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: 
StreamerUser
Level 20

Re: YouTube TV vs Roku negotiations


@sabrin514 wrote:

So by your logic, if Roku decided to remove ALL the apps that people are using until the only thing left was the roku app, that would be fine? Does anyone genuinely think anyone would ever choose to spend the money for a Roku device? People purchased it because they wanted to stream their chosen content providers and it was compatible. Yes, by their "Tos" they can take things away, but most companies would put this in their as a disclaimer. Sort of like how the Tylenol bottle lists possible side-effects, however rare. No one expects that POPULAR and widely used apps are just going to be taken away because Roku feels like it.

 


Just "most" would put it in their Terms?

Are you unfamiliar with the concept of a carriage dispute, historically? 

They didnt/dont happen over unpopular and/or unwatched channels/content (its the popularity (demand) that drives the upward price pressure that ultimately leads to the dispute).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carriage_dispute

 

0 Kudos
CaptGrumpy
Level 11

Re: YouTube TV vs Roku negotiations


@howieg00 wrote:

@CaptGrumpy wrote:

@sabrin514 wrote:

Yeah... patient. So it's nearly 6 months later and us Spectrum TV app users are still "being patient" and unable to access the Spectrum content that we PAY for on the Roku. How long do we give them?



Clearly, you are just picking what you want from my post. I never said all disputes are solvable. What I did say, and what you seem to miss is this: "Read the TOC. It says quite clearly that apps can be added or deleted at any their discretion." and "Sometimes, you need to have alternatives."

Picking and choosing what I said does not negate my argument.


Well here we have the Capt'n again (and again) telling us why you should have read that , and this, and it is not Roku pulling a fast one, but you were stupid.

NOOO, it is Roku pulling a fast one. They screwed Spectrum (not a postal child for ethical) and now they are screwing with all the Yttv users who were STUPID enough not to read the fine print. There is no fine print, if you are on the up and up, you do not block competing services. People bought Roku, for the simply reason that they believed it DID NOT tie them to a service. Now the truth comes out , they will screw around with any vendor and the **bleep** with the users who bought their devices.

Capt'n you are an apologist for Roku. I am not going respond to any of your Flames, since that is what pumps you up.


I'm neither an apologist for Roku and I didn't call you stupid. I believe that if you don't read the fine print than you're opening a door for disappointment. My beliefs. I ALSO understand how business works in some cases. That doesn't make me an apologist. All it means is that I don't agree with you. However, picking and choosing what I say in a sentence and taking it out of context does not make for a discussion. 
 
I guess I don't understand this. I look at the situation and see options. I've talked about the options, perhaps more passionately than you'd like; potatoes, potahtos.  I check Terms of Service (erroneously calling them TOC in previous services) because, I've been screwed in the past. One thing I know is, just because we bought Roku doesn't mean we are owed every service out there. 
 
Outside of this forum, there aren't enough people complaining to change Roku's mind. 
 
Call me a realist, but DON"T ever call me an apologist. Like I said, I never called anybody stupid. You started the name calling

 

 
StreamerUser
Level 20

Re: YouTube TV vs Roku negotiations


@sabrin514 wrote:

You're not one of the "lucky ones". If you understood the issue with Spectrum it is that in December, the app was removed from the apps available to install by Roku. IF you already had it, you could keep using it; HOWEVER, if you canceled your spectrum service because you moved and then tried to use the spectrum app to loggin with a new account, it was blocked.


Thats not what you initially claimed (that I responded to, pointing out the specific incorrect false hyperbolicness of this claim), which doesnt match what are claiming now.

You:  "I bought the rokus specifically for the purpose of streaming the spectrum app... And now Roku removed it. Then it removed Youtube TV. One by one, Roku is taking away apps that people are using and probably based their purchase of the Roku on."

Not being available for new download/install via the channelstore isnt the same as "removing the app" or "taking away apps that people are using" (you cant take away something one doesnt possess).

(And there were/are some customers that actually had their app "removed"/"taken away" from their devices - they certainly know the difference)

Looks like the person that doesnt understand the carriage dispute(s) is, well, you. Or at least, you dont understand you made different claims in your posts.  Projection is pervasive.

This goes back to my response to your initial hyperbolic (look the word up) claim. 

You could have made the clear statements about lack of channelstore availability since mid-December, removal of the app from some customers devices, limited private app availability with code from Spectrum, unavailability of app for old customers with new accounts, etc.

But that isnt what you initially claimed (that I pointed out was hyperbolic) - you went with the blanket hyperbolic (and incorrect) statements about app removal and taking away (of the Spectrum and YTTV apps) in an attempt to make/take a stronger position/argument against Roku.

And you didnt change/clarify your initial claims until I pointed out the hyperbole.

Perhaps just stick to the known facts without distortion, and make your anti-Roku arguments from there.

 

0 Kudos
Joemn
Level 8

Re: YouTube TV vs Roku negotiations

Sabrina,

Getting into a match with grumpy and streamer is like getting into a match with the roku marketing department.  Show them a wall painted black, and they will respond, its not rokus fault, its everybody else's; the content provider, big bad google, or their customers.  BUT NOT ROKU.  Worse than apologists who at least believe the tripe they broadcast, these two are purposely publishing false information and degrading a conversation into resolving rokus CUSTOMERS issues with roku.  Who's interests do grumpy and streamer represent????  Roku should give those two boys a raise.

