Roku Warns YouTube TV Customers That Service Could Go Dark Due To Google's 'Predatory' and 'Monopoly' Moves (deadline.com) 99
Roku is warning its customers with YouTube TV subscriptions that the service could go dark in the coming days due to what it calls Google's "predatory" and "monopoly" behavior. From a report: In a lengthy statement, a Roku spokesperson blasted Google's actions in detail. The tech giant is "attempting to use its YouTube monopoly position to force Roku into accepting predatory, anti-competitive and discriminatory terms that will directly harm Roku and our users." The company has also sent an email to customers this morning expressing the concerns. Roku is arguing that YouTube and Google are out to manipulate the user experience to siphon data and tilt search results in YouTube's favor, among other complaints. It also maintains that Google could require Roku to spend money upgrading microchips or other equipment in order to accommodate YouTube TV. The current agreement between the companies will expire in the next few days. While the Roku statement did not specify a date, this week will see April end and May begin, a turning of the calendar that matches with most distribution contract deadlines.
Re: (Score:2)
Consider that Roku is trying to turn YouTubeTV into a dumb provider of channels with Roku in total charge of the UI. Do you think Google is going to go quietly along with that?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Trying telling that to Google and see how far you get.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if you want Google's content on your Roku device, and Roku can't make that happen because they refuse to accept Google's terms of service, then I guess you'll probably care what Google thinks in a few days when you can't do what you want.
Superior tech doesn't always win the day.
Re: (Score:1)
You just need a web browser to access youtube. I have a homemade HTPC and I access it just fine, with firefox. Does Roku have a web-browser? You shouldn't need a corporate agreement to access this content.
This seems more like corporate grandstanding.
Re: YouTube TV to go dark on ROKU (Score:2)
If the YT Roku "channel" disappears, I recommend Web Video Cast. It will play any web page's video on your Roku, including TY (I just checked).
Re: (Score:2)
Roku's GUI is superior, so why would I care what Google thinks?
I guess you need to make a decision about what's more important: the Google service+content, or the front. There's no business reason for Google to be a dumb provider for services like Roku to monetize. They want your user data, that's where the money is at.
Re: YouTube TV to go dark on ROKU (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They should. Google has their response in the form of Android TV. Trying to control how Roku displays information is an overreach.
That said, this is google we are talking about.
Lesson learned (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Lesson learned (Score:5, Insightful)
You're not wrong; however, no company is completely faultless in the asshole category. Roku is trying to squeeze more money out of their platform, including through monetization of their customers.
While I have no doubt Google is pulling shit, Roku is no better and we shouldn't believe a word they push out when they are in platform contract negotiations like this. It's not the first time Roku has been in this situation and it won't be the last.
Re: (Score:2)
Google advertises incessantly. Roku has extremely limited advertisement and it is only on their home page and it is not obnoxious and is relevant to other streaming channels they have, and Roku has never killed my bandwidth or introduced malware in the same way as typical advertising does. Roku only monetizes its customers through the cost of buying its devices, which is how it should be.
Re: Lesson learned (Score:3)
No, Roku actually charges content providers for a slice of their revenue, much like apple does, plus it sells advertisements. Roku has been doing some shady shit for over a decade now. They were making this exact same complaint against HBO Max until last year, and it was all over the exact same demands that Roku is demanding of Google.
Not only do you pay for your physical streaming box, but any subscription fees you pay to streaming services also goes to pay Roku.
I personally tossed the last of my Roku boxe
Re: (Score:2)
That sounds like it's pre-downloading stuff. So much for concern about killing your bandwidth, which seems more like an advertising tick point for what you are pushing as a replacement for Roku.
Hey, waitaminnit!
