×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Roku Finally Gets a 2D Menu System

samzenpus posted 1 year,26 days | from the new-look dept.

Media 80

DeviceGuru writes "Many of us have griped for years about Roku's retro one-dimensional user interface. Finally, in conjunction with the release of the new Roku 3 model, the Linux-based media streaming player is getting a two-dimensional facelift, making it quicker and easier to access favorite channels and find new ones. Current Roku users, who will now begin suffering from UI-envy, will be glad to learn that Roku plans to push out a firmware update next month to many earlier models, including the Roku LT, Roku HD (model 2500R), Roku 2 HD, Roku 2 XD, Roku 2 XS, and Roku Streaming Stick. A short demo of the new 2D Roku menu system is available in this YouTube video."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

80 comments

I believe we already crashed linuxgizmos.com (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43309959)

I believe we already crashed linuxgizmos.com because it's incredibly slow.

It's only been four minutes!

Re:I believe we already crashed linuxgizmos.com (2)

blydro (2844535) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310011)

Yep. I had to use google cache. Coral isn't working either.

Re:I believe we already crashed linuxgizmos.com (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43310147)

All three of us crashed it.

Why always shit stories? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43309973)

This is crap. Crap is king.

Roku 3 (4, Interesting)

fyngyrz (762201) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310135)

Sadly, although the new Roku has the new interface and a fast CPU, it's lost a lot of the connectivity that made the original Roku such a great device; the optical audio is gone, and so is the component video. The 3 is composite video + analog audio, or HDMI+audio, or nothing. I made great use of that connectivity with a high end, but older, Denon receiver for one unit, and a toshiba flatscreen 720p CRT display. Both still work perfectly, but will have to stay with the original roku, which is very slow. So no new interface for me, sigh.

I'm thinking there's still a lot of similar hardware out there, too.

Maybe you need an HDMI switch with TOSLink? (2)

glennrrr (592457) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310329)

You could spend some money on an HDMI switch with TOSLink optical output to keep your receiver viable for a bit longer. I've bought one several years ago, and it's currently feeding my Logitech desktop surround system.

TOSLink is only 2 channels (3, Informative)

bigtrike (904535) | 1 year,26 days | (#43312479)

You'd be better off with high quality analog outputs. TOSLink is limited 2 channels, so any conversion with more channels (assuming the Roku even supports that) requires some sort of encoding scheme and a loss of quality.

TOSLink is not 2 channel only (1)

glennrrr (592457) | 1 year,25 days | (#43317299)

I'm guessing that most of the usage would be streaming encoded Dolby Digital which is typically 5.1. For instance, if I'm watching a recent movie on Netflix, it will likely have a Dolby Digital track. It's true that the original TOSLink (S/PIDF) spec only allowed for stereo PCM, but a hack was added a long time ago to allow DTS and Dolby Digital. Now, you can't get Dolby Master Audio or DTS HD over TOSLink, but that isn't a big deal when it comes to streaming video services, and will go a long way towards keeping an older receiver that doesn't have HDMI viable.

Roku 2-1/2 (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43310339)

Welcome to my world. I have a second generation (before the HDs, but latter than the very first). Optical and 5 Ghz. One thing other than the new interface is that some apps will not even show up for my generation, like the TWC app. So if I want that I'm relegated to buying a new unit anyway.

Re:Roku 3 (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310451)

The 3 is composite video + analog audio, or HDMI+audio, or nothing.

So, it's a Raspberry Pi.

For all I rag on Pi, it makes an adequate thing on which to run XBMC...

Re:Roku 3 (2)

garcia (6573) | 1 year,26 days | (#43311367)

So buy an old one. I have both an old and a new Roku (the new one was $50 on sale around Christmas and we plan to use it at our vacation home).

I mean, do you really expect them to support devices which few people use anymore? I didn't have a HDTV until a few months ago but most people haven't had a need for component input for a VERY long time.

