Slashdot Mirror


Google Is Pulling YouTube Off the Fire TV and Echo Show as Feud With Amazon Grows (theverge.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: Three months ago, YouTube pulled its programming from Amazon's Echo Show device -- the first skirmish in what is apparently an ongoing war. Shortly after, Amazon stopped selling the Nest E Thermostat, Nest's Camera IQ, and the Nest Secure alarm system. Two weeks ago, Amazon got YouTube back on the Echo Show by simply directing users to the web version, a workaround that left a lot to be desired. But even that version won't be available after today. In a statement, Google said it has been trying to reach an agreement with Amazon to provide customers with access to each other's products and services. But, Google said, Amazon doesn't carry Google products like Chromecast and Google Home, doesn't make Prime Video available for Google Cast users, and last month stopped selling some of Nest's latest products. "Given this lack of reciprocity, we are no longer supporting YouTube on Echo Show and FireTV. We hope we can reach an agreement to resolve these issues soon."

238 comments

  1. And as usual by jordanjay29 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the only people really hurt are the consumers caught in the middle.

    1. Re:And as usual by cayenne8 · · Score: 0
      Ouch..yeah, this will hurt.

      I use Amazon FireTV's as my streaming since I cut the cable cord. And I find that I often do watch a good bit of YouTube on there.....

      Isn't Chrome just a free browser? Why would Google want Amazon to "sell" that? Not sure what a chrome cast is....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:And as usual by Albanach · · Score: 3, Informative

      I agree, though in this instance it does look like Amazon started it.

      There's no good reason for Amazon not to sell things like Chromecasts or Google Home devices other than they don't want to concede any market-share to Google. To then want Google services on their own devices is a bit rich.

      The consumer wins when there's competition. A marketplace for smart devices that doesn't end up with 95% being Echos, or 95% being homes is one that will spur innovation. It's also one that will give greater incentive for security and privacy. If/when there's a hugely dominant vendor, all incentives to improve are gone and all we're left with is how to monetize the users.

    3. Re: And as usual by c6gunner · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A Chromecast is the google equivalent of your fire stick thingy.

      I have a Chromecast, and I have Amazon prime. But I never actually watch anything on Prime Video because their damn app won't cast to the Chromecast.

    4. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      they aren't caught in the middle, they are the "invisible hand" that will determine winners and losers in the marketplace based on their relative merits.

    5. Re:And as usual by Albanach · · Score: 1

      Isn't Chrome just a free browser? Why would Google want Amazon to "sell" that? Not sure what a chrome cast is....

      Google want Amazon to sell their Chromecast which allows users to stream video/audio to televisions/speakers. A bit like the Fire Stick, but without any build-in applications. You "cast' from your phone/laptop and, under typical use, once cast it no longer requires any input from that device.

    6. Re:And as usual by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I dunno, there might be some entertainment value.

      Fight! Fight! Fight!

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    7. Re:And as usual by jordanjay29 · · Score: 2

      Chromecast is a streaming device that 'casts' media from a phone, tablet or computer to play on your TV (there's also an audio version that does the same for music on speakers). It's a barebones competitor to FireTV, Roku, AppleTV, etc.

    8. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chromecast is the same as the Firestick. It's just another device to connect to your TV to stream stuff. In this battle between Apple, Google and Amazon, you either have to pick a side and choose to not get one of those services (go with Chromecast and not get any Apple or Amazon love for example) or get multiple devices.

      I have Roku and Chromecast for my needs and it works out great.

      The only winners in this war is Google, Apple and Amazon. The consumers are, as usual, fucked in the ass without the benefit of at least getting a lube job.

    9. Re:And as usual by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      It appears that Google and Amazon haven't learned to compartmentalize their businesses yet.
      Just look at Apple and Samsung for example. Apple is Samsung #1 competitor and one of their major customers at the same time. Because their Smart Phone Market is in competition, but Apple buys their components.

      Amazon and Google can Complete against each other while at the same time sell each others services and work with them.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    10. Re:And as usual by jordanjay29 · · Score: 1

      Sort of, those who have bought into the Amazon ecosystem (with FireTV or the Echo Show) are the ones now stuck without YouTube on their preferred streaming device. To ask those customers to abandon the entire device for one app, even one as prolific as YouTube, is a pretty high bar to set, and may not be financially viable depending on the amount of investments one has made into Amazon's media library (if you own a lot of digital shows through Amazon, for example). All things being equal, yes, consumers do pick the winners and losers, but these companies are trying very hard to make the playing field unequal.

    11. Re: And as usual by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have a Chromecast, and I have Amazon prime. But I never actually watch anything on Prime Video because their damn app won't cast to the Chromecast.

      Oh man, don't get me started on the Amazon Prime Video app. I use a Roku, and the app for Amazon Prime Video is one of the worst interfaces I have ever seen for any application on any platform. It doesn't respond to most keypresses, the pause and fast forward are broken, it crashes the Roku at least once a week and you have to set subtitles separately for each episode of a show you watch. Further, if you press the key to select subtitles, or rewind, it takes the app about 10-15 seconds (I'm not kidding) to respond. The Netflix app, and the other video apps I have tried, do not have this problem.

      Maybe it's just an effort to get people to buy it's own dongle, but you would think Amazon would be better off pulling its application off the Roku platform than letting this represent their company. Even if I wanted to buy a Fire, I have no reason to believe the Amazon Prime Video app runs any better on that device.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    12. Re: And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Compartments... isn't that the oposite of "synergy" in the 90's buzzword sense?

    13. Re:And as usual by e3m4n · · Score: 1

      For two years I was denied access of my Ultraviolet collection on the FireTV because Vudo wasnt allowed on the FireTV and eventually Flixster (streaming in SD) was removed from the lineup as well. It wasn't until October, when Disney's Movies Anywhere ecosystem took off and I can now see my entire digital movies collection with their app (and amazingly enough it also shows up in my amazon video library too). So I don't think they care about disrupting anyone's ecosystem. Now I find myself; once again, turning to my PS4 for certain aspects of video content, atleast for this TV. The smaller tv has a roku ultra.

    14. Re:And as usual by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      Hmm..so, it is like a FireTV stick, but you use your phone as a remote with the chromecast thing...?

      I ended up getting the FireTV boxes....the sticks just weren't powerful enough.

      I mostly get my "cable channels" thought Playstation VUE, and on older Roku, or firesticks, they just couldn't seem to handle the guide that PS VUE has for scanning channel guide and seeing what all is one for hours, etc.

      I couldn't imagine that the chrome stick would be a powerful enough processor....

      But yeah, I can't see why Amazon wouldn't sell the chrome stick too....

      I also like the Fire TV unit because it can handle 4K and HDR tv too....those little sticks don't seem to have enough horsepower in them yet.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    15. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what happens when corporations fight. Peon humans get squashed.

    16. Re:And as usual by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      ive always prefered the roku over the firestick myself. been a couple years since ive messed with a firestick so not sure (other than kodi) what im missing these days with it over the roku but being a hardware maker only, i dont anticipate these kinds of issues with the roku

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    17. Re: And as usual by cayenne8 · · Score: 2

      Oh man, don't get me started on the Amazon Prime Video app. I use a Roku, and the app for Amazon Prime Video is one of the worst interfaces I have ever seen for any application on any platform. It doesn't respond to most keypresses, the pause and fast forward are broken, it crashes the Roku at least once a week and you have to set subtitles separately for each episode of a show you watch. Further, if you press the key to select subtitles, or rewind, it takes the app about 10-15 seconds (I'm not kidding) to respond. The Netflix app, and the other video apps I have tried, do not have this problem.

      You might need to buy a newer Roku....I saw those type problems you described back on an older Roku 3 model..but the newer ones seem to run Amazon prime and Playstation VUE speedily enough....

      Although I have to sat, the FireTV boxes (not sticks) really seem to out perform the Rokus overall from my experience.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    18. Re: And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why we should all support kodi or mythtv or any of the myriad of other free software players. The big players removing their competitors apps is way beyond even the PMS bitchy level. Google and Amazon need a smackdown.

      Also apps to make your app appy suck. Just rebirth sane browsers

    19. Re:And as usual by sjames · · Score: 1

      This is exactly the kind of nonsense with "packages" that got people wanting to cut the cord in the first place. This show is only in the FireTV package, but that one is only in the Chromecast package. Soon, your TV looks like a porcupine with all those things sticking out of it.

    20. Re: And as usual by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      It's hit and miss; my mother has one of those set-top android boxes, so I installed the Prime Video app on it for her with my credentials. Seems to work just fine that way; she gets plenty of use out of it, so at least one of us gets to enjoy it.

      Maybe it's just the casting on it that's problematic.

    21. Re:And as usual by gnick · · Score: 1

      it is like a FireTV stick, but you use your phone as a remote with the chromecast thing...?

      Yes. When paired with Plex, it's a good way to watch downloaded video.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    22. Re: And as usual by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

      You might need to buy a newer Roku....I saw those type problems you described back on an older Roku 3 model.

      I have a Roku 4 HD. All the other video apps work fine. What's wrong with Amazon. Also, it's not the hardware's problem that Amazon doesn't retain my subtitle settings from episode to episode in the same show.

      But I will try resetting my Roku again to see if I can get it performing better. Since yesterday, it no longer shows any of the thumbnails in the Amazon Prime app.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    23. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, though in this instance it does look like Amazon started it.

      This isn't a school playground, Google need to grow the fuck up.

      Intentionally disabling your services on a competitors device is a dickweed move, and probably hurts Google in the long term too. How many affected consumers will be willing to purchase anything from a Google owned company after this short sighted, childish move ?

      Then again, Nest already have form for fucking over their own customers, I'm not suprised they didn't think twice doing the same to someone elses.

    24. Re:And as usual by infolation · · Score: 1

      They're not going far enough with the Amazon Echo/Google Home/Apple HomePod.