Re: (Score:2)
Roku only monetizes its customers through the cost of buying its devices, which is how it should be.
https://docs.roku.com/publishe... [roku.com]
B. Information We Collect Automatically Through the Roku Services
1. Device Information...
2. Information from Cookies and Similar Technologies...
3. Activity and Usage Information on Roku Sites, Roku’s Mobile Apps, Roku’s Channels and Roku Devices...
4. Activity, Location, and Usage Information Through Roku’s Advertising Services...
https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
Smart TVs like Samsung, LG and Roku are tracking everything ...
https://www.theverge.com/2019/... [theverge.com]
Of course, data is part of the reason TVs have gotten so cheap. Today, Roku’s sell for less than $200, subsidized in part by targeted advertising. Technically, people agree to have their data sold when they set up their devices. But many aren’t aware it’s even happening.
Re: (Score:2)
You apparently can't tell the difference between "Youtube" and "Youtube TV".
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I had a little bit of sympathy for Roku until they started babbling about custom chips for YouTube TV.
Re: (Score:2)
Why does Roku not ... (Score:3, Insightful)
push an update to its machines that make them look like plain ordinary PCs as far as youtube is concerned ?
It might not be as easy as I suggest, but worth doing if they can.
Re: (Score:2)
Google will find a way to detect the change and fix it. Roku does the same, customers lose.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks to javascript your browser leaks tons of information. Here is a good example.
https://webkay.robinlinus.com/ [robinlinus.com]
Even knows how many cpu cores my desktop is running. Shouldn't be too hard to come up with a profile for Roku based devices.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon tried that on their devices when Google and Amazon were having their content wars. Google blocked it pretty quick.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Why does Roku not ... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
A web browser in a roku would be a terrible experience, and one that Roku has thus far avoided.
Their design is centered around a handheld remote, mostly centered around cursor key navigation and a handful of dedicated purpose keys.
In order to keep up with a big 'screw you', they'd either have to pull in a remote-hostile web interface, or invest a bunch of effort into reverse engineering the website and making a client to imitate the calls to APIs with zero promise of compatibility on, that could evaporate/e
Re: (Score:2)
They are too busy pushing shitty updates for shitty content they are providing that I don't care about.
I purchased a Roku box because it just about the only box that does all the catchup and streaming services you could want here in the UK, with the exception of Britbox
Meh (Score:3)
It isn't worth the money.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Translation (Score:5, Insightful)
Notice how vague Roku's claims are? I'm guessing that Roku wants to siphon off user data from Google, and Google isn't letting them.
Keep in mind, Roku watches *everything* you do on their platform and sells that data.
Re:Translation (Score:5, Informative)
Here are some of the things Google wants:
https://www.engadget.com/roku-google-youtube-tv-app-preferential-treatment-140612500.html
"Roku told customers in email that Google supposedly wants conspicuous placement for YouTube in search results, including a dedicated row."
"It also hopes to block results from other providers while using the YouTube app, Roku said, and to prioritize YouTube music results when using the Roku remote for voice commands while YouTube is open"
"Roku further alleged that Google threatened to set chipset and memory requirements for devices that would raise hardware prices, potentially giving Google's Chromecast an unfair advantage."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Those are the things Roku is claiming Google is requiring. Until the terms are publicly disclosed by someone other than Roku or Google, I'll take that with a grain of salt.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, sure, some skepticism is healthy, but everything there looks consistent with what Google would push for.
Google is all about trying to advance their brand, so they are pushing for special treatment to advance their brand. This is very much consistent with Google's behavior.
Same with the chipset/memory requirements. A roku is pretty damned puny compared to, say, a typical AndroidTV device. I would easily imagine Google's developers expressing frustration that developing for Roku is harder than Androi
Re: (Score:2)
"Roku further alleged that Google threatened to set chipset and memory requirements for devices that would raise hardware prices, potentially giving Google's Chromecast an unfair advantage."
Chromecast will never have an unfair advantage. Chromecast suuccckks. They are useless compared to Roku or even the Firestick. I have two Chromecasts in a drawer somewhere. Both of them barely used. And to make matters worse, they both caused problems when connected to my WiFi.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't make the mistake in thinking the better technology wins out. It doesn't.
True. But is seldom the case that the worst one in the field wins out either.
Re: (Score:1)
So like Android, but less insidious?
