•   
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4(current)
  • 5
  • 6
  • 229
  •   
  Thread Closed
NVIDIA Shield (Android TV set-top box)
#46
(2015-03-04, 22:22)Tinwarble Wrote: Why would they need to come down on the price? If it does what it says it does on paper it will be like no other device available.

What would you pay to get everything it offers on the most powerful ARM box available and that does it without a bunch of hacks to get it to work? I'd say it would be well worth the price......I mean come on, it's $140 for just the box. That's just $40 more than the most powerful ARM box currently available and it stomps those on the benchmarks.

EDIT: And the controller uses WiFi Direct, which means it connects directly to the box and doesn't need access point (like a router). Basically it's like bluetooth, but it connects using WiFi.

I'm not saying they need to come down on price, just offer different packages. The cost of the system with controller is $199 ... the controller is $59, so they are saying the system itself is $139. In the presentation itself they have a whole segment basing the Shield as a SmartTV and compared in a graph its power to the AppleTV, Roku 3, FireTV, Nexus Player ... which all cost around $99. You aren't directly competing with a product if you cost $100 more. By having that graph, they are acknowledging that streamers are part of their target audience. I think the price point has to be closer for the Shield to be considered over the competition. Sure, our crowd might see the benefits and think the price premium is worth it, but a mom & pop going to Best Buy who primarily want Netflix and HBOGo streaming are not going to spend $100 more for a Shield over a Roku/AppleTV, no matter how much more powerful they are told it is by a sales rep, especially if it only comes with a controller and no media remote.

I think to appeal to the streaming crowd they need a media package, which is the Shield with the media remote for around $150. They might actually shift streamers at that point, but right now I can only see our niche crowd and people buying it with gaming as a purpose.

I'd like a base unit alone for $140 if possible because I only use a DS to game (ps4 and computer), and I wouldn't use their controller, and I already have a Harmony so I wouldn't really need the remote, but that wouldn't be a deal breaker. Yes I could always buy the unit and sell the controller but who wants that hassle if it can be avoided. I'd buy a media package day one, $50 is $50, especially when I know the controller would be useless to me.

Image
#47
(2015-03-05, 16:18)essential Wrote: I'm not saying they need to come down on price, just offer different packages. The cost of the system with controller is $199 ... the controller is $59, so they are saying the system itself is $139. In the presentation itself they have a whole segment basing the Shield as a SmartTV and compared in a graph its power to the AppleTV, Roku 3, FireTV, Nexus Player ... which all cost around $99. You aren't directly competing with a product if you cost $100 more.

Well, you're looking at it as a price competition, which it's not.

It's directly competing in the same "market" as AppleTV, Roku 3, FireTV, etc.. Being in the same market competition does not mean you have to be in the same price range. People who buy or want a Android box aren't looking for just a media player, or just a streamer or just a gaming device, they are looking for a "all in one" device.

You don't have to be in the same price range to be in direct competition with other devices. And you can have a higher markup if your device is better than all your competition. That's how the market place works.

Now, would it be nice if they offered different packages......Yes. But since they are marketing it (for now) as a "Gaming" device, then it's not likely; at this time anyway. But it probably doesn't matter because if it can do what they claim, anyone looking for an "all in one" Android box (and can afford it) will buy it.

Forum Rules (wiki) | Banned add-ons (wiki) | Wiki (wiki) | Quick start guide (wiki)
#48
I'm certainly interested in one, especially if it can do all the things it says in the specs. Right now I'm using a Zotac CI320 with OpenElec on the old kernel and it does the job, at least for 1080p playback. It doesn't look like Intel is going to ever fix the Bay Trail bug, so there'll be no updates for it.

A box with HDMI 2.0/4k output, HVEC/VP9 hardware decoding, DTS-HD/TrueHD passthrough, USB 3.0 (which supports external storage), and BT 4.0 certainly sounds appealing, especially if it's $200. After I put a harddrive and memory in my CI320 it ended up costing more than that anyways. This seems like a better deal.
#49
Tinwarble put it very well.

