38 Responses

  1. Sasha
    Sasha
    February 26, 2010 at 7:05 am | | Reply


    This article makes some great points; I got my father a Roku for christmas, primarily for the netflix option, but the inclusion of mlb.tv and other services (which we didn’t even know about at the time) makes it an incredibly versatile and useful device. I would certainly subscribe to an EPL Talk channel.

  2. sucka99
    February 26, 2010 at 7:21 am | | Reply


    what else is on Roku for those who don’t watch many movies or baseball?

    1. totoro
      totoro
      February 26, 2010 at 12:36 pm | | Reply


      There’s something else to watch?

      Seriously, though, there’s some extra stuff (you tubey type sites, pandora, links to some photo sharing sites such as facebook’s albums) that augments the main courses, but at this point it’s likely not something you’d buy the box for.

      Most people get the roku because they already have Netflix, and streaming movies to a PC or the roku requires no additonal sub fee. Ditto for MLB.tv if you’re a subscriber to the premium version of that service.

  3. jmf
    jmf
    February 26, 2010 at 7:40 am | | Reply


    Gaffer,
    I’m a web only soccer viewer. I have a laptop with an HDMI output that I plug into a Hi Def TV. For someone like me – who doesn’t mind setting up dual output on the laptop and connecting a couple of cables – does ROKU offer anything? IMHO you’re quite right on two points; EPL transmission is in the dark ages – so so streaming usually in 4:3 (or stretched) format – and the UEFA model is the way to go – I can every Champions League & Europa Cup game this season through UEFA.com for $40
    Nice article!

    1. mcv
      mcv
      February 26, 2010 at 3:24 pm | | Reply


      How do you manage to watch soccer only over the web? I’ve tried Justin.tv, but it just doesn’t cut it. I don’t know any sites that have (or sell) access to quality feeds for EPL or La Liga or Serie A games. How good is the UEFA feed–is it HD?

      1. jmf
        jmf
        February 26, 2010 at 4:59 pm | | Reply


        I’ve been a subscriber to Setanta-i for several years; the service is not, or should I say was not, HD but the quality improved over the years and I was able to enjoy live/recorded games on a large screen TV. I’ve just subscribed to foxsoccer.tv, hoping that some of their EPL games will be live, and I’m happily surprized by the quality. Although not HD, it is true 16:9 and very decent. ESPN360.com also carries soccer; not HD but again very decent. They offer a 16:9 ratio but it is simply a stretched version of 4:3. They are rebranding on April 1 to become ESPN3; I am hoping they introduce true widescreen then. Overall I would say that there is room for improvement; hopefully with so many soccer games from Europe originating in HD these providers will upgrade their service

  4. Steed
    Steed
    February 26, 2010 at 8:10 am | | Reply


    Don’t give up all hope on FSC going to Roku/Xbox360. I emailed them about this a couple months ago. Here’s there response:

    “Unfortunately, we have not plans this season to support the Xbox360 platform, but we are considering to add this feature for next year.”

    For those who don’t know the Xbox360 functions the same as a Roku. So maybe FSC will come to Xbox but it will probably still be delayed for next day viewing only.

  5. jeneria
    jeneria
    February 26, 2010 at 8:45 am | | Reply


    I love my Roku!

    You can get so many television shows (through Netflix), documentaries from around the world through Netflix and through a channel called DreamTV), really cool indie channels that I wouldn’t have known about such as Revision3 (shows on anime, gadgets, comic books, hacking, etc), Mediafly which gives you podcasts from all sorts of news sources, the aforementioned Pandora, and those are just a few of the free channels.

    Plus you can buy movies through Amazon to use on Roku.

    I hardly watch “real” tv anymore and when I do it’s mostly sports.

  6. Mike
    Mike
    February 26, 2010 at 8:46 am | | Reply


    Roku is a niche gimmick. There are plenty of other ways to stream media and online “apps” onto a TV, such as Apple TV, the Samsung thing, Xbox etc. Or you can hook up your computer and not have to choose from the three or four pre-approved websites.

    I don’t think FOX or the EPL could be bothered with setting up a new streaming service just for a potential few tens of thousand subscribers. MLB is a special case because the fact that they have nearly 100 games a week and very few games with (exclusively) national distribution (just the three Saturday FOX games, the one on Sunday on ESPN and maybe the Thursday MLB network one) meant that they could start streaming out of market live online years ago. It’s a developed enough platform that they’re pushing it out into various devices: iPad app store, Roku, possibly more.

