Roku has long controlled the set-top box streaming market with a variety of products but the company is now moving in the direction of Google’s Chromecast with the Roku Stick.

Roku Stick: A Direct Chromecast CompetitorUnlike its previous set-top boxes, the Stick will plug directly into a TV in order to make accessing content even easier than before.

Even though the Roku Stick does cost more than the Chromecast ($50 vs $35) it is not tied to your smartphone and will likely come with access to more channels than what Google has been able to offer thus far. This means that for just $15 more, the Stick may be quite worth it.

Since it failed to attain the same level of attention as the set-top boxes, the first iteration of the Roku Ready Stick (released in 2012) had many flaws. Now that the market has progressed and Roku has learned from its mistakes, this Roku Stick will presumably be much better and offer significantly more than what was available two years ago.

The screen casting functionality built into the Stick will only work with YouTube and Netflix in the beginning, but other Roku partners may have the ability to update their services in order to provide support for screen casting in the future.

Just like the set-top boxes, the Stick will also come with a physical Roku remote, something that many people will enjoy if they are using the product as a primary media consumption device.

One of the primary differences between the 2014 Roku Stick and the Ready Stick from 2012 is that this iteration will feature HDMI support rather than a custom MHL port that was previously being used. Since all modern TVs come with more than enough HDMI ports, this connection method is more efficient.

Pre-orders are already open for the Roku Stick and according to today’s announcement, the device will begin shipping sometime in April.

Summary: Roku has announced a new device, the Roku Stick, which will compete directly with Google’s Chromecast. The Stick will plug directly into a TV via an HDMI port and will be available for $50 compared to the Chromcast at $35.

Image Credit: techcrunch



  1. Avatar

    what can the $50 roku offer that Chromecast cannot with an update to the Chromecast firmware? There is a good chance Google will release updates since they have opened up the Chormecast API recently. Most people who would buy these units would already have a smartphone so using that as a remote should be one less handheld

  2. Avatar

    Google has a different agenda than Roku, what makes you think Google would copy Roku functionality and give it to you for free?

  3. Avatar

    Chromecast is a transparent free way to play apps of any type to the TV. You can binge-watch Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones or listen to Pandora or Google Play. Roku hijacks your tv and turns it into a hyper-expensive pay-as-you-go hotel-style tv. Roku sucks bigtime, the clumsy remote requires primitive hunt and pick entering of long text strings. You have to give a credit card to even test it. Chromecast is all apps, all free, to your TV. PBS gave my dad a roku. We tried it for an hour, gave a credit card to even see it first, then realized what a piece of garbage it was and threw it in the trash. Die a quick death roku.
    Chrome-cast or interfaces like it, might very well be the future of TV. Roku is to TV what AOL was too the internet. “You’ve got fail!”

  4. Avatar

    Chromecast is free. Plays your music and videos, for people with older tv’s extend to netlfix and hbo app, google play etc…. Roku is pay-as-you-go hotel-style tv, clumsy hackneyed tech, hard to navigate. Roku is just a clunky middle-man between you and your tv. Chromecast is the Google version of Mac’s Airplay, easily ported to any apps. I threw my roku in the trash after an hour and dumped the account, total waste of time and for those with a smart tv totally useless.

Write A Comment