Judging by the comments on this forum, Vero4Ks are flying off the shelves as fast as Sam can produce them, so they are obviously not too expensive for a lot of people. The only device I can think of that will do the streaming stuff you want, as well as administering a local library, is an AppleTV 4K which will cost you at least half as much again as the Vero …
The reason Netflix et. al. are not available on the Vero (or any Kodi-based device) is more due to licensing issues rather than technical ones. The rights holders of movie and music ip are really not keen on anything that smells of open-source.
On a side note, I have a ‘4K’ tv of about 50". To be honest, I can barely tell the difference between 720p and 1080p from my usual viewing distance (~2.5 m) on this screen. So, unless you have a > 100" screen (or sit really close to your tv) it really doesn’t matter whether the Vero can stream 4K or not - you probably won’t be able to tell the difference anyway …
You are both right. But it doesn’t mean users can’t demand or expect more services in the box. Specially the most popular ones without losing quality. And for playing 720 or 1080, honestly, I don’t think I would have purchased this box.
Well the only alternative that comes close to the vero is the apple 4k that comes without usb support and a very closed down device compared to the vero also good luck asking Apple to fix your issue for you if you have one or implement a new feature you’d like.
Plenty of people would also rather die than bring an apple device into their home so that’s that
Obviously people have different expectations but I, for one, would never expect any more ‘services’ than what already are available. And, as has already been explained, the likelihood of Netflix or Amazon on this device in anything better than standard HD is very slim due to it being open-source.
I bought my Vero4k for what it does now - not for what it may or may not do in the future. I regard it’s 4K capabilities as an added bonus for if and when there appears any content actually worth watching in that format. For the time being almost all my library is SD or standard HD …
I think there has been some talk of an AndroidTV image for the Vero4K+ which presumably would allow the big streaming services to run in 4K but surely most people who have a 4K tv already have these apps built into the tv itself so I’m not sure there’s much point having them on the Vero too …
The limit of human vision is around 1 minute of arc (1/60th of a degree) which, if you do the sums, means that if you’re viewing from around 2.5m, on a 42" screen you can’t see any difference between 720p and 4K, and on a 65" screen you can’t see any difference between 1080p and 4K.
However, that analysis assumes that you’re dealing with otherwise-similar, high-quality sources. I have a 65" screen, with similar viewing distance, and I usually can’t see the difference between a 1080p blu ray and a 4K SDR version of the same thing. But the difference between 1080p and 4K on Netflix is very visible indeed. The reason is simply that 1080p Netflix streams have a quite low bit-rate - often around 5Mb/s (as compared with 30Mb/s or more for a 1080p blu ray). So, when it comes to streaming something like Netflix, you can easily see a difference between 1080p and 4K versions of the same video - it’s not really to do with the resolution as such, it’s more to do with the source quality.
And on top of that, of course, there’s HDR and WCG to consider - if the TV is capable of rendering those, then the difference between 4K HDR and 1080p can be dramatic.
That is true, although some might argue that it has fewer bugs in the first place. Plus, it runs apps that are under active development - Apple may not offer new features, but the authors of Infuse and MrMC will.
It is obviously rather more expensive than the Vero 4K. As a way of accessing Netflix, Amazon, etc. it is greatly superior to the Vero 4K. In some situations it’s rather less good at local streaming: in particular, it can’t bitstream audio tracks, meaning you can’t have Dolby Atmos or DTS:X on locally-streamed video. (There are also one or two - rare! - situations where it’s better for local streaming, e.g. if you’re an anime fan and want to play stuff encoded as Hi10P; but that’s definitely the exception rather than the rule).
I don’t think that’s a safe assumption. I believe Netflix tends to insist on a device’s boot-loader being locked down before they will certify it for a proper Netflix app - so, it’s not enough for the device to run Android, it has to be incapable of running anything else.
Also debatable. Getting Dolby Atmos sound out of a TV’s built-in app is not so easy - and sometimes impossible. And people like myself who use video processors need everything to come from an external source. (Okay, we’re a minority! ) Also, some TVs can’t play 4K/HDR on YouTube and/or on BBC iPlayer, but can handle those if they come from an external player.
So did I. I bought the box because what it does now, but to be honest, once you have set up your box (2hours . 2 days…2 weeks?) … which support effort could I expect/demand if no new features will be added ?
We can’t forget this is GPL software and without legal streaming support atm, so no expensive licenses to pay. It is just a customized Kodi box built over free software with a “just enough” HW meant to do only that job.
If I pay 140€ I just expect more than plain support for the things the box already do, for the incoming years.
If only a few users ask for a feature that could be considered as “niche” and if it’s a really popular demand high chances that Kodi Team (not only OSMC) will implement it.
I know, it’s my totally my fault to expect “a bit more” but also my right to expect in the following months “a value added”.