    EPL broadcasts are entirely national; there are no out-of-market games broadcast locally. Sites like foxsoccer.tv have delayed streaming, but for now there will be little interest in developing channels for tiny audiences on things like Roku.

    1. yespage
      yespage
      February 26, 2010 at 9:00 am | | Reply


      Pretty much this. If you have an oldish computer or a laptop you can have near the television, you can have anything that is offered on the web played onto your HDTV, as long as you have an RGB connector. All you need is to make sure you can hook up a digital audio line to your receiver ($10ish for cable, $30 for quality USB sound card) and a UXGA cable ($15ish). And for that, you can not only play anything from the net, you can use your computer on your television to do whatever, surf the web, play games, etc…

      1. Martin
        Martin
        February 26, 2010 at 9:21 am | | Reply


        Um, why wouldn’t you just use an HDMI cable from Computer to TV?

        1. Martin
          Martin
          February 26, 2010 at 9:30 am | | Reply


          My bad, you said “oldish” computers, which wouldn’t have HDMI ports. apologies ;)

      2. totoro
        totoro
        February 26, 2010 at 12:45 pm | | Reply


        Well, the roku box comes in different flavors, from $79 for SD and $99 for HD, and the box is compact (just a few inches across). It’s pretty convenient.

        Ostensibly it’s not horribly complicated to enable something like the roku (or internet-enabled tv’s) to access streaming that already exists. I suspect that’s why roku was able to add the mlb.tv channel so quickly. I’ve wondered if MLSlive would be added, since it is run by mlb.tv, but perhaps there truly are so few potential customers here that even modest efforts wouldn’t be worth it.

        The biggest difference between MLB and EPL/Fox here (in the US) providing such services is not the nationally distributed games (which you can see on MLB.tv a few hours after the game is over), but the difference in market size.

  7. Mike
    Mike
    February 26, 2010 at 8:55 am | | Reply


    Perhaps Major League Soccer could wind up on these platforms though. They use the same technology vendor as MLB (MLS Matchcentre streaming looks like MLB.tv three years ago or so). The obvious drawback being that MLS plays about 8 games a week, and after you take out the ESPN2 game of the week, the FSC doubleheader, and Spanish only game on Telefutura, that only leaves about 4 live matches a week, sometimes less (which is what you get with the Direct Kick package).

    1. totoro
      totoro
      February 26, 2010 at 12:47 pm | | Reply


      I’d be interested (since I already have a roku for movies). You’d be able to watch any of the games as replays (sort of like the UEFA package, except obviously the level of play would be er, different).

  8. CTBlues
    CTBlues
    February 26, 2010 at 9:12 am | | Reply


    Fox is very aware of these set top boxes be it the Roku or Boxee because they constantly complain about Boxee showing content from Hulu without there permision even though Hulu is FREE. The big TV networks don’t want you streaming TV shows to your TV via the internet because they think they will loose the TV ad revenue.

    In the UK Sky can be viewed on your Xbox360 but you have to either have or subscribe to a full Sky package.

  9. Martin
    Martin
    February 26, 2010 at 9:27 am | | Reply


    I didn’t really know what Roku is, but after reading this article, i understand why. It sounds pretty worthless. Like other people said, you can do the same if not better things than Roku by hooking your laptop to your TV w/ an HDMI cable to show your computer screen on your TV, by streaming content from your computer to your TV through your PS3, X-Sux360 or other media server, or by playing native content through the PS3 and X-box (both offer online purchase and streaming of movies and shows directly through the system).

    So, why would anyone use this Roku?

    1. totoro
      totoro
      February 26, 2010 at 12:54 pm | | Reply


      Sorry that I’m repeating this from above, but here are some reasons:

      -Roku is cheap ($79/$99)
      -Small (5″x5″x1.75″)
      -I don’t know about your laptop, but it’s far easier to connect to the tv (all I have on mine is a VGA out…what do I need to connect that to my tv?)
      -I also like to browse the web on my laptop when watching sporting events.
      -I do not have an xbox, apple tv, or other set top box.
      -Roku appeals to people who already are Netflix subscribers, since it can be used to stream their content

      No doubt in a couple years it will be completely superceded by something else. Perhaps most tv’s or blu-ray players will have its functionality built-in. But for a few years, it is quite a nice, inexpensive, purpose-built “stopgap” that works very well.

