Streaming boxes had great potential. They were trying to reinvent the cable box for the internet age, making it easy for users to find, organize, and watch everything available in this age of endless content. We were trying to turn our home hub, the TV, into a smart gadget that we could do almost anything with. Streaming boxes were the next big thing.
Instead, well, streaming boxes suck. There is no product on the market that even remotely meets this vision. Instead of a thriving hardware and software category, streaming boxes have turned into ever-cheaper commodities. At Walgreens down the street from my house, a $30 Roku Express HD sits, sandwiched between AA batteries and oddly unbranded wired headphones. Good buy. Streaming boxes are bad and getting worse instead of better.
In its current form, it can almost be argued that streaming boxes need not exist at all. In most respects, the majority of US consumers already own a smart TV, and if you’re looking for a new set, you’ll hardly find one without an operating system built-in.
Of course, most of these smart TVs are slow, ad-filled, and try to track your every move. That’s why good A streaming box is a very good idea, at least in theory. Other technological advances have made good TV hardware and software even more important. Streaming boxes allow you to upgrade without throwing away the big screen, or add new features that may not have been built into the set itself. Plus, a good box could mitigate the worst in the world of smart TVs. To borrow an old TV analogy, built-in smart TVs are like old rabbit ears and require a cable box.
But no streaming box is perfect. Who is to blame? everyone. But it starts with the streaming service itself. For a streaming box to truly serve the purpose of a cable box, it must index and access all the content available across all services, allowing users to search and organize it however they like. But by and large, streaming services have decided that it’s best to adopt a smartphone-style app model, so they’re more about apps than content. myth bustersNow open the Netflix app and see what you see.
As such, many services withhold data from aggregators and search engines. So many companies tried to build a universal search system, but no one could even come close to it. You might get two nearly identical results.) Our TV viewing is stuck in the old Internet paradigm that requires navigating endless series. of aggregators and folders to find what you’re looking for.
You can see how this works by looking at the home screens of set-top boxes on the market. They don’t lead on content. They are leading in the app. Even things like the new Google TV interface that try so hard to push shows and movies to the fore still rely on apps on his second row on the homepage. Now that more streaming box makers are offering streaming services, new competition is emerging. Your Fire TV will stick his Freevee perfectly down your throat, but Roku will never let you forget about the existence of the Roku Channel.
Every app is a universe in its own right, so there’s absolutely no way or reason for companies to put additional features on the box. So what do you charge if you can’t build boxes that are more than portals to homescreens and other things? You charge tiny little upgrades. Need 4K streaming? That’s a few dollars above the base price. Dolby Audio, Dolby Vision, faster Wi-Fi? a few bucks more. Non-smoking remote control? $20 normally. But that alone has its limits. This is probably why even the most expensive and possibly high-end streaming devices rarely cost more than about $80.
There used to be premium priced products that offered a better experience, but now they are all but gone.
By the way, this was not always the case. Back in the day, TiVo boxes were expensive, but they were popular because they did exactly what they wanted to do, better than anything else on the market. The skip button alone was worth a lifetime subscription. The Slingbox was a similar high-end gadget, but it served a specific purpose and worked well. Companies like Cavo have worked regularly to truly upgrade the experience. Even Microsoft made a big bet on reinventing entertainment on the Xbox One, and it didn’t pan out. Over time, the industry seems to have learned that it can’t do this well, and that it’s not really worth trying.
Another problem is that very few people in the streaming device business are actually trying to make money from streaming devices. You know the old Amazon adage? It also largely dominates the streaming box business. , I just want to turn them into YouTube TV and YouTube Premium subscribers. (But mostly ads.)
Even the initially successful Roku because It used to be a hardware business that didn’t compete with streaming services for advertising and content spending, but now it’s an ad company with a hardware side. Even as the company expands to other smart home his devices, Roku continues to see the device as just a leader in losses. Roku CEO Anthony Wood said in a letter to investors last year:
How do I build scale on my device? If your goal is to buy something that plays videos on your TV, that’s good. Easier and cheaper than ever! But if you want the promised streaming box, the race to the bottom makes it all worse. Every day, I swear my apps open a little slower.
There are two minor exceptions to the rule here. Apple and Nvidia. Apple’s ambitions for Apple TV seem to be the right one, as they pushed to turn the TV app into the evolved TV guide we’ve been waiting for, adding some games and smart home controls to the device. As my colleague Chris Welch said, this is probably the best overall streaming box you can buy. If nothing else, at least it’s fast. But fixing guides is a lot of work for Apple, and rocks never climb that hill. As it stands, the Apple TV interface is probably the most “just a grid of app icons”. And as it continues to invest in shows and movies for Apple TV Plus and its service business, it looks like the Apple TV is turning into what every other Apple product is. .
Now, if you own an Nvidia Shield, you’re probably yelling at your screen. what about the shield? Shields are great. And you are not wrong. Interestingly, Shield is the exception that proves the rule. Three years after its last update, Nvidia’s Android TV powered box was built primarily to prove that a powerful streaming box is actually a good idea that should exist. He is one of the most powerful and functional streaming boxes on the market. Supports cloud gaming, most high-end streaming features, updated apps, and everything you need. Much like the Apple TV, the main stumbling block is the fact that no one wants software to behave the way it should. It’s not clear if Nvidia cares about Shield anyway. Rarely updated and rarely referenced by the company.
I hate to be a downer, but all evidence points to this situation getting worse instead of better. is trying to be everything for all viewers. You can now subscribe to streaming services within other services. You can play games in the Netflix app, Apple is building a whole new service to show MLS games, and YouTube is systematically trying to erode all other streaming services. Some streaming apps are still downright terrible (think HBO Max), while others are getting better and more ambitious all the time.
All evidence points to this getting worse before it gets better
As with many parts of the tech industry, software is paramount. The quality of shows and movies is clearly more important than loading speed. But the state of the set-top box world, after the industry agreed that “software is king,” quickly pushed the iPhone, Galaxies, and Pixel off the market, leaving people to choose between Tracfone, Blu, and Motorola. It’s kind of forced. Inexpensive devices are important and valuable, and it’s great that they keep improving. It’s a shame, however, that the idea of a “high-end” streaming box doesn’t exist at all. We use these devices for hours a day, they are central to our home, and they have to serve a much larger purpose than slowly buffering video.
If Apple can finally crack the streaming guide, if Nvidia can prove they really care, or if Roku, Amazon or Google decide it’s worth building a true flagship streaming box, I I gladly agree to it. Until then, I will continue to hate set-top boxes. But I think I’m stuck with them.