CaptGrumpy
Level 11

Re: YouTube TV vs Roku negotiations

@Joemn wrote:

Sabrina,

Getting into a match with grumpy and streamer is like getting into a match with the roku marketing department.  Show them a wall painted black, and they will respond, its not rokus fault, its everybody else's; the content provider, big bad google, or their customers.  BUT NOT ROKU.  Worse than apologists who at least believe the tripe they broadcast, these two are purposely publishing false information and degrading a conversation into resolving rokus CUSTOMERS issues with roku.  Who's interests do grumpy and streamer represent????  Roku should give those two boys a raise

I serve my own interests. I point out business reasons and that makes me a lacky for Roku? I research the situation and read several news reports and try to understand the situation. You, on the other hand are a child who is ticked off because Papa Roku took away your toy, without even considering, or caring about the reasons. I guess there's a difference from a generational point of view. My parents taught me that I can't always get what I want. You obviously don't think that way. That's ok. 

What's not ok, is acting like a 3 year old and making accusations against people without even knowing who they are and why they say what they say.  Grow up, Joe.

 

Tell me where I lied. Bring the receipts 

 
 
 
 
 
 
0 Kudos
CaptGrumpy
Level 11

Re: YouTube TV vs Roku negotiations

 

 

 
0 Kudos
StreamerUser
Level 20

Re: YouTube TV vs Roku negotiations


@Joemn wrote:

Sabrina,

Getting into a match with grumpy and streamer is like getting into a match with the roku marketing department.  Show them a wall painted black, and they will respond, its not rokus fault, its everybody else's; the content provider, big bad google, or their customers.  BUT NOT ROKU.  Worse than apologists who at least believe the tripe they broadcast, these two are purposely publishing false information and degrading a conversation into resolving rokus CUSTOMERS issues with roku.  Who's interests do grumpy and streamer represent????  Roku should give those two boys a raise.


Being frustrated and angry if your YouTube TV or Spectrum app was removed, or are unable to download it, or unable to use it, is entirely reasonable, as is directing it at Roku and/or Spectrum/Google - making up or distorting facts to do so isnt.

However, spending much energy on it also isnt reasonable (especially for YTTV), because:

1) Google provided a simple workaround using the YT app,

2) The YTTV (and YT) app is available on every other streaming platform,

3) Devices can be acquired for $20-40 or even free, if you have a SmartTV (and used in future carriage disputes, which there will be).

4) No amount of consumer complaining at either/any party in such carriage disputes affects the outcome or timeliness thereof.

All of this has already been stated repeatedly by myself and others (in this thread and elsewhere); advocating acquiring and using free/cheap/reasonably priced alternate streaming platforms (or access methods) isnt pro-Roku, or pro-StreamerUser, but it is pro-affected-consumers.

What is more important to you? Making repeated (distorted) complaints/arguments which have no effect on Roku (or Google for that matter), or finding a solution to the issue of lack of access to YTTV? 

Considering the plethora of (repeatedly stated) available solutions, the latter would seem to be moot, thus making the persistent exercise of the former some form of emotional cathartic exposition. ("Outrage Theater" or "Victim Theater" perhaps)

sabrin514
Level 9

Re: YouTube TV vs Roku negotiations

Roku is the one that removed it from their store, so yes, Roku did, in fact take it away. Roku is the one controlling what is available, so yes it is reasonable to blame them for removing it when both of the other companies in question here Youtube tv and Spectrum both stated that they were not the ones that made this decision. Roku is useless without the apps that someone wants to use. It's like buying one of those cheap tablets on Amazon and then discovering that it does not have the ability to access the Android app store so you're severely limited as to what you can do with it.

I'm not crying. I'm a customer that spent hundreds of dollars on devices manufactured by Roku only to have the only app I needed it for removed. Then 6 months later, with no resolution on that front, I see they removed youtube TV as well. Roku appears to be going in the wrong direction with this by trying to control what their users can access. I did not buy Roku for content. I bought it purely for the ability to access apps that I subscribe to more conveniently. Now Roku has removed the main  apps that I used so for me, it is worth about as much as a paperweight.

The reason people are angry is that Roku has the ability to resolve the issues with these apps, but instead makes lame excuses about "protecting" the privacy of Roku users (Hey that's us). Do we want or need Roku to protect our privacy from apps of services that we're paying for? Spectrum has all my information based on my customer relationship with them. A relationship that I chose. I did not choose to have an relationship with Roku except as a hardware device to plug into the TV and use apps of my choice. I'm pretty sure that given the choice, customers do not want some USB don gle with a user interface making choices for them under the pretense of "protecting them".

 

 

 

 

HoosiersWestLaf
Level 7

Re: YouTube TV vs Roku negotiations

Amen, Sabrin514.  Lost all ability to access YouTube and YouTubeTV today, and can't reload the YouTube app from ROKU.  If access is not restored soon, we'll be looking for new streaming hardware and cancel ROKU account.

atc98092
Community Streaming Expert

Re: YouTube TV vs Roku negotiations


@HoosiersWestLaf wrote:

If access is not restored soon, we'll be looking for new streaming hardware and cancel ROKU account.


Since you pay nothing for a Roku account, I'm not certain what you gain from that. I believe you'll find issues with content providers with other platforms as well, so why discard the Roku devices if in the future they might offer something the others don't? Be mad at them, that's fine. But since you've paid for the hardware already, it they still provide access to almost everything else available on the Internet, why get rid of them? Throw them in a drawer if you must, so they don't appear as a connected device to the Roku servers. But don't throw money away.

Dan

Roku Community Streaming Expert

Help others find this answer and click "Accept as Solution."
If you appreciate my answer, maybe give me a Kudo.

I am not a Roku employee, just another user.