Kodi users are mostly in pursuit of the white whale (do it all device) so it is hard to pigeon hole them in one or two general categories. It is a very niche market, people want something that plays local media perfectly, does HD Audio, does live TV perfectly and can act as a DVR, now some people want 3D, some people want access to paid apps Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, etc. So if you have something that does all of that, it will be in high demand within that circle.

Dont know if this one will do it all but when you throw in high end gaming, I would say this becomes something between your average streamers such as ATV, Roku, FTV and gaming consoles such as Xbox and PS. From that point, if people really value he features, the price point will not be an issue.
#50
If they can find a way to move VDPAU over to ARM and have these things run openelec like an ION box will then I would buy one in a heartbeat. If they keep them pure Android TV than they will be limited by Google's platform, as unlike with normal Android they can't just ROM in the fixes they need.

Sure the first box that does remote-driven Netflix, HD audio, de-interlaced Live TV, and 24p will be the favorite around here at any price point, but until Google makes changes nothing running Android TV fits that bill. And then if they do make the changes a ton of Chinese boxes will do that too, so the value of an Nvidia solution is limited without that VDPAU ARM port.
#51
(2015-03-05, 17:11)Tinwarble Wrote: Well, you're looking at it as a price competition, which it's not.

It's directly competing in the same "market" as AppleTV, Roku 3, FireTV, etc.. Being in the same market competition does not mean you have to be in the same price range. People who buy or want a Android box aren't looking for just a media player, or just a streamer or just a gaming device, they are looking for a "all in one" device.

You don't have to be in the same price range to be in direct competition with other devices. And you can have a higher markup if your device is better than all your competition. That's how the market place works.

Now, would it be nice if they offered different packages......Yes. But since they are marketing it (for now) as a "Gaming" device, then it's not likely; at this time anyway. But it probably doesn't matter because if it can do what they claim, anyone looking for an "all in one" Android box (and can afford it) will buy it.

I think they think they are trying to compete against the Roku/AppleTV/FireTV/Nexus and price will be a huge factor. That graph would show it's power vs the average gaming pc/xbox one/ps4 if that's where they wanted to be grouped. You don't present the new Range Rover which cost $80,000 and compare it to a Ford Focus and Honda Civic which cost $30,000 and appeal to a different market segment. The whole first segment of the GDC presentation talked about the Shield as a "smart tv device" which is one of their main focuses. I understand it's a premium price for a premium product, but I think the price difference is too large of a difference to be considered among that streaming market segment.

I'm just saying, at $199 with a controller ... I have no idea what broad market is going to buy it. Our niche market will, and others interested in the gaming aspect, but many of us already have next gen gaming systems or high power pc's for gaming already. I think, to get in homes, focusing on the streaming market is a good idea, I just don't think at the price anyone outside of a niche market is really going to buy it, especially since the average user won't even realize the power difference when using basic apps that are available on most of the devices.

Outside of our niche market, what broad group is looking for a "all-in-one" Android device?
#52
(2015-03-05, 13:34)RockerC Wrote:
(2015-03-04, 14:41)Skank Wrote: What about 3d games? Even in kodi?
What do you mean by 3D games in Kodi?

First you need to understand here that Kodi is not an operating-system. Kodi is an application, just as a game for Android/PC/console is also an application. And normally you can not run an application inside another application, as you can only an application on an operating-system. RetroPlayer for Kodi is currently the only way to play games "inside" Kodi, but those games are not Android games/apps, those are game addons for Kodi, hence it is an game addon inside Kodi and not an other application that runs inside the Kodi application.

http://forum.kodi.tv/forumdisplay.php?fid=194

So do you really mean play 3D games inside Kodi, or do you instead maybe mean simply launching external games as in Android apps?

If you meant to ask if Kodi can act as a launcher and launch other Android apps and games, then the answer to that is yes, it can.

