Channel Issues & Questions

Help & troubleshooting for channels on your Roku device, including adding/removing channels, logging in to, authenticating, or activating a channel, channel-specific playback issues, assistance contacting channel publishers to report issues, and adjusting channel-specific settings.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Level 9

Re: First HBO Max, Now Peacock... Roku needs to be more flexible

Jump to solution

My niece's TV came with Android TV built in.

She ended up attaching an AppleTV to it, because she finds Android TV impossible to add channels to. Also, she's Apple all the way -- Macbook Pro, iPhone, iPad....

Your statistic is a bit misleading -- Android has a huge percentage of the SmartPhone market. When it comes to Smart TVs, Android TV only has 10% of the market -- less than either WebOS or Tizen.

A different article, from The Motley Fool, gives Roku TV a one-third of all Smart TVs sold -- in the US. But it also cautions that a large part of Roku TV's popularity comes from the brands it's a part of, especially TCL with its extravagantly-praised (by almost every television reviewer and testing lab out there!) and modestly-priced line of Ultra-High Definition (UHD) TVs with High Dynamic Range (HDR) across all its "4K" line. The article further warns Roku that it could lose all that growth in a hurry if it's not more responsive to both its Television partners, like TCL, and it customer base, like us....

The Motley Fool article uses TiVO as a case study. I still use TiVOs because I far prefer them to the utterly-huge-pile-of-**bleep** Scientific Atlanta DVRs cable companies rent you (I've cut the cord at my office, but not at home because my wife still wants to channel-surf), but as I said elsewhere I'm also something of a tech geek who still uses a Chromecast, where none of the other people I gave them to as Christmas gifts still do!

Cable Companies are legally required to support third-party DVRs like TiVOs, but they make it as hard as legally possible for "normies" to do so, with Cable Cards that come with instructions that are virtually impossible for inexperienced users to translate, and woefully obsolete "Digital Tuning Adapters" that have to be turned off and switched back on on an irregular but frequent basis! They are the reason why so many of us have walked away from cable completely -- as has been said elsewhere in this thread, a lesson Roku needs to consider.

Highlighted
Level 8

Re: First HBO Max, Now Peacock... Roku needs to be more flexible

Jump to solution

@Infensus wrote:

When it comes time to upgrade because Roku, or Samsung, or whoever no longer supports that TV or OS, will you buy another one?  Or, if the picture is still good, will you just buy the $50 streaming device to plug into it and be instantly upgraded?


That depends on whether I can afford to upgrade, bonebrain. Usually I'll keep what already works, tell the company that expects me to throw away a perfectly good device (that only lost any functionality because they decided to stop supporting it in order to force me to spend money I can't afford to spend) to go f--- themselves, and find something else to do with what I have. 

Highlighted
Level 9

Re: First HBO Max, Now Peacock... Roku needs to be more flexible

Jump to solution

@akbennyewu wrote:

Hi Danny,

We are all very, very aware your company's product doesn't support modern streaming apps. 

Please feel free to post a solution to resolve our problem TODAY, and not just inform us that you are going to report it to your team. Who at Roku doesn't know this happening? 

I have a solution that solves the problem TODAY; go buy a Chromecast. 

 


I'm assuming by "modern streaming apps", you're referring to Peacock?  Because HBOMax is NOT a modern streaming app.  No 4K at launch, no Dolby Atmos, etc.  It's almost as if Warner/AT&T thought, "Our customers have been paying us a crapload of money for **bleep** cable...they won't notice", and then vomited out HBOMax.  But you have to be talking about Peacock, because to call HBOMax a modern streaming app is laughable.

Highlighted
Level 9

Re: Since HBO Max and Peacock TV are unavailable on Roku - thinking it's time for a new device

Jump to solution

@bknabe wrote:

@Infensus wrote:

People - this is a non fight. It’s not like a cable provider fight where there is only one provider in town. 

get an android TV and move on. Problem solved and Roku loses customers. 

stop stressing over a non-issue. 