SmartTubeNext (Score:2)
I have a FireStick 4K plugged into my Roku TV because Android is where developers are.
https://github.com/yuliskov/Sm... [github.com] is excellent.
Too bad Roku makes development of apps so difficult and so hard for consumers to find. I would like the underdog to have the better tech.
This sounds suspicious (Score:2)
YouTube TV is not a monopoly, there are tons of streaming alternatives. It is not even in the top 4. As for the chip upgrade thing, it has to be because Roku performance sucks, YouTube does not want to degrade their signal to accommodate it. Is Google making them buy Google chips?
Re: (Score:2)
Roku performance sucks
Don't buy the budget model. A Roku is like a PC. They offer performance models and value models. Youtube doesn't perform as well because of how badly coded it is, but a Roku Ultra performs really well and a Roku Premiere is also not too bad.
Re: (Score:2)
It's my experience that even the "performance" versions of Roku have a laggy UI. I don't recommend them to anyone precisely because of the "click click click click click click click click - oh it finally did something" experience.
Roku has been had problems with this from the original versions up to whatever it was making as recently as the end of 2019, which was the last time I messed with one.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been using an Ultra as a daily driver and haven't had any noticeable UI lag. Very responsive. The express on the other hand is as bad as most smart TVs.
Re: (Score:2)
The last one I played with was also an Ultra. Input lag was infuriating to the person who bought it.
It was returned and replaced with a Shield TV, which if nothing else can manage a one to one correspondence between button presses and things happening on-screen.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll admit, I don't use the Bluetooth remote. It's very possible that the Bluetooth inputs are slower or there was interference in your case. All the Bluetooth models also have an IR receiver and work with universal/programmable remotes pretty well.
Re: (Score:2)
The Roku Ultras I have all over the house work great. Input lag is sometimes caused by low battery on the remote, that is the majority of issues I ever deal with.
Going from FireTV to Roku was a no brainer for our household as their hardware was total crap. It's pretty similar though, get the low-end and pay the consequences. That's why we went with the Ultras. Occasionally if you haven't been using it for a few days it can take a minute to wake up but for regular daily use it works great. YouTubeTV on the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Ruku sticks are practically disposable. They are poorly designed and over heat easy. I've had two of them and nether lasted more than a few months before they cook themselves. I picked my first one up when I was on the road moving from hotel to hotel. Roku sticks are good for that. Easy to hook into the hotel's wifi and I don't have to watch the crap cable they have. By the time I got home the stick was a brick. Had that happen to two of them.
Re: This sounds suspicious (Score:2)
Or because Android devices compete with Roku.
Re: (Score:2)
But Roku performance doesn't suck (with regard to current-gen models). They decode smooth 4K HDR 60 with surround sound. If it ever reboots it boots up in seconds. Menu navigation is smooth. Apps work fine including UI over video backdrops.
Re: (Score:2)
Roku vs. YouTubeTV - who wins? (Score:2)
Roku is in a tough spot. If they lose YouTubeTV and subscribers buy a cheap Firestick, they could lose a lot of customers, as could YTTV if their subscribers chose to go with a different streaming provider. Roku could, for example, team up with Hulu and offer a discount to sign up for their TV offering. YTTV could offer a one time rebate for subscribers that purchase a new device to replace a Roku.
I wonder who will blink first? The problem for Roku is the information available to drive a decision is in
Re: (Score:2)
I think YTTV is currenttly in the weaker position, brand wise.
As you say, they know the *current* base, but I guarantee that they are not happy with their subscriber counts. They have about 3 million total subscribers.
Contrast to netflix, who has 208 million. Disney+ has 100 million. Hulu has 40 million and paramount+ has 30 million.
The last thing they need is to alienate all those Roku TVs and home streaming device users by making it even harder to watch their content.
Re: (Score:2)
I think YTTV is currenttly in the weaker position, brand wise.
As you say, they know the *current* base, but I guarantee that they are not happy with their subscriber counts. They have about 3 million total subscribers.