Are companies really supposed to support dying technologies just to make a handful of geeks happy? The device is tiny and cheap as it is, continuing to hold out on these old technologies drops the ability to have support for other things people want.

Move along, nothing to see here.

Re:Roku 3 (1)

fyngyrz (762201) | 1 year,25 days | (#43316459)

So buy an old one.

I *have* an old one. Reading comprehension fail much?

I mean, do you really expect them to support devices which few people use anymore?

No. I expect them to support optical audio, which is a standard connection even today; and I expect them to support component, which is *also* a standard connection, even today. They can of course choose not to include such support, just as they have done, but then I will choose not to buy the new device to replace my old device, just as I have done. Understand now?

I didn't have a HDTV until a few months ago

Ah, well then, you're an expert, aren't you? /rollseyes

Are companies really supposed to support dying technologies just to make a handful of geeks happy?

These are not dying technologies. They are simply older technologies. Both are still in use; both are present on an astonishing number of devices currently in use and currently for sale. Look here: Marantz AV7701, current high end pre-pro: 3 component inputs, one out; two optical audio inputs. Onkyo TX NR515, current middle of the line receiver, component in and out, two optical audio inputs. Samsung UN32EH5300 1080p current LED HDTV, you guessed it, component input. There are huge numbers of similar devices. Just go look.

The device is tiny and cheap as it is, continuing to hold out on these old technologies drops the ability to have support for other things people want.

No, it doesn't. There's no reason at all they can't have a model for people like me with the broader connectivity, while still maintaining a more narrowly targeted HDMI only system. They already had the tech; I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have been a huge pushup, and putting out a few more bucks to keep very expensive devices useful is a perfectly sane consumer decision. Roku simply punted when they could have kicked for the field goal. It's also worth pointing out that the original models had this connectivity, and they were *still* tiny and cheap.

One-dimensional Interface? (5, Funny)

degeneratemonkey (1405019) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310197)

Did it look like this? ---

Re:One-dimensional Interface? (1)

clickclickdrone (964164) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310217)

Exactly. WTF, just WTF. Don't people even know what dimensions are anymore?

Re:One-dimensional Interface? (1)

Enokcc (1500439) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310283)

Dimension of a vector space is the number of linearly independent vectors in its spanning set of vectors. And I don't know how this applies to user interfaces.

Re:One-dimensional Interface? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43310683)

Yes, but apparently you do not.

A dimensional is limited to one axis of movement.

A 1-dimensional interface is a dropdown box, or a photo viewer with only left and right (up or down too)
Most programming styles are also 1-dimensional in that commands are laid out in a line-by-line basis since there is no decent IDE out there to support 2-dimensional coding styles, and retarded bosses and managers still count work on per-line basis, hindering the entire industry in general.
The day someone makes the natural Excel of programming will be glorious. But every way I can think of such a style, it just feels obtuse in so many ways.
Getting the right balance would be hard. And that isn't really the hard part at all, it is making links between code logically that you could see easily in 1-dimensional layouts, such as braces and general indentation. Translating that to 2 dimensions will be difficult.
I guess 2 might need to be skipped entirely and go straight to 3D where braces actually get linked together in groups via some boxing method. (think like something out of Star Trek or a Good Implementation of the ideas behind Visual Basic where you have a huge workspace that can easily be scrolled around and you have code linked correctly, in fact some SDKs use this if I remember correct, doesn't UDK use something like that?)

Re:One-dimensional Interface? (5, Insightful)

Jarik C-Bol (894741) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310305)

It took me a while, but I finally figured out what the hell he meant by '2 Dimensional' It seems that the original Roku interface was a lot like the 'Photo Stream' or 'Album Stream' in apple products. Scroll left or right, and it pages through 200 channels. Now, its more like the Xbox home screen, with several channels displayed per page, in a block, and you can navigate up down left and right in that page.

Its still a retarded way to describe the problem.

