It does feel like antiquated tech but what streaming service uses even 50+mbps streaming? The services I know of (apple, Netflix, Disney) all max out around 30mbps.
But could the decoder keep up? Decoders come in a variety of sizes and I doubt they’d pay the extra cost to put a 120Mbps decoder in the device when no streaming services require it.
It’s appropriate for the device’s functionality. 4K HDR is at most 40Mbps. If the device supported large local storage and offline playback, you’d have a point. But given the device’s use case as a streaming client, I doubt you’d be able to find any workload that gets close to saturating the network. Even if you could find a content source that was higher than 100Mbps, it’s unlikely the decoder would be able to keep up.
Bluray rips can be 80mbps+ but I’ve never had trouble streaming them on any device including roku. Important to remember that the bitrate is an average so some scenes will be well above the advertised bitrate.
Yes but that’s why the network and decoder are buffered. It’s also why most content is constrained at encode time to target both an average bitrate and a peak bitrate. A 200% constraint is typical, so you shouldn’t find 4K HDR in the wild at over 80Mbps peak bitrate.
The buffers on streaming devices are much smaller on these devices because of how cost reduced they are. You’re way overselling how large they are.
Also, 80mbps is actually a pretty common avg bitrate on 4kuhd blurays. You have 100gb of disk to play with and they generally want to use it as much as possible.
Been watching a load of old crap on them recently. Stuff like Timecop. It’s like discovering an old world that the regular streaming services forgot.
“Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem.” said Father Gabe years ago. And he’s right. If there was one legit service that had all this stuff, all you can eat streaming, for like £30 a month, all in as high quality as they made it, surround sound and all the trimming, I’d pay it.
They took a gamble and tried to play the streaming game - and lost
Did any of y’all Roku owners buy their device for the purpose of their streaming content? I know I didn’t - I bought it because of the promise of an excellent UI to organize all of my other already-existing-and-too-many services in an easy streamlined interface even my dad could use.
Yeah. Their expenses to try and add streaming was a waste. Plex did much of the same.
I bought Roku for the set top box replacement. They should continue to focus on that, though there really isnt too much more to do there either. They gotta innovate somehow i suppose and that means taking risk.
I will say they keep adding that goddam roku streaming channel to my list. I have exact an even number of lines of apps. It keeps throwing it off and its annoying.
“That big meanie is trying to make us admit to the fact that not only are we not doing anything to combat hate and lies, we’re actively and purposely spreading as much of both as we can! So unfair! 😭”
“If @X has nothing to hide, then they should have no objection to this bill,” Assemblyman Jesse Gabriel, who wrote AB 587, said in response to X’s lawsuit.”
The government breaks out absolute worst argument they could
There’s nothing intrusive about asking for transparency from companies doing a piss poor job limiting the spread of hate and lies while claiming that their efforts are herculean in effort as well as effectiveness.
What is precisely unlimited about this? Should companies be able to keep whatever they want behind the curtain and we aren’t allowed to ask what it is?
You said that government business is whatever the government passes laws about, which literally gives the government unlimited justification to do anything and everything because, by definition, it’s the proper business of government under that standard.
It’s the job of the government to inspect and regulate businesses and this is a reasonable and frankly way overdue example of them doing exactly that. Nothing unreasonable about it and calling it unlimited intrusion or whatever makes you look like the dumbest of libertarians, which is REALLY saying something.
No, it isn’t the purpose of government to just make demands of private businesses. It’s absolutely unreasonable for the government to do so with intent to censor
The fact the you bring up shit like “stochastic terrorism” just proves my point. I see no further reason to engage since you’re clearly off the deep end
How does asking to see how they moderate their content behind closed doors terminating basic rights? Can you describe which right they’re terminating here?
Governments make demands of private businesses all the time with things like workers rights, safety regulations, emissions standards, etc. We don’t live in a libertarian no holds barred corporate wonderland and we’re better for it as these businesses have long proved they can’t be trusted if left to their own devices.
It’s not “private shit it has no business asking for”, it’s proof that social media platforms are upholding the special duties that come with the special privileges being the “public square” of the internet.
Yeah there is. It’s called public safety. The January 6th attempted coup was (poorly, but still) planned on Twitter, Facebook and Parler. If those three had been better moderated when it comes to hate speech and misinformation, the 9 people who died as a result of it would probably be alive today.
Lmao Jesus, if one pointless riot is your reasoning that everyone should be monitored and censored, you just simply don’t believe in basic rights. Also nice falsely inflated death count. 1=/=9
Yes there is, you can go to Speakers Corner, a literal public square, and talk about all kinds of nonsense, but if you bust out the Nazi regalia you’ll be shut down quick sharp by the old bill.
Also because they’re fond of pretending that if something they’re doing isn’t expressly forbidden in the constitution, that means it’s VIRTUOUS and must be protected at all costs!
On the other hand, anything that their opponents do that isn’t expressly MANDATED by the constitution is villainy most foul and must be outlawed and penalised with at least a decade of enslavement that is highly lucrative to the owner donors imprisonment
I call it X/Twitter/whatever just to add some frustration and negative sentiment to the branding in my own circles. A reminder that the platform’s been poisoned and it isn’t what people should be using.
engadget.com
Oldest