First time cord cutter, any tips?

[harshness]

My answers are in bold in the quote.

Yeah, that's the least preferable way to do that.

I see them now that I clicked on the "Click to expand" button but Xenforo squeezes ginormous quotes down to just few lines.

The proper way to quote is to enclose your response in a /quote quote pair. I have no idea how you might accomplish that with a phone app.

The downside is that I can't quote your responses because they are part of a quote and are not brought along.

o Charter doesn't have caps - good for you and any of the 12% of the population they serve. The fine print says that while they're not allowed to cap their service as part of the TWC merger, they can and will engage in throttling.

o DVR with PS Vue is great - assumes that PS Vue (and its cloud DVR feature) meets the needs of the household.

o need for multiple streamers - assumes that your local channels are carried by your OTT services or that you're willing to live without them or watch them live

o Vue suits your needs - funny how our needs adjust to fit what we've chosen.

o offers enough sports - RSNs are pretty badly under-represented in many areas on the OTT services (unless you subscribe to the RSN directly). Sports is a different story for each household.

o User eXperience - my grandmother was in a similar situation and she had trouble watching her one channel (the local ABC affiliate) if someone switched the channel on her so other's mileage will vary widely. Navigating with those silly little eight-button joypad remotes (unless you suffer an AppleTV with three or six buttons) leaves a whole lot to be desired as well.

 

[Zookster]

o Vue suits your needs - funny how our needs adjust to fit what we've chosen.

I can definitely relate to that. In cutting the cord, I've adjusted my needs such that I no longer require 200+ channels, 80% of which I never watch. While at the same time, I now require complete access to all my channels and recorded content on every screen in my house without paying $40+/month extra for it. I also now require unlimited DVR space so I can record, and not ever worry about deleting, every one of my home team's MLB games. Though, I've never required the ability to archive and keep them for more than 9 months. I realize some people do like to hold on to their recorded content. Everyone's needs are different.

o offers enough sports - RSNs are pretty badly under-represented in many areas on the OTT services (unless you subscribe to the RSN directly). Sports is a different story for each household.

I've rarely heard of anyone having trouble accessing their RSN (if their OTT TV service level includes sports channels) when they live in an RSN's market and that RSN isn't owned and controlled by the market's local cable company, which is the case in several cities. Sometimes people who live in between markets and would prefer a neighboring RSN to the one they're getting have issues, or the OTT service mis-locates a customer geographically, thus requiring contacting a CSR to straighten in out. But in my experience of daily interacting with cord-cutters on social media and discussion forums, RSN availability is actually one of the things OTT services got right from the git-go. PS Vue and YouTube TV were especially keen to make sure to provide the big four networks and RSNs.

 

[Howard Simmons]

I posted this on another thread, it's dated Dec. 4th from USA today: Cutting the cord: Which cable TV alternatives make the grade

 

[ncted]

It doesn’t seem all that accurate though. At least for my area and with locals. I didn’t look much beyond that, other errors may exist.

Well, it is beta software, so hopefully it will improve. It obviously doesn't include hidden packages like the Welcome Pack, but it was accurate as far as I could tell for my location.

 

[harshness]

Though, I've never required the ability to archive and keep them for more than 9 months.

Some content is relatively timeless and you can't reasonably get it back. I'm thinking for the Bejing opening ceremonies as one important example.

I've rarely heard of anyone having trouble accessing their RSN (if their OTT TV service level includes sports channels) when they live in an RSN's market and that RSN isn't owned and controlled by the market's local cable company, which is the case in several cities.

Neither PS Vue nor YTTV carry ROOT Sports NW or Pac12. They both carry NBC Sports NW which is largely a Comcast exclusive so this is kind of the flip side of what you were talking about.

Bein Sports is also missing from their rosters (although which disappears first between Bein and PS Vue is an active debate).

 

[Zookster]

Some content is relatively timeless and you can't reasonably get it back. I'm thinking for the Bejing opening ceremonies as one important example.

If I ever want to watch a clip of a past major event, I just go to YouTube. But like I said, everyone has different needs or interests in what they want to retain and rewatch.

Neither PS Vue nor YTTV carry ROOT Sports NW or Pac12. They both carry NBC Sports NW which is largely a Comcast exclusive so this is kind of the flip side of what you were talking about.

