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


@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


@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


@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

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?

 

 

Highlighted
Level 7

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

In full agreement that this sucks and its users who are inconvenienced by the issue.  Here's my work around. 

Background: I'm on AT&T so have HBOMax free for one year--I won't have access to HBOGo app on my ROKU at the end of the month.

We all have smartTVs now--I went to the Smart TV function on my set, joined it to the wifi, and downloaded the HBOMax app.  Works well.  No additional costs, minor amount of toggling around to go from the app to my ROKU. Hoping this will be a short term workaround because it is more convenient to stay with ROKU for viewing.

Hope this is helpful.

Highlighted
Level 11

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


@Infensus wrote:




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.


 I hope you're right. But corporate cultire is very hard to change, and Warner and Comcast both have a culture of trying to dominate any space they enter for a very long time.

Highlighted
Level 10

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


@Infensus wrote:

@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.

 


Thanks for the clarification. I thought you were suggesting that someone who has just bought a smart TV should also be expected to buy a separate device for that new TV. Instead, you meant someone whose smart TV OS is no longer being supported can improve it by purchasing a stick/box rather than replacing the TV. I see that point. Although, I hope it is many years before my new Samsung TV will no longer update to the latest Tizen OS.

In this case, though, the reason we are all having this discussion in this forum has nothing to do with an aging OS. We are caught in the middle of an apparent struggle over ad fees, user data, and whether the device manufacturers can control the user experience. I just replaced the dumb TV in my living room with the Samsung I mentioned. A month into Roku not giving me access to the HBO Max app, I looked at non-Roku sticks and boxes for the dumb TV. Then I decided to just make the investment in a smart TV. Unfortunately, while Samsung does have HBO Max available, it currently does not have Peacock TV. (Though a Peacock rep told me that "other platforms" will be supported in the future when I asked about a Tizen version of the app.) Meanwhile, I also took advantage of a sale on Fire Sticks and learned how to sideload unsupported apps. So now I have three different platforms available to stream my subscriptions.

I just think it shouldn't be this way. And I'm lucky that I can afford this. 

As for the Logitech hub, I've been using a Harmony universal remote for years. But I'm actually replacing it with a SofaBaton, assuming it works as advertised. It's a remote, not a hub, but it allows you to set up the kinds of routines you described, and it claims to control non-IR devices like my Roku Ultra and the new Fire Stick, which my Harmony remote can't do. 

And fyi, Android and Roku aren't the only smart TV options. Those two are separate OS platforms that are integrated by TV manufacturers like Sony and TCL, but other TV manufacturers have their own smart TV platforms. Samsung, LG, and Vizio all created their own operating systems. I like the Samsung Tizen OS. My sister has an LG, which seems a bit more complicated than Tizen. I haven't looked into Vizio.

Highlighted

Time to unload Roku? Too many programming disputes

No HBO Max.   No Peacock.   This is why we have left cable TV, so many issues revolving around trying to screw with the customer.

Now ROKU and Amazon Fire TV stick are doing the same thing.   I can side load the Fire TV stick, but I am tired of it, it's a hassle.   Roku I can't.

I see new Android TV sticks and equipment entering the market daily.

Initially I was convinced it was greedy HBO.   But now, I am thinking it's both.   This has dragged on and on.

I give up.   Faithfully owned my Roku products for years, but so tired of all of these fights.   

New Android TV player ordered and on the way.  I give up   Roku for sale....

Highlighted
Level 7

Re: Peacock & HBOMAX

The issue is these 2 MEGA corporations are trying to pressure  Roku >Basically NBC/UNIVERAL  and ATT want special deals not pay what everyone else is paying , including Disney.It is actaully a sharing fee , complian to them not Roku.

Highlighted
Level 11

Re: Peacock & HBOMAX

Doesn't matter who's to blame, people bought Roku and cut cords because they were sick of this garbage with their cable companies. Now it's come to Roku.

Customers and users aren't interested in the details of what's going on; they want working apps/channels. If they can't get that, they aren't going to "complain to" someone else, they are going to ditch Roku for another device, such as Amazon Fire, where even though there is no deal for HBOMAX or Peacock they have the ability as users to sideload the channels and get the access they want.

If this doesn't get sorted out for customers by the end of this week I don't think Roku is going to be able to recover from this.