Started By
Message

re: Playstation Vue Price Increase

Posted on 7/7/17 at 7:53 pm to
Posted by StraightCashHomey21
Aberdeen,NC
Member since Jul 2009
125393 posts
Posted on 7/7/17 at 7:53 pm to
quote:

But people prefer having their television content delivered via streaming internet, where the picture quality is less than traditional cable/satellite and buffering is a potential issue. Further, a traditional style remote with numerical input for channel selection doesn't exist.


You do realize streaming services are in 720p which is the same quality as almost every tv channel over cable or satellite. Most the internet in the US is run through the same infrastructure as cable tv. You don't need blazing fast speeds to stream in HD.
quote:

People are only cutting the cord to save money, not because it's better technology.

That's bullshite bc there is way more 4k content via streaming than from traditional tv.
quote:

I'll live with a service call once every 2 years to setup new cable/satellite service


Keep paying extra for useless channels
This post was edited on 7/7/17 at 7:55 pm
Posted by t00f
Not where you think I am
Member since Jul 2016
89706 posts
Posted on 7/7/17 at 8:30 pm to
As others have said unles we can pick the channels we want for a price this appears to be cycling back to people dropping steaming TV like they did cable TV.

I know it's complicated with licensing but this is going in the wrong direction and it's like the are blind to the whole purpose of people walking away from cable TV.

I want AMC, a few food channels, all the espn's. USA, HBO , Fox News , BBC America , syfy, and like 4 others and thats it.
Posted by 632627
LA
Member since Dec 2011
12717 posts
Posted on 7/7/17 at 8:36 pm to
quote:

You do realize streaming services are in 720p which is the same quality as almost every tv channel over cable or satellite. Most the internet in the US is run through the same infrastructure as cable tv. You don't need blazing fast speeds to stream in HD.


this argument is clearly going above your head.

It's not about 720 or 1080. It's about the compression and bitrate of the picture. Streaming content is highly compressed.
Posted by 632627
LA
Member since Dec 2011
12717 posts
Posted on 7/7/17 at 8:39 pm to
quote:

Keep paying extra for useless