      I keep reading about the advances in autonomous weapons platforms, and how the world's going to be over-run by swarms of 'killer robots', yet even with the resources of Google and Amazon, their idea of a turf war is 'directing users to the web version'.

      Man-up guys, I want to see the home entertainment system equivalent of Robot Wars, right in my front room. Partner with DARPA, weaponize those babys up, give them some tank-tracks, and let's see Amazon and Google really duke it out for prime real-estate in the consumer's house.

    25. Re:And as usual by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

      I don't know if Amazon started it but the war started much earlier than the recent spat. The Amazon Prime Video app works fine on any Android device that ISN'T Android TV. The app refuses to run on Android TV even if you sideload it. Most apps that aren't available for the TV are because they aren't formatted for the screen size and will still load just fine. They'll just have a different resolution than the native TV. Amazon refuses to address support requests on these devices. The app also does not include casting ability so the chromecast is out as well.

      --
      "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
    26. Re:And as usual by kqs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Intentionally disabling your services on a competitors device is a dickweed move, and probably hurts Google in the long term too. How many affected consumers will be willing to purchase anything from a Google owned company after this short sighted, childish move ?

      So, you are unhappy that Google will not allow Amazon devices to use Youtube, but you have no complaints that for the last several years, Amazon has not allowed Prime Video to be viewed on Chromecasts and has not sold any Chromecasts or Nests? That's rather one-sided of you.

      "Intentionally disabling your services on a competitors device" is EXACTLY what Amazon has been doing for multiple years, but you only have a problem when Google does it?

    27. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The phone doesn't even act like a remote, all of the selecting content and navigation is done on the phone. The phone literally just tells the Chromecast to "Play this Netflix Video" and the Chromecast does the video streaming. No issues with menues because they're all on the phone. The Chromecast Ultra can handle 4k and HDR. Ultra is $70, the regular is $35, so they are very good entry-level streaming boxes. There is also one that does audio-only streaming to a stereo system, which I find much more useful.

      Using the phone as a remote gets tiring fast for video content, but it's not that bad for audio.

    28. Re:And as usual by Kaenneth · · Score: 2

      It sounds like Amazon is abusing their dominant market position in one market to lock out competitors in another.

      Blocking Youtube is the nice way, complaints to EU/US government would cost Amazon a LOT more.

    29. Re:And as usual by timmyf2371 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hmm..so, it is like a FireTV stick, but you use your phone as a remote with the chromecast thing...?

      The Chromecast offers a significantly inferior user experience (in my opinion) when compared to the FireTV stick.

      When you control your FireTV stick with the remote control, you're navigating a UI and have full control. You might even find that your TV remote can control actions such as pause, play, next and back.

      With the Chromecast, there is no UI and there is no remote control. You use compatible apps on your phone/tablet, such as YouTube/Netflix etc, to find content. Then you press a button to 'cast' to the Chromecast, which launches the specific stream you've asked it to play.

      As there is no remote control, pausing a Chromecast stream typically involves opening the app on your phone/tablet, reconnecting to the Chromecast, and then pausing it.

      We've found the Chromecast to be useful for quick streams like YouTube, but we use our FireTV stick for the children's shows (and Kodi for the stuff we download).

      --

      Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
    30. Re:And as usual by darkmeridian · · Score: 2

      Sure, but Amazon is bullshit. Get on that website, search for a Google Home, and they offer to sell you an Alexa.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    31. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have both, current gen models of Roku and Fire TV. The interface on the Fire TV is much nicer, some flash and polish make it more enjoyable to use (it is somewhat similar to the updated Netflix interface you can get on Roku, but you can disable video and audio autoplay), and performance seems better. Amazon is also better about pushing their own content in front of everyone else than they used to be.

      Roku has much more media sources and is good about giving them equal value though. Vudu is not on the Fire TV, nor is Fandango or Google Play Movies. Fire TV does have the Movies Anywhere app, but rentals are sorely missing. Roku is showing hints of trying to move into the streaming space, beginning with the Roku channel they've recently added.

    32. Re:And as usual by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      I've got plex on my FireTV box...works pretty good, I hook to my friend's Plex server for some things.

      I'm wanting to figure how to build my own Linux Plex server, but I only really want it to keep my high end FLAC rips so I can stream lossless audio to my living room stereo.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    33. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      don't give them the money: buy a NAS instead and pirate^H^H^H^H^H^Hurchase everything. Then you can watch it even after Netflix loses license or Disney throws a hissy or Amazon removes your purchased content or...

    34. Re:And as usual by DickBreath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Get a Roku. It gets YouTube. It gets Amazon Prime. It gets HBO, Starz, Hulu, etc. Anything you have a subscription to already.

      Roku is the perfect example of a content delivery platform that is NOT compromised by also being a content provider. It is also why we need Net Neutrality. If ISPs can also be content providers, this whole Amazon-Google spat will affect everything you ever want to see based on who your ISP is.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    35. Re: And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh man, you are right about that!!

      Now there's some monopoly abuse!

      We need more than network neutrality, we need the FTC and Sherman Act all over. Maga my ass.

    36. Re:And as usual by gnick · · Score: 1

      FireTV wasn't a thing when I got my Chromecast. I bought it on Amazon. I can't defend it against the alternatives; since it meets all my needs I've never looked further. I'm fortunate enough not no need lossless audio; I'm not good enough to tell the difference after I've compressed down to 192kbs.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    37. Re:And as usual by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      thanks for the updates! I went with roku initially because i didnt like the layout, glad to see they have worked on that

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    38. Re:And as usual by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      If Amazon puts prime on cast, I will benefit as a consumer though.

      It's not a no win situation.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    39. Re:And as usual by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I will say that I prefer the Chromecast for the same reasons you don't like it.

      Anyone in my house can cast whatever they want (except Amazon Prime) just by finding it on their phone and pressing a button. There is no remote to lose at all.

      Play pause is available as an ongoing status on my phone (though controls beyond that generally require launching the app and reconnecting).

      The killer feature to me for the Chromecast is that I and the people I know have remotes and don't need to browse an unfamiliar interface.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    40. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't know about it. Who would use Chromecast? Especially when you can get a FireTV stick for peanuts.

      Besides, it's not as if Amazon is singling out Chromecast for exclusion, which is what Google is doing with YouTube. I'm sure there is a smart toilet seat that lets you watch YouTube while you take a leak.

    41. Re:And as usual by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      I *love* my chromecast's
      Every HDMI enabled device has one in my house.
      Ultimately I caved and bought a FireStick for Prime video because I couldn't cast Prime to Chromecast. I felt dirty doing it because I knew I was enabling this petty-assed war, but damnit I wanted to see GT on my TV easily.

      All that said, Amazon started this feud, and hopefully Google prevails. I honestly believe that Google should allow Youtube to FireTV devices, but set all the ads to unskippable *and* make sure there is a 15 second ad about Amazon blocking Prime Video on Chromecasts and not selling google products in every single video. Petty as fuck, but it would be absolutely hilarious. "Want these ads to stop? Use your Prime account to tell Amazon to quit blocking Prime video on Chromecast and to stock them in the store".

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    42. Re:And as usual by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      I get why you're calling it inferior, but I would argue it's such an orthogonal design that it isn't the same class.

      Chromecast offers what has to be the most minimalist interface possible. Dead simple, pretty darn reliable, and *very* feature light.

      FireTV devices offer a more STB type experience, and try to be feature rich.

      I like them both, depending on the user and desired interaction level. Expect lots of pause and resume? FireTV. Launch the stream and not planning on pausing, even if I need to do something else while it's playing? Chromecast.

      Additionally Chromecast is great for "projecting" my phone screen to show others my photos.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    43. Re: And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I originally became an Amazon Prime user so I could stream via KODI. The interface was excellent and highly usable. Amazon said, "fuck you, you're too happy." As such, they locked out KODI users.

      Amazon only provides shit interfaces to the prime service because they want to be able to cram bullshit advertising into your face while you consume the services for which you've already paid.

    44. Re:And as usual by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      Nice!, just looked and the only google home stuff is a book, some mounts, and a Google WiFi range extender.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    45. Re: And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ITT: the same companies that demand Comcast not be allowed to use Comcast's infrastructure to block access Comcast's competitors, use their own infrastructure to block access to their competitors.

    46. Re:And as usual by richpoore · · Score: 1

      Amazon has been singling out Google for a while, ever since they stopped selling the Chromecast. I have used a Chromecast and the cost is comparable to the FireTV stick which is why Amazon stopped selling it. Amazon did start the war. They still sell Apple TV, Roku and a bunch of off-brand Chromecast devices. Chromecast may have been the first cheap way to stream to your TV. It's always been ~$35. Google typically plays nice, but I see this as necessary since Google and Amazon may end up being the biggest tech companies on the block and Amazon has been excluding Google for a while.

    47. Re:And as usual by Xciton · · Score: 2

      Except if you are in Canada. We just got Prime Video a year ago. Amazon WILL NOT release a Roku app in Canada (it's not Roku, it's Amazon that provides the app). So, no Chromecast support, no Roku support. It seems Amazon doesn't want me to watch their service. Fine.

      I'm not buying a FireTV device.

      Not sure I can support Amazon Prime anymore.

    48. Re:And as usual by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      Same with Apple TV. Amazon mewls that Apple won't license it favorably, but never mind that they already have an app for iPhone and iPad and they're presumably OK with that (identical) licensing.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    49. Re:And as usual by Xciton · · Score: 1

      > Intentionally disabling your services on a competitors device is a dickweed move, and probably hurts Google
      > in the long term too. How many affected consumers will be willing to purchase anything from a Google owned
      > company after this short sighted, childish move ?

      Did you know Amazon refuses to release a Roku app for their Prime Video service in Canada? For over a year since they "rolled out" Amazon Prime video to Canadians? The US folk have an App, but not Canadians (and maybe many other regions? Dunno).

      Who's the dickweed again?

    50. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prime Video is not YouTube so it's not an apples to apples comparison. IMO, it's very short sighted of Google to limit distribution of YouTube since YouTube content creators come from everywhere, not just Google users or high-end production companies.