Re:One-dimensional Interface? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43311709)

In other words... instead of linear it's a grid.

I agree, the article and the summary was written by someone that needs to go to college and learn how to use the English language.

Re:One-dimensional Interface? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43310309)

It's not a literal 1D. If you visualize moving back-and-fourth on the menu, then it only moved in a straight line, as opposed to left-and-right and up-and-down. Conceptually1D vs 2D.

Re:One-dimensional Interface? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43310381)

It's conceptually 1D vs 2D if you have no idea what 1D or 2D is.

By that same token, it's conceptually potato vs Godzilla.

If you can only move in one dimension, like LCD (3, Informative)

raymorris (2726007) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310417)

If you can only scroll up and down, through a long list, that's one dimension. Think single line LCD display. Compare to a standard desktop, where you can move the mouse up and down, or left and right (2D). Tbe display is 2D obviously, but if the navihation is just up-arrow and down-arrow, that's one dimensional navigation.

Re:If you can only move in one dimension, like LCD (1)

jedidiah (1196) | 1 year,26 days | (#43311583)

1D is a line.

2D is a plane.

Re:If you can only move in one dimension, like LCD (1)

Mindscrew (1861410) | 1 year,26 days | (#43312707)

Not Trolling here....

Isn't 1D a single point on a plane and 2D is 2 points on a plane connected by a line?

It's no wonder geeks get shit all the time (5, Funny)

Overzeetop (214511) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310551)

Yes, actually it did look like this - - - - -

And now, it looks like this:
- - - - -
- - - - -

Where each - represents an icon. Notice how the icons may be addressed by a single value, or a single dimension. Now, they are addressed by two values - sometimes known as 2 dimensions.

I'm guessing that you're the guy who, when he walks into a lab with lots of critical equipment and the lab manager says "don't touch anything," you are the one who asks "Can I touch the air? Can I touch the floor?" Grow the fuck up.

whoosh (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43312609)

Settle down, Francis, he was joking.

Too bad the mods couldn't get past your first few lines.

Re:It's no wonder geeks get shit all the time (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | 1 year,26 days | (#43312721)

For someone not versed in UX, the summary sucks. We get it now, 2D has a special meaning in UX design versus the more common meanings. Do not yell at the reader for the article's shortcomings.

Re:One-dimensional Interface? (2)

Tarlus (1000874) | 1 year,26 days | (#43311545)

It would have been better described as an interface with one-dimensional navigation. If you think about it, a lot of UI's could be described this way. Throwing in that extra dimension so that items could be laid out into a grid instead of a line makes it quicker to navigate through a long list of items.

One Dimensional ???? (1)

nukenerd (172703) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310213)

As the link has been Slashdotted, I am left with my imagination boggling as to what the one-dimensional interface looked like.

I am thinking in terms of a thermometer-type slider, like those 1960's radio tuners; am I right? But with no room even for markings by the side, just a thin line that changes colour as you slide?

Re:One Dimensional ???? (2)

poetmatt (793785) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310711)

beyond humor, the current roku setup is exactly like above posts had mentioned:

--------------

that is your menu. you scroll left to right, and that's it. It functions and you can rearrange things, but roku is really set up like that.

Thankfully Plex on roku has a better interface than roku, I suppose you can call it a 2 dimension interface as you have horizontal and vertical aspects, better arranged.I would never even use a roku if it wasn't for plex.

seriously? (2)

tracius01 (2541214) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310221)

there is no such thing as a 1D interface.

Re:seriously? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43310327)

The next thing you will tell me is that there is no "cloud", and that it's just another marketing term for a server(does it bring me drinks?) or a computer service.

If you watch the video, you will immediately realize that what they mean is a 2-pane interface. Remember back in 1998 when people started using frames in webpages? It's like that. You can click on a menu on one side, and the menu stays on screen while the information is displayed in a larger pane next to it.

