I think the best thing about Roku and why I chose them after researching all the others years ago was that Roku was basically non-proprietary in nature. As compared to the other streaming platforms, almost any channel you wanted could be found "at least somewhere" within Roku's apps/channels. They were and remain the most affordable in my opinion.
Whenever cable or satellite is having dispute with a channel or network, the customer gets the raw end by blackouts, channel removed etc. They may not have a channel for months and it is always during playoffs or a season premiere/finale of a show. Such disputes have no effect on streamers. Subscribe(if you choose) directly to the channel. No middle man. (excepting this spectrum dispute that I have been hearing about)
I think Roku has a pretty sound model. Just stick to their streaming devices and their own channel programming and their TV affiliation, and stay out of the paid subscription service business, I say. Remember the days when everyone bundled phone, internet, TV because 100 sounded better than 300. How long did that 100 last? Also, and I really can't say because I have yet to have to replace a device because it stopped working (quirks, yes) but with all the complaints and device problems in these forums, maybe just a renewed goal of quality assurance and customer appreciation/support should be Roku's focus. Luckily, everyone I have nudged toward streaming is really enjoying the Roku. It can be confusing enough cutting the cord. Alot of it is mindset.
Just my two cents. I like the simplicity of the system as is. Keeping the streaming devices seperate from the programming, I believe, is the best way to keep it freely developing. Of course, I'm also a Linux guy...so....