Contrast to netflix, who has 208 million. Disney+ has 100 million. Hulu has 40 million and paramount+ has 30 million.
The last thing they need is to alienate all those Roku TVs and home streaming device users by making it even harder to watch their content.
Netflix and Disney are more complementary to YTTV since they do not offer TV channels, and Hulu has about 4 million Live TV subscribers so it's numbers are not that much better than YTTV. YTTV's biggest advantage, however, is Google and its bank account.
The network subscriptions are interesting, since they essentially add content and if you are only interested in shows from them are a much cheaper alternative; especially if you binge watch and cancel.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hulu is owned by Disney, so it's safe to say Google's "bank account" isn't going to be that much of an advantage. Disney may be a lot smaller than Google, but it's not poor, and there's a limit that both companies would spend promoting their streaming TV services that's well below Disney's usual annual profit.
True, but my point was not YTTV vs Hulu but Google vs. Roku.
There's also other live TV operators, Sling would be the obvious one - at 2.7M it's smaller than YTTV or Hulu Live TV, but it's still in the same ballpark and arguably its only handicap right now is that Dish Network doesn't want to push it as its a direct rival to its own satellite service, especially after seeing what happened to DirecTV. In time though, they may do that, if they continue hemorrhaging customers from their satellite operation.
I think as wireless internet becomes more widespread, especially in rural areas, satellite TV is doomed.
Re: (Score:2)
While the nature of the offering may be different with significantly different financial results, from a Roku perspective the number of people are what matter, since they don't get a cut of the much larger premium that YTTV charges compared to the more popular services.
So Google may not need as many subscribers to declare it a financial success, they don't have a lot of leverage to make Roku acquiesce to their demands, and also can ill-afford being unable to access a large market of set-top streaming boxes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If Google are making demands remotely close to Roku's claims, then FireTV definitely isn't going to be an option. Amazon is a full-on Google competitor in most of the online video space, and the only surprise is that Google doesn't make its own shows yet, and Amazon doesn't have a cable-TV alternative.
Yea, I probably should have said Chromecast with GoogleTV.
Lots of words... (Score:2)
Why bother (Score:1)
I get my TV and VOD from 2 pirate Chinese OTT provider: I pay $100 per year for 5,500 channels and all kind of movies and TV series, and the customer support is better than any legit service I've ever tried.
Re: (Score:1)
I misunderstood and was excited that you said OTA, I didn't realize people are calling stream "OTT" now. If there is a cheap Chinese Satellite TV service, that would something interesting ... to my friend, yea a friend of mine wants it.
Feel bad for Roku but... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
OTOH, my life is effected exactly none by them dropping Youtube
Re: (Score:2)
This is specifically YoutubeTV (which is different than YouTube, a sign of Google's brand challenge). So even fewer people (no more than 3 million total) would care if Roku suddently were unable to access.
However, if they did tank Youtube (not-TV), then Roku would lose a chunk of value that they would care about.
do we need an cable card like law for steaming tv (Score:2)
do we need an cable card like law for steaming tv?
So that you just buy the steaming service and all you need is an basic box that is not linked to some 3rd party deal to give access to that steaming service?
This is why (Score:3)
This is why a couple years ago I just got a cheap refurb PC and stuck that under my TV for streaming. Every TV box out there gets abandoned by it's creator or ends up not being able to use a certain service after a couple years. A PC will most likely always be supported, or if it isn't supported, I'll at least be able to use it for my own purposes. Dedicated boxes and stuff built into TVs always want to find a reason for you to upgrade to keep the cash flow going. A 10 year old i3 has more than enough power to access all the streaming services, host a Plex server, and even play a few basic games.
Re: (Score:3)
I use a Raspberry Pi.
Can be on all day and cost nothing, can transcode videos streams on the fly, and in Europe a DVB-T hat for it costs 20GBP.
Stick Kodi/Plex/tvHeadend or whatever on it and off you go.
I do not understand display devices that have inbuilt content devices, or content devices that do nothing more than stream from the Internet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I tried that too. The one and only reason I went back to a Roku device is the remote.