    51. Re:And as usual by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      FireTV has a web browser now - Silk. No, it's not a great browser, but it's good enough to view anything on youtube. Combine FireTV with a Bluetooth keyboard and you're in business. You don't need the youtube app at all. I wonder if Google even knows this.

      I use a Bluetooth keyboard/trackpad called the iPazzPort and it works great -- full qwerty keyboard, pretty good range, and all the buttons you'd ever want to play with.

    52. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amazon also only made Prime video available only for Kindle and iOS. Purposefully leaving all of Android behind, until recently

    53. Re: And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cast PrimeVideo from your computer in GoogleChrome or if you have Android phone, cast the whole screen, and then run Amazon Prime Video.

    54. Re:And as usual by FrankHaynes · · Score: 1

      I agree that the Roku is a good investment.

      But I'm secretly hoping that Amazon and Google both obliterate each other and take Facebook down with them. Then we can start fresh.

      --
      slashdot: A failed experiment.
    55. Re:And as usual by JThundley · · Score: 1

      You mean the people that can't figure out how to pirate?

    56. Re: And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess Iâ(TM)ll be going back to Apple TV! This is why I hate google / android. Stupid child like behavior!

    57. Re: And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. It'd be one thing if they cut off Play Movies. But YouTube is a decentralized platform and is going to hurt content creators as well as consumers.

    58. Re:And as usual by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      No consumers aren't harmed, because they'll just pick an ecosystem and that ecosystem is Google since Google's services are more important than Amazon's services.

      That's what Google did to Windows Phone. They blocked YouTube, Gmail and Google Maps so people who were otherwise interested in Windows Phone just switched back to Android.

      Amazon loses in this instance. Very few people care about prime video. Nearly everybody cares about YouTube. The consumers are fine because they won't buy an Echo Show, they'll buy a Google Home device. Consumers are "Fine" because they've been forced into a walled garden.

    59. Re: And as usual by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      I'm aware of those possibilities, but they're such horrible workarounds that I feel dirty just contemplating the idea. If Amazon is deliberately going to keep their service incompatible with Google products, I don't feel any great desire to use them. I can always just grab their content from torrent sites.

    60. Re: And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have roku2 XS and don't have any of these problems. Prime app works just fine. It may not have the best interface but it is very usable and stable.

    61. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, you are unhappy that Google will not allow Amazon devices to use Youtube, but you have no complaints that for the last several years, Amazon has not allowed Prime Video to be viewed on Chromecasts and has not sold any Chromecasts or Nests? That's rather one-sided of you.

      Less than 3 months now constitutes several years? And where did I say I supported Amazon's actions? I merely said Google's were bad, I made no mention of Amazon's, and your inference betrays your bias.

    62. Re:And as usual by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Cough, cough but if you are getting hurt being caught in the middle, simply step to one side and let the morons go at it, who cares. Amazon want to be dicks, simply stop using them. Google want to be control freaks than https://duckduckgo.com/?q=amaz... or https://duckduckgo.com/?q=ebay....

      The only sound consumer response, what to control freak dicks, fine, fuck off and use some one else. Sure maybe takes a little getting used to swapping to say https://duckduckgo.com/?q=duck... but it works well enough and you can escape Google's political bullshit. As for Amazon, simply use them as a shopping service and than fuck them over by buying direct, once you have found the product, remind the actual seller, they get to keep Amazons profit.

      Believe it or not, it will not cause you pain and suffering to stop using either Google or Amazon, just companies that abuse their customers, ohh and look at the spat and on display hypocrisy when they do it to each other, instead of us. So join their game and seek to fuck them over all of the time and see how they like it, it will hurt them way more than it hurts you ;).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    63. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a bit of both.

      It started with the android store and kindle books - Amazon didn't like the cut that google takes on digital purchases, so they wen't and built there own app store. Haven't played nice since.

    64. Re:And as usual by Vektuz · · Score: 1

      I've got KODI installed but yeah, this will hurt a lot. It doesn't make me hate amazon though. it makes me hate google.

    65. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've used a lot of streaming devices and prefer Roku to all of them. It has everything all in once place and allows me to search all of my channels from one easy to use interface. Fantastico!

    66. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To then want Google services on their own devices is a bit rich.

      A bit gay, I'd say

    67. Re:And as usual by nogginthenog · · Score: 1

      That's not correct. Chromecast is a streaming device that 'casts' media from a server (normally on the internet, but a local Plex server can be used for example). A phone, tablet or computer acts as the _remote_. You can mirror from a local device but the results are average at best.

    68. Re:And as usual by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Get a Roku. It gets YouTube. It gets Amazon Prime. It gets HBO, Starz, Hulu, etc. Anything you have a subscription to already.

      One thing I can't see, can it play network content from a NAS? The website seems to focus mainly on streaming aspects.

    69. Re:And as usual by andydread · · Score: 1

      THIS!! Amazon started this spat by dropping Chromecast devices from their store and refusing to support Chromecast in their App and making it difficult to get Amazon Prime Video on android devices. I had to install Amazon's app store in order to install Amazon Prime video. In order to watch Amazon Prime Video on my chromecast i have to mirror the screen of my device to the Chromecast. Obviously not the ideal solution but works well. Fuck Amazon...because of their hostility towards Chromecast I have stopped recommending Firestick to people.

    70. Re:And as usual by andydread · · Score: 1

      Amazon started this bullshit. Bitch at Amazon.

    71. Re: And as usual by Hodr · · Score: 1

      Maybe you have an old Roku? I have a Roku 4 and RokuTV at the moment and both run the Amazon Prime Video app fairly snappy. The real abominations are the new Hulu interface which is HORRID to do anything other than watch the latest episode of something. And the new style of the cable channel apps (the ones that need to be authorized with a cable account online, like HGTV) throw me into fits of rage.

    72. Re:And as usual by DrXym · · Score: 1
      Chromecast is Google's streaming device. Amazon stopped selling it when they developed their own equivalent device. Same for Amazon tablets, which are running a ripped off / forked version of Android tied to Amazon's own appstore ecosystem.

      So it's understandable why they might be close to war with each other.

    73. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Amazon Prime TV app works on the SHIELD Android TV box and Sony Android TVs.

      It's more that they have obviously signed agreements with certain OEMs and are not going to let it go outside of those.

    74. Re:And as usual by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      "Intentionally disabling your services on a competitors device" is EXACTLY what Amazon has been doing for multiple years, but you only have a problem when Google does it?

      Antitrust anyone?

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    75. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Amazon Prime Video app works fine on any Android device that ISN'T Android TV. The app refuses to run on Android TV even if you sideload it..

      Works fine on my Sony Android TV (1st gen "X1" processor).

    76. Re: And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      amazon sort of started this back in 2015 when they
      stopped selling both chromecast and appletv

    77. Re: And as usual by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      No individualism is the opposite of synergy.

      Synergy is when the outcome of a task is greater then what the sum of what anyone could do by themselves.
      For example if to do a job it take 5 people to do a job in 4 days, while it would take one person to do the job in 30 days, is considered synergy.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    78. Re:And as usual by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      You forgot Twitter. The joy is not complete unless Twitter also goes down in the destruction.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    79. Re:And as usual by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      Yes it can. Roku has "apps" called "channels". So I'll use Roku terminology. There is a Roku "channel" called something like "media player". (Sorry I don't have a Roku right in front of me right now.) The Media Player will play content from a USB plugin (I have not tried this) or from a network server.

      One thing to be very aware of, it does not support AC3 audio. (I think that is the one.) So I make all my content use mp3 audio along with the video. Otherwise, it plays very nicely. My router allows plugging in a USB hard drive and providing its contents as a DNLA server. RoKu's in the house can all play content from this.

      Hope that helps.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    80. Re:And as usual by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Many thanks. We were looking at this the other day as we were close to getting a Chromecast because Kodi is just taking forever to get Netflix support. But 2 weeks ago Amazon Prime came to the Netherlands, and put that idea on hold.

      And the smart TV's built in Netflix App is garbage (doesn't understand accounts), and so is the Prime app (crashes a lot, sometimes mid-movie).

    81. Re:And as usual by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      The RoKu definitely does understand Netflix sub accounts. Also Hulu recently got the same feature -- sub accounts. So that Hulu can track individual viewer's habits and preferences, and this works on the RoKu.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    82. Re: And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Android had prime video since at least 2011, Google shill...

    83. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it is annoying - you need to do a bunch of crap to get the google framework installed on fire devices which is dumb since it is an android tablet - if you are going to go and use the android OS you might as well let people use their pre existing libraries and the framework and actually try to compete with those stores rather than trying to lock the other out. You could even have app price comparisons, movies, etc and compete rather than turning people off of the tablets and buying a totally different device and getting zero revenue from hardware or app/media sales and subscriptions.

    84. Re:And as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But, but, but ...

      Amazon loves its customers. I know cause they say so: https://www.amazon.jobs/principles

    85. Re: And as usual by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      Amazon's services are generally pretty good, but their software sucks. I tried installing Tidal the other day on my tablet, and after I did, the regular Amazon Music player got really stuttery. Around that time Tidal crashed (why was it even running, I hadn't launched it), so I uninstalled it. Amazon Music went right back to working again. Their software is very buggy, and the Amazon Music app for Windows is horribly designed. I'm not surprised with the stories you're telling.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    86. Re: And as usual by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      This is what the content providers don't seem to understand. The pirate sites provide much better service than what you get for paying for the content. I don't use them myself, and I don't condone it, but when paying for something gives you less value and more hassle than torrenting it, you can expect more and more people will do that.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  2. There's a difference.. by nightfire-unique · · Score: 1

    .. between not supporting and actively blocking. If Google intentionally changed their code specifically to block Amazon's hardware, that is not okay.

    --
    A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
    1. Re: There's a difference.. by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 2

      Remember that this began with Amazon banning the sale of hardware devices that competed with its own products, including Apple TV.

