Slashdot Mirror
Inside the Tech of the Roku Netflix Player
MojoKid writes "A little over a week ago Netflix unveiled the Netflix Player, developed by the team at Roku, a set-top box for watching on-demand movies and TV. This interview with Tim Twerdahl, the VP of Consumer Products for Roku, goes into some detail about the guts of the box and the future of the set-top box. Of course the system runs an embedded Linux OS, but interestingly also runs on a Nexperia (Philips) media processor."
Wow, that was one of the most in-depth interviews I've ever read. They go really into the details of what makes it run and how the system works. Well worth the read!
This guy's the limit!
My only complaint is that I don't want tons of different boxes. That is part of the reason I stayed away from Tivo and waited for my cable provider to offer DVR in my cable box. I already have on demand movies and TV through my cable box.
I'm not sure why I should purchase a second box to add functionality I already have, despite the fact that this box would presumably offer a much larger library of content.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
Roku: Third, we've heard feedback from home theater purists who said that they don't want to hear fan noise.
HotHardware: Is that right?
Tim: Yep. Quite a few people don't want to hear the hum of a fan in the background while watching TV.
So the obvious question is, where do I get the source code?
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
It's not exactly what you'd call "inside" the tech of the box, here's all you learn:
*It uses a custom-built linux (of which no details are given)
*It has flash memory inside it
*It has an NXP processor
The summary actually contains more technical details about the box than the article itself, purely because it mentions that the NXP is made by Philips.
I know it's Sunday and all, but come on, try harder.
+1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
jdb2
I'm tempted by one of these, being a Netflix subscriber who doesn't use the streaming service at all (I use Linux and Mac OS X). Since this thing runs Linux, I suspect that Netflix is offering their videos in a different form than the normal desktop version, perhaps even without DRM. It's my understanding that the reason there is no Mac client is because the MS-designed codec/DRM is not available for OS X.
It's also tempting to get one of these for these for what the future might bring. Netflix could up their quality and this device is supposed to theoretically do up to 720p. It doesn't seem unreasonable for them to implement streaming from local sources (especially things like music). Still, I don't want to buy a device and end up disappointed when they don't do anything with the feature set. I've been burned by that before, with an iriver mp3 player a few years back that was supposed to add ID3 database capability to a firmware update. It never came.
The one thing you probably can be guaranteed of is more movies from Netflix. It'd be interesting to know which movies/shows they've tried but have been unable to get the digital rights for. The rate of growth of the movie database will have to slow at some point; let's hope it's not anytime soon.
Before I get this, I need to hook up a Windows computer to my internet connection and see whether I get the "best" video quality from my DSL. The complaints I've seen about Netflix video quality are often due to people not being able to sustain the highest quality download. Since we already seem to be right around the max of DSL/cable modem speeds to get in the realm of DVD 480p quality, any HD movies will likely need some serious caching capability or really nasty compression. I'd rather have low-compression 480p than high-compression 720p, but that's because I don't have an HDTV.
It's too bad the cable and phone companies are competing in the streaming movie segment; it'd be nice to have Netflix mirrors sitting at my ISP, but that doesn't seem too likely. It's also unfortunate that without some sort of net neutrality agreement, my ISP could make Netflix streaming all but useless quite easily.
Still, for $99, it shouldn't be too hard to get your money's worth. They certainly priced it right.
"The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
I'd rather see real competition in network service than some kind of BS regulation for monopoly service. It's fine to require neutrality out of companies that use public servitude lines but it's not OK to limit access to that servitude. A better solution will be open spectrum.
The details of the box are going to be what you expect. A tivo like mix of free and non free code that GPL 3 is designed to bust. I want one of these things like I want a tivo or a paperweight.
Netflix's current streaming video service (on the watch instantly tab) is basically useless to a lot of people because it only works under IE, thereby meaning windows only.
The advent of this technology holds out hope that someday Netflix might also actually support the rest of us customers who would like to watch streaming stuff but aren't using IE and/or Windows.
I beg to differ. I am a *very* happy Netflix subscriber and the catalog of films for instant viewing is *huge*. You probably don't get to see all offerings until you subscribe and have access to the browsing interface. Not only is it ready for prime time, it is raising the bar. (The flaw is that Windows is required to view the instant titles.)
Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
Well, call it a hunch, but we're talking about Linux on a "new" CPU and on custom hardware, including no hard drive, flash memory, and special data in and video out circuitry. I suspect there may be a few changes to "standard" Linux. And just as Linksys had to do when they built routers that used GPL code, this project should be required to release the sources. And users shouldn't have to speculate if anything was changed or what was, it should be available as source. They may not want to do that, but it's the price that they agreed to when they chose to build on GPL code rather than go the much more complex route of completely building their own from scratch.
This little Linux box with it's special video hardware could be a very slick platform to build upon. I certainly hope that, if they don't release the sources on their own (and I rather expect that they just might not play nice), they should be made to do so.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Intel DG45FC, full HD support, HDMI (unknown if that includes audio), integrated 7.1 audio, Gigabit, SATA, load of USB. Diskless and cache to RAM with standard DDR2 up to 4GB. Fully assembled would likely be under $300 and put the Roku to flying shame. If their media player is anything like their music player be prepared for disappointment. AppleTV is probably better. FWIW, this post not intended as a troll. I'm speaking as someone who has owned both an HD1000 and M1001.
I don't usually buy something when it first appears but in this case I made an exception. I ordered my ROKU on the day it became available and I received it yesterday (Saturday).
My first impression was positive. The unit is much smaller than I was expecting it to be and it can connect to just about anything. The one shortcoming I found is that the unit ships with only minimal cabling. There was no ethernet cable, s-video cable, or hdmi cable included. The only cable provided (besides the power supply) is a 3-pair RCA composite video/analog stereo sound cable. The unit can use WiFi or hard-wired ethernet and I prefer to use hard-wired when possible. Fortunately I had a cable handy and it took me less than 5 minutes to get the hardware set up.
The unit defaults to DHCP so it had no trouble configuring itself to work on my network. The first thing the unit did was to download a software update and restart. I've got a 15 megabit symetrical fiber connection for my Internet service so this went pretty fast. The picture quality is surpurb and the sound is excellent. The unit takes about 3 seconds to buffer content before it will play and it displays a progress meter while buffering. The user interface is simple and easy to navigate. My only complaint at this point is that you cannot browse all the available content from the TV. With one exception, you must log into your Netflix account via the web and add "watch now" selections to your queue. I'm going to complain about this and I fully expect a future software update to address this shortcoming. The exception mentioned above relates to content with multiple episodes. The unit will allow you to browse and view additional episodes (if any) of the shows in your queue.
All in all this is a cool gadget and definately worth the one hundred dollar price.
--
This space for rent
Assuming you're not trolling, it depends.
Amazon is required to post the source code to their GPL'ed components; this would include the Linux kernel and any modifications they made to it.
However, using a GPL'ed kernel with non-GPL'ed userland is totally fine in most cases. (see http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#PortProgramToGL). Assuming you meant more than just the Kindle's now kinda-rickety-looking 2.6.10 kernel (Source: Wikipedia), which looks like it was uploaded in 2004 when you said "Kindle's code", you're probably SOL. I don't know what Kindle's userland looks like but I'd be surprised if the interesting parts were GPL.