The device is about the size of a double-album plastic CD case. That takes up more desk surface than the Roku 3 or the Apple TV, but it can be placed out of the way, even in a desk drawer. That's because the Fire TV's remote control connects with the device using Bluetooth wireless technology rather than infrared signals, so you don't need a direct line of sight.
Roku 3 uses Wi-Fi and doesn't need a direct line of sight either. Its remote has a headphone jack that captures audio from shows wirelessly, so you can watch late at night without disturbing others. Fire TV doesn't have that.
As stated previously, Fire TV is comparable in price to the Roku 3 and the Apple TV. Roku has cheaper options, for as low as $50, though it's worth paying $100 for a faster processor and other benefits. Meanwhile, Google Inc. has a $35 streaming device called the Chromecast. It's more of a conduit for flinging video from your phone or tablet to your TV. It's more cumbersome to use than a stand-alone streaming device, and it works with relatively few apps.
With Fire TV, you can stream personal photos and video stored on Amazon's Cloud Drive. A software update coming next month will also give you access to personal music files and to parental controls.
And that goes back to the idea of Fire TV being largely about promise. Many features aren't ready yet, and the ones that are don't work yet with every service.
Fire TV is a good investment if you use a lot of Amazon content, but you'll need patience for features to arrive or get better.
Latest Business News