    2. Re: There's a difference.. by jordanjay29 · · Score: 1

      They still sell Roku, though. Kind of bewildering that Roku makes the cut and not AppleTV or Chromecast.

    3. Re: There's a difference.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure if the reasoning is legit, but Amazon said they refused to sell it because Apple refused to allow them to put the Amazon Video app on the Apple TV and feared the users would be confused because it didn't support Amazon.

    4. Re: There's a difference.. by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Until recently Roku didn't sell content, it was 100% neutral. Even now, the only content it "sells" it does in ad-subsidized form. So from Amazon's point of view, it's no more a competitor than Dell, a seller of computers that can run web browsers, is.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    5. Re:There's a difference.. by ThePawArmy · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing thats exactly what they did.

    6. Re: There's a difference.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They still sell Roku, though. Kind of bewildering that Roku makes the cut and not AppleTV or Chromecast.

      Not really, follow the money.. This is about money (and who gets the cut).

      Google and Apple and Amazon all typically require a cut of any item (including content) purchased via their store. No one is willing to reduce their cut and no one wants to see increase prices for specific platforms.

      Roku, on the other hand, simply sells the hardware, and lets those companies price their product and content as they wish.

    7. Re: There's a difference.. by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      Remember that this began with Amazon banning the sale of hardware devices that competed with its own products, including Apple TV.

      Too bad YouTube is a separate entity (YouTube LLC) that does not sell hardware products. It's almost as if this is an antitrust violating "contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States," rather than independent decision of one organization to boycott another...

    8. Re:There's a difference.. by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      .. between not supporting and actively blocking. If Google intentionally changed their code specifically to block Amazon's hardware, that is not okay.

      They seemingly did it to Microsoft without people raising a stink.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    9. Re: There's a difference.. by atrex · · Score: 1

      Roku's a minor third party vendor in comparison, plus, I think they willingly pre-install the Amazon Prime Video/Video on Demand app.

      It's a good question as to where all this actually started. Certainly one of the most visible events was when Amazon kicked both AppleTV and Chromecast products off it's store front - particularly when they forbid third party sellers from listing any such items.

      My guess is that it goes back much much farther than that though. I would say that it goes back to the Amazon App Store for Android, Google Play Movie rentals, and the origin of FireOS.
      If I had to guess, Amazon wanted to list their VoD app for Android on Google Play, but balked at the percentage Google insisted on taking for any in-app purchases made through their service. So they took their ball and decided to build their own court: ie the Amazon App Store for Android. Of course, there was no way for them to get their AppStore preinstalled on regular Android devices, so, they launched their own Fire line of devices running FireOS.

      FireOS of course, is just a fork of Android. Heavily skinned, with Amazon branded applications pre-installed, and sold are what arguably must be a steep loss hardware wise to undercut other competitor devices. Not sure if Amazon keeps forking each new iteration of Android and reskinning it, or if they keep taking the code updates from Android and applying them piecemeal as security patches, or if they completely run their own closed source development on the OS now.

      I'm not 100% sure but I don't think Google Play started offering movie rentals and purchases until after Amazon launched it's first Fire device. Google Play also sells books now too - though Google doesn't sell any dedicated e-Ink reader device yet.

    10. Re: There's a difference.. by aceboomblain · · Score: 0

      The roku was built by netflix for netflix, but they had the foresight to spin it off as a separate company so that the roku could be neutral from the point-of-view of content providers.

    11. Re: There's a difference.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember that this began with Amazon banning the sale of hardware devices that competed with its own products, including Apple TV.

      FWIW, Apple has been banning app on iTunes that competed with its own products like since forever...
      Those apps they haven't banned, they try taxing (e.g., 30% tax on buying ebooks on the kindle app)...

      The big companies, they don't play nice...

    12. Re: There's a difference.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you talking about? Roku existed before Netflix even had a streaming service. Pre-video they use to sell music streaming devices.

      I still have this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SoundBridge

    13. Re: There's a difference.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Remember that this began with Amazon banning the sale of hardware devices that competed with its own products, including Apple TV.

      Too bad YouTube is a separate entity (YouTube LLC) that does not sell hardware products. It's almost as if this is an antitrust violating "contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States," rather than independent decision of one organization to boycott another...

      YouTube is not a separate entity from Google, it is a wholly owned subsidiary. It is no more separate from Google, than Google is from Alphabet. Interestingly, if they *wanted* to divorced the association with Google, in the recent Alphabet re-org, they could have parented Android and YouTube businesses with Alphabet (like they did with Nest), but they decided to leave both YouTube and Android owned (and managed) through Google. Google chose this relationship association and is apparently acting as if they are all part of the same company (which for all practical purposes, they are).

    14. Re:There's a difference.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Screw Amazon. Their karma is finally catching up with them.

    15. Re: There's a difference.. by kqs · · Score: 1

      Though since Amazon has Amazon Kindle and (years late) Prime Video on Android, that theory seems unlikely.

    16. Re:There's a difference.. by barc0001 · · Score: 0

      Serious question, why is it not OK? Seems Google is only doing this in response to Amazon going out of their way to stop selling Google products. Note that with Amazon, it's not just Amazon directly that are no longer selling Google products (and haven't been for a while), Amazon also specifically forbid any of their resellers to sell any Google hardware like the Chromecast.

      If the argument is that it's OK for Amazon to forbid sales of Google's hardware through their site because they don't want to "help a competitor", then Google blocking Amazon hardware seems to be more of the same.

    17. Re:There's a difference.. by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      you mean like Amazon intentionally blocking their Prime TV app on all android TV/Cast devices but no other Android devices?

      Can't install, can't sideload, nothing.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    18. Re: There's a difference.. by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      You're thinking Copperweld inability to conspire. The problem is, Eastman Kodak violations are a section 1 violation, the separate and independent nature is relevant to impermissible product tying, and the attempted conspiracy is between the intra-enterprise actor (Google/YouTube) and the unwilling target (Amazon).

      Thanks for playing "I did not study antritrust law and it shows."

    19. Re:There's a difference.. by Vektuz · · Score: 1

      Pretty much. Given that the app literally already works on the fire devices and works pretty well, the only way they'd pull it is if they actually made an update to the app that checked whether it was on a fire device and specifically refused to work because of that.

  3. Please don't piss off AAPL by christoofar · · Score: 0

    I watch a lot of long-docos on YouTube on an old AppleTV.

    Please don't piss off GOOG, APPL.

    1. Re:Please don't piss off AAPL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to have a problem with completing your words...

  4. Re:Sing Sherman, Anti-Trust! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    OK, Trump, here's your chance to smash two enemies with one law.

    Anti-trust enforcement on Amazon, and Google, for F-ing over each other! The best kind of victory!

  5. Anti-consumer by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anti-consumer, anti-choice cr@p like this is why repurposing an old PC (or just using an Intel NUC) as an HTPC is better than any proprietary junk from Apple, Microsoft, Google, or Amazon. They're all interested in controlling their users instead of providing good, flexible software -- ta hell with all four of 'em.

    1. Re:Anti-consumer by jordanjay29 · · Score: 2

      There's always the Plex app for those who have already bought into a FireTV or Chromecast.

    2. Re:Anti-consumer by nctritech · · Score: 2

      Given the cost of a low-end Intel Compute Stick, I don't see why anyone buys these locked-down ad-laden closed-ecosystem sticks other than lack of sufficient knowledge to set one up with Plex or Kodi.

    3. Re:Anti-consumer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anti-consumer, anti-choice...

      I've never really considered those two attributes (consumerism and choice) to ever go together (not sure if you are intentionally implying that). But then I'm pretty anti-consumer so maybe that's just my biased view.

    4. Re:Anti-consumer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As each year passes, I dislike proprietary things more and more. I've opted for LibreOffice to be rid of Microsoft's proprietary document format. I will even use plain ASCII text files to store my most important information. I wish developers would stay away from things like DirectX and Metal, .NET and Swift, and so on. For me, things are better when they are not locked down and restricted by these different companies fighting for control of our lives.

    5. Re:Anti-consumer by atrex · · Score: 2

      I like the NVidia Shield personally, it may have a TV skin to it but under the hood it's still Android and you can sideload pretty much anything you want onto it if it isn't already available in the play store. Built-in google cast support too (aka it works as a Chromecast). Built-in Plex too (without any need to be subscribed to PlexPass). Or you can install Kodi if you prefer. Only device I've found that allows digital audio passthru of DTS tracks (Chromecast will only do passthru of AC3 iirc).

    6. Re:Anti-consumer by WrongMonkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because Plex and Kodi are just players. They don't actually host any content. If you're pirating all your content, then Plex or Kodi are reasonable solutions. If you have some legal or moral hesitation over pirating, they aren't very useful.

    7. Re:Anti-consumer by lgw · · Score: 1

      Came here to say this. I just use an old laptop: Netflix, Amazon, and YouTube all work. However, Netflix is on my shit list because they won't stream 4K to the browser, only to the stupid proprietary boxes. Anyone have a work-around?

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    8. Re:Anti-consumer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have some legal or moral hesitation over pirating, they aren't very useful.

      How's that? No idea about Plex, but I use Kodi all the damn time to play legal content which I legit purchased.

    9. Re:Anti-consumer by nctritech · · Score: 1

      Fine, drop Windows or Linux and Firefox on there instead. It's a general-purpose computer, it can run Firefox and play stuff from Netflix and YouTube that way.

    10. Re:Anti-consumer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because Plex and Kodi are just players. They don't actually host any content. If you're pirating all your content, then Plex or Kodi are reasonable solutions. If you have some legal or moral hesitation over pirating, they aren't very useful.

      Flag parent troll! I use Kodi and do not use those streaming plug ins... I use it to connect to my DVR and it works GREAT for legitimate, legally timeshifted content.

      Not all use is infringing. Not all infringement is illegal - some of it is fair use.

      Without protections for the free flow of ideas our civilization would collapse under the weight of power seekers corrupting it to their own limited vision of self aggrandizement.

