Hacker News Reader

Comment by jonknee | Hacker News Reader

I've never seen a TV that has Netflix/YouTube built-in that doesn't have a horrible interface. The [low] cost may be worth it just for less pain.

View on HN

OK, but if you have a game console, your experience is more than good enough (and already includes HBO GO, Amazon, Hulu, MLB...). Also, if, like many in the US, you own iOS, Airplay more than makes the Apple TV worth the extra $60 (for streaming music to your TV and beaming photos/videos). Roku is also a great option for a few more bucks - it has about any service you could think of plus a nice "universal search" that shows you if something is on Netflix before you rent.

Chromecast is nice - and novel in a few fun ways - but I just don't see it changing the world, especially since most of its target demographic is somewhat tech savvy (smartphone owning Netflix subscribers) and therefore quite likely to own at least one of the above.

Is it really less pain if you can't use the thing if your phone is charging in the other room?

For me it would be, I have much more rage with trying to type with a remote control than I do finding a device with battery left (you can use a phone, tablet or computer and I don't foresee a time when all three are out of juice and my power isn't out).

The Apple TV is the worst of both worlds because the remote is required but is smaller than any other remote out there so that it's very easy to lose.

You can use any remote with the AppleTV (it can be trained) and you can use your iOS devices entirely once you initially configure the wireless.

That's true, but it's definitely more of a hassle to pull out a laptop, or go digging through a box to find that tablet you never use, than it is to grab a remote that only exists to fulfill this one function.

It also works with smartphones, which most people have and use regularly. Not to mention the fact that the kind of person who would buy a Chromecast is probably an above-average user anyway.

I guess it's differing tastes, but I'd much rather have one less remote control and just be able to use one (or more) of the devices that I always have within arms reach. If the Apple TV had a decent app to use instead of the remote I would use it and dump Apple's joke of a remote. It doesn't, the app is literally four arrows so you can navigate around like the very limited remote. Steve Jobs hated buttons and as a result his ideal remote is garbage.

Using WiFi also means line of sight isn't necessary which is a nice perk.

There is an app from Apple on the App Store that allows you to control the Apple TV from your iOS device over wifi. The interface is hilariously bad (mostly just a grid with some arrows), but it is a fallback when you can't find that ridiculously easy to lose micro-remote.

Then grab your laptop, or your tablet, or any of the 5 other wifi connected devices laying around in your house.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com