ROKU 4, does it support 4k?

[scott911]

Just saw an advert for roku 4.
features: headphone jack built into remote, cool.
find lost remote features - I can see that being useful...
amazon prime out of the box, always handy...

wait - no reference to 4K? Could it be that roku's bean counters F-d us thier device too?

ok, it's got 4K, it's simply a minor line in the spec sheet.

I guess that makes sense that a new device designed to be a key hub of the one's AV experience would certainly support 4K, no need to advertise the obvious, right?

 

[robgendreau]

Heh. I noticed Apple didn't even publish the max video output of the ATV. I still can't understand why it's not 4k; even if the content is limited (and it is) didn't they realize that some of us have our own stuff—video, stills, etc—that we'd like to show on a 4k display?

 

[phrehdd]

Roku 4 does do 4k streaming from the appropriate providers. Elsewhere (other sites) are discussions on the Roku performance (and issues). However, it does do it and evidently does it well. Somehow, it looks like the recent ATV can't do it and is well perhaps more a stop gap until Apple plays catch up with all of its main competitors.

Just a quick gloss -

ATV - great front end for iTunes plus some apps/gaming and some Apple eco system features.
Amazon Fire TV - powerful, 4K capable and like Apple, it favours Amazon Prime
Roku 4 - high end 4K capable streamer. This is what it does (streaming) and does well and nothing else.
NVidia Shield TV - best hardware, depends on Google. Does brilliant streaming, gaming but does not have (yet) Amazon Prime and will obviously not get iTunes. The main menu is a touch clunky but usable.

What we see is there really isn't any one device that does everything, comes with a front end (menu system) that pleases all. Pick what works best for you. I like Nvidia's offering, other family members like Roku and I end up setting up for some people ATV.

 

[thisismyusername]

Yes, it handles 4K with no problem. I've had one since it came out and haven't had any problems with it, including streaming 4K stuff.

ok, it's got 4K, it's simply a minor line in the spec sheet.

I guess that makes sense that a new device designed to be a key hub of the one's AV experience would certainly support 4K, no need to advertise the obvious, right?

They make it clear on their website that it's a 4K device. Everything else I saw, including the box, made it clear as well but I'll admit that I don't pay much attentions to its advertisements.

 

[Snoopy4]

Just saw an advert for roku 4.
features: headphone jack built into remote, cool.
find lost remote features - I can see that being useful...
amazon prime out of the box, always handy...

wait - no reference to 4K? Could it be that roku's bean counters F-d us thier device too?

ok, it's got 4K, it's simply a minor line in the spec sheet.

I guess that makes sense that a new device designed to be a key hub of the one's AV experience would certainly support 4K, no need to advertise the obvious, right?

Did you try to read the product specs?

https://www.roku.com/products/roku-4

 

[scott911]

Did you try to read the product specs?

https://www.roku.com/products/roku-4

did you try to read my post?

 

[tanfan]

I bought the Roku 4. Whats nice besides the 4K support is that it has ALL the channels (no itunes of course) RIGHT NOW...everything and then some!

 

[BlueGoldAce]

I have both the rook 4 and the New Apple tv. Got the Apple TV over black friday for my basement TV, and got the roku 4 yesterday, to go with a new 4k TV.

The Apple tv has the better interface, in terms of being pretty to use. The roku's interface is more functional and efficient. The my feed feature, and search ability is great. Siri is smarter, but the universal search of Roku searches all the services available (minus iTunes, of course). It eliminates the need to check multiple apps to see if a movie/show is free/cheaper on different services. The roku has every streaming service one could want (again, minus iTunes), and that is a big plus, making it the better cord-cuter device. Both perform really well.

Apple TV: Pretty and smooth interface, better for gaming (I haven't tested this, I game on current gen consoles), has iTunes. Airplay

Roku: More functional, efficient interface. Content agnostic, more (all) services. 4k. Cheaper price for equal performance.