Even the apple TV remote doesn't work for web browser content.
A bluetooth keyboard still requires a mouse or track pad to move the pointer, and that's not easy to do on a bed (bedroom TV) and means I have to reach onto the coffee table if I'm lounging on the couch (yes, lazy as hell, I know.)
Solve the remote problem and I'll happily jump back to using a mac mini for my Streaming.
Any suggestions?
Re: (Score:2)
One more think I forgot -- Another reason I had to go back to the Roku device is because all the old browsers stopped being supported by the streaming services. I use Snow Leopard, which can't run the modern browsers, and my mac mini can't be upgraded to a more modern version of OSX. I haven't used Windows since they killed Windows 7.
So browser compatibility is also a problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure about Mac, but on PC I use an app called Unified Remote so I can control the PC from my phone. It allows remote keyboard and trackpad access from my phone. I also have a Logitech trackpad on the coffee table for when I don't have a phone around or one of the kids wants to use the TV.
Roku Shmoku (Score:1)
If Roku ditches Youtube from its platform, if it's removed from my TV, the TV gets hung from my balcony with a big sign: "ROKU SUCKS BALLS".
This outfit required an internet connection and Roku account, with confirmation email, just to power on the damn TV out of the box.
I mean, this is a damn $175 television. Are you kidding me? WTF.
Regret buying Roku in a big way. it's junk. Lesson learned.
Re: (Score:2)
This is Youtube TV, not Youtube. Youtube TV is a subscription television service.
The evil that is google emerges... (Score:1)
Congratulations YouTube! (Score:2)
If YouTube forces me to replace my Roku box, I won't be replacing it with a Chromecast or AndroidTV; I'll be replacing it with an old PC that lets me run YouTube with adblocker installed. So congratulations YouTube, no more ad revenue for you.
Re: (Score:2)
This isnt Youtube, it's Youtube TV. Adblocker wont do shit for that.
Isolated or widespread? (Score:2)
Google is evil (Score:2)
This is an American web site, so I guess most don't know this, but Google (including Youtube) has become almost unusable in Europe, unless you allow them to track you AND don't fight it. Anyone who regularly clears cookies can just forget about Google. The Do Not Track header should inform Google that tracking isn't accepted, and by law they must not ignore that, but they do. If you disable Javascript, you get (HTTP-)redirected to a consent form. If you filter the on-page pop-ups with an ad-blocker, the res
Nvidia Shield TV (Score:2)
Spend a little more, and get a Nvidia Shield TV Pro, you won't regret it.
Android TV,
Can upscale HD video to 4k using AI (even on twitch),
Supports 4k 60fps, HDR, DolbyVision video and supports Xvid, DivX, ASF, AVI, MKV, MOV, M2TS, MPEG-TS, MP4, and WEB-M.
For audio you have Dolby Atmos and DTS-X surround.
Native SMB connections
Google Assistant and Chromecast built in. Works with Alexa too.
Gaming support.
This is everything Roku wants to be, but isn't; and you don't have to deal with their bullshit.
ROKU shutdown
Re:Nvidia Shield TV Pro (Score:2)
Oh ya and comes with a built-in plex media server.
Re: (Score:2)
What a coincidence (Score:2)
I just bought an nvidia shield because of Roku's predatory advertising.
Pot kettle black much?
Say hello to streaming carriage disputes (Score:2)
Nothing like having the same cable experience with a Streaming box.
I'd say that Youtube TV users should switch to another platform, but since Google can't make up their mind what their platform is, (Google TV V1 Intel, Google TV V1 ARM, Chromecast, Android TV, Google TV V2) Fire TV is a laughingstock with no apps beyond Amazon Prime and Netflix, and the Non Roku TV's are a hodgepodge of crap and support drops, I'd say their pretty much screwed.
As much as I hate to say it, even though Roku has scummy practic
What about regular YouTube? (Score:2)
Same thing or just YT's TV subscription only?