View Single Post
Old 04-04-2014, 02:08 PM   #74
elemenoP
Wizard
elemenoP ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.elemenoP ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.elemenoP ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.elemenoP ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.elemenoP ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.elemenoP ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.elemenoP ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.elemenoP ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.elemenoP ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.elemenoP ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.elemenoP ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 1,717
Karma: 3790058
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: NYC
Device: Kindle Paperwhite, Sony 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by OtterBooks View Post
Its hardware alone easily makes it a better value than the equally priced Roku 3, so the price actually is rather aggressive. It's hardware that matters, too. This thing could be $120 and still be a better value, imo, but $100 makes it a no-brainer (a term that seems like it should mean the opposite of what it does).
Performance on my Roku is pretty bad but my understanding is that it's due to my DSL line, not the box. Would a better processor allow movies to START sooner and not have to re-buffer in the middle of a movie? (That's the worst part about streaming). Would a bigger hard drive allow for better buffering? On the Roku, if I rewind or fast-forward even a little bit, I have to start the buffering all over again. I have often wondered if that was a limitation of the hard drive. If it had a bigger HD, presumably it could cache more of the movie?

eP
elemenoP is offline   Reply With Quote