  10. ALBERT
    ALBERT
    February 26, 2010 at 10:03 am | | Reply


    This is exactly what I have been asking for. I have ROKU and thinks will be a big advantage to pipe FSCHD and FS+ to ROKU.
    I always think this is the best environment for it. This should even make their channels more accessible and will reach a broader audience

    SO you know, ROKU IS just a internet content receiver for the TV. So if you have one its easy to view content on your BIG HGTV

  11. StephenLucey
    February 26, 2010 at 10:29 am | | Reply


    FYI, y’all, I know exactly what I’m doing technically, but I consider having to hook my laptop up to my TV a major pain in the ass. If I could get all the live HD sports I crave on my Xbox 360, than I would kick DirecTV out of my room with no cab fare home.

    1. yespage
      yespage
      February 26, 2010 at 10:52 am | | Reply


      It is something to consider whenever you decide to replace your laptop. You can just park your old laptop next to the tv, so hooking up the cables won’t be a problem. This option isn’t for everyone! If you can’t run cables under a floor or through a ceiling, you’ll have cables all over the place. The benefit of Roku or a streaming Blu-Ray is the lack for the need of connecting a device that is 10 to 40 feet from the television, to the television. The disadvantage, of course, is that you are completely limited by Roku or Blu-Ray as to what you can stream, where as the laptop, you can watch whatever.

  12. M.
    M.
    February 26, 2010 at 10:55 am | | Reply


    Not sure why you’re singling out Roku as a digital distribution channel (probably because you use one), but as others have pointed out there are dozens of ways to bring web-available content to the TV. It is fairly popular, but so are Apple TV, Boxee, Xbox, PlayStation, Wii… and just a plain old computer-to-TV hookup. The salient point, though, is that FSC should look into digital match distribution, and I believe to some extent they are getting into this business by absorbing Setanta and their setanta-i.com channel – which is being rechristened FoxSoccer.tv.

    If FSC brought all of their matches online for a fair price, I could be that much closer to cutting the cable cord. Stupid MLB, for all their cutting edge technology, will still not accept any amount of money in exchange for letting me watch my local team in-market. Luckily Premier League matches don’t present that issue!

    1. sucka99
      February 26, 2010 at 1:15 pm | | Reply


      Setanta-i still exists in Canada, Ireland and Australia for streaming games that they have broadband rights to and in the US for streaming PPV events from Premium Sports. Foxsoccer.tv is something separate – they’ve only reclaimed the rights that Setanta US used to have and are offering a somewhat similar service starting next month.

  13. M Emanuel
    M Emanuel
    February 26, 2010 at 10:58 am | | Reply


    I would prefer to use my Xbox 360 if the capability became available, however I would consider purchasing a Roku box if I was certain that the content would include options that extend beyond what I currently have available. I’ve had a setanta-i membership from the beginning and while I enjoyed being able to watch matches while travelling, it was a pain sometimes to be confined to the computer. I’m sure I could circumvent this by hooking up my laptop to my TV, but as Stephen mentioned, it’s a pain and I usually don’t bother. All in all, I’d be interested in pursuing a Roku box if it could fill the void that Setanta-I filled (until its demise).

    On another note, does anyone have info on the UEFA live package that’s on FoxSoccer.tv? Are the games actually live or available on a delay? The reason that I ask is that I’m not always around a tv for champions league matches and if the matches were available on FoxSoccer.tv in real time, I’d be inclined to check it out.

  14. brn442
    brn442
    February 26, 2010 at 11:34 am | | Reply


    Whether it’s Apple tv or Roku – it’s clear that set up devices that stream specialized content are the potential future, or at least the bridge between what we have now and seamless integration of web – based content and television (Martin, plugging a HDMI cable from your computer to your TV isn’t it.) At the end of the day, it will come down to how much of a role cable’s influence will play. As the artificial speed bumps that stand in the way of US internet download speeds start to fall away, something has to give.

    1. Mike
      Mike
      February 26, 2010 at 11:44 am | | Reply


      American broadband is a pretty big speed bump. Fiber optic won’t be available to those outside of the 50 biggest cities for a long time, so there’s just cable with the potential to increase speeds. But from everything I’ve seen its getting worse. Bandwidth caps are being imposed, and monthly prices are being raised and speeds lowered (as tiered bandwidth plans are tweaked).

      And given that these are the cable companies, unless required by law, they’ve got no interest in providing a red carpet right up to your doorstep for online services to take away the money you were paying them for all these lousy channels just to get the few with soccer goodness.

      1. brn442
        brn442
        February 26, 2010 at 11:53 am | | Reply


        Mike, that’s where the “Google” factor comes in

        http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/11/technology/companies/11google.html

        Plus, their bluff bid a year ago forced the eventual winner to open up the spectrum.

        Technology waits for no man. Those creak, old, poorly run, cable monopolies will get their day of reckoning sooner than you think.