    11. Re:Anti-consumer by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

      Anti-consumer, anti-choice cr@p like this is

      ...only going to get worse once the broadband providers get in on it.

      What happened today? Google took their ball and went home, like a spoiled brat. So, sideload Kodi, and install the YouTube Add-on. Alternatively, (and less brain power required) skip the Starbucks habit for a few days and buy another streaming device. I can't imagine HDMI ports are a precious commodity, when a faux reproduction (it's emulator based) of a 26 year old gaming console is so popular, retailers can't keep it in stock.

      In a post-net-neutrality tomorrow, it's only a matter of time before the broadband providers start taking sides in these content provider turf wars. You'll long for the days when the fix was quite so simple.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
    12. Re:Anti-consumer by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

      Given the cost of a low-end Intel Compute Stick, I don't see why anyone buys these locked-down ad-laden closed-ecosystem sticks other than lack of sufficient knowledge to set one up with Plex or Kodi.

      The Compute Stick sucks as a media streamer. It's constantly doing all the annoying shit Windows tends to do (incessant notifications, updating when you least want it to, etc.) when you just want to sit down and watch some TV. It still hasn't gotten the sleep/wake process perfect, and you're frequently futzing behind the TV having to restart the damn thing. Netflix's Windows 10 "Metro" (or whatever Microsoft is calling it now) app is an abomination, and runs slow as snot on anything remotely considered a budget CPU. Amazon Prime Video only works through the web browser, and that gets old quick.

      That being said, in addition to the Fire Stick, I do have a PC connected to my living room TV. It's my media server for Kodi (which runs just fine on the Fire Stick).

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
    13. Re:Anti-consumer by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

      If you're pirating all your content, then Plex or Kodi are reasonable solutions. If you have some legal or moral hesitation over pirating, they aren't very useful.

      I see no moral issues with ripping copies of my own legally purchased content, and putting it on a NAS for my own personal use. A perfectly legitimate use for Kodi, IMHO.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
    14. Re:Anti-consumer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you know of kodi (not many) and know how to set it up (fewer), why not get a vanilla Android unit, which is much cheaper?

  6. getting the goo out.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    deception is obsolete... good sports with good spirits prevail.... cease fire stand down... our moms & babys need us to be sound...

  7. Can't we all just get along? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    -- Jesse Jackson

    1. Re:Can't we all just get along? by senileoldfart · · Score: 1

      Nope. Rodney King.

    2. Re:Can't we all just get along? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sigh....There has been a lot of incorrect posts on this article. I think that's why we have Trump as president, no one seems to know how to research facts anymore (and I'm not talking about "alternative facts").

    3. Re:Can't we all just get along? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All nigg3rs look alike.

  8. It's about time Amazon is put on a leash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are out of control, it took them many years to bring Prime Video to android phones. They use everyone else's technology but refuses to share theirs. Amazon is not playing nice with others and it is hurting consumers.

    1. Re:It's about time Amazon is put on a leash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice try google employee!

  9. It turns out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have heard that Amazon has a reputation for being bad to its business partners. (Partnering with them to get as much data as possible and then metaphorically stabbing them in the back.) This appears to confirm that story.

    To be fair, it is also similar to how supermarkets operate when they spin up the in-house brand of any product.

  10. Prime on Chromecast by MrSome · · Score: 1

    Not sure what Google did, but over a year ago I tried streaming Prime through the browser and casting that to my Chromecast. It didn't work too well back then.

    However, I tried it again within the past few months and it works fantastic now.

    1. Re:Prime on Chromecast by Mr3vil · · Score: 1

      Interesting, I tried not too long ago on my Gen1 Chromecast and I got a black screen on the TV from my laptop. I thought DRM might have had something to do with it. Might have to try again. It could just be a flaw with the G1 Chromecast.

    2. Re:Prime on Chromecast by sl3xd · · Score: 0

      over a year ago I tried streaming Prime through the browser and casting that to my Chromecast. It didn't work too well back then.

      We a similar pissing match with AppleTV and Prime streaming. There was a "promise" that they'd have it working before the end of 2017, but there's no end in sight.

      And there'll be another one as Google tries to force everybody to use video codecs it effectively controls, and refuses to use the ISO standard that device manufacturers agreed to use and support. (The alternative being any company using Google's codecs has to give up their ability to enforce their own patent rights).

      So yeah, companies saying "I'm willing to fuck my own customers to get your company to do my company's bidding."

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
    3. Re:Prime on Chromecast by MrSome · · Score: 1

      I have a Gen1 also. I was using Chrome (browser). I was surprised it worked as well as it did. I almost felt like chromecast was buffering the video to make sure it streamed well. Normal stuff was in real-time when streaming browser to chromecast, but the video was delayed by a few seconds.

  11. same problem as amazon VS apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's a similar problem between amazon and apple, where amazon didn't sell the apple tv, and the apple tv doesn't have an amazon prime video app. I've heard many times that this war was over.... we'll see.

    1. Re:same problem as amazon VS apple by sl3xd · · Score: 2

      I've heard many times that this war was over.... we'll see.

      No end in sight

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
  12. Two Network Neutrality supporters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if these two supporters of Net Neutrality would be able to do this under their proposed rules?

    If so, what's the point of all those rules?

    Oh yeah, to cement the position of entrenched players such as Google and Amazon.

    1. Re:Two Network Neutrality supporters? by Shatrat · · Score: 2

      Amazon is not an ISP and Google is not using their ISP unit, Google Fiber, to block Amazon. This has nothing to do with Net Neutrality.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    2. Re:Two Network Neutrality supporters? by sexconker · · Score: 0

      They are not a telecom providing access to the internet, but they provide major services on the internet and sell devices with which to access services (theirs and others). This would be like ATT refusing to connect your calls if you're using a Verizon/Sprint/MCI/whatever phone line.

    3. Re:Two Network Neutrality supporters? by um...+Lucas · · Score: 1

      They're both for Net Neutrality. But they're also both for the DCMA act, which allows them to pull this stuff.

      Let's not forget, both Amazon and Google don't have their applications on Apple TV. Which is incredibly lame, since they both have free downloads for iOS, which is what Apple TV runs, a variant of it at least. But they both said "F the customers". They have no problem offering their apps on the iPhone, but won't offer the same exact apps for Apple TV unless they can get different terms. It's only us that suffer by this meaningless battle.

  13. Google can stick it where... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chances are many users are perfectly able to find where to buy Chromecast and Google Home devices without help from Amazon using... Google!

    I just bought a Fire TV Stick over a Chromecast because the former is a full (if skinned) android OS device connectable via HDMI. The latter only allows me to wirelessly stream from my Android device to the TV... not my preferred solution. The former allows me to sideload Kodi and pull content from my DVR. The latter... still gotta have a separate Android device to do that stuff with, and I'm not sure Kodi plays with Chromecast.

    Stupid. Amazon, Google, get off your butts and interoperate before someone else comes along and steals your bread and butter.

  14. but wasn't google all about net neutrality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    why should google be allowed to discriminate against certain user agents?

  15. Let the balkanzation begin. by MrLint · · Score: 1

    Amazon took Twitch off of Roku, Everyone wants their own exclusive outlet.

    Ajit must be thrilled.

    1. Re:Let the balkanzation begin. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is worth noting that NN does positively nothing to prevent situations like this. Lets just nip that in the bud right now.

    2. Re:Let the balkanzation begin. by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      I can see it now...

      "Welcome to Amazon Video for Chromecast! You can now start watching all your favorite Amazon shows, ad free, with your low subscription price of $9.99/month*.

      Want even more value? Add a subscription to Amazon for iPhone or Roku! We offer attractive multi-device discounts - the more devices, the greater the savings! You can watch Amazon Video on three different platforms for the low, low price of $25.99/month. Four devices is only $31.99 monthly!

      Thank you for being an Amazon Video customer!"

      * Not all episodes of all shows are included with the base subscription.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    3. Re:Let the balkanzation begin. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But it is partly what he was talking about when he said that companies like Google and Facebook are threats to that very neutrality. What good is having a neutral pipe if the only way to use said pipe is by buying vendor locked devices?

  16. Use a web browser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The youtube app sucks anyways as you can't block ads.

  17. FTC should step in. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is called bait and switch. Google committed to this device and now the people who bought it are screwed.

  18. Complete garbage all around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This sounds like a good thing all around for consumers. I hope this war escalates perpetually so people will finally realize that all of those devices are pieces of trash.

  19. Re:Sing Sherman, Anti-Trust! by jordanjay29 · · Score: 1

    Trump? Anti-trust? LOL

  20. Network Neutrality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who needs it! (sarcasm)

    Stop the pissing match already and just make things that work.

  21. so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If net neutrality is removed there is hope that the hardware vendors could oppose the gatekeepers for a time as it was fought in the days of old.

  22. Re:Sing Sherman, Anti-Trust! by e3m4n · · Score: 1

    the fact that these products are part of a different line of business but the anti-competition behavior is being waged on an entirely different business (amazon store, kindle app store, etc) goes far and long in support of the criteria of a Trust. This pissing match proves, without a shadow of a doubt, that they are using their enormous power base to harm consumers for their own financial gains.

  23. 8-word summary of the argument by sehlat · · Score: 1

    Amazon: "Mine! Mine! Mine!"
    Google: "Mine! Mine! Mine!"

    1. Re:8-word summary of the argument by sl3xd · · Score: 2

      There's a caucophany of others.

      It's like the early '2000's all over again, when Microsoft was pushing its own "standards" and "services" (that it was wholly in control of).

      The only difference is now, it's Google creating the "standard", and instead of paying for licenses, companies have to give up their right to sue for IP violations (on their own patents).

      Google is great at making something "open source", and then making any community (or external) involvement pointless. Take AoSP, where it's "open source", but Google uses it to leverage other companies into doing its bidding.

      Amazon forked from AoSP, and isn't doing Google's bidding, so Google is breaking Amazon's fork.