4k is huge, and a damn shame apple didn't include it, when the hardware is more than capable. If you don't have a 4k, it might not matter to you, but you can't say it doesn't matter to the industry. Go to, for example, Best Buy and try and buy a TV (like I did a few days ago). 4k TVs are everywhere, and affordable. A good example is the Vizio E class (1080p) vs M class (4k) The E class is a damn good, affordable TV, with a great picture. The M class (based on the sales on amazon and best buy) is only 100 or so more for, example, the 50 inch ($499 vs $629). The M class is rated as one of the best looking TVs you can buy right now. Put them next to each other, even with 1080p content (due to the technology in the 4k panel) and the M series looks significantly better. Then, when you play 4k content, it blows you away. Its not just the resolution, it is the color and contrast.

Once you use 4k, you see the difference. I love my 60 inch plasma, which my Apple tv runs, and will keep it for as long as I can...but I have to admit 4k looks wondrous on my 50 inch Vizio. 4k is the new thing, and will really take off this year....just as 4k content is really starting to build up.

If the Apple TV streamed 4k, I probably would have go another Apple TV. But it doesn't, and so I got a roku 4....and I really like it. It is cheaper, and its approach to content is superior. For a streaming device that cost $150-200 (roku is $120) its ridiculous. The Apple TV offers less content (streaming, not games) and capabilities then the roku. I love my Apple products, and really enjoy Apple as a company. But it seems this is a blatant approach to withhold a feature for the 5th gen Apple TV. Why else would they limit the 4th gen Apple TV? If the current Apple TV had 4k, why would one need to upgrade anytime soon, minus gaming power? We can hope for a software update, but why gimp the Apple TV out the door. It only hurts sales, as in my case.

 

[BarcelonaPaul]

I have both the rook 4 and the New Apple tv. Got the Apple TV over black friday for my basement TV, and got the roku 4 yesterday, to go with a new 4k TV.

The Apple tv has the better interface, in terms of being pretty to use. The roku's interface is more functional and efficient. The my feed feature, and search ability is great. Siri is smarter, but the universal search of Roku searches all the services available (minus iTunes, of course). It eliminates the need to check multiple apps to see if a movie/show is free/cheaper on different services. The roku has every streaming service one could want (again, minus iTunes), and that is a big plus, making it the better cord-cuter device. Both perform really well.

Apple TV: Pretty and smooth interface, better for gaming (I haven't tested this, I game on current gen consoles), has iTunes. Airplay

Roku: More functional, efficient interface. Content agnostic, more (all) services. 4k. Cheaper price for equal performance.

4k is huge, and a damn shame apple didn't include it, when the hardware is more than capable. If you don't have a 4k, it might not matter to you, but you can't say it doesn't matter to the industry. Go to, for example, Best Buy and try and buy a TV (like I did a few days ago). 4k TVs are everywhere, and affordable. A good example is the Vizio E class (1080p) vs M class (4k) The E class is a damn good, affordable TV, with a great picture. The M class (based on the sales on amazon and best buy) is only 100 or so more for, example, the 50 inch ($499 vs $629). The M class is rated as one of the best looking TVs you can buy right now. Put them next to each other, even with 1080p content (due to the technology in the 4k panel) and the M series looks significantly better. Then, when you play 4k content, it blows you away. Its not just the resolution, it is the color and contrast.

Once you use 4k, you see the difference. I love my 60 inch plasma, which my Apple tv runs, and will keep it for as long as I can...but I have to admit 4k looks wondrous on my 50 inch Vizio. 4k is the new thing, and will really take off this year....just as 4k content is really starting to build up.

If the Apple TV streamed 4k, I probably would have go another Apple TV. But it doesn't, and so I got a roku 4....and I really like it. It is cheaper, and its approach to content is superior. For a streaming device that cost $150-200 (roku is $120) its ridiculous. The Apple TV offers less content (streaming, not games) and capabilities then the roku. I love my Apple products, and really enjoy Apple as a company. But it seems this is a blatant approach to withhold a feature for the 5th gen Apple TV. Why else would they limit the 4th gen Apple TV? If the current Apple TV had 4k, why would one need to upgrade anytime soon, minus gaming power? We can hope for a software update, but why gimp the Apple TV out the door. It only hurts sales, as in my case.