Bein Sports is also missing from their rosters (although which disappears first between Bein and PS Vue is an active debate).

Well, there are plenty of channels in all genre categories that aren't going to make it on to services that carry fewer than 100 channels. Bein is a niche sports channel featuring global sports and not in any way an RSN.

When I think of RSNs, I'm mainly thinking of market-specific channels that carry all the MLB and/or NBA games of one's local team. But yes, Pac-12 is a troublesome outlier for college sports fans in west of the Rockies who subscribe to YTTV and PS Vue. But there are OTT services that do carry it, so fans have options.

Since you brought up the issue of RSN availability, if you drill down into every market you'll find problems and missing channels across the various TV providers. For example, Dish Network has been notoriously bad about carrying my region's RSNs. When I had Dish for four years, I had to subscribe to cable TV as well (speaking of having to have multiple providers/devices) to get the cable company-owned RSN that broadcast almost all of the Padres games and many local college sports games, which it did until 2012. When the Padres moved to Fox, Dish dragged its feet for a full year before carrying Fox Sports San Diego. Dish also never carried the Mountain West Conference RSN (exclusive broadcaster of San Diego State games) during its six-year run (though DirecTV carried it). And of course Dish, like the OTT services, doesn't carry the cable-owned Spectrum Sports Net in LA, which San Diego cable companies offer because of all the LA Lakers fans here.

 

[harshness]

If I ever want to watch a clip of a past major event, I just go to YouTube. But like I said, everyone has different needs or interests in what they want to retain and rewatch.

I see that someone posted the 2008 Bejing Opening Ceremonies a couple of months ago.

Well, there are plenty of channels in all genre categories that aren't going to make it on to services that carry fewer than 100 channels.

Is that an excuse?

Bein is a niche sports channel featuring global sports and not in any way an RSN.

It may be a niche channel for some, but it offers perhaps the best coverage of rugby and motorcycle racing anywhere along with a lot of good soccer matches.

When I think of RSNs, I'm mainly thinking of market-specific channels that carry all the MLB and/or NBA games of one's local team.

MLB and NBA is a pretty narrow view of sports in the grand scheme.

But yes, Pac-12 is a troublesome outlier for college sports fans in west of the Rockies who subscribe to YTTV and PS Vue. But there are OTT services that do carry it, so fans have options.

And those choices are? Pac12 seems to be an insoluble problem for DIRECTV as well.

Since you brought up the issue of RSN availability, if you drill down into every market you'll find problems and missing channels across the various TV providers. For example, Dish Network has been notoriously bad about carrying my region's RSNs.

Around here, DIRECTV is the lame carrier as they only offer Root Sports NW. DISH carries that and part of Pac12 (and I gots to gets my volleyball). Comcast carries everything so they are the go-to for the major sports fans.

What service you get varies widely from locality to locality so one must not make assumptions in identifying the best combination of providers for their particular situation.

 

[Zookster]

Is that an excuse?

No, it's a fact that anyone looking into OTT services quickly learns: channel selection is limited and varies among the different services. You simply aren't going to get 200+ channels in a $40-$50 package.

MLB and NBA is a pretty narrow view of sports in the grand scheme.

I mention them because those are two of the big 4 professional sports in the US for which RSNs carry almost every single game for one's home team. And in cord-cutting groups, the vast majority of the questions regarding RSN access are "how do I get [my MLB/NBA home team's] games?" NHL too, but much less so.

And those choices are? Pac12 seems to be an insoluble problem for DIRECTV as well.

FuboTV and Sling.

What service you get varies widely from locality to locality so one must not make assumptions in identifying the best combination of providers for their particular situation.

On that we can totally agree. That's why I hate questions like "I want to cut the cord. What's the best service?" There are so many variables.

 

[harshness]

There are so many variables.

Further, those variables aren't limited to whether the service carries the channel or not but whether they offer an SD or DVD version of what was a HD program and whether it is the original sound format or a cheap stereo rendition (that doesn't matter if you're watching on your phone or tablet). Add to this that certain higher-quality formats may only be available on certain streaming platforms or the guide on one streamer is insufferable in comparison to that of another platform.

There is no best answer until the person asking the question arrives at their own answer.