      What good is Android being "Open Source" when Google leverages control over it like this?

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
    2. Re:8-word summary of the argument by andydread · · Score: 1

      this has nothing to do with Android fork. did you even RTFA??? This is Amazon block the sale of google products and refusing to support google cast services and so Google is retaliating. Plain and simple.

  24. Flow Chart? by senileoldfart · · Score: 1

    We are going to need a connectivity flow chart.

  25. Re:Sing Sherman, Anti-Trust! by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

    A chance to screw over two blue states... he will compromise.

  26. A first look at the future internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First it starts in the physical world .. next it will be the internet world..

    {.}-{.}

  27. Re: Sing Sherman, Anti-Trust! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only things Trump may have a monopoly on are

    1) egotism
    2) narcissism
    3) traitorism
    4) being orange
    5) the name trump

    Almost everything else he's done in life is a complete failure.... See his university, his vodka, 80% of his real estate dealings, his bankruptcy and his presidency

  28. More of this please! MORE! MORE! by klingens · · Score: 1

    Anything that helps making their privacy destroying big brother products, which can't work without network connections on purpose when there is no real tech reason for it (like all the broken by design NEST products for example), sell less, less desirable etc. then this is a big win for all the consumers world-wide.
    Hooray for Google and Amazon killing each their own shitty products!

  29. Battle of two monopolies by ilsaloving · · Score: 0

    So now we have one monopoly that thinks they can do whatever they want, with another that thinks the same.

    I wonder what the end result will be (apart from consumers getting screwed in the process). IMO Amazon needs Youtube far more than Google needs Amazon, so maybe Amazon will start their own youtube-like service?

    1. Re:Battle of two monopolies by Carcass666 · · Score: 2

      Two monopolies?
      You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means...

    2. Re:Battle of two monopolies by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Well I'm not sure Amazon's search is really a major player. (actually I can't even find the site to put a link, have they been shut down?)

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    3. Re:Battle of two monopolies by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

      Google has monopolistic control of search, and has also effectively has a monopoly on cat videos if the latest video stats are anything to go by.

      Please correct me if I'm wrong, Amazon on the other hand, is now the overwhelmingly dominant force in retail, not just crushing all other online retailers, but are being fingered for the steady decline of meatspace retail as well.

    4. Re:Battle of two monopolies by um...+Lucas · · Score: 1

      I'm not buying a Google device. Although I much prefer having youtube than not, I already have small libraries in both Amazon and Apple, I'm not about to add a third entity.

  30. Hooray for Neutrality! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The good of the consumers are both company's #1 priority for sure!

  31. Their loss. by XSportSeeker · · Score: 1

    We can always sideload, but for regular consumers, this means less Amazon Fire TV sales, less reasons to get an Echo Show, and more complaints thrown at both companies.
    I... just don't care. Saw this shit coming ages ago with Google's problems with making Windows Mobile apps. I also noticed inherent limitations of casting dongles and just decided to pull a cable from the desktop directly to the living room TV.
    As for Echo Show... heh, that's something I'll never buy, so.

    1. Re:Their loss. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just (last week) recommended an echo Show because the end-user could walk up to it and say "Alexa, show me cat videos" and that is awesome for the 80+ market who doesn't want to mess with technology. Now I suddenly have to rethink this. Everyone, including Amazon and Google are the losers in this fight.

    2. Re:Their loss. by Vektuz · · Score: 1

      Youtube cannot be sideloaded to Fire TVs because they don't include the giant bulk of google's "play store" and "Google services" which for some reason, youtube demands also be installed. KODI does work though.

  32. Correct ... article is wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're right. "the first skirmish in what is apparently an ongoing war." wasn't Google pulling YouTube of the Echo Show show as claimed in the article. The "first skirmish" goes to Amazon for pulling the Chromecast out of its store!

    https://www.wired.com/2015/10/...

    1. Re:Correct ... article is wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was in retaliation for this:

      Google Removes Amazon’s App Listing From Google Play....
      https://techcrunch.com/2014/12/11/google-removes-amazons-app-listing-from-google-play-search-following-addition-of-appstore-instant-video-integrations/

    2. Re:Correct ... article is wrong. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      As a consumer, the first dick move was Amazon not supporting Chromecast.

      They then said that they had to pull Chromecast because it was confusing to sell them when they weren't supported.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  33. It all started when she hit me back! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'Scuse me while I reach into my big bag of Give a Fuck and don an appropriate degree of outrage on Google's behalf...

    Whoops! Bag's empty. I don't give a fuck about Google's problems with Amazon. Google screwed over Roku for years like this (heaven forbid some device not support Youtube ads flawlessly.)

    Maybe Eric should jump in one of his planes and go see President Obam^HTrum^H... oh wait. Never mind.

  34. Build the walls! by WolfgangVL · · Score: 1

    These gardens wont segregate themselves.

    --
    You are being ripped off every second of every day, so that advertisers can help rip you off even more tomorrow.
    1. Re:Build the walls! by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      Build the walls around the gardens and make the gardens pay for it!

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    2. Re:Build the walls! by coofercat · · Score: 1

      Gardens? Is that a metaphor?

  35. How is this even possible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Youtube is a website. The Fire TV is a computer. It should be able to access Youtube.

    This is beyond stupid. Both companies are being assholes.

    1. Re:How is this even possible? by sl3xd · · Score: 1

      Welcome to Y2K!

      The players have changed, but the game has not!

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
    2. Re:How is this even possible? by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      I'm waiting for Y10K. That is when everyone will panic at our short sightedness at limiting years to only four digits. When the year 9997 rolls around, everyone will already be in full blown panic mode. And then I will seriously brush up on my COBOL skills and get rich!

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    3. Re: How is this even possible? by sl3xd · · Score: 1

      Just how many virgins girls are you going to exsanguinate to live that long?

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
    4. Re:How is this even possible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're forgetting that you'll simply be living in an AI generated paradise simulation at that point. Like the matrix, except we won't actually be connected to any living body. We're all fully software. So sure, you'll get rich with your COBOL skills, but nobody will care because money is meaningless. Food and shelter aren't needed, but it's something we all participate in just to follow the motions of something that once defined us as humans.

  36. Nest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm pretty sure I've seen a nest show up in my searches with in the last week so I just did a search, not only does it show up it is an "Amazon Choice"...so how much of the rest of the summary is bullshit?

  37. Ecosystem lock out, go figure. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amazon and Google are just trying to lock users into respective ecosystems. Gee, Apple has been doing this forever and Microsoft appears to be going that direction too. Myself, I picked one a while ago and just stick with that. Yes, it would be nice to have more choice, but that doesnâ(TM)t seem to be happening and these companies would rather keep their systems isolated to their own stuff then allow competition in.
    Yes, the end user suffers the most with these squabbles but its clearly a money game.

  38. I don't think it's really anti-consumer by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    Amazon's blocking Google's adverts. If you successful do that on your HTPC google will take what steps they can to prevent you from getting the content they host. They're less successful with HTPCs because it's harder to do but they'll still try (actually, they'll try to get around your ad blocker, which they probably can't do with Amazon's box).

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:I don't think it's really anti-consumer by lgw · · Score: 1

      f you successful do that on your HTPC google will take what steps they can to prevent you from getting the content they host.

      YouTube has ads?

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  39. Roku by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is why it's nice to have a Roku box. They're like the Switzerland of set top boxes. While google is blocking Youtube from Fire TV, and Amazon is just getting over their block of Prime Video from Apple TV, Roku just about works with everything.

    1. Re:Roku by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

      Roku just about works with everything.

      ...except Kodi. Thanks for playing, but it's all the same walls - just a different garden.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
  40. Monopoly and anti-competitive? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    A service I can see freely on any PC and nearly any device is now being blocked on certain devices from a certain company. So much for an open internet, we're moving to vertical stack monopolies and soon into internet isolationism.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    1. Re:Monopoly and anti-competitive? by andydread · · Score: 1

      Blame Amazon. They are the one that started blocking competitors services and devices. So now others are responding to Amazon in-kind.

  41. Lack of Reciprocity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is this stage before or after we see glasnost, Perestroika, "Trust but Verify"?

  42. Everybody is focused on net neutrality by TuballoyThunder · · Score: 1

    and yet the actions of Google and Amazon are just as bad.

    1. Re:Everybody is focused on net neutrality by FrankHaynes · · Score: 1

      Well, you can't fight City Hall, ya know!

      --
      slashdot: A failed experiment.
    2. Re:Everybody is focused on net neutrality by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

      and yet the actions of Google and Amazon are just as bad.

      No, no, no. A thousand fucking times, no.

      You still have a choice not to be a customer of Amazon, Google, or the lot of 'em. Apple will be pleased to sell you a phone. Bing or DuckDuckGo will happily take your search queries. I'd be here all night attempting to list every retailer which competes with Amazon.

      In my neighborhood, there is one choice of wired broadband provider.

      Net Neutrality is necessary because it means no matter how much Amazon, Facebook, or Google decide to wall up their gardens, some upstart can still register their own .com, and be given a fair share at taking them on. That is what we stand to lose. Someone could start a great new competitor to YouTube, but if my broadband provider doesn't come to favorable terms with them, here's South Park saying it better than I ever could.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
  43. I'm not really into YouTube much by slack_justyb · · Score: 1

    I'll just say my two cents here. I'm not sure how many people are like me here but YouTube doesn't really appeal to me much anymore. I just don't see it having "good" content. Maybe CGP Grey and Kurzgesagt but that's about the end of it. Even then those two aren't regular publishers and leaving them alone for a year and then coming back, I can watch everything they've done in the in between in one sitting.

    There's not really much a point to trying to "discover" anything on YouTube, because the vast majority is just trash or is content that has its own platform that's more tailored to its content, like Twitch. I think the strength of YouTube is its inertia and getting rid of it on a device is a sure fire way to wake folks up and have them realize how little value there is left in YouTube. Again, maybe that's just me.

