it) or whether he meant the same software players (Hulu, Netflix, etc.) are available for free.

I've got one of each - a Chromecast, a Roku and an Android box. Each has their advantages - Ccast is cheap, Roku is easier for the kids/wife to use, and the Android box offers me the most flexibility.

In comment 11754166 jcn56 said:

Quote:

I've got one of each - a Chromecast, a Roku and an Android box. Each has their advantages - Ccast is cheap, Roku is easier for the kids/wife to use, and the Android box offers me the most flexibility.

jcn56, would you go into a little more detail on how the Android box offers more flexibility? What can you do with the Android box that other devices wouldn't be able to do. I'm using to flashing new Android rom's on phones, so I guess those Android box would have similar type of custom rom's to download that give you different features?

of the Google Play market, so you can install most apps (depends on the CPU, build, etc.). For some people, this would be overkill. But in my case I have a webcam and we Skype or use Google Hangouts from it occasionally. I use Play Music to stream unlimited music on my home theater (and will now use Amazon Music as well).

But, most of that stuff has to be installed and configured. I bought my mom a Roku, plugged it in and she can use it without doing anything else to it. Can't say the same for the Android box (I could have preconfigured it, but it'd need some periodic maintenance along the way).

Same way I have an Intel NUC small form factor computer that I use as a HTPC. It has the same software a desktop would have, since it has a Core i5 processor, and we edit home videos and pictures on it. That sucker cost about $500 all in after adding memory and a hard drive to it, but it can do a lot more. You go up the scale of computing depending on how much processing power you need and in what form factor you need it (more power, smaller = more expensive every single time), but you should always buy based on what you *need*, not what's out there. I think more people should look at Chromecasts simply because they're not looking to do more than the bare minimum, which they happen to do quite well on the cheap.

Android based boxes are based around XBMC.

Open source media center. The best one on the market, and completely free.

Depending on what add-ons and repositories your direct your XBMC client to, you can access every tv show and film in existance.

I really only watch Elementary and Person Of Interest, and on tuesdays and thursdays the latest episode would be on the 1 Channel an hour before it was broadcast on CBS.

Don't want to pay for HBO to see season 1 of True Detective? It's all on XBMC.

I was contemplating going to the Sunshine Theater to see a showing of Jodorowsky's Dune a few months back, except that it was already on XBMC before it hit the theater.

I still keep a basic cable subscription in the city with ESPN and use a slingbox 500 to watch NFL and NBA games while im in PA.

XBMC is the future of tv.

Amazon, Roku, Google and Westinghouse are trying like hell to sell you all these devices that don't really do anything except hold apps for Netflix, youtube, crackle and Hulu.

You can run all of those on any Android box, but the key is the XBMC app. It blows the doors off of everything else.

Also, FYI - Amazon's Fire TV runs XBMC.

it uses antiquated dlna technology designed for the original xbox to deliver its signal, and it has been cludged numerous times now to try and work with other devices now. Something it simply does not do well. Plex is a much better Media Managing solution for this new age of streaming devices and unlike XBMC it works over http, and as such it allows anything to be streamed to any kind of device via the net or WiFi.

I personally abandoned XBMC years ago now in favor of the far more robust Plex platform. I would never go back to XBMC after using Plex. While it certainly has some pretty features, under the hood it's just not up to snuff anymore, in my opinion.

It's ok. Not in love with it -- seems like you have to constantly reset the sports devil feed so it's current. But there are no ads... Unlike the various streaming sites.

Didn't know amazon fire supported it though. Interesting....