Discussions

[Visitor45763]

---

@atc98092 wrote:

Since Roku doesn't manufacture the TVs, it's the job of the manufacturer to ensure the OS operates on the hardware they have chosen. 

---

So, you're asserting that Roku sends the updates to the tv manufacturers to validate? Do you have a reference for this claim? (It seems odd that Roku has been silent about this for all these months/years -- as its updates are blamed for directly breaking TVs.).

[atc98092]

I made no such claim. Only that it seems likely. Again, Roku doesn't make the TVs, so it's not their job to ensure the TVs all work with any updates. The fact they seem to work just fine with almost every other Roku TV manufacturer tells me that someone somewhere is testing the OS updates. Roku never discusses their internal processes, and almost no other company does either. I'm not defending Roku, but simply stating a fact that deals with the overall process. 

I am a beta tester for Roku with several of my devices. I would be shocked if a manufacturer of Roku TVs didn't do the same. Based on some of the problems reported by TCL owners, it seems that maybe they don't. 

[Visitor45763]

---

@atc98092 wrote:

 Again, Roku doesn't make the TVs, so it's not their job to ensure the TVs all work with any updates.

---

That sounds like supreme double talk. Your original assertion was that "it's the tv manufacturers job to ensure all TVs work with any updates," that implies Roku is sending the updates to the TV manufacturers to validate. But, then you exclaim: "I made no such claim" (only to imply it a again 2nd time).

Frankly, I don't think you know what you're talking about. @RokuDanny-R could clarify if Roku sends final updates to TV manufacturers to test and sign off. If that's the case, that's a story we've all needed to hear for YEARS. The way we haven't heard it makes me think that's not happening.

IMO, when all this started it was just go-go "what could go wrong" lack of leadership. I suspect there was no hardware specification for tv makers to abide by. No expectation for them to test updates. And now it's just impossible for Roku to test against an infinite number of hardware configurations.

A lack of leadership by Roku. But, if there was/is an expectation tv manufacturers approve updates, we need to know about that. (Or, if there is a defined hardware spec that manufacturers are ignoring, we should know about that too.). I think a lot of the problem with Roku TV is that nobody knows what's going on. I don't think Roku knows. There's no bug tracking. No acknowledgement of problems. Lots of speculation (like mine and yours).

Roku could clear this up right now. If they don't, I'm not believing your "it's the manufacturers" deflection. Roku owns the updates. If they break tvs, that's on Roku (until it wants to explain how that's happening in a way that isn't their fault).

[Visitor45763]

---

@atc98092 wrote: Only that it seems likely.

---

I apologize for coming on strongly. Let's run with the idea that it's likely updates are blessed by tv manufacturers before being pushed out. (Originally you said that it "is" their responsibility, which is what stood out to me as being an assumption that it is happening. We don't know that for sure.). But, I can see your point that it's at least possible they have some role. (Not knowing is a big problem for Roku -- not the tv manufacturers -- when it's Roku's update that breaks things. That's not hyperbole, as you dismissed someone else. It's a serious problem. If people overstate it, that's a symptom of their very legitimate frustration for what looks like a Roku problem, not a tv manufacturer problem. And, when people minimize it, it makes you wonder what they're motivated by.).

So, let's run with your "probably" position. I can agree that it's *possible* Roku structured their relationship with tv manfacturers to have them bless updates before being released. (I've been thinking similarly, that Roku would have a hardware specification and test suite for TV manufacturers to comply with. Same idea. Either way, it begs the question of "who's not doing their job." Did Roku not have that spec? Are they not developing to that spec? Are tv makers deviating from the spec? We're basically saying the same thing. Just a matter of details. The real issue is: who's not doing their job?).

So, the issue really seems to be -- after so many months (and years) of this arrangement obviously not working -- even if it's the tv makers not doing their job, that wouldn't indemnify Roku. Roku knows there's a problem. And, unless Roku specifically comes out and says "TCL told us the update worked," then it's Roku's problem. They're the ones who pushed it -- and continued to push it knowing there's a problem!

Right? All of this is sounding more and more like Alice-in-Wonderland. Roku knows this is disasterous to customers. If it has a partner approving updates without testing them (or building hardware outside the agreed upon spec), Roku is just going along with it? That's what you're saying is "likely." Right?

I would agree with you that something THAT malodorous is occurring. I'm just not sure who. The way you worded it made it sound like "it's the tv maker, and Roku's not to blame. They don't make the TVs." By now, it should be beyond any doubt (whatsoever) that Roku knows it's involved with a bad partner. By now, Roku should have been finding a way to accommodate the customer (with the ability to go back to the prior working version), not just being the conduit for the bad partner to affect Roku's prized subscriber and impressionable viewer. Right?