It used to be that there were more than one cable company in most places. 


Where have you seen this? I’m in NYC area and we never had more than one cable company for decades. 

around 10-15 years ago FIOS came to the area, but not everywhere. They just rolled out to the most densely populated areas. 

Only attempt at competition is Dish/DirecTV which don’t offer Internet other than non-competitive DSL lines. 

Cable companies have enjoyed near monopolies everywhere. 

Highlighted
Level 12

Re: Since HBO Max and Peacock TV are unavailable on Roku - thinking it's time for a new device

Jump to solution

@Infensus wrote:

@bknabe wrote:

@Infensus wrote:

People - this is a non fight. It’s not like a cable provider fight where there is only one provider in town. 

get an android TV and move on. Problem solved and Roku loses customers. 

stop stressing over a non-issue. 


It used to be that there were more than one cable company in most places. 


Where have you seen this? I’m in NYC area and we never had more than one cable company for decades. 

around 10-15 years ago FIOS came to the area, but not everywhere. They just rolled out to the most densely populated areas. 

Only attempt at competition is Dish/DirecTV which don’t offer Internet other than non-competitive DSL lines. 

Cable companies have enjoyed near monopolies everywhere. 


Yes, I am talking about ancient history in most places (we still have multiple options here, but we are the rare case). But you're making my point. There used to be options. Now the two biggest cable companies are aiming at streaming. It is only a matter of time if people let it happen.

Highlighted
Level 7

Peacock & HBOMAX

Jump to solution

I own a Roku TV and 2 Roku devices for streaming.  I am appalled that I CANNOT stream either Peacock or HBOMAX.  It will drastically alter my future purchases of Roku.  

This is nothing but a money grab of a large company to force customers to use services they approve and force the comsumer to pay more for services.  

My Roku devices will go in the drawer and not be used again.  Also it will greatly reduce use of my Roku TCL TV.

Donald

Stillwater, OK

Highlighted
Level 9

Re: Since HBO Max and Peacock TV are unavailable on Roku - thinking it's time for a new device

Jump to solution

@bknabe wrote:

@Infensus wrote:

@bknabe wrote:

@Infensus wrote:

People - this is a non fight. It’s not like a cable provider fight where there is only one provider in town. 

get an android TV and move on. Problem solved and Roku loses customers. 

stop stressing over a non-issue. 


It used to be that there were more than one cable company in most places. 


Where have you seen this? I’m in NYC area and we never had more than one cable company for decades. 

around 10-15 years ago FIOS came to the area, but not everywhere. They just rolled out to the most densely populated areas. 

Only attempt at competition is Dish/DirecTV which don’t offer Internet other than non-competitive DSL lines. 

Cable companies have enjoyed near monopolies everywhere. 


Yes, I am talking about ancient history in most places (we still have multiple options here, but we are the rare case). But you're making my point. There used to be options. Now the two biggest cable companies are aiming at streaming. It is only a matter of time if people let it happen.


I'm not making your point, i'm saying that there was never competition with cable providers in most any area.  It never happened by design.  Cable companies are folding now due to decline in traditional TV.

Cable companies will not control streaming.  They aren't going to develop their own platforms and will most likely use either Android or Roku SDK's.  This will always allow other device manufacturers to get into the market and deploy apps.  Cable companies won't own the apps, but could negotiate access to the apps via channel lineups.

Cable companies will instead focus on Internet access and raising rates in that area to generate revenue in place of TV.  They will make people think they need 1GB access for 4K when a 100mb line will easily accommodate families of 4.  Figure ~15mb per 4K movie (60mb if all 4 people watch a separate movie at the same time).  Hopefully Starlink and Amazon will offer competition in this area.

If a cable company does own a channel, why would they want the headache of developing a streaming box to deploy potentially globally and have to support?  It's probably easier and cheaper to negotiate beneficial rights to deploy on existing devices and leave the maintenance/support to someone else.

This is why the advertising, subscription, data, content negotiations are so important to them.