Just mentioned it could be great to get a “dual boot” for Android. At lest the box could have a chance to be used with legal apps if anyone is interested.
And I’m sorry, I’m starting to sound a bit grumpy, I know, I just expect you to see my point, not to fully share it. And not trying to ruin anyone’s experience.
Yes, I know there’s more to 4K than simply the resolution. I can well imagine a low bitrate 4K stream can look ‘better’ than a good 1080p one.
The Wetek boxes were Netflix certified weren’t they? They came with a OpenElec/LibreElec too. But maybe that’s changed …
I have to admit I’ve lost interest in the big streaming services since they never seem to send anything I want to watch anyway. So I’ve gone back to buying good old fashioned Blurays and even DVDs …
Aah! I always forget there are actually people who use all those toytown multichannel audio formats! Me I’m resolutely stereo. In fact most of my library is probably recorded in glorious mono on a rented Nagra III …
I’m with you there. I run everything through an eeColor LUT box which, incedentally, is max 1080p. But as you say, that’s a minority use case.
I am having a bit of a problem to follow your logic.
So when you buy a car you also assume that 2 months after you start driving the producer invites you for a repair shop visit to add you additional features?
Don’t try to move the conversation to an another …waaaaaayy different arena. That’s not very nice. If you want to talk about cars I want to talk about phones and computers.
I still use a 10 years old laptop computer because it supports Windows 10 and tons of apps. 10 years old.
Talking about Apple, not my favourite brand, my wife’s iPhone 5s still is getting updated… acquiring new features about 4 years after first purchase.
Any premium software/hardware products I’ve bought and had lasted for more than 2 years, usually have been able to get updates to improve and increase their features over the time.
You sell this box at higher price point than competition while offering free software and not spectacular HW (that’s a fact). And you claim that the price is because it will be supported along 5 years.
¿ Does it mean than if AV1 becomes “a popular codec” in 3 years (I hope that not) I can demand an update ? I think that no, because AV1 will need HW decoding an this HW still hasn’t (as anyone board else atm, indeed).
So “by 5 years support” I personally would like to get new/more features.
¿ You won’t add it ? I guess I’ll have to live with it.
My original question was aimed at having one box “do it all”. Today, I have two: a Roku for internet streaming and the Vero4K for playing local content. Both boxes do video and audio very well. Of course, both have their competitors, all with pros & cons.
Towards the theoretical goal of having one box, the hardware redesign/upgrade (if needed) I assume is a surmountable issue. If it’s merely software, with Kodi or OSMC, that too seems like it could be addressed. I realize that I am a non-technical person probably trivializing a complex challenge.
My guess is, the licensing barrier is the real problem.
Today, I have to switch inputs between the 2 little boxes and keep 2 remotes handy. The Roku costs about half what the Vero4K does, so for under 200 I can watch everything I want across two boxes. Having high quality video and audio in my home at my finger tips is worth it.
The AppleTV 4K is probably as close you’ll get. So long as you don’t need bitstreamed audio on locally-stored files, don’t need 4K/HDR on YouTube, and don’t care about MVC/frame-packed 3D, it does just about everything else (with one or two eccentricities).
It’s not that you are wrong to expect improvements – but what is the nature of the improvements that you can expect? Kodi and OSMC are under constant development – but their development is more of an evolutionary nature. It’s probably a bit utopian to expect radically new features like 4K/HDR support for the major streaming services when that is known to be essentially impossible due to licensing restrictions. You can, however, probably expect improvements in rendering, a more fluid interface perhaps, better colour, and things of that nature …
What makes you think you won’t be able to use your vero 4k + 10 years from now to watch 1080p and 2160p video ? As long the format specification’s dont change drastically that should be no problem.
You say that as if its a bad thing. There is plenty of people that buy the vero because it runs open source software and is highly customizable. While the HW is not spectacular the software that runs on it is so customized that every bit of performance is squeezed out of the hardware which is also nice and not a bad thing.
I don’t have a 4K TV, so I don’t play anything more than 1080p, but I jumped at the Vero 4K because the software is the only truly open solution for media playback. Being based on Debian instead of Android allows the user to do almost anything with the box fairly easily. There are literally thousands of applications that can be added with apt-get install ..., and plenty of resources to help users configure them.
It also means that there are many ways to make your local media available for playback (Kodi’s built-in support, fstab mounts to NAS, USB device, etc.), and all are, again, widely documented even if this forum didn’t exist.
But devices that are pure streamers (Roku and FireTV sticks, etc.) with no real support for local media are practically being given away in cereal boxes. You can choose whatever you want and never pay more than US$50. So, solve all your streaming problems with one of those plugged into an AVR/processor/whatever, and use the Vero for what it excels at: watching media that is stored in your home.