    1. Re:I'm not really into YouTube much by um...+Lucas · · Score: 1

      Nah, things like Colbert, Daily Show, Morning Show, etc, are all on YouTube if you can stand to watch with a little delay. I always start out the night with Youtube to catch up the days news and commentary, and the previous nights laughs. Then I might go looking for something interesting on Netflix. If there's nothing there, I then need decide whether I want to look for something on Amazon and stay in the living room thanks to the Roku, or check out Apples offerings on their little black box in my bedroom.

      IT's really getting maddening.

    2. Re:I'm not really into YouTube much by turp182 · · Score: 1

      For me, it's about music. We listen (not watch) to tons of music via YouTube through a Roku.

      And, having 7 year olds, we watch fucking cat videos. For the record we have two cats and they are pretty awesome.

      Shameless self promotion, here's a cool time lapse dash cam video I put together with a basic guitar bit I wrote, sunrise during a rural-to-urban drive:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      That's what I use it for. Also have the videos of a band practice from the early 90s out there, nostalgic. Shotgun against laptop, yeah, did that.

      We also used to sponsor MMA fights (over 25 fight nights over 5+ years, it was a serious hobby) and put all of it on YouTube, another perfect use case. Most local promoters don't do that, or at least didn't when we were.

      There are tons of uses for YouTube, but not a lot that can be monetized in my opinion. Or that are interesting, but there are some of each. I typically hate video.

      --
      BlameBillCosby.com
    3. Re:I'm not really into YouTube much by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 1

      That depends on what you call good content. For me tutorials and build videos (the physical type, not compiling / linking) *are* good content and are widely available all day long on Youtube.

  44. Simple Obvious Solution by DickBreath · · Score: 1

    What we need is for new TVs to have twenty HDMI connectors on the set. That way you can put in a "stick" for every single content supplier since they are never going to get along.

    Right now, since Roku is not a content provider, merely content delivery, they manage to deliver pretty much any content you have a paid subscription for. For example, both YouTube and Amazon Prime. And HBO, Starz, Hulu, etc.

    Changing "channels" will be using the input selector to select which "stick" or "box" to use. Disgusting.

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  45. Not net neutrality, but an indicator of effects by RhettLivingston · · Score: 2

    Though not a net neutrality battle, this is similar and, sadly, allowed by regulations to proceed.

    Amazon is the overwhelming leader in the online retail market. They have chosen to become a provider of devices that they sell, thus competing with the retailers who use them to reach a large portion of the market. Google is the closest competitor to some of their devices, so they took advantage of their position and locked them out.

    How is this different in nature from what can happen when ISPs that are regional monopolies merge with content providers and there is no net neutrality regulation in place? Do we really think the ISPs' content providers won't be given a leg up on other content providers? How long before the first competitor is blocked by an ISP?

    At least when Amazon flexes muscle, we can go to Walmart or some other online retailer. In my area, we only have alleged competition to Spectrum.

    1. Re:Not net neutrality, but an indicator of effects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow. a web site (this is regarding the *web* youtube and not the 'app', which was already shut down by google) and top 10 internet destination saying 'fuck you' to an entire *browser* and all of its users, just cuz the two companies compete.... wtf, google. wtf. what's next? non-chrome browsers gonna get the shaft with slowed video? degraded quality? more ads? or you just gonna tell us to fuck off too?

      hey, boys.. is google evil *yet*? if not, what the fuck are you waiting for. they've been evil since at least gmail's debut.

      and hey, fucktard pai.. *THIS* is the type of shit america will have to deal with after you fuck over the country.

    2. Re:Not net neutrality, but an indicator of effects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair to Google, Amazon didn't just "compete", they barred sells of some Google devices that compete with their devices. Given their lock on such a huge portion of the online sells, that's a huge foul.

      Google barring Amazon's free use of Youtube as a selling point on their devices is closer to poetic because of that first foul. I guess the next logical step might be Amazon launching a true Youtube competitor in response assuming they don't back down.

  46. oligarch battles censor and spy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The world's richest oligarch battles the internet's Ministry of Truth and biggest snoop. Maybe they'll self-annihilate and we'll all be better off.

  47. The details of the actual feud by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    The actual feud between Google and Amazon is Youtube vs Twitch (so Alphabet vs Amazon actually) and they're competiting to see who can mismanage their platform the worst, enforce the rules unevenly and make them up as they go, and generally piss off their users the most. Up until recently Twitch was winning by banning males more than females for lewd acts on live stream but Youtube pulled WAY ahead by ignoring reports going back to 2006 about underage fetish erotica disguised as kids content. Also the CEO Susan is the most under-qualified person to run a giant company in the entirety of the US, including non-english speakers, the mentally unstable, and non-human animals.

    1. Re:The details of the actual feud by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 1

      Also the CEO Susan is the most under-qualified person to run a giant company in the entirety of the US, including non-english speakers, the mentally unstable, and non-human animals.

      Careful, no matter how accurate your comments are the SJWs will automatically lump you in the sexist category and harass you in the name of the greater good.

    2. Re:The details of the actual feud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go back to /r/livestreamfail already

  48. Only one thing to say by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Funny

    Begun, the Tube Wars have.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Only one thing to say by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      Begun, the Tube Wars have.

      Wake me when they start the Lube Wars

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

  49. Problem is vertical integration by Solandri · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem is vertical integration - companies trying to use dominance at one level to leverage dominance in another level where they are weak.

    In the 1980s Microsoft had no presence in the productivity suite market (word processor, spreadsheet, etc). They used their dominance of the PC operating system market to steer the dominant companies (WordPerfect, Lotus) towards creating OS/2 versions in preparation for phasing out DOS, all the while assuring them that OS/2 was the future. Meanwhile they secretly worked their own productivity apps (Word and Excel) to run on what became Windows. Then suddenly they announced they were dissolving their relationship with IBM, pulling support from OS/2, and Windows was the future. WordPerfect and Lotus were caught flat-footed, but Microsoft said not to worry - you can buy our productivity apps which will work with Windows.

    Later they repeated this with Stacker (automatic file compression) and Internet Explorer, packaging those with Windows to drive the competition (Stacker and Netscape) out of business so they could dominate those markets.

    Today we're suffering from it with the data transport companies (Internet and cellular data service providers) (ab)using their position to influence other markets that they don't dominate (having to buy cell phone from branded or authorized stores to be sure it'll work with your carrier, holding up Android updates so they can "customize" it to their satisfaction, cable set-top boxes before the government mandated Cable Cards, Internet fast lanes, etc).

    In all cases, it's just companies trying to leverage their dominant position in one market to a dominant in another. This is more of the same. Amazon using its dominant position as online retailer to influence how you use the products you buy (whether they be FireTV or Chromecast). Google using its dominant position in user-created video content (YouTube) to as leverage to try to get Amazon to behave.

    The whole thing would be a lot simpler if companies were prohibited from certain types of vertical integration. If Microsoft had been split into an OS company and software company, both Windows and Office would've had to compete on their own merits. (In fact they refused to release Office apps for Android/iOS until it was clear that Windows Phone was a failure. Likewise if ISPs weren't allowed to sell or provide media services (and likewise Cable companies weren't allowed to provide Internet service - only sell access to other companies which provided Internet service), then none of this net neutrality/Internet fast lanes BS would be happening. And if Amazon were only allowed to act as an online store, their primary goal would be to support all hardware platforms without bias or prejudice and this problem would never be happening.

    1. Re:Problem is vertical integration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought we were done with the Microsoft conspiracy theories. MS didn't have leverage over Lotus and WP. Those were the big guys, while MS just supplied the OS. For most of their users, if Lotus or WordPerfect didn't run on a computer, they didn't buy the computer!

      Microsoft was actually putting all of their weight behind OS/2 in the late 1980's. It was only in 1990, when Windows 3.0 became very popular and still nobody cared about OS/2, that MS decided to put their weight behind Windows instead.

      Meanwhile, Windows released the Windows version of Word the same year they released the OS/2 version (1989).

      Excel never had a non-GUI version (because it was originally written for Mac), so it was always written for Windows. The first versions came out years before anybody had Windows so it actually shipped with enough of Windows to run it. Nevertheless, the first OS/2 version came out in 1989.

      The reason MS had Windows versions of their software before everyone else is that Windows wasn't popular until 3.0 came out in 1990. Once it became evident that users would actually use Windows, then guys like Lotus and WordPerfect wrote Windows versions of their DOS apps.

      MS spent several years refining their apps, waiting for them to become popular. Once Windows took off, MS was sitting pretty having already taken the risk of making ports of their apps, while the other guys didn't take the risk. And once they did do the porting, they had to port apps that had entrenched keyboard-based interfaces. These were major apps being written by companies without the years of practice making GUIs that MS had. It's no big surprise that MS ended up winning.

      And what's the deal with IE? MS was actually innovating here. There isn't a computer, table, or phone that doesn't come with a free, built-in web browser. Why? Because MS decided that the browser should be part of the OS. Can you imagine now a device that doesn't come with a browser? How would you even download one? You can't even use an old browser like IE6 to download a new browser because the stupid browser web sites all require JS that doesn't run on old browsers.

      dom

  50. Plex... meh by gosand · · Score: 1

    I tried Plex, didn't like it and stayed with serviio.
    It has some annoyances, but has been working for me for years. We mainly stream videos from my server to computers and TVs via Rokus. Works like a charm.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  51. Oh geez by um...+Lucas · · Score: 2

    All I want is a box to plug into my TV to watch my media. I don't want to have to worry about who I bought the media from.

    Currently, I have an Apple TV. I'm fine if my Music stays apple-only, but since Apple Music is available for Android, I feel like that's portable enough. Which leaves me with video.

    I do Netflix, Amazon, and Apple. I used to do Youtube on the Apple TV, and still can (last I checked) by running the app on my phone and streaming THAT to my Apple TV.

    There is no combination of devices that allows me to play all 3 vendors' material. Roku might be the closest.