Totally agree with you! 4K TVs are everywhere here in the UK - LG's at under £400 now. With VIMEO now offering both streaming and downloading of the films that I like (surfing and skateboarding) in 4K, I want a box that will play 4K. I seriously cannot believe the stupidity of Apple with the ATV4. It was out of date even before it hit the shops with no 4K playback. Just crazy and very greedy and incredibly shortsighted of them. They look like total idiots, as though they don't understand the market and competition out there. At £129/169 in the UK, it's very very hard to be impressed by it. It's even gained weight and gone fat. Is this the first Apple product to be fat rather than thinner???
[doublepost=1452110885][/doublepost]

I have both the rook 4 and the New Apple tv. Got the Apple TV over black friday for my basement TV, and got the roku 4 yesterday, to go with a new 4k TV.

The Apple tv has the better interface, in terms of being pretty to use. The roku's interface is more functional and efficient. The my feed feature, and search ability is great. Siri is smarter, but the universal search of Roku searches all the services available (minus iTunes, of course). It eliminates the need to check multiple apps to see if a movie/show is free/cheaper on different services. The roku has every streaming service one could want (again, minus iTunes), and that is a big plus, making it the better cord-cuter device. Both perform really well.

Apple TV: Pretty and smooth interface, better for gaming (I haven't tested this, I game on current gen consoles), has iTunes. Airplay

Roku: More functional, efficient interface. Content agnostic, more (all) services. 4k. Cheaper price for equal performance.

4k is huge, and a damn shame apple didn't include it, when the hardware is more than capable. If you don't have a 4k, it might not matter to you, but you can't say it doesn't matter to the industry. Go to, for example, Best Buy and try and buy a TV (like I did a few days ago). 4k TVs are everywhere, and affordable. A good example is the Vizio E class (1080p) vs M class (4k) The E class is a damn good, affordable TV, with a great picture. The M class (based on the sales on amazon and best buy) is only 100 or so more for, example, the 50 inch ($499 vs $629). The M class is rated as one of the best looking TVs you can buy right now. Put them next to each other, even with 1080p content (due to the technology in the 4k panel) and the M series looks significantly better. Then, when you play 4k content, it blows you away. Its not just the resolution, it is the color and contrast.

Once you use 4k, you see the difference. I love my 60 inch plasma, which my Apple tv runs, and will keep it for as long as I can...but I have to admit 4k looks wondrous on my 50 inch Vizio. 4k is the new thing, and will really take off this year....just as 4k content is really starting to build up.

If the Apple TV streamed 4k, I probably would have go another Apple TV. But it doesn't, and so I got a roku 4....and I really like it. It is cheaper, and its approach to content is superior. For a streaming device that cost $150-200 (roku is $120) its ridiculous. The Apple TV offers less content (streaming, not games) and capabilities then the roku. I love my Apple products, and really enjoy Apple as a company. But it seems this is a blatant approach to withhold a feature for the 5th gen Apple TV. Why else would they limit the 4th gen Apple TV? If the current Apple TV had 4k, why would one need to upgrade anytime soon, minus gaming power? We can hope for a software update, but why gimp the Apple TV out the door. It only hurts sales, as in my case.

And yes, I've been commissioning video work to be shot, edited etc in 4K for the past three years now

 

[Beerstalker]

This is an example of why Apple has skipped 4K for now, and why many people may be regretting their 4K purchases soon. 4K specs were still up in the air (and I'm not convinced that this new spec is going to be the last change).

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/s...hd-blurays-that-will-launch-this-spring/28690

So pretty much anyone who has bought a 4K TV so far will not have a true Ultra HD Premium TV, and the TVs that meet the specs aren't going to be out until later this year.