Try explaining to your grandma what a "pane" is though. (you're hurt?! OH...What, like a window? my computer already has windows!). Marketing people have to justify their paychecks and therefore we get this interface renamed to "2-D". It will look better on the box, and everyone will know what 2-D is. It also paves the way for the next roku that you really want....the one with the 3-D interface.

TL:DR : it doesn't make sense to you because you're smarter than the average consumer that they are marketing to.

Re:seriously? (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43310365)

A lot more people will understand "multiple row" than "2-D".

The best you could come up with was "pane". Terrible analogy, but you probably didn't put too much time into it so that's okay. It's also not your job.

Terrible journalism written by and for simpletons.

Re:seriously? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43311353)

I have no idea what multiple row means but it sounds complicated!

well, I originally thought "frame" instead of "pane". I remember when frames first appeared, but instead of frames having scrollbars and being where the menu is located they are now a way to place things on a page, typically ads. And the scroll bar is nonexistent so no one beyond app developers recognize things as being "frames", and even that might get confused with entire frames (photo/video) when trying to market this feature.

How about..." It's one more box than previous! Now double the boxes with stuff in them on your screen!". 2-B is easier to understand than 2-D!

Also, while you are right about me not putting much thought into it (it was 5:30am I had just woken up), pointing that out was unnecessary. I was trying to explain the constant dumbing down of everything and you managed to imply that I was dumb and yet not creatively dumb enough to communicate it effectively to dumber people.

Re:seriously? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43310709)

They should have said "switched from an interface that only allowed movement in one dimension to allowing movement in two dimensions".

Re:seriously? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | 1 year,26 days | (#43311025)

They should have said "switched from an interface that only allowed movement in one dimension to allowing movement in two dimensions".

But then what would all the pedants have done for entertainment? In my book, having all the selections laid out along a line is one-dimensional. That it has a meaningful two-dimensional representation shouldn't prevent any slashdotters from comprehending what was meant.

Roku? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43310291)

I'm sure both Roku users are happy, but for the rest of us - how about a link to e.g. the project's website next time?
Like this. Roku.com [roku.com]

One-dimensional user interface (3, Funny)

Sesostris III (730910) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310341)

I use one all the time. It's called the command line. I have no problems with it!

Re:One-dimensional user interface (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43310373)

How are you able to see the letters if they have width but no height or depth?

Re:One-dimensional user interface (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43310555)

The dimensionality has to do with the number of directions the interface can be navigated in. Left and right, which is one dimension. Up and down the screen would be a 2nd dimension, then 3D would be in and out of the screen.

Re:One-dimensional user interface (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43312095)

Doesn't sound like much of a command line if it can't word wrap and doesn't display previous command results.

Better than Boxee Box? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43310371)

I started comparing the Boxee Box and the Roku *after* I bought the Boxee Box and almost every review had the Roku either barely beating or slaughtering the Boxee Box. Now I come to find out that Roku is about to get the menu system that the Boxee Box has had as long as I've had it -- going on 3 or 4 years, and the Boxee Box has almost everything I need. I can't stream PBS Frontline shows currently, but that's about it in terms of how I use it. If I had tossed the Boxee Box years ago for the singular horizontal menu, I'd have been pretty pissed.

Re:Better than Boxee Box? (1)

cblguy2 (1796986) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310655)

I bought a Roku 2 of some sort (cost about $90 from Amazon). I guess I gave it too much credit, it didn't work nearly as well as I'd hoped, nor interface with media streaming devices on my network as well as I'd hoped either. Neflix was OK I guess, but I decided to return it because $90 for a Netflix device is no good. My Panasonic Blu-Ray player DOES interface with my network devices, and it plays Netflix, and was only $2 more. Oh yeah, it plays Blu-Rays & DVDs too.

Re:Better than Boxee Box? (1)

omnichad (1198475) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310971)

$90 for a Netflix device IS no good - especially since Roku sells their baseline 720p devices for $50 direct. What seller was gouging you for $90?

