I recently purchased a
Roku HD Streaming Player for a friend's birthday and set it up. In my July 4, 2012 review of that product I gave it five stars, but noted that while it met my friend's needs it fell short of mine.
Specifically, I use Youtube more than I do just about any other video service. I know that is an odd statement when some premium services such as Netflix and Hulu Plus are almost as good as cable at a fraction of the cost (and are making inroads to a 'cut the cable' movement that is taking place.) However, even if I was more mainstream in my use of streaming video devices I think this model is still superior to the Roku HD. Here is my comparison.
Set-Up. Both devices are a snap to install and configure. I will give a bonus point to Roku's documentation.
Content Delivery. To a novice I think this beats the Roku. While you can add a lot of channels to the Roku, it is something that you discover and do as you get used to the device. This, on the other hand, has more content immediately available after you set it up.
Remote. I prefer the Roku because it is simpler (I used the term elegant in my review). While this has my beloved Youtube assigned to a button, that may be deemed a waste of real estate on the remote by folks who do not care about that service. Also, both D-Link and Roku missed the boat in my opinion by hard wiring a service to the buttons on the remote because it's entirely possible that future services may eclipse them. Better would have been three buttons that were user assignable.
Cost. As I write this the competing Roku model is twenty bucks less. However, that is not an apples-to-apples comparison because the Roku to which I am comparing this is their entry level model, while this one is a 'Plus' model that is a step up from D-Link's entry level model that is exclusive to WalMart and is ten bucks less than the Roku. More importantly, this model will display HD in 1080p if the channel you select supports that. When you factor in that you need the higher-priced
Roku 2 XD Streaming Player 1080p to achieve that resolution, then the prices are nearly identical.
Another cost that you need to factor in is an HDMI cable to connect this directly to your TV. The Roku comes with composite audio/video cables bundled with even the low end model, making it a turn-key solution out of the box.
For me the deciding factor was, as I said, Youtube accessibility. The other major services - Hulu Plus, Netflix, Pandora, etc. - are available via both devices. Had the Roku provided me access to Youtube I would have probably opted for their entry level model because my needs are modest and I don't even use the HD 1080p feature on my TV.
If I were a more mainstream consumer I would probably opt for this D-Link model, though. Especially if you are one of a growing number of consumers who are examining ways to 'cut the cable' from costly cable or satellite services that can easily cost five to ten times what Netflix or Hulu Plus (for examples) charge monthly. Indeed, for around sixteen dollars a month you can get both of those services together, which covers a lot of content. It does not take long for this device to pay for itself and start saving you lot of money that you are probably now paying in monthly fees to cable or satellite companies.
Personally, it's hard to go wrong with this (or any of the Roku models). Carefully compare the features of this to competing models, including streaming services that are available, before making a final decision. Whichever you choose is probably going to be as convenient and significantly less expensive than services for which you are currently paying. This device may be the one that cuts your cable.