1080P has pretty much become the current standard, and what the majority of homes have. Make the Apple TV4 work with it and once the 4K specs are truly standardized then you can come out with an AppleTV5 that meets the Ultra HD Premium specs (or the newer version if that gets replaced soon).

 

[mcdj]

did you try to read my post?

your apple tv question was...?

 

[BlueGoldAce]

This is an example of why Apple has skipped 4K for now, and why many people may be regretting their 4K purchases soon. 4K specs were still up in the air (and I'm not convinced that this new spec is going to be the last change).

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/s...hd-blurays-that-will-launch-this-spring/28690

So pretty much anyone who has bought a 4K TV so far will not have a true Ultra HD Premium TV, and the TVs that meet the specs aren't going to be out until later this year.

1080P has pretty much become the current standard, and what the majority of homes have. Make the Apple TV4 work with it and once the 4K specs are truly standardized then you can come out with an AppleTV5 that meets the Ultra HD Premium specs (or the newer version if that gets replaced soon).

That is the perfect example of the constant flux that is technology. You can't make a product that will be future proof, beyond a doubt, for years to come. You can make a product that fits the current state of tech, especially when you outprice everyone else.

 

[AZREOSpecialist]

And then 8k is right around the corner...

 

[Snoopy4]

did you try to read my post?

Yes. You asked if it supported 4K and I directed you to the specs where it tells you the answer is yes.

Had you gone to the page you'd find its not just a line in the specs. Had you clicked on the 4K logo, you would have been directed here:

https://www.roku.com/4k-ultra-hd

 

[2010mini]

This is an example of why Apple has skipped 4K for now, and why many people may be regretting their 4K purchases soon. 4K specs were still up in the air (and I'm not convinced that this new spec is going to be the last change).

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/s...hd-blurays-that-will-launch-this-spring/28690

So pretty much anyone who has bought a 4K TV so far will not have a true Ultra HD Premium TV, and the TVs that meet the specs aren't going to be out until later this year.

1080P has pretty much become the current standard, and what the majority of homes have. Make the Apple TV4 work with it and once the 4K specs are truly standardized then you can come out with an AppleTV5 that meets the Ultra HD Premium specs (or the newer version if that gets replaced soon).

More like Apple TV 6

 

[mattopotamus]

This is an example of why Apple has skipped 4K for now, and why many people may be regretting their 4K purchases soon. 4K specs were still up in the air (and I'm not convinced that this new spec is going to be the last change).

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/s...hd-blurays-that-will-launch-this-spring/28690

So pretty much anyone who has bought a 4K TV so far will not have a true Ultra HD Premium TV, and the TVs that meet the specs aren't going to be out until later this year.

1080P has pretty much become the current standard, and what the majority of homes have. Make the Apple TV4 work with it and once the 4K specs are truly standardized then you can come out with an AppleTV5 that meets the Ultra HD Premium specs (or the newer version if that gets replaced soon).

To be fair most late 2015 sets fall under those specs. It will be years and tons of money later before sets support rec 2020

 

[Beerstalker]

To be fair most late 2015 sets fall under those specs. It will be years and tons of money later before sets support rec 2020

They may meet those specs, we won't really know for a while. The article even mentions that some of LGs new TVs they were showing off at CES meet the specs, but evidently not all of them do.

"With the Ultra HD Premium standard now public, LG has announced that their key 2016 4K OLED TVs have already passed the certification testing phase and will not only be certified as Ultra HD Premium, but have even been designed to exceed technical specifications set forth by the UHDA."

So their "key" OLED TVs meet/exceed the specs, but evidently not all of their new 4K TVs or they would have said so. I personally wouldn't be buying a 4K TV unless it has already passed certification. As we have seen with Carplay/Homekit many times manufacturers claim that their stuff will meet the specs/work in the future, but that often turns out to be false.