The Roku is not a tablet. It's a streaming set top box. To set up Chromecast and control it you can use an Android device, iOS device, a Mac, a Chromebook, or a PC. If you don't have one of those you are really not likely to be the sort of person who would be interested in this kind of thing. You would also be fairly rare - in the US anyway. I have a variety of these Android Stick PCs and the Roku and the controls are pretty bad on them. I have long wanted just to use my phone or tablets and now I can. Nice. That my kids can use their cheapo Chinese Android tabs as a controller is awesome - you can get those for $50, which is not much more than the cost of a universal remote control.
Maybe they can get streaming gaming going on the thing, using the surface of my Android devices for inputs and secondary display and the bigscreen for audio and main content. That would totally rock. Or stream the display for Google Docs to the TV but use my other device for inputs. I wonder if it can tether to my phone's wifi and share LTE... That would be cool for conference rooms and hotel rooms. But that is later on. You wouldn't expect them to launch that on the first day.
If you have the 4-stream plan that's 3x$11.99 = $35.97. It's yours for less than the cost of shipping.
Yes, bluray player and Smart TV interfaces and apps leave much to be desired. There just isn't a lot of money for processor hardware in a Bluray player and smartTVs could afford to put a decent processor in there but for some reason they don't.
You know what would be even cooler? A monthly AI bot that took all of the hot memes in tech and applied them to "prospective Intel tech" that may or not ever appear. That would probably save Intel a billion dollars a year in marketing expense over having it done manually. Seriously Intel, if you're going to do this year after year after year, you may as well automate it and save some money. You're all about automating repetitive stuff, right?
It could enumerate monthly the latest convincing reasons why your latest mobile tech is going to take over the Woooooorld, just like we've been hearing for the last decade. But without the expense of employing actual artists to draw pictures of "this is what an Intel-based mobile world might look like."
Further on they say global losses are "probably" in the "range" of $300 billion.
These are the losses - data loss, the costs of identity theft and notification. If you want to count the cost of the Windows malware ecosystem you have to include both the losses and the cost of defense. That's all the costs of data losses, the entire revenues of all antivirus, firewall, next-gen endpoint sofware companies including the (now Intel) McAffee. These things cost money, and without the Windows monoculture they could not persist.
I have long said that the cost of the Windows malware ecosystem far exceeds Microsoft's own revenues. This is proof. The cure is easy: Don't run Windows. You can choose to not have this problem. You can opt out. Google did. If someday your choice of other OS becomes also so infested because it has become too popular and its developers lose track of security you can choose another. The OS isn't really that important anyway.
Sigmund Freud is alleged to have said that in the last analysis the entire field of psychology may reduce to biological electrochemistry.