    I think these giants are all dropping the ball here, and perhaps they oughtn't not be the ones selling the media. Why can't the studios sell media licenses directly, so that if I buy a WB or Miramax movie, I can play it on ANY device with a WB or Miramax player, which they could then develop for Roku, Apple, Amazon, Google, etc. I guess that's the Model HBO is taking actually. I'm just sick of these disputes, where Company X wants to make money from selling someone elses content, and therefor moves to cripple its competitor by NOT letting it play the same content (even though that content is available for it on another App), etc.

    It's just getting beyond frustrating, for us consumers.

    I'd say follow Apple's lead and make the money off your hardware, but given that Apple won't let Amazon onto the Apple TV unless they get their slice of in-app purchases, that's not the way either.

    These movie studios need to realize that consumers would be happy as hell to buy from them without the middle man, and wind up with media purchases that are portable across platforms. That seems like the only real solution.

    1. Re:Oh geez by BLToday · · Score: 2

      I do Netflix, Amazon, and Apple. I used to do Youtube on the Apple TV, and still can (last I checked) by running the app on my phone and streaming THAT to my Apple TV.

      What? I have an Apple TV 3 and Apple TV 4. Youtube is a built-in app, you don't need to stream it from the phone. You do need to stream the Amazon Video from the iPhone to Apple TV until Amazon releases their app (which Amazon promised will be this year, hahahaha).

    2. Re:Oh geez by coofercat · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it feels like it'll be a lot of years before we see a 'content browser' that can search for something across Netflix, Amazon Video, Apple TV, Youtube and maybe 'the internet'.

      Our Amazon FireTV box does reasonably - it's got a Netflix, iPlayer and (side-loaded) Kodi apps. so from there I can get to nearly all my content. Anything I've recorded on the TV still needs me to click the other button on the universal remote to fire up the ordinary TV box (which has Netflix and iplayer, but it's fairly terrible).

    3. Re:Oh geez by um...+Lucas · · Score: 1

      I still have an ATV2, which had Youtube until it disappeared from the home screen...

      No matter. Apparently, at the time I typed this, Amazon and Apple came around to my viewpoint, and Amazon has made a Prime App for the Apple TV 4. You can thank me later, meanwhile, my conundrum about which little black box to buy got easier.

    4. Re:Oh geez by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      These movie studios need to realize that consumers would be happy as hell to buy from them without the middle man, and wind up with media purchases that are portable across platforms. That seems like the only real solution.

      If movie studios were remotely sane about distribution, that would have happened a decade ago. Direct studio purchasing would have destroyed Blockbuster, Redbox would never have existed (or been much smaller), and the current balkanization wouldn't be happening either.

      Unfortunately the movie studios are stark staring insane about distribution. They dug a very deep hole and dragged us all in after them. Their insanity is ongoing to this day.

      Some of that insanity stems from MBA idiocy. IT and software development are not "core competencies" of a movie studio. Unless it's being used to distribute the product, in which case it is, but you can't tell an MBA that. Even granting that premise, they still could have outsourced development while owning the infrastructure and software. Bittorrent was already half a decade old by then, and plenty of other viable protocols also existed.

      The rest of that insanity stems from sheer greed. Their wet dream is pay-per-EVERY-view and they still haven't given up on that dream, to this day. A convenient, portable, downloadable format is anathema to that dream.

  52. Ironic by reanjr · · Score: 1

    The irony of Google telling us we need net neutrality. Isn't this almost exactly what Google is saying internet providers should be forbidden from doing?

    1. Re:Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its retaliatory - Amazon does the same shit to google with the chromecast.

    2. Re:Ironic by andydread · · Score: 1

      Amazon blocked Google devices first. The banned selling Google devices on their store when they came out with their own fire stick. Google is simply fighting back.

  53. Kindle devices are subpar by danny.acosta · · Score: 1

    I feel deceived by Amazon KINDLE FIRE I needed a cheap table and bought the Amazon Kindle fire for 79 dollars. I regret the decision. I'll give it away and buy a real Android tablet. All the important apps that I need either don't exist on the Amazon store or they are outdated in comparison to their counterpart on Android. When I bought the tablet they mentioned that I could remove advertising from it for a fee, but they make it nearly impossible to do so. AMAZON PRIME I bought Amazon Prime, but I can barely watch any their content outside of the US, even Amazon's "original" content. THE STORE I recently noticed that buying directly from the suppliers listed on Amazon is cheaper even if I have to pay shipping fee. I recently saved around 50 dollars on a bunk bed by ordering directly from the supplier instead of Amazon.

  54. Oh the tears by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh the tears

  55. Issue is that end users do not control their devis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem is end users do not control the devices they own! If a free OS and app ran on fire, it would be forked so fast it would make your head spin.

    Proprietary software allows end users to be manipulated like pawns!

    Do not buy devices that can not run free software.

  56. monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google better watch how how it wields the youtube stick because it could get them in deep trouble with abuse of monopoly power. Youtube is a monopoly.

  57. Good for Competition by SmaryJerry · · Score: 1

    Honestly, we need a real YouTube competitor and an Amazon competitor. With these giants blocking out each other, it is perfect for other parties to grow as competition. The real problem will be when Google blocks smaller third party sites from YouTube because it has a deal with Amazon.

  58. Product tying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't it awesome when companies use their dominance in one market to manipulate another market? It'd be nice if Internet users could boycott them both for a single day, but that'll never happen.

  59. There is a long history here.... by mattmarlowe · · Score: 1

    Amazon at one point entered the search engine business.....google started to cancel some of the ads that Amazon used to buy for paid search.

    Than Amazon wanted to create its own version of android and app store, but google told app developers they would be penalized if they uploaded their apps to both the Amazon appstore and Google's playstore. Now, every amazon tablet has to be hacked to run google play in order to have decent apps. Amazon's still pissed about that as it ruined a lot of their hardware plans - they even had to lay people off in the tablet biz.

    Google wasn't happy when Amazon launched their own phone. Google somewhat retaliated by going after Amazon's online shopping business by creating their own 3rd party shopping cart and checkout technology.

    And, of course, Amazon and Google are competing in video streaming and other markets.

    Personally, I realize they are both monopolies that like to steal my data, but at least Amazon actually treats me like a customer and offer me good value. And, provides excellent customer service. Google seems to think I'm such a putz that I'll give them every possible piece of data about my life for occasional free stuff. Google has zero customer service..everything is automated and you either take their stuff in the same fashion as everyone else or go away.

    I'm slowly pulling myself out of every google service I can. Youtube is the most difficult to replace.

  60. app neutrality! by doctorvo · · Score: 0

    These are champions of net neutrality. How about we send the FTC after them to force them to honor "app neutrality"?

    I have a lot less choice in terms of streaming sticks than I have in terms of ISPs.

  61. But you forget... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google wants to use its monopoly power.

    Remember their moto us now "Do Evil"

  62. My use of XBMC has always been legal by Medievalist · · Score: 1

    If you're pirating all your content, then Plex or Kodi are reasonable solutions. If you have some legal or moral hesitation over pirating, they aren't very useful.

    I don't "pirate content" (which I presume has something to do with murder, forcible asset reallocation and eyepatches on the high seas.)

    I also don't do any illegal or unethical copying of media, and I never have. I see no reason to do so; it just attracts unfavorable attention from morally challenged corporations and law enforcement without providing any compensatory benefits.

    But I've been using Kodi/XBMC for well over a decade, and it's extremely useful to me in my one hundred percent legal activities. The only thing it doesn't do is play bluerays, so I have a cheap, linux-based, standalone Insignia-branded player for that.

    1. Re:My use of XBMC has always been legal by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1

      Now you've added two extra steps that have to be performed with every instance of media. As well as significantly more cost.

    2. Re:My use of XBMC has always been legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't "pirate content" (which I presume has something to do with murder, forcible asset reallocation and eyepatches on the high seas.)

      Sadly, the ship had already sailed on "piracy = copy right offense" in the 1600s. You might have more luck objecting to the use of "hackers" to mean "people who do bad things with your computer" instead of "people who tinker with their computers in novel ways".

    3. Re:My use of XBMC has always been legal by Medievalist · · Score: 1

      Now you've added two extra steps that have to be performed with every instance of media. As well as significantly more cost.

      I don't mind the extra steps, since it saves me more steps than that every time I use my networked players. When I originally ripped my hundreds of CDs and dozens of cassettes I just did a minimum of two CDs every night for a year and a half or so. DVDs took another six months.

      Cost's not really an issue since my computers come from dumpsters. The only additional cost to build my tape ripper was a A/D converter and a yard sale cassette drive ($10 for a unit that originally cost over $400), and CD ripping doesn't even need that.

  63. What google is doing here is blocking a browser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Basically, this spat is much older than what most people realize. Google refuses to make an app for FireTV. Amazon is basically using the public site youtube.com/tv and the "app" is just a bookmark that takes you there.

    Amazon stop selling google devices because google would not allow their apps on their devices. Which, while I believe it sucks and hurts consumers, it was the only way to try and pressure Google in supporting their devices (it hasn't work). I wonder if the new round of ban devices had to do with wanting to add pressure or just them being dicks (i'm leaning towards them being dicks)

    What google is doing here is a bit scary. What they are basically saying is that because I don't like the company you buy things from, I'm going to block you from using publicly (free) available sites / services.

    They are basically doing the same as if Disney got mad at Apple, and decided to not allow anyone with a macbook to access espn.com.

    Anyways, my guess is someone will come up with an app that spoofs the browser as chrome or something else, and will hopefully bypass all this. The thing that sucks, is that it will most likely have to be side loaded which will hurt those that have no clue how to do it. Would love Amazon to do it themselves just to see how far this could go... hehe

  64. We should blame Amazon/Bezos by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    Maybe that's fair, but it starts a bad precedent for everyone to sink to Amazon's level. In the end I think its the end-users who get screwed.
    I'm not really into determining who started the fight, I think we should hold any company that participates in these tactics accountable, no matter what their reasoning.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire