Thanks to a few inadvertent leaks (here and here) on Roku’s part, nearly all remaining questions have been answered. And the Roku 2 will be announced Wednesday.
As we previously surmised, the redesigned Roku 2 digital media streamer will be offered in three variations: The 720p HD ($59), the 1080p XD ($79), and the 1080p XS ($99). The top end model comes bundled with a new Bluetooth motion (!) remote to support Roku’s casual gaming initiative… and Angry Birds will be made available for free at launch. Folks who pick up the HD and XD model can later upgrade to the gaming remote, as it’ll (eventually) be offered as a $29 accessory. Although, at that point, you’ll wish you had bought the XS given the pricing and Roku’s commitment to gaming:
Angry Birds is just the beginning. We are spending a lot of time with the major casual game publishers. Between now and Christmas you’ll see the games selection on Roku grow dramatically. My goal is to grow Roku into a major low cost family oriented gaming platform. And they’ll be in the $5 range rather than $30 range.
As something more than a casual gamer, Peggle doesn’t interest me the way Roku’s updated Netflix app might… bringing 1080p, subtitles, and perhaps 5.1 audio. Also joining the Roku 2 launch are new premium content partners that include live FOXNews, for those so inclined, and Major League Soccer.
Of course I intend to get my hands on some product in the very near future and will report my findings. Which will hopefully include expanded USB codec/file support.
(Thanks, Matt!)
Guess Roku accidentally published their blog post a day early but didn’t yank it before Google cached the whole thing. Oops. ;)
Any word on whether or not the updated Netflix app will find it’s way to the Roku 1?
We don’t know yet. Certain older hardware models are capable of 1080p, yet we don’t know if the new Netflix app requires the beefed up processing power and additional memory contained within these new units. I also don’t know how much 1080p content Netflix actually has…?
And by my count, the new line would actually be the Roku 3 or the Roku 4. ;) In fact, the model line is in the 3000s (v3) where as last years line was 2000s (v2). So I’m not sure how they came up with 2. Unless they had intended to launch with a new second generation UI. So the Roku 1, again by my count, isn’t capable of Netflix 1080p. But two of the three 2010 models could be. We shall see.
1080p never worked on my Roku XR with my Sony Bravia TV (always get a signal not supported error whenever playing a 1080p video). I wonder if they fixed that with the new Roku box or not.
Just noticed the Bluetooth remote retains the instant replay remote that’s been dropped from the IR remotes (bundled with the HD and XD models). That alone could be worth the $20 differential between the XD and XS to me.
USA Today released their write-up/pseudo press release a bit early as well. They noted that Roku is adding Netflix subtitles.
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2011-07-19-roku-2-netflix_n.htm
Dave, nobody really knows how much 1080p content Netflix has. Over on AVSForum, those of us with PS3’s have speculated on this, mainly by measuring bandwidth. Such new NBC editions like 30Rock and Parks and Rec are thought to be 1080p simply because they look so good.
Also, the PS3 cannot properly pass-through DD+ or 24FPS on anything but Blu-Ray playback. For this reason alone I’m going to purchase a Roku 2 (or one of the cheaper units if it’s supported).
Hey, doesn’t Vudu already exist as a channel on the older Rokus? That’s 1080p/24FPS and DD+ 5.1, correct? If so, why wouldn’t the older units be able to support it on Netflix?
HDGuy,
No regarding Vudu on Roku.
Mike, after they slipped up and we caught them they decided to let the news fly early… hence the late night coverage. And, to my blogging buddies – I’d never been briefed and wasn’t held to your embargo. Sorry!
HDGuy, wish there was a Vudu channel!
I’m a bit baffled by the drive by streamers to provide 1080.
Given that the constraint on streaming PQ is bitrate, not pixel dimension, I have trouble thinking any of the current streaming services will provide any better PQ at 1080 than 720. If you stream at 2.5mbit, you’re not going to get better PQ at 1080 than at 720.
It might look nice in the specs, but in practice, it should not help matters one single whit.
(If I were in the market for a Roku, which I most certainly am not, the useful upsell point is the 5ghz radio receiver on the high end model. If you’re not connected via ethernet, that actually will get you better PQ in reality, even though 1080 won’t.)
Yeah, it’s probably a bit of a red herring. And all units have the same processing power, although not the same memory, so that 720p HD limitation could be artificial anyhow.
I also notice that on the box one of the channels listed is EPIX which is not available on the first gen boxes.
Chucky,
I agree with your broader point – and Dave is probably correct when he notes the references to 1080p are probably something of a red herring – but to my eye, the HDX streams from Vudu, 4.5 Mbps, are comparable to any other video source. I have watched plenty of movies on blu-ray and via Vudu on my PS3, and I am hard pressed to see a difference in PQ; irrespective of whether they call it 720p, 1080p or anything else.
Speaking of Vudu and the new Roku boxes, I am a little surprised there hasn’t been any chatter about the service making its way to Roku – particularly after the recent announcement of the Walmart partnership. And if it ever does, I will be curious to see if they bring the HD (2.5 Mbps) and HDX (4.5 Mbps) streams or just the HD streams…and how they compare to playback on the PS3. While I guess some are interested in Angry Birds specifically, and casual gaming in general, on Roku devices, I am still waiting for the likes of Vudu and an overhaul of the UI.
jcm, I’m with you. Roku needs Vudu (assuming it comes with better quality HD) and an interface refresh. Also, whomever brings HBO Go to their set-top box first gets my money. Well, Roku will probably get it anyway – but that’ll be a blog expense, rather than a lustful personal purchase. :)
“I have watched plenty of movies on blu-ray and via Vudu on my PS3, and I am hard pressed to see a difference in PQ; irrespective of whether they call it 720p, 1080p or anything else.”
Well, depends on the size of your screen, of course. The bigger the screen, the more you’ll notice the difference in PQ between “good enough” streaming and blu-ray. On a 32″ screen, the difference certainly is hard to notice. On my larger screen, I can certainly notice the difference between “good enough” streaming and Blu-Ray or Amazon downloaded VOD. When the screens get big, bit-rate matters.
Also depends on whether or not you like to sometimes change your aspect ratio to force widescreen movies into fullscreen 16:9. Zooming is another place where the difference between “good enough” streaming and Blu-Ray comes into play.
But “good enough” streaming is just what the name says. For the majority of purposes, though not for all purposes, it is indeed good enough.
(I’m a PQ freak, so I’m in the minority. For example, I can’t believe that Disney multicasts the NBA Finals in 720 instead of 1080, since in the high-bandwidth environment of multicast, the difference between 720 and 1080 is pretty damn noticeable to the human eye. But I seem to be the only one who cares…)
But to get back to your actual point: I have no experience with Vudu HDX, so I have no idea how the HDX promised 4.5mbit functions in the real world. It obviously isn’t going to match Blu-Ray PQ, but if it is delivered as promised, it obviously should better Netflix. But now we’re no longer talking about streaming, are we? And that limits the universe of devices that will be capable of handling Vudu HDX, no? (I’m admitedly pretty ignorant about all things Vudu, and am curious.)
“Also, whomever brings HBO Go to their set-top box first gets my money.”
Wouldn’t Occam’s Razor suggest we’re waiting on HBO Go to go there, and not waiting on some set-top box to go there?
(There were originally reports several months ago that HBO Go was being built into next-gen TV sets, but since those rumors, we’ve seen no move whatsoever by HBO to allow the service into the lean-back space. Also, if one thinks about the very name of the HBO Go service, it makes one ponder if lean-back is in the cards.)
Yes, absolutely. So it’s who does HBO bless (if any) and who gets there first. Unless we resort to web browser hackery on the TV. But I’m hoping for better.
And if you really cared about PQ, I don’t think zoom would be part of your lexicon. ;)
Chucky,
If you are ever in Southeastern Arizona, you will have to drop by for a screening in my theater/media room – my own slice of heaven – and judge Vudu HDX quality via a PS3 for yourself. I would be interested to get feedback from a videophile with a discerning eye.
“And if you really cared about PQ, I don’t think zoom would be part of your lexicon.”
If I had a 110″ screen, I’d never zoom to 16:9, since I could sit close enough to the screen to get immersive viewing even at 2:35:1. But given my more realistic screen size, there are some movies where I want an immersive picture more badly than I want the director’s chosen framing.
When I watched the (highly recommended) Enter the Void, going 16:9 was a no-brainer decision.
Similarly, I endorse the (controversial) decision to release the Barry Lyndon Blu-Ray at 16:9 despite the 1970’s letter from Kubrick to the contrary. If Stanley was alive today, I think he’d have signed off on 16:9.
—–
“So it’s who does HBO bless (if any) and who gets there first”
“If any” is the only real question here. If they Go into lean-back, they’ll let everyone in. If they want lean-back, they’ll want every subscriber who wants it to have it.
“If you are ever in Southeastern Arizona, you will have to drop by for a screening in my theater/media room – my own slice of heaven – and judge Vudu HDX quality via a PS3 for yourself.”
I’d genuinely be curious. HDX is essentially a download service akin to Amazon TiVo VoD, no? It’s some kind of movie-size local buffer scheme, no? At that bit-rate, you can certainly start to approach “good enough for bigger than average screens” PQ, but I’d be curious to see it in person.
Unfortunately, the State Department bulletin advises against all unnecessary travel to Libya, Ciudad Juarez, and the state of Arizona, so I’ll have to wait until I have pressing business in the area. But I do thank you for the offer. I love checking out a well-crafted home theater, even one without an unknown service like Vudu HDX to also check out.
This is probably a dumb question, but I’m having a hard time tracking down an answer.
Will the Roku 2 units have component?
I’m stuck with an older TV that has no HDMI and not really looking to upgrade since its still a great tv in all other regards.
Similiar pullquotes, completely different responses:
“And if you really cared about PQ, I don’t think zoom would be part of your lexicon.”
Interestingly, zoom to full-screen is less degrading to PQ than one might initially think.
The black bars at the top and bottom of the screen of a 2.35:1 movie are essentially cost-less during the encode. Which means for a fixed bit-rate, the smaller picture area of the 2.35:1 movie gets encoded at high-quality than a 16:9 movie would.
So when you zoom in, you’re zooming in to a higher quality encode. You do lower the PQ by zooming in, but not to the full extent one would initially assume.
“So it’s who does HBO bless (if any) and who gets there first. Unless we resort to web browser hackery on the TV. But I’m hoping for better.”
The thing is:
I think we all figured this out when HBO Go first debuted. It makes no sense for Time-Warner to implement it on lean-back because you could go watch old seasons of original programming for a few weeks and then cancel HBO. It would stop HBO from being able to “window” their original programming.
The only way it would make sense for HBO Go to implement on lean-back is if they really throttle the PQ, ala Hulu. Then they’d still be windowing the high-PQ stuff, while letting the low-PQ archive be available to customers on lean-back. And if that’s true, then perhaps they’re delaying out of worry about the possible PR fiasco and damage to the “brand” that low-PQ on lean-back would do to them.
Or maybe it’s a fake play to occupy the space until AllVid comes to town.
Scott, nice catch! I just heard back from Roku PR who say EPIX is coming soon.
ScrayMike, the new Roku 2 does composite or HDMI. There is no component. So if you’re in the market for a Roku and component is required, you’d need the 2010 model and a special breakout cable.
Chucky, it’d take a lot of weeks to catch up on The Wire and The Sopranos… What I think is more likely is they pull some sort of Hulu-ish rotating content thing if they’re concerned about losing customers and/or giving away content. I hope they do make it available in a lean back fashion.
“Of course I intend to get my hands on some product in the very near future and will report my findings. Which will hopefully include expanded USB codec/file support.”
Huh. I’d been thinking 1080 support was irrelevant because Roku was emphasizing WAN streaming while neglecting LAN playback.
But I forgot all about Plex on Roku. Assuming the Plex client works acceptably, that solves most of Roku’s LAN problems, and provides relevance for 1080 over 720…
Well, my existing Roku also does 1080p. But I still haven’t gotten around to playing with Plex. Too many projects. But true DLNA is more important than Plex of the USB sideloading. Not sure Roku will go there, although they surely now have the hardware.
“Well, my existing Roku also does 1080p. But I still haven’t gotten around to playing with Plex. Too many projects.”
I do understand it’s not your thing. But if you’re one of the subset of potential Roku customers who is really interested in local playback, then all you need is a spare Windows or OS X box on the LAN running the Plex Media Server, and then you’re good to go with a Roku, (assuming the client performs acceptably). The niche is taken care of without Roku having to do it.
I’ll hit it right after I get to your RedEye review… ;)
“I’ll hit it right after I get to your RedEye review…”
You should leverage your warm relations with Roku’s PR folks to get them to send me a 5ghz unit on extended loan. I’d be happy to review the Roku/Plex experience…
Actually, I got a better idea. I will loan you my XDS (dual band) for Plex coverage as I’ll be picking up the new XS soon. Drop me an email where to ship it – I’ve got a FedEx run scheduled for tomorrow.
Could someone explain to me the attraction of such online services as HBO Go and EPIX? I could understand watching a movie on a smartphone, but why bother watching EPIX over Roku at home when on FIOS they offer pretty much every EPIX movie in HDOndemand with a subscription?
HDGuy, EPIX doesn’t interest me but HBOGo does. The set-top box On Demand doesn’t include every single episode of every single HBO series. Also, I have been known to travel with my Roku and some of the current movies would be cool to watch while on the road. Also, kitchen and sunroom aren’t wired for cable TV, but I could watch movies on a Roku in those locations.
At the moment I’m using my mother-in-law’s account. She moved in with her boyfriend but hasn’t gotten around to canceling cable. If/when she does, we’ll most likely pick up a HBO subscription – it’s a solid value. Maybe double a Netflix subscription but way more than double in value. :)
That’s OK I guess in a pinch, but I’d just rather wait so I can watch in full HD quality with 5.1 surround. It’s not like HBO doesn’t re-run content ad-nauseum, and besides, I pick up what I like on Blu-Ray.
Any idea if the Roku 2 has Native resolution output. If it does I would like to get it so Netflix and other services will output 720P for 720P content and 1080P for 1080P content. Instead of scaling everything to 720P and doing a poor job at it like the PS3 and other players. When compared to my DVDO DUO.
Someone mention VUDU HDX streams at 4.5mb/s. That is the lower end of HDX. The upper end encode is 9mb/s and there is also another encode somewhere in the middle, with one HDX bars being 4.5mb/s and three HDX bars being the 9mb/s encode. While the 4.5mb/s encode looks good. There is a huge difference between the 9mb/s HDX encode and the 4.5mb/s HDX encode.
I know at one point I was having streaming issues and it would only stream at one bar, the 4.5mb/s encode. I got a credit for that movie since I could not watch the whole thing since I’m used to the higher quality 9mb/s HDX encodes.
Re. HDX at 4.5Mbps. That’s nothing special. Bit rate dominates resolution as Chucky pointed out. If HDX really was at 4.5Mbps then it wouldn’t look any better than Apple TV stuff at 4-5Mbps or XBox Live stuff at 5-6Mbps. They’re all using h.264 anyway. The 720p stuff would probably look better if anything. Now if HDX really can run at 9Mbps (peak) then yes it probably does look better than that 720p stuff and its probably worth doing 1080 rather than 720.
Don’t mix up broadcast and non-broadcast stuff though. Somebody else mentioned ABC showing sports in 720p. On BROADCAST 720p means 720p/60 or 60 frames per second. On BROADCAST 1080i (there is no 1080p) is 30fps (well, 29.97). So specifically for sports, at the same bit rate given the panning of the camera and the fast motion, you can get better PQ out of 720 than out of 1080. This is BROADCAST though. In OTT applications its all typically 720p/24 vs 1080/24 meaning the frame rates are the same and the two can be compared more directly.
On the Roku losing Component that’s too bad. Glad I bought the existing model, since with only 3 HDMI inputs on my living room TV I’ve had to hook the Roku up using component, at least for now.
WRT HBO Go, I doubt we’ll see sanctioned support for it on any STBs. At least not until you can buy a subscription to HBO GO without subscribing to the channel on cable. As a Tivo user without access to cable VOD, I’d certainly appreciate it being offered. Kind of hoping Tivo/Comcast will work out something in the next year or so…
Will the Roku 2 XS support 1080p/24FPS and DD+ bitstreaming for Netflix (at least DD+ Bitstreaming)? Roku doesn’t seem to say anything in the specs other than “1080p” output.
“Don’t mix up broadcast and non-broadcast stuff though. Somebody else mentioned ABC showing sports in 720p. On BROADCAST 720p means 720p/60 or 60 frames per second. On BROADCAST 1080i (there is no 1080p) is 30fps (well, 29.97). So specifically for sports, at the same bit rate given the panning of the camera and the fast motion, you can get better PQ out of 720 than out of 1080. This is BROADCAST though.”
I assume MULTICAST and BROADCAST are identical here.
And if that’s true, I’d humbly beg to differ. (If not, never mind what follows.)
Time-Warner multicasts their NBA games in 1080i. NBA League Pass multicasts 10% of their NBA games in 1080i.
Disney, OTOH, multicasts their NBA games in 720 via ESPN and ABC.
I can see an enormous improvement in detail in the 1080 multicasts over the Disney multicasts.
Now, obviously, there could be other factors at play beyond just the 1080 vs 720 distinction. The Disney games are (if my fuzzy memory on the topic is correct) transmitted at a somewhat lower bit-rate than the other games. But I assume that is tied into the decision to go 720 vs 1080 in the first place.
All I do can really say for sure is that, as an avid viewer, the games multicast in 1080i are noticeably superior in detail to the games multicast in 720. This could be causation, or it could simply be correlation with other factors, but it is there.
Chucky,
I can’t really say what’s behind the issue you’re seeing. As you say it could all be bit rate related. I’m certainly not suggesting that you can’t see the difference between 1080 and 720p resolution. You certainly can. But there are advantages to the higher frame rate of 720p as well in some cases.
The main time you’d notice the frame rate advantage is when things are moving fast. So maybe following a puck in a hockey game. Or the fast pan a camera might make in following a play in football when the view is zoomed in pretty close. With the lower & interlaced frame rate you’ll see more ‘judder’. And since your display is actually progressive, and has to convert any interlaced source to display anything, there’s the potential for more screen artifacts with 1080i and fast motion.
When they’re making movies they intentionally limit the speed at which they pan the camera because they know what’ll happen at 24p if they pan faster. With broadcast TV they don’t always do that. And sports would be the most obvious example.
That said, if you’re watching a football game and the camera ISN’T panning right now, the extra resolution of 1920×1080 is certainly going to be visible vs. 1280×720. I mean you’ve got something like 4 times the pixels.
BTW, I was somewhat surprised yesterday to find that my 2010 Roku’s USB Channel didn’t support AVCHD video shot by my digital video channel, meaning I’ll have to transcode the stuff. I mean, its just a transport stream, and they actually support the h.264 codec, its not that much more work. Plus this is the format the average consumer would have video in, unlike the MKV format that is very well supported for most people is used only in video they download from torrents off the internet. I suspect that tells you something still about Roku’s priorities here, and who they care about…
@Glenn
3 bar HDX which is a 9mb/s bitrate peaks at 18 to 19 mb/s.
No idea what th eone bar HDX(4.5mb/s) peaks at or the two bar HDX peaks at.
“I can’t really say what’s behind the issue you’re seeing. As you say it could all be bit rate related.”
No doubt.
But my theory has always been that that is the root cause here.
If you look at the stations that multicast in 720p like Fox and Disney, you’ll find that they are using a lower bit-rate than the stations that multicast in 1080i like Time-Warner and Comcast/GE.
It’s always been my thought process that this is not coincidental. In other words, Fox and Disney decided to transmit at a lower bit-rate, and that decision led them to use 720p instead of 1080i.
So we’re not comparing apples to apples. And at least at the moment in the multicast world, identifying 720p is a reliable proxy for identifying a lower quality picture than 1080i.
“But there are advantages to the higher frame rate of 720p as well in some cases. The main time you’d notice the frame rate advantage is when things are moving fast. So maybe following a puck in a hockey game. Or the fast pan a camera might make in following a play in football when the view is zoomed in pretty close. With the lower & interlaced frame rate you’ll see more ‘judder’. And since your display is actually progressive, and has to convert any interlaced source to display anything, there’s the potential for more screen artifacts with 1080i and fast motion.”
I’m aware of this theoretical framework, and do follow the logic.
However, as a religious viewer of NBA games, I’ll note that I don’t perceive any advantages in 720p over 1080i in picking up fast motion in what is, after all, a game filled with fast motion.
Now, again, this may all just go back to bit-rate. But at least perceptually for me, the games at 720p are inferior in all ways to the games at 1080i. Not only is there the (expected) less detail in the picture, but keeping track of fast motion seems less detailed as well.
Perhaps things would be different if I were a viewer of other sports. In football, the ball and players have a marked color contrast with the background (field) in a way that doesn’t exist in the NBA. But the only sport I watch is the NBA, so that’s the only viewing experience I can report upon.
We’re a group of volunteers and opening a brand new scheme in our community.
Your website provided us with useful info to work on. You have performed an impressive process and our whole group shall
be grateful to you.