Re:Better than Boxee Box? (1)

cblguy2 (1796986) | 1 year,26 days | (#43312327)

It was the Roku HD or XS or 2. something-or-other... not the $50 one, but the $90 one. Standard price for that unit. It wasn't the lower-end Roku.

Re:Better than Boxee Box? (1)

PlastikMissle (2498382) | 1 year,26 days | (#43314467)

To allow you to stream from your own network storage install PLEX media server on the computer hosting your stuff, and install the PLEX app on your Roku.

Re:Better than Boxee Box? (1)

cblguy2 (1796986) | 1 year,25 days | (#43317933)

Plex doesn't work in all situations (like with my DVR - my Panasonic BR player will stream recordings from the DVR via DLNA, but the Roku couldn't). I didn't want to build yet another server to house videos.

major facelift (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43310431)

I lifted my stream into your mom's face last nite

But still rife with useless advertising? (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310561)

So, will we still get adds for the PPV fight as the first 5 items in the list on the TV in the toddler's playroom? That's why I ditched the Roku to begin with - the first screen of items was stuff I didn't want, and couldn't rearrange. Maybe now I only have to scroll through one 2D page of ads instead of three screens of useless icons?

Re:But still rife with useless advertising? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43313397)

The more I read about this (especially TFAs) the more I'm glad I'm using an old HP tower for a media center.

Finally? (1)

realinvalidname (529939) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310599)

Just started getting into Roku programming in the last month, and I kind of like the ifPosterScreen's [roku.com] "arc-landscape" 1-D metaphor — for small numbers of objects, it's easier to see the selection when it's placed front and center (as a result of your right-left arrowing) than to just put a little highlight box around it like AppleTV does. CoverFlow does nothing for me on iOS or (especially) Mac, but on Roku it seemed to work pretty nicely.

And it's not like this is the only menuing system available on the Roku SDK. Many apps with a large amount of content -- your Netflixes and Crunchyrolls and what have you -- use a 2D grid of horizontally scrolling lists. I think this is the ifGridScreen [roku.com] , but I haven't used it myself yet, so I'm not sure.

Anyways, this didn't seem like something that desperately needed to change, but I assume they know what they're doing. Roku's picking up steam and they're going to be fine. Would be nice if there were a real YouTube app for it, but I suppose we can't have that until Google gives up on the GoogleTV fiasco.

Menu 'dimensioniality' aside (1)

wbr1 (2538558) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310699)

My question is this. Netflix will not support Linux. They simply stonewall from what I can gather. Of course you can get it running in Wine, hell you could probably even get it running in an Android emulator.
The Roku however runs Linux and handles Netflix, TV's that run Linux internally handle Netflix. How does they accomplish this? Closed source code certainly, but Netflix is just a streaming service.
If you were trying to build a 'renegade' Netflix app for Linux, where does the problem lie? In convincing their end that you are a valid and authenticated client? Is this information sent encrypted? Surely the user info is, but that can all be done via the browser with a faked User Agent and all should be good. Or, does the problem lie on the other end in decoding the streaming video? Does Netflix use some proprietary compression or streaming protocol?
Any Netflix engineers/managers should be paying attention here. While it is beyond my skill, eventually someone will crack this problem.
You have a great business model, and people have proven willing to pay the subscription fee for streaming and not pirate. I already pay it and watch on my tablet and via windows.
Many here probably do as well. Just make a Linux client, browser based or otherwise. We won't be stealing your service any more than the asshats on Tor trading stolen/hacked accounts so they can watch on a valid client.
For me, I do not want a Roku. I have a custom HTPC/ media server in the closet in my living room. It does quite a few nice things. However, I want to ditch my windows license on it, rebuild it in Linux and Netflix is the main reason that I cannot.

Re:Menu 'dimensioniality' aside (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43310799)

No linux driver for my tuner card prevents my linux switch so I duel boot it.

