they got this man looking like Doctor Who

>you don't need a Pulitzer to write those

This is like when people who stick up for shitty filmmakers bring up Citizen Kane, right?

Nobody's saying it has to be Pulitzer Prize or nothing. What I'm saying is that Collider is a junk outlet, they hire junk writers, and there's nothing worth looking at on their junk "Geek Culture" clickfarm.

It's like if you admitted you liked huffing farts, and someone else said "you maybe shouldn't do that" and then you responded by saying "We can't all fart Chanel No. 5, you know."

Like... what? Who said... Chanel? My guy stop inhaling other people's colons, that's all. And stop breathing it on other people if you can.

home is fuckin' great, my guy! I mean, i'm killing time at work right now, though, but home is all gravy.

But anyway, for real though, stop visiting Collider, and for certain stop sharing shit from Collider. They're not a news site, they don't know what they're doing 3/4ths of the time, and they certainly don't have anyone there worth reading for their critical thought and writing skills.

I'm looking forward to reviews of this special, absolutely. There are a few critics whose insight is very much valued and I can't wait to see how they weigh in.

Collider is a Geek Culture clickfarm staffed by absolutely trash-tier "writers" who, in every case, are nothing more than graduated forum posters/bloggers at best and there is literally zero worth to be gained from reading whatever 8th grade essay someone there churned out for $10 bucks a whack.

>The market for stand-alone "streaming boxes" is.

I've already addressed why it's not simply "stand-alone" streaming boxes, and why it also includes the streaming software included in many of the Smart TVs being sold, their software ALSO becoming subpar in the time they spent to pursue content creation alongside their hardware becoming undesirable.

(also the market for standalone boxes/pucks/sticks isn't "on its last breath" either)

You keep suggesting that Roku on Smart TVs works by "launching the app" when that's not how that works, too. You don't "launch the app" on a smart TV powered by Roku. You just turn the TV on. Roku is the software that makes the TV go. You seem to believe it's an app - it's the OS.

>Because the market is on its last breath

That's not why they did it

Nor is the streaming software/hardware market "on it's last breath." especially considering the fact streaming is about to be the primary means of consuming television.

>No, seriously, what are their other options

not letting their software/hardware suck in comparison to competitors in that space.

Which they did.

They chose to spend time, money, and resources chasing content creation instead of shoring up the product that got them known in the first place. They didn't have to go that way, but they did. Again, they're not helpless to pursue bad biz decisions. They chose to do so.

Dude, it's not my fault you ran into a convo trying to cape for faceless execs with no real knowledge of anything you were talking about.

Like, it hasn't occurred to you that knee-jerk assuming the execs in question (whoever they are, LOL) had to make the dumb moves they made is a bad assumption to make. But it's almost always the assumption always made, for no other reason than they're rich execs and we're not.

>They were losing platform domination because their platform (the set top box) was no longer necessary

They had already moved into providing a lot of the software for Smart TV's alongside providing standalone boxes by that time. You seem unsure as to how Roku actually works inside a smart tv, too.

They had other options beside "content," people - without really understanding what they're talking about - wanna keep acting like they were helpless to make this dumb call that they made.

>Based on what evidence

The last 5-7 years.

Also, the product wasn't just stream boxes. Their product was placed in a lot of Smart TVs as well, which seemed like a great call for manufacturers precisely because Roku had gotten enough brand ubiquity in the space as to basically be "streaming" for many consumers.

And as they shifted focus towards content creation over platform domination, their grip on the market slipped and the quality of their boxes AND their Smart TV implementation declined.

They chased after content creation when they didn't have to, and they fucked that up.

>Hence why Roku is trying to shift into content production.

No, that's backwards. The product declined BECAUSE they tried to shift to content production. They mismanaged resources and took their eye off the ball.

They tried to expand and fucked their brand up. They didn't have to do this to themselves. They weren't helpless. The executives making these calls made the wrong calls. They're not infallible. They're just people. And because they're rich doesn't automatically mean they're smart.

Lol, what.

The conversation is right there, above us. Its what we're talking about. Its literally how we got here.

It hasn't changed in the hour or so its existed

>Lmao look around the rest of the comments, and then come back to ours and look at the up and downvotes.

You realize this doesn't actually mean anything right? It's not a scoreboard. You don't "win" at opinions because the doots point one way or the other. Because the doots don't mean anything. Having a bunch means exactly the same as having negative amounts. Because four people on a subreddit hit the downarrow doesn't have any intrinsic meaning. It's four people. Online. In a thread about Roku laying off 200 people. in the middle of a workday.