(2015-03-05, 12:30)looun Wrote:
(2015-03-04, 22:22)Tinwarble Wrote: As already mentioned is supports playback up to 24-bit/192KHz over HDMI and USB. So yeah, most likely you will be able to pass-through HD audio.
However, I would caution anybody looking to get one, if it's possible things like HD audio pass-through may not work out of the box. There is probably going to need to be some tweaking to Kodi to get those things working.
i have himedia Q5 , only with himedia player Audio HD 7.1 passthrough( DTS-HD, Dolby Atmos ) or decoding work without problem.
it is possible by pass os limitation with proprietary app, i hope android tv fix this limitation.
But does that Himedia Q5 really output it as 24-bit/192KHz or does it downsample it to only 96KHz and output that?

The limitation in the default Android OS kernel is the video and audio output parts, and not the codec decoding part.

Amount of channels is not the same as sample rate.

Even if it supports 7.1 channel output it could still be limited to only 96KHz output.

Sorry mistyped
I meant 3d movies
#53
(2015-03-05, 17:27)poofyhairguy Wrote: If they can find a way to move VDPAU over to ARM and have these things run openelec like an ION box will then I would buy one in a heartbeat. If they keep them pure Android TV than they will be limited by Google's platform, as unlike with normal Android they can't just ROM in the fixes they need.

Sure the first box that does remote-driven Netflix, HD audio, de-interlaced Live TV, and 24p will be the favorite around here at any price point, but until Google makes changes nothing running Android TV fits that bill. And then if they do make the changes a ton of Chinese boxes will do that too, so the value of an Nvidia solution is limited without that VDPAU ARM port.

There are Chinese boxes that do Netflix and have 4k HDMI 2.0 output? Which ones?
#54
(2015-03-05, 17:38)Wagg Wrote: There are Chinese boxes that do Netflix and have 4k HDMI 2.0 output? Which ones?

Nothing yet, but Chinese Android TV boxes are certainly coming just like we saw with normal Android and then eventually Android Wear. I am always looking at trends and the future, and less what is available today. Today if you call yourself a videophile you have a Chromebox or better in the livingroom, anything Android or Android TV isn't good enough.

That is kinda my point: the OS is holding back the potential of the Nvidia box. Who cares about HDMI 2.0 if you can't even get proper 24p playback?

The issue for Nvidia is that Android TV can't be "skinned" and must remain as it is from Google. So only Google can provide the needed fixes to be a proper HTPC. If Google doesn't bother to do that until a year or whatever after the box is released then by the time this thing reaches its potential any cheap Android TV box will be 90% of the way there.

If Nvidia wants to sell a ton of these to this community, and get some nerd excitement built up around the box, then they need to go around Google. We already have an excellent HTPC platform in Linux, so if they bring over their drivers and throw some resources at fixing VDPAU we might have the successor to the Chromebox.

I am a huge Nvidia fanboy, but I am almost out of a reason to buy their products. VDPAU on ARM would change that.
#55
I just want it to accepts multiple usb drives. Why does android make this so hard?
#56
The box would be useless to me if it doesn't recognize my USB 3.0 drive bay.
#57
(2015-03-05, 17:51)poofyhairguy Wrote:
(2015-03-05, 17:38)Wagg Wrote: There are Chinese boxes that do Netflix and have 4k HDMI 2.0 output? Which ones?

Nothing yet, but Chinese Android TV boxes are certainly coming just like we saw with normal Android and then eventually Android Wear. I am always looking at trends and the future, and less what is available today. Today if you call yourself a videophile you have a Chromebox or better in the livingroom, anything Android or Android TV isn't good enough.

That is kinda my point: the OS is holding back the potential of the Nvidia box. Who cares about HDMI 2.0 if you can't even get proper 24p playback?

The issue for Nvidia is that Android TV can't be "skinned" and must remain as it is from Google. So only Google can provide the needed fixes to be a proper HTPC. If Google doesn't bother to do that until a year or whatever after the box is released then by the time this thing reaches its potential any cheap Android TV box will be 90% of the way there.

If Nvidia wants to sell a ton of these to this community, and get some nerd excitement built up around the box, then they need to go around Google. We already have an excellent HTPC platform in Linux, so if they bring over their drivers and throw some resources at fixing VDPAU we might have the successor to the Chromebox.

I am a huge Nvidia fanboy, but I am almost out of a reason to buy their products. VDPAU on ARM would change that.

Pretty much sums it up for me.