 

[Bruce]

Further, those variables aren't limited to whether the service carries the channel or not but whether they offer an SD or DVD version of what was a HD program

Is that your attempt to put down OTT services picture quality, do you not have Comcast which is knocking down 1080i to a over compressed 720P for their Video services.

When I switch to Vue we still had Comcast for about a week, I was amazed that Vue 720P looked so much better then Comcast at the time which was sad because I remember when Comcast’s HD picture rivaled DirecTV.




Sent from my iPad using SatelliteGuys

 

[Zookster]

PS Vue had great PQ when I had it. YouTube TV is just as good if not better, with almost all content, at least what I watch, in 1080p/60fps. In the early months of cord-cutting (in 2016), I'd switch to OTA for a big sports event whenever I had that option rather than watch it via OTT streaming because of OTA's better PQ. But in the last year or so I found that's no longer necessary.

Slam OTT live TV all you want for lack of 5.1. PQ is not an issue for PS Vue and YTTV ( I don't have personal experience with the others, so I won't speak on things I don't have any personal experience with. )

 

[Ronnie-]

PS Vue had great PQ when I had it. YouTube TV is just as good if not better, with almost all content, at least what I watch, in 1080p/60fps. In the early months of cord-cutting (in 2016), I'd switch to OTA for a big sports event whenever I had that option rather than watch it via OTT streaming because of OTA's better PQ. But in the last year or so I found that's no longer necessary.

Slam OTT live TV all you want for lack of 5.1. PQ is not an issue for PS Vue and YTTV ( I don't have personal experience with the others, so I won't speak on things I don't have any personal experience with. )

I agree with the pq assessment on both of those. I am using Hulu Live at the moment, and its not quite YTTV quality, but its pretty close. It has definitely improved over the year.

 

[harshness]

Is that your attempt to put down OTT services picture quality, do you not have Comcast which is knocking down 1080i to a over compressed 720P for their Video services.

I'm not slamming anything. I'm pointing out that not all streaming services offer the best available rendition of the content that they carry. The same applies to conventional providers but if you like what you're getting from a wired carrier, it may not be the same with an OTT provider (and vice versa).

One or two of the big wireless companies offer "free" Netflix but what they're offering is limited to SD content and the number of streams may be even more limited than Netflix's own basic offering.

According to an article on the Cosmo website Netflix is working on flagging accounts that are being used to serve up geographically distant locations which could substantially thwart the 39% of Netflix users that are using someone else's account.

 

[Jhon69]

OTT providers will gradually go the way of cable and satellite when the subscriber numbers reach a certain number,then we will probably see increases in costs,just hope they don't wreck it like the rest did.

 

[harshness]

OTT providers will gradually go the way of cable and satellite when the subscriber numbers reach a certain number,then we will probably see increases in costs,just hope they don't wreck it like the rest did.

The mature OTT providers have already raised their prices at least once. The only saving grace is that you can still get in while the newer and/or weaker (DIRECTV Now, I'm calling you out) services try to gain a reasonable audience share. Netflix's rate increases may be coming at shorter intervals and I expect that before long, the ads are going to become more ubiquitous in Amazon Prime (so they can launch an ad-free service as YouTube has done).

For a dozen years the hew and cry in pay TV has been for paying only for what you want and other than Sling TV and maybe Amazon, there's not much of that to be had outside of subscribing to a bunch of different services. If OTT isn't going to bring us the solution to the well-identified problem we've been clamoring for, what's the point?

 

[gblaue]

After 20 years with Dishnetwork, we gave them the old heave-ho. $220/month for 9000 channels that I don’t care about, to get the 100 channels that I do want. Ergen gets in a pissing match with HBO. The one channel that I do want. He is gong to lose the battle anyways, and pass the cost on to the customer.so, why piss us off for several months?
The end result is the same, almost. I just walked away. DirectTVNow provides exactly all the channels that I want for $91 with all pay channels. The picture quality smokes dishnetwork. I’ve been pay8ng $65/ month for internet for 20 years now. Now I am really using the bandwidth that I’ve been paying for. Everything now revolves around streaming apps. Life is much simpler. I’m really happy to have thrown the dish out.

 

[harshness]

I’m really happy to have thrown the dish out.

So is this your plan, a long-term review of your experience with the DIRECTV Now or somewhere in between?