The bright lines of whose fault it is don't seem that bright to me. You said you'd be surprised if TCL (et. al) aren't testing updates. I think we've all been surprised enough by now to know that anything is possible. How much more surprising is it that Roku just keeps enabling the bad partner? Silently? Without protecting its customers? Thinking the whole time that it can just blame the tv maker? Like that absolves Roku from responsibility?

C'mon, man. There is no good way to look at this mess (after all this time Roku had to fix it's broken relationship with a tv maker?). That looks as bad as anything other possible explanation (like my suspicion that Roku doesn't have a hardware spec, and doesn't care.). 

That gets back to how we really don't know who's not doing their job. You think it makes sense TV makers would bless updates before release. I think it makes sense that nobody even thought of this six years ago when it all started.  It's just turned into an anarchy of hardware nobody thought they'd have to test for. The obvious lack of concern exhibited by Roku (if, as you suggest, they've partnered with a very irresponsible tv maker -- and just keep going along with it, as they watch the customer complaints role in for months and years) would support my view that they just don't test and don't care. Who's not testing is a moot point by now, right? 

In fact, if it were really that way (not Roku's fault, but a lazy tv maker), you'd think Roku would have moved to document how updates are done, and track bugs, and close them as "TCL's fault." Right? The absolutely weaselly way of leaving it all nebulous and unclear, and bugs not acknowledged, nor even tracked, and customers left to hope and wonder (as long as they're willing to hope and wonder) suggests who the lazy party is, right?

And then the disaster Antenna TV has become. That couldn't have been TCL making Roku temporarily stupid. Right?

I guess what I'm saying is, you're applying normal-world logic to something that defies it (at every turn). You say you'd be shocked if tv makers didn't test updates before Roku releases them, as if that's perfectly understandable. I'd say: someone's obviously not testing them, and I'm shocked Roku's ok with that -- as if they don't bear any responsibility for being part of it, enabling it, staying quiet about it.

You mentioned Microsoft to normalize your explanation for why this is such a disaster. Microsoft lets customers run older versions of software that worked before an update broke something. They don't just say "blame the hardware maker" (and leave people high and dry!).

That's what shocks me about Roku. It's like they want it BOTH ways. Roku wants a closed system they're entirely in control of. A "simple" system (not multiple versions of software to support). Then, Roku allows the hardware angle to be loosey-goosey (or they don't test, or don't care if their partners don't test). Roku won't let customers test, preferring instead their very flawed relationship with TV makers. Microsoft lets customers test *AND* allows older versions of the software to be run (even other operating systems to be used).

Essentially, we have the worst of all possible worlds. That's not the tv manufacturers who made it that way. Roku is at the top of the food chain in this matter. It's the one who says "customers can't test updates." Or, "customers can't run older versions of software." That's always been on Roku. The only thing that's worse is that we can see how badly this business model is working -- and Roku's still holding to that model (with no regard for the customer).

If anything is "shocking" to anyone, that should be. Roku has a duty to ensure their partners are testing the updates (if it's working the way you say it does). If it knows that ideal of "how the world should work" isn't working then it should provide the older version of software so people can stay where they were (vis-a-vis your analogy to Microsoft). And/or, turn to customers for testing.

To me, everything I've seen points to a severe lack of integrity. It's like the problem isn't even being taken seriously. Nobody's responsible. It's "convenient" that way. In some cases it's the tv makers. In other cases it's Roku. In all cases we never really know, because there's no bug tracking (but, that's convenient too, because it's the other person's fault.). Meanwhile, customers are seriously affected. The only thing that seems to matter to Roku is keeping things "convenient."

Nothing about this looks good for Roku. The more I see, the more contempt I have. This isn't innocent, random bugs with good-faith responses to them. This is some kind of Alice-in-Wonderland world of denial and finger-pointing -- without any concern for the customer.

[atc98092]

"This is some kind of Alice-in-Wonderland world of denial and finger-pointing -- without any concern for the customer."

I agree. While it might not be Roku's responsibility in the end, it's still making them look bad. Even if TCL is the problem, it's not being reflected back on them. Personally, I wonder if TCL even cares, since I've heard that they're moving to the Android TV platform with at least some of their sets. They may have no interest in supporting their Roku OS TVs. I'm not saying it as a fact, but it seems possible.

One reason I wouldn't even consider a TCL TV when I last replaced a set was because I wanted a remote with direct channel access, and that isn't available on any Roku TV. But the other reason is I continue to see problems reported here that seem most often to only impact the TCL-made sets. From wireless issues to audio delays, along with a few other things. They all come back to TCL TVs, and almost exclusively that brand. My Sharp and Insignia Roku TVs have never experienced any of the issues that seem rampant on TCL sets. 