Re:Menu 'dimensioniality' aside (5, Funny)

omnichad (1198475) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310981)

Is that where you set two IDE hard drives both to Master and see which one wins?

Who runs PATA-town? (1)

Guppy (12314) | 1 year,25 days | (#43316345)

Is that where you set two IDE hard drives both to Master and see which one wins?

Two Drives Enter! One Drive Leaves!

Re:Menu 'dimensioniality' aside (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | 1 year,26 days | (#43311011)

If you were trying to build a 'renegade' Netflix app for Linux, where does the problem lie?

The problem is that they can change the server around endlessly to crap on your app.

I have a custom HTPC/ media server in the closet in my living room. It does quite a few nice things. However, I want to ditch my windows license on it, rebuild it in Linux and Netflix is the main reason that I cannot.

You mean, you will not. In any case, if someone were going to spend effort on integrating Netflix with a Linux HTPC it would be a much shorter trip to use vmware player and script launching iexplore. Since you already have a Windows license (as do most PC owners) this is not really a problem for you except perhaps on an ideological level.

You could always switch to using an Android-based device to display to your TV. That would let you have XBMC and Netflix (Etc etc.)

Re:Menu 'dimensioniality' aside (1)

realityimpaired (1668397) | 1 year,26 days | (#43311421)

The Roku however runs Linux and handles Netflix, TV's that run Linux internally handle Netflix. How does they accomplish this?

The same way Android, Boxee Box, and WDTV accomplish it: by being a closed system that allows DRM. It's not that Netflix doesn't want to support Linux, it's that the content providers for Netflix don't want them to support a system where they can't control what happens with the stream.

Re:Menu 'dimensioniality' aside (1)

jedidiah (1196) | 1 year,26 days | (#43311635)

That's nonsense.

Linux is no less of a "closed system" than Windows or MacOS is yet those platforms support Netflix. Anyone can run a debugger or a memory monitor on those platforms and start chipping away at Netflix and their little stronghold.

A proprietary binary enforces the DRM. Doesn't matter if you are talking about Netflix or Amazon. Doesn't matter what platform you are talking about.

Linux happily plays protected Amazon streams and no one in Seattle gets their panties in a bunch over it.

Ironically enough, the situation is reversed with Amazon. My Linux desktop plays stuff just fine but my Android devices aren't supported/blessed with suitable apps.

Re:Menu 'dimensioniality' aside (1)

realityimpaired (1668397) | 1 year,26 days | (#43311979)

A proprietary binary enforces the DRM.

How would they distribute that proprietary binary on a Linux system, when they need to compile against different versions of different libraries that may or may not be installed on your system, and may or may not still exist next week when you update your system? Do you suggest they statically compile all of the libs and dependencies they need into the binary itself?

Short of coming up with their own Linux distro specifically for the purpose, they have decided that there's no way they can distribute a proprietary binary for what they're doing. For better or for worse, they've gone with Flash on Apple, and Silverlight on MS Win to provide the functionality, rather than building their own app for it. You may think it's a cop-out, but it's still the decision they've made. And they've said many times now that the reason they made that decision is that it's too difficult to control the environment on a Linux system, and their content providers are requiring them to exert that kind of control. There's nothing stopping you from running netcat on another system on your network to capture the stream, and then brute-forcing the encryption either, but that's an extreme case that most of us won't bother to do.

The GP asked why there were Linux systems like embedded TV's and DVD players that can run Linux. If you don't like the answer given, then provide a counter-explanation.

Re:Menu 'dimensioniality' aside (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43314843)

Do you suggest they statically compile all of the libs and dependencies they need into the binary itself?

Yes. Exactly that. Most Windows programs include dll dependencies in their installation folder, what is the problem with statically compiling a binary to solve dependency issues on Linux?

Although, I think you can run Netflix under Wine now. So since it is possible to run Netflix on Linux, there is no good reason not to provide a proper Linux binary (which obviously already exists for the Roku). The excuse that it is too difficult to control the environment on Linux is bullshit, because you can't really control the environment on Windows or OSX either.

