WDTV Live has many problems

Today I sent WDTV Live device back to the store. It was an easy decision and I understand why it was returned the first time around. Below is incomplete list of problems that were encountered during the week WDTV was in my possession.

The avi files do not play well over DLNA or Samba share. To be honest, some files do play but most  stutter. The high bitrate mp4 files do not play well at all. Roku plays these same files without any hitch. The wmv files also hit and miss. Some do play really well, some do not play at all.

User interface is very clunky and slow. If the DLNA server crashes, the box completely freezes or becomes so unresponsive that it is useless. At this time the box must be rebooted to bring it back in to the working state.

Different video controls are available depending on the type of the video file which makes the UI inconsistent. The mp4 files and the mkv files can be positioned to a time point, the wmv and the avi files cannot. Files or all types can be fast forwarded but the max speed is only 16x and it seems much slower than that in practice.

Hulu application is much worse than the one on Roku. This is one of the most used services in our household because we do not have cable so it is important that Hulu app works. With WDTV  only few shows can be played and then application needs to be restarted in order for it to work. The ad insertion on Roku is almost like in broadcast tv. On WDTV the ads buffer separately and there is a significant pause before and after the ad. It makes duration of the show to be almost as long as over the cable. The only useful feature of WDTV Hulu app is that one can force maximum bitrate . The app on Roku is much newer version than the WDTV and that may explain the difference.

The "channel" selection on WDTV is  much smaller than on Roku and the box looses big in this respect. The server software for Roku is very simple, MyMedia being an excellent server. The server software I used for WDTV was the PS3 Media Server. This server is very reasonable but it gets huge after running for a while and has to be restarted. It also takes a bit of knowledge to configure this software correctly. Live transcoding mode supported by this server does not work well on my quad core Phenom so I have to transcode offline which negates some of the convenience.
At the end I could not figure out a format that would be well supported by both Roku and WDTV and as a result each file should be encoded in two formats. If you would like to watch content on both devices the size of your library would double.

Given all of the above my derision was to standardize on Roku boxes to minimize size of the library and improve over all experience. Too bad no company can figure out how to do networked media player correctly.

Update on WDTV subtitles and more

I have been trying to get WDTV subtitles working with mp4 format so I don't have to keep separate format for Roku. So far I learned a few things. First is that WDTV does not appear to understand internal subtitles inside mp4 container. I was able to multiplex subtitles using ffmpeg as well as mp4box. In both cases VLC was able to play subtitles but WDTV was not. The second thing I learned is that Roku does not appear to understand multiplexed subtitles ether. This fact is apparently documented on Roku forums and elsewhere online. The third thing I learned is that WDTV is pretty bad at playing mp4 files. Somehow the playback is very choppy and the video freezes a lot. Monitoring consumed bandwidth I found that it is very low and is not enough to play the content smoothly. Converting the file in to mkv container without transcoding, fixed all playback problems. The bandwidth consumption became much more even and video played without any issues. This was a bit surprising as Roku played the same mp4 file rather well.

WDTV subtitles from DLNA server

So far I could not figure out how to stream external subtitles from DLNA server. However WDTV supports MKV container and subtitles can be embedded in to the video file. To do this use mkvmerge tool from the mkvtoolnix set. Obtain the srt subtiles for the content you want to watch and then run following command to merge the subtitles and the video in to one mkv file:

mkvmerge.exe -o output.mkv input.mp4 input.srt

This will produce the mkv file that can be streamed over DLNA and your WDTV will be able to display the subtitles. Roku on the other hand can not display subtitles from the MKV container and needs an external file. Given that Roku often crashes when playing or navigating in the MKV file, you would need to keep a separate mp4 file and a srt file for the playback on Roku.

WDTV Live again

I took my replacement Roku back to Costco and decided to give WDTV Live a second try. The box arrived from Amazon and I was excited to to open it and start comparing it to Roku (again).


The WDTV box is obviously larger than Roku but that does not bother me. Ether box is small enough to be placed somewhere near your TV.  The WDTV is also more power hungry than Roku, it has a larger power supply and runs much warmer. The WDTV is noticeably warm on touch even when in the off state. The box is running Linux and clearly does not power off, other than turning off the video output and the led. Nether does Roku but the chip it uses is less power hungry.