Maybe we should just agree we don't agree on the topic.

 

Highlighted
Level 10

Re: First HBO Max, Now Peacock... Roku needs to be more flexible

Jump to solution

@Infensus wrote:

The argument that a person bought a Roku TV, or other smart TV and then doesn't want to buy "another" device doesn't make much sense.

 


Hi. Here are some reasons why someone who paid good hard-earned money for a smart TV does not want to buy an additional separate streaming device:

1) Smart TVs are expensive, long-term investments, whereas sticks and most boxes are not.

2) Smart TVs should have all streaming services easily accessible on one home screen, so the viewer does not need to switch inputs. 

3) Smart TVs are supposed to reduce the clutter, so viewers deal with fewer cables and power cords and remote controls.

Maybe you don't care about these reasons, but many of us do. And it may seem like switching inputs is not a big deal, but it is inconvenient when I'm looking at my TV's home screen deciding what to watch, and I don't think about that other service for which I am paying, because it is only accessible via that other separate device. Also, people who have more than one smart TV should not have to buy a separate stick/box for each TV, nor should they be expected to move one portable device from TV to TV just to watch one subscription service in a different room.

Highlighted
Level 9

Re: First HBO Max, Now Peacock... Roku needs to be more flexible

Jump to solution

@Paddypods wrote:

@Infensus wrote:

The argument that a person bought a Roku TV, or other smart TV and then doesn't want to buy "another" device doesn't make much sense.

 


Hi. Here are some reasons why someone who paid good hard-earned money for a smart TV does not want to buy an additional separate streaming device:

1) Smart TVs are expensive, long-term investments, whereas sticks and most boxes are not.

2) Smart TVs should have all streaming services easily accessible on one home screen, so the viewer does not need to switch inputs. 

3) Smart TVs are supposed to reduce the clutter, so viewers deal with fewer cables and power cords and remote controls.

Maybe you don't care about these reasons, but many of us do. And it may seem like switching inputs is not a big deal, but it is inconvenient when I'm looking at my TV's home screen deciding what to watch, and I don't think about that other service for which I am paying, because it is only accessible via that other separate device. Also, people who have more than one smart TV should not have to buy a separate stick/box for each TV, nor should they be expected to move one portable device from TV to TV just to watch one subscription service in a different room.


So - any TV a person buys these days will be a smart TV.  I recently looked for the old fashioned basic one and did not see any.  Therefore, whatever you buy will be either Android or Roku (let me know if you see something different - always curious).

TV's are long term expenses, but the software on them is not.  This is why I say that people shouldn't discard a TV simply since the OS may no longer be maintained.  So, eventually I hope people will add a streaming device to a TV to:

- Keep the TV OS current at a much reduced cost.

- Potentially diversify the TV to support more than 1 OS.

Your points 2 & 3 can easily be solved by purchasing a Harmony Hub by Logitech.  With the press of 1 button the device can power on your TV, power on a cable box or surround sound, change to the proper input, and reduce clutter.  No additional remotes required.  Very cool device.  It can't hide cables though...

So - the point I was making is that it doesn't make sense that a person would never add another device since it is much cheaper than buying another TV.  Eventually, a person will have to in order to run the then current version of apps built for the newer OS of that time.

 

Highlighted
Level 8

Re: First HBO Max, Now Peacock... Roku needs to be more flexible

Jump to solution

I must say that I find myself frustrated and disappointed by the lack of official response here.

@RokuDanny-R 

As Roku customers, we are asking for a resolution or at least an ETA.

At this point, I would be happy with a response that looks like empathy.

Something like this:

"Thank you for reaching out. We understand your frustration and we are working hard to get this resolved as quickly as possible.  Unfortunately, I do not have an ETA at present, but I will share updates as soon as they become available."

Customers post here because they care.

For every customer that complains, many, many more just switch products and go away without saying a word.

In that context, this type of feedback is a gift.  Please be respectful of that.

Is there any word on when HBO Max and Peacock will be available on Roku?