I think that this box will be more centered around gaming than media playback. I just wish someone would make a box I can turn on and off with a remote, run Kodi and pass HD audio. And not beta test it as a consumer like some boxes we know...

#58
(2015-03-05, 17:29)essential Wrote:
(2015-03-05, 17:11)Tinwarble Wrote: Well, you're looking at it as a price competition, which it's not.

It's directly competing in the same "market" as AppleTV, Roku 3, FireTV, etc.. Being in the same market competition does not mean you have to be in the same price range. People who buy or want a Android box aren't looking for just a media player, or just a streamer or just a gaming device, they are looking for a "all in one" device.

You don't have to be in the same price range to be in direct competition with other devices. And you can have a higher markup if your device is better than all your competition. That's how the market place works.

Now, would it be nice if they offered different packages......Yes. But since they are marketing it (for now) as a "Gaming" device, then it's not likely; at this time anyway. But it probably doesn't matter because if it can do what they claim, anyone looking for an "all in one" Android box (and can afford it) will buy it.

I think they think they are trying to compete against the Roku/AppleTV/FireTV/Nexus and price will be a huge factor. That graph would show it's power vs the average gaming pc/xbox one/ps4 if that's where they wanted to be grouped. You don't present the new Range Rover which cost $80,000 and compare it to a Ford Focus and Honda Civic which cost $30,000 and appeal to a different market segment. The whole first segment of the GDC presentation talked about the Shield as a "smart tv device" which is one of their main focuses. I understand it's a premium price for a premium product, but I think the price difference is too large of a difference to be considered among that streaming market segment.

I'm just saying, at $199 with a controller ... I have no idea what broad market is going to buy it. Our niche market will, and others interested in the gaming aspect, but many of us already have next gen gaming systems or high power pc's for gaming already. I think, to get in homes, focusing on the streaming market is a good idea, I just don't think at the price anyone outside of a niche market is really going to buy it, especially since the average user won't even realize the power difference when using basic apps that are available on most of the devices.

Outside of our niche market, what broad group is looking for a "all-in-one" Android device?


Again, I think your missing the point, no, to use your analogy, you can't compare a Range Rover to a Ford Focus or a Honda Civic. But then they are designed to do different things.

Yes, they all are vehicles, but if you want something that you can go off road and still take the kids to school then you get the Range Rover, if all you need is something to get you back and forth to work and around town then you go for the Ford Focus or a Honda Civic. You wouldn't take a Focus to traverse the jungles of Africa or to drive through the Sahara.

And I think you're reading too much into that graph that they had. For one, it was showing the power of the Shield with the Grid against other devices and it was in reference to gaming. I mean, they also had an image up that compared it to a Xbox 360.

As for the "broad market", it's the same market that would by a FireTV or such device and wants a better experience (like having 4K Netflix streams) and to gamers and casual gamers. There is more than just a niche market for it.

(2015-03-05, 17:51)poofyhairguy Wrote: Nothing yet, but Chinese Android TV boxes are certainly coming just like we saw with normal Android and then eventually Android Wear. I am always looking at trends and the future, and less what is available today. Today if you call yourself a videophile you have a Chromebox or better in the livingroom, anything Android or Android TV isn't good enough.

That is kinda my point: the OS is holding back the potential of the Nvidia box. Who cares about HDMI 2.0 if you can't even get proper 24p playback?

And how do we know what can or can't be done yet or whether the OS is hold anything back? Just a few pages back someone said, Android TV doesn't support 24-bit/192kHz, but then the Shield does.

Forum Rules (wiki) | Banned add-ons (wiki) | Wiki (wiki) | Quick start guide (wiki)
#59
It's possible to get that output, but sometimes it's not a standard Android feature/API/whatever. So sometimes companies have to make their own specific hacks or whatever to get the proper output/feature.
#60
If this box supports 24p I will change that top thread.
  •   
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4(current)
  • 5
  • 6
  • 229
  •   
  Thread Closed
 
Thread Rating:
  • 9 Vote(s) - 5 Average



Logout Mark Read Team Forum Stats Members Help
NVIDIA Shield (Android TV set-top box)59