After spending 2 days with the WDTV, I am back to thinking that Roku has more polished product, despite all of the shortcomings. But let me describe things in order.
Configuring WDTV box takes about the same time as Roku - you need to configure network and your TV output format. The WDTV has few more customizable options that allow you to set various things but over all experience is close. The WDTV does not have any downloadable apps so the configuration ends here.
We only have Hulu Plus so I registered box with the Hulu site and tried watching some content. The Hulu app on WDTV is somewhat different from the Roku version. Queue display is different and also the WDTV app allows you to set the bitrate, which is a great feature! Roku app often stutters because the bitrate of the content is too high and there is no way to get it down. When I run in to this problem I will try to compare the two boxes and post my observations.
The local content playback is the area where WDTV suppose to shine. It does play any format that I have tried. It played all the MKV files, that caused Roku to reboot, without any problems. There were however few issues.
First problem was to get Windows7 to share the files. This task should become simpler to accomplish with Windows7, in reality it was more complicated than XP. For some reasons after enabling Home Group sharing the WDTV still did not see the the directories. Eventually after some fiddling with the settings, the box could see the shares and play the videos. It worked OK for the lower bitrate videos but somehow higher bitrate made it stutter. I assume the problem is with Windows networking being too chatty. Same videos over DLNA worked just fine.
The second problem is finding a good DLNA server. I have tried every free DLNA server running on Windows that is listed on Wikipedia. I wanted a small footprint DLNA server since at the base of DLNA is just a simple web server. Most of the servers are large and some of them are unstable. When the DLNA server crashes the WDTV box gets very unhappy! The menu is completely unresponsive and the only reasonable solution is to pull the power plug.
At the end I settled on two candidates - PS3 Media Server and Serviio. Both seem to behave more or less OK although both use copious amounts of memory, with Serviio being a little smaller.
One thing I wanted to mention in conclusion - I could not get external subtitles to work with the DLNA server. If subtitles are important to you Roku seems to be easier to get working with the external subtitles.
I will keep this blog updated on my experience with WDTV over the next few weeks.

Roku2 vs WD TV Live

I recently picked up Roku2 at Costco. I figured that we can try using it for streaming some media from the internet and the PC. My initial impressions were not very good because of the defective remote. The remote would lock up about twice a day and I had to remove and replace the batteries and that was very annoying. Other than that device was OK but it did not support many formats. After talking to the Roku customer support person I returned device to Costco and got WD TV Live which a lot of people liked. After using Roku2 and WD TV for a week each I formed my opinion.

In streaming from the internet Roku wins hands down. It has many more channels, some even very good. If you only want to use Netflix and Hulu, WD TV is OK. If you want more choices Roku2 is your box! It has bunch of educational channels like Khan Academy and MIT Open Courseware.

If you want to stream variety of formats locally WD TV could be a better choice if you do not want to transcode. Since I occasionally had to transcode video for iPod, I already had Handbrake and has no trouble transcoding for Roku. Roku only supports H264 and VC1 codecs and only few containers, while WD TV supports a large selection of codecs and containers.

To stream locally with WD TV you can use DLNA server or just use windows sharing. Windows sharing is dangerous to use over wifi since my network is not secured. All DLNA servers that I used are huge and clunky. At the end I used ps3mediaserver which after running overnight grew to 1GB in size. There is NO REASON why a glorified web server should be that large.
To stream to Roku, one also has several choices. I tried two - Rocksbox and MyMedia. Rocksbox is pretty good and works well. It costs $15 after a month trial period. It works together with the monogoose webserver or any other webserver that you can configure. The monogoose server is light, small and fast. It is very easy to configure.
MyMedia server has its own server solution written in Python and the source of the Roku app is included. I liked that approach since I could add features and fix any problems, not that it had any. At the end I went with MyMedia and it works very well. Memory footprint starts under 10MB and grows to around 15MB after running for a while. The server is responsive and supports multiple Roku units.

In the user interface department Roku2 wins with the large margin. User interface is fast, responsive and intuitive. WD TV is very far behind. You can tell that this product was done by the company with no experience in user interfaces. UI is sluggish, progress indicators are absent in the few notable places. You think that box is hung but after a few long seconds it comes alive and does its thing. The WD TV is never actually hung but I thought several times that it did.

WiFi performance is much better on Roku2. When away from the router WD TV had trouble with the streaming and video would often freeze. Roku never had any problems.

So over all my preference is Roku2. The only area that falls short is a media format support. Given fast computer and handbrake it is not a huge problem. On my quad core AMD Phenom PC 1 hour SD movie is transcoded in about 6-7 minutes. This machine is about half speed of modern i5 or i7 machine.

WD TV power consumption about twice that of Roku2. Not that it matters much since both boxes consume under 10W. Roku2 consumes under 3W when running and less than 2W when screen saver is running. KillaWatt could not detect any energy being used by Roku2.

The only area WD TV box is better than Roku2 is the media format support. If you are not willing to transcode your media but instead willing to live with clunky and slow interface, WD TV is your box. If you want many free and good internet channels, willing to transcode and like good interface experience, go with Roku2.

Costo bundle of Roku2 XS contains 2 months of Hulu and a HDMI cable. Given that the price of the bundle is lower than just a Roku box elsewhere, it is a very good deal. Do not forget a complete Angry Birds game which comes with this Roku box.

WD TV Live went back to the store and I bought a new Roku2 unit at Costco. This unit does not have the problem with the locking up remote and I am very happy with it.