>considering we're arguing about the popularity of a service I think this small sample size does great job representing the overall picture.

You're arguing that based on the actions of four people in a reddit subthread the completely bullshit "stat" you threw out regarding "literally everyone" saying they're the best at streaming is, in fact, now proven true.

This is not how that works, LOL.

Sure, but we're not talking about that. We're talking about people going into a Walmart and coming out with a TV. The idea put forth was that if you got a TV at Walmart, it had Roku on it, and it turns out that's increasingly not the case, and in fact, a number of folks are going into Walmart to come out with Walmart's own branded streambox

>Considering literally everyone (including in this thread) talk about how they have the best software for streaming,

That's not happening. Not here, not "literally" everywhere, either.

edit: if I only had that thing in me that causes me to root for and pledge allegiance to brands and brand concerns like it was a sports team, LOL.

"Literally everyone says its the best software" = 4 people in a reddit thread about Roku laying people off, talking to each other.

I just went and that's not what I'm seeing. Maybe that's a function of whatever regional differences there are in purchasing practices and stock on hand, but Roku is losing business to Google/Android as the hardware OS for smart tvs, even at Walmart.

Walmart itself is actually becoming fairly well known for their own ONN-branded androidtv box/stick

It's actually way closer to 50/50 (or maybe even 60/40 by now) that the Hisense you grab at a Wal-Mart is using GoogleTV/Android TV as its OS, not Roku.

Same with TCL, I believe.

No, they didn't. They needed to continue being basically the short-form brand name for streaming platforms, period, and they took their eye off that ball by trying to be a programmer.

Their product declined, people don't like it compared to other offerings, and now their brand is diminished.

It was a bad call. Corporations make those all the time. It's not like executives are somehow infallible geniuses who are in the position they're in because of their unassailable intellectual acumen.

Rich people can (and do) fuck up.

Roku should have never tried to become a programmer in the first place, and it was pretty obviously never going to work out for them. And it isn't.

Roku is a brand that people recognize for no other reason than it allows them to find streaming apps and use them. Nobody is going to Roku because of "The Roku Channel," or anything on it. It's a bonus feature at best. It's not a draw. It's never going to be a draw. It was always a weird, futile idea. It'd be like watching Mr. Coffee spend billions trying to compete with Starbucks as a roaster.

At this point Roku is probably going to cut as many costs as possible before offering itself up to be eaten alive by Amazon, Apple, or Google. Which is fine because while Roku has been chasing this dumb pipedream to become a legitimate streaming service, the product anyone actually cares about - the streambox itself - is declining.

AH-AHHHHHH-AHHHHHHH

LOL.

"People are posting stuff they like and I can't complain about shit I don't like."

It'll pass.

Hey, at least you figured it out! And that's good to hear, for real. It sucks when the stuff you get (and care about) doesn't work the way you want it to, or the way its SUPPOSED to. I know that frustration myself.

Congrats on finding the fix man

Physician, heal thyself

>I was a sound engineer who’s recorded and mixed live events and low budget independent films.

OK?

You being a sound engineer doesn't change any of the shit I was talking about. (It wasn't even directed AT you, I was responding to someone else). Also, you complaining about sound engineering and then conveniently leaving out for absolutely zero reason that you're a SOUND ENGINEER for "low budget independent films" in the OP where you're making it sound like it's novel that you're complaining about bad audio at home is a wild choice.

Movies older than 15 years ago still actually had people behind those boards who gave a shit about mixing for stereo at home because they knew a lot of folks would be listening that way. Now, that still happens (maybe to a lesser degree) today, and those mixes are still made available. What's happening a lot more NOW is that Consumers now have a habit of forcing 5.1 shit through terrible soundbars, shitty TV speakers, or not great speakers, or less speakers than needed, with processing they're not really aware of happening by automatic process inside their TV and their soundbar.

Again - none of this has shit to do with whether you run the board at concerts or not. It's not awkward that we didn't stop to acknowledge that our discussion didn't note you mix live concerts (which is really different than what we're talking about anyway, and what you're complaining about isn't really "sound engineering" either.)

And if you have a 5.1 system at home and you're having problems hearing dialog - or anything - try the stereo mix. Even if you don't WANT to try the stereo mix because "ewww, Stereo," and then see if you don't hear what's happening a little better.

90% of the time you do.

this is going to happen to Pokerface in a year and a half.