  15. sucka99
    February 26, 2010 at 1:32 pm | | Reply


    The advantage of using a STB is that you have a consistent UI and authentication process between the box and the box service provider. Then the content providers feel secure that their content won’t be stolen or otherwise used against their wishes. For instance – the way the iPhone restricted the Google Voice app because it was end-running AT&T’s cell network. The challenge for STBs is to provide a wide enough set of applications that would interest a lot of users. The Roku thing looks great – if you’re a Netflix or baseball fan. But other than that all you get are basically a bunch of video clips from god knows who. The idea is great but I wanna see the content I like – like The Daily Show or Lost or The Office or whatever. Not some c-list celeb using blip.tv as their entrance into the biz.

    Either way, as someone pointed out, the giant elephant in the room are cable companies. They control the broadband pipe, and they can offer a lot of the same stuff through their own cable STBs – as Comcast seems well on its way to do. What they do with NBC’s content might be a good idea of where the industry is going. In the end, I see things like Roku as the next Slingbox – a great idea for it’s time and very popular for a short burst of time until other big giants caught up.

    1. Steed
      Steed
      February 26, 2010 at 1:58 pm | | Reply


      As far as the Daily Show/Lost/The Office goes I purchased “playon media software” for $20 bucks and it streams all of Hulu directly to my Xbox. It is open software, so they have a website where people make new streaming software, including one for southparkstudios.com and Justin.tv (although I have yet to get that to work for a live game).

      I just point this out because I think it shows that the content available to these devices is rapidly expanding and if there is something that is missing, it will probably be added at some point.

      1. sucka99
        February 26, 2010 at 2:48 pm | | Reply


        only thing I worry about with that is that open software and DRM don’t mix. DRM is all about control where OSS is all about free access. So when something like that comes about it’s bound to be broken with a new x-box or hulu update of some kind. Look at the jailbreaking with the iPhone or PSP – the back and forth is relentless and only a true techie would put up with re-jailbreaking after a new update.

  16. iib
    iib
    February 26, 2010 at 1:59 pm | | Reply


    Are our prayers about to be answered?

    http://sports.yahoo.com/soccer/news?slug=ap-premierleague-globalchannel&prov=ap&type=lgns

    Sounds like big news on the horizon….

    1. yespage
      yespage
      February 26, 2010 at 2:37 pm | | Reply


      “the network will broadcast news and feature programing alongside classic matches”…

      News – already have it.
      Feature Programming – Is that live EPL games or just shows?
      Classic matches – as opposed to classic match ups? IE old stuff.

      Have no idea what to expect from that.

      1. sucka99
        February 26, 2010 at 2:50 pm | | Reply


        sounds like the channel will basically play 24 hours of Classic matches, Premier League Review, Premier League Magazine, and Premier League Preview. IOW what people complain about Fox Soccer Plus just showing a bunch of old games.

  17. Jason Gatties
    February 26, 2010 at 2:22 pm | | Reply


    I’ll never understand the attraction to Roku. Its not like I’m ancient either…I’m 34.

  18. Aaron from Phoenix
    Aaron from Phoenix
    February 26, 2010 at 2:56 pm | | Reply


    HD Nation did a review of the Roku and MLB streaming package. Here is a link http://revision3.com/hdnation/mlb#rev3Player

  19. Chuckles
    Chuckles
    March 1, 2010 at 2:48 pm | | Reply


    The main reason I bought a Roku?

    Because I didn’t like running my PC for hours on end while I watched a movie. For $99 I have saved an untold amount of wear and tear on my system not to mention being much greener….the first month I had my Roku my electric bill dropped $28. A few more months and the thing has paid for itself.

    Also, it is way more user friendly, it works just like any other set top box via remote and is couch potato approved.

  20. Diriye
    Diriye
    June 1, 2010 at 2:26 am | | Reply


    http://discover.sonystyle.com/internettv/?XID=O:internet%20on%20tv:corp_internetTV_gglrsch

    Logitech’s set-top box using Google tv technology will allow people to access any video from any website. All you need to do is to hook up the box to your HDTV through hdmi cable. It is coming this fall. That means we can watch MLS, Uefa directly from their website using the logitech box in our living room.

    The next thing is to have every video on 1080p.

  21. Bern
    Bern
    February 6, 2012 at 8:57 pm | | Reply


    I see that this article was posted a while back. Nowadays, Foxsoccer.tv is a subscription, web-based product. So what’s the difference between FStv and Netflix? In theory, what’s the difference between being allowed to watch on my laptop and being able to scream content via Roku? Roku would be a nice convenience for me.

Leave a Reply