Re:Menu 'dimensioniality' aside (1)

prestonmichaelh (773400) | 1 year,26 days | (#43312601)

This actually works really well:

http://how-to.wikia.com/wiki/How_to_watch_Netflix_(Watch_Instantly)_in_Linux [wikia.com] It uses WINE, but the ppa sets everything up for you (if you are using Ubuntu). For things like TVs and Rokus, they have special, non-silverlight DRM built in that Netflix has specified. The problem with making truly native Linux client is that, like most things for Linux, the market share isn't there to make it cost effective.

Now if they could just publish a STANDARD (2)

argStyopa (232550) | 1 year,26 days | (#43310855)

Now if Roku would just accept/publish a standard so my universal remote - that controls EVERYTHING else in my a/v cabinet - can also take over from the forlorn little retarded Roku remote that I daren't possibly lose.*

*ok that's an exaggeration, I found an app for my android that lets me control it in a pinch, or when I want to piss off whoever's watching TV. I do wish it had a "here's what's being watched" scroll though.

harmony remote works fine with roku (2)

Chirs (87576) | 1 year,26 days | (#43311317)

Not sure what remote you're using, but my Harmony works fine. If it's not in the database can you have your universal remote learn from the Roku remote?

Re:Now if they could just publish a STANDARD (1)

jedidiah (1196) | 1 year,26 days | (#43311657)

It's like 5 buttons. What's to publish?

Reverse engineer that trivial number of buttons and publish that on the web for anyone to use (and integrate into their $10 remotes).

If companies are interested in supporting it, it's pretty trivial if they have any interest in at all. Clearly your bargain bin IR remote vendors can't be bothered.

Re:Now if they could just publish a STANDARD (2)

uncanny (954868) | 1 year,26 days | (#43311945)

I think some ROKU's remotes operate over RF , not IR. Most universal remotes dont do RF

Re:Now if they could just publish a STANDARD (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43313611)

Well, you'd be wrong. Thanks for contributing!

Re:Now if they could just publish a STANDARD (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,26 days | (#43315389)

He's not wrong at all I just got a Roku a few weeks ago (2XS? says XS on top, but Roku 2 on bottom) and it definitely does not use IR, so some sort of RF (unless it's magic).

The only thing that pissed me off about setup was they wanted a credit card and since I don't intend to pay for anything through it, I didn't want to.

Re:Now if they could just publish a STANDARD (1)

argStyopa (232550) | 1 year,24 days | (#43327421)

FWIW you can just give them a fake number with wrong data, it doesn't confirm the details unless/until you try to buy something.

Oh great, an "update" (1)

neminem (561346) | 1 year,26 days | (#43311409)

We have a a semi-old Roku box. It generally works great, but I've noticed half the time their "updates" break things horribly and we have to wait for another "update" to fix whatever they broke.

Still, if it works, I'll be happy enough. It is a pretty mediocre UI at the moment.

Biggest question... (0)

Lumpy (12016) | 1 year,26 days | (#43311711)

Is it still smeared all over with Advertisements? It's the one reason I left the Roku for the apple TV. Roku was great until they got greedy and started slathering the thing in adverts.

Re:Biggest question... (2)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | 1 year,26 days | (#43316251)

Mine has one banner ad at the bottom of the Roku main menu which advertises some show or service from one of the channels. Is that what you mean by slathering and smearing, or do you get something different?

What I really want... (1)

hiro45 (541604) | 1 year,26 days | (#43314289)

is for Roku to go back to allowing you to access Netflix without having an account with Roku. When I bought my Roku years and years ago I just wanted a simple Netflix streaming device. Recently I was forced to do a hard reset and firmware update and now they require you to have an account with Roku and the account is tied to an email address and if you don't jump through hoops a credit card as well. Just what I need another company to track my viewing habits :(
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...