"Yogi76" wrote:
Yes, the YouTube Kids content filter isn't perfect, but you are letting perfect be the enemy of the good. You know what else isn't perfect... seat belts.
"Yogi76" wrote:
Amazon and Google have worked together to allow YouTube Kids on Amazon Fire devices
"Yogi76" wrote:
@fluke, I see that you conveniently ignored where I discussed the other benefits of the YouTube Kids app, such as better monitoring through allowing Google Family Link "children" accounts and time limits. I would never suggest that any parent rely 100% on any technology, including the YouTube Kids content filter, but should only use technology to help improve traditional parenting techniques such as monitoring their children's activities, talking with them about what they have seen, and limiting their time in certain activities and entertainment. The YouTube Kids app and it's features (yes, including the content filter) are a tool to help parents achieve these.
"Yogi76" wrote:
Yes, the Fire OS is based on Android, so you are correct that it is easier for Google to port their Android apps to Fire devices. However, I still contend that is not the main reason that Google hasn't released YouTube Kids for Roku. I think it's a business decision, much like not allowing a proper YouTube app on Windows Phone was a business decision. As proof, I submit that Google not only didn't create a YouTube app themselves for Windows Phone, which would have taken time and money on their part, they also blocked the YouTube app which Microsoft developed themselves (https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/mic ... s-openness), which was developed with no investment from Google. This was a purely anti-competitive move by Google and I believe the same forces withing Google are probably preventing the YouTube Kids app from being released on competing platforms to Android TV. However, sometimes anti-competitive moves work, which is one of the reasons why Windows Phone failed. I would love to be able to stand on principle and refuse to cave to such tactics, but I ended up ditching Windows Phone and I very well could end up ditching Roku.
"Yogi76" wrote:
As far as which device I would buy if I do leave Roku, I will further evaluate the decision then. I agree Nvidia Shield is the best rated Android TV device on the market, but it is also currently cost prohibitive to have on all my TVs. I helped a friend setup a Mi Box S and I was actually pleasantly surprised with its features and functionality. I do agree that its delayed (and possibly missed) availability of updates is problematic. Timely updates is one of the reasons I currently use a Pixel for my Android phone. However, for a television streaming box, as long as it runs the handful of apps that we need, it doesn't bother me as much that it is using an older OS. The apps we want it to have are YouTube TV, Philo, Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, Plex, ESPN, HBO GO, PBS, Disney NOW, PBS Kids, and, yes, YouTube Kids.
"fluke" wrote:
Yes, I did. For me YouTube poor response that they now expedite report handling after someone has already been exposed is a show stopper issue. My position remains that other features of the platform do not justify them failing to provide hard numbers on the percentage of content that gets reported and requires manual action.
With kids home from school and parents working at home; please put aside whatever differences your company has with Google or whoever manages it and give us Kids YouTube.
I really would prefer to let her spend her reward time at distance viewing a TV than a table she holds too close to her face.
Desperate parents are in need of assistance here. Come through for us. Here in Florida we are full of idiots and will be stay at home till June possibly.