[Visitor45763]

---

@atc98092 wrote: They all come back to TCL TVs, and almost exclusively that brand. My Sharp and Insignia Roku TVs have never experienced any of the issues that seem rampant on TCL sets. 

---

Without formal bug tracking, it's hard to say. We may see more TCL TVs because more are sold. I've seen some Sharp's mentioned. (Just because your particular TV hasn't had a problem doesn't mean much. My two TCL tvs haven't had a problem, but that's not denying what you say could be true. Without formal problem tracking and history, there's no way to know much. Every indication is: Roku wants it that way. Then the question becomes: who is Roku protecting? Themselves or TCL? Everything here suggests Roku's protecting Roku. They don't want to get into the details.).

It would be interesting to know more about Roku's software development process. How updates are tested. Personally, I doubt Roku engages the TV makers. I suspect Roku has a hardware spec & test suite. "If this suite runs on your hardware, our updates will work." There's probably problems in that definition which the TV maker isn't responsible for, and (given everything we see with Roku), Roku doesn't care. They just want to get past it with minimal responsibility. (Even if it's the TV makers not living up to their end of the partnership, obviously Roku just wants to get past it with minimal responsibility. That's the common theme).

I still think all of this points to a profound problem with integrity. Roku looks shadier & shadier. My constant sensation since joining this forum and seeing what's going on is "I would have never believed it if someone had told me about this. It's beyond belief."

I can understand an offshore manufacturer leaving customers in the lurch. To me, that's what looks so bad for Roku. Roku isn't one of those. Roku wanted to rule the world of streaming. They expressed higher standards. Roku partnered with other companies to that end, and is (according to your theory) protecting their malfeasance. I think Roku partnered without thinking about the long-term. Everything about Roku displays such disregard/glibness. I think we're just seeing the culmination of years of disregard for how this would work. (Not TV makers failing to do what Roku so carefully planned to minimize problems. If minimizing problems were any concern to Roku, they'd have formal bug tracking, and describe how updates are tested, and be open about who's wrecking the experience they diligently sought to avoid. Not problem reports treated like mild suggestions to be "passed along" endlessly and customers never hearing any more about it.).

It's really hard to believe this would be a good thing if not for a shady tv maker. This looks much more like "birds of a feather fly together." Roku is the face to the customer when it comes to the software. The way Roku doesn't care (at all) how its reputation is being damaged by irresponsible tv makers (if your theory is correct) makes the tv makers much less of the problem. Every indication they're getting is that Roku doesn't care either.

That's what's strange about Roku. Nothing makes sense (Alice In Wonderland.). On the one hand you're right. You'd expect the tv makers to be responsible for their hardware to work. On the other hand, you'd expect Roku to realize that isn't working, and protect the customers -- because in the end this whole marriage with TV is to build Roku's subscriber base. Not help the TV makers. But, every (EVERY!) indication is that Roku is more concerned with protecting the TV makers (if your theory is correct, that it's them who are dropping the ball). Every indication is that Roku does not value its customers one bit. If I taught a class on customer service, this would be the 5-star example of what NOT to do.

To me, this all gets back to a lack of integrity. Roku wants everything both ways. They married TV with a Pinky & the Brain notion of taking over the world (by coming with TVs). But, they want the owners of the TVs to be customers of the TVs, not Roku. To any extent Roku acknowledges these people as their customers, it's just lip service (passing your problem along, like an act of charity).

I don't see Roku surviving if they don't have an immediate realization of some very systemic problems with THEIR business model. As you noted, TCL is going with Android. Other makers are too. When all this is over, it's not going to matter who wasn't living up to their expectations (to test updates, or listen to customers). TCL, Onn, Sharp (et. al.). Aren't going to be affected. Nobody thinks of them as the bad guy ruining Roku. It's Roku ruining Roku. That's how it's going to look when all these TVS are being sold with Android, and everyone has a bad taste in their mouth about Roku. The historic narrative about how TV makers were responsible won't matter one bit. Roku's doing NOTHING to protect itself from that. Which, in my estimation, points to the problem being Roku -- not the TV makers.

Any rational person would say "you know, this relationship we have with TV makers is killing us. They said they'd test our updates -- but they're not. Or, they said they'd adhere to a hardware spec, and they're not. We need to let customers test updates. They're the ones we want to maintain a relationship with. They're the ones who will get angry at us, not the tv maker. We need to track bugs in a formal manner to help clarify (in a formal manner) the source of the bugs. Instead of blaming tv makers with vague innuendo (which looks like finger-pointing), we can do it professionally, openly, with well-documented examples."

Any sane person would protect themselves from partners making them look bad. The way Roku NEVER does (instead, acting like nothing matters) points to the problem being Roku -- not the partners. Roku is not conducting itself in a manner you'd expect from someone who's best-laid business plans are being derailed by uncaring partners. The entire story sounds gaslighting.

[atc98092]

Roku does do public beta testing for users that offer to join the group. I have my Sharp TV, Premiere and Ultra 4640 enrolled in it. My guess is they'd like a lot more testers, to cover as many scenarios as possible,

[Visitor45763]

---

@atc98092 wrote: My guess is they'd like a lot more testers, to cover as many scenarios as possible,

---

Why do you guess that (when it's not been mentioned on this forum -- even as scores of customers have complained that there is no beta test)?

Isn't this another example of gaslighting?

The actions say something very different than the words? Your theory is that Roku requires the TV makers to test updates before release (it's the TV makers ruining the customer experience -- which Roku is actively hiding from customers by minimizing that poor experience, treating bugs nonchalantly.). That condition should lead Roku to stop depending on tv manufacturers, and engage customers in testing. But, Roku's been silent about that even when customers complain that they're not engaged.

All of this points to Roku being the problem.

The scale of the problem (I've seen) would cause me not to waste my time testing. I think the problem is much, much larger (systemic, organizational). I think testing would be a rubber-stamp (facade) activity. Using a squirt gun on a forest fire.

There's so many things in Roku's control that it refuses to fix or address. It's hard to believe they take testing seriously (after months of pushing out an obviously buggy update, and no bug tracking, etc.). A lot of this stuff can't be blamed on the tv maker. It's not the tv maker causing Roku to miss gigantic opportunities to engage the customer (encourage customer participation in testing; coherent bug tracking, etc.).

My guess is it's exactly the opposite of your guess. I think the only difference is that my guess seems more fitting with what we see.

[Harvini]

Thank you for the full and coherent analysis of the current (lack of) support situation.  As you may have seen on another thread, I am beginning to attempt to document the discrepancies that I am encountering in an orderly fashion.  The questiion that I pose to you is this:

Do you think it possible to create a bug tracking system, right here on this forum, IN SPITE OF ROKU, run by users to benefit other users.  The issue I can see is lack of knowledge/vocabulary/understanding by the users with a problem.  For example, a TV may periodically crash and execute a Power-On reset, but the user description will be "I don't know, my TV just keeps cutting on and off".

Or, should we just not bother and bail out of the hardware ASAP and just have done with this "amateur night at the Turkish Bath".

[Visitor45763]

---

@Harvini wrote: Do you think it possible to create a bug tracking system, right here on this forum,

---

Anything's possible. But, as you noted, it would be working against Roku's efforts to not have such clarity. And, as you noted, affected users are sometimes not as explicit/descriptive of their problem. The nice thing about formal bug tracking is that software for that purpose will guide the affected individual to provide all the relevant info. It's not a "start talking" environment. It solicits model numbers, serial number. As much template-driven input as possible. Plus, affected users can browse known problems and choose "affects me too" (instead of opening a new bug report. If they open a new one, it's easily merged into an existing bug).

Canonical/Ubuntu had Bug #1 many years ago, which was Microsoft's dominance and uncompetitive activities. The problem we face with our TV is that Bug #1 is Roku. They don't want to track that. (Even if the bugs are due to Roku's partners -- the tv makers -- Roku obviously doesn't want that tracked either. It's all very convenient. A form of collusion tactics. Ultimately nobody's responsible. TV makers say "contact Roku." Roku says "contact the tv maker."

When "cut the cord" was popular, it was due to predatory & insensitive cable companies, etc. All the Comcast horror stories come to mind. Roku was the cord-cutter's buzzword. "Signalling" how edgy they are as independent tv viewers. Today, Roku is as bad as Comcast. Roku's help on this forum is as useful as an impenetrable voice menu ("I'm sorry, I didn't understand that choice. Please press 1 to..."). They act that disingenuous, like nobody will call them out on it.

So, I don't see any improvement until Bug #1 is addressed. I think your investigation of different tv states (how the software functions differently) is good. I don't want to say everything's pointless. But, I think trying to track bugs that Roku doesn't want tracked would be like the dutch boy plugging the dike. It would never address the fundamental problem: why are these updates not tested? Who's supposed to test them? Who's not doing their job? Why does Roku keep pushing buggy updates knowing there's a problem? And won't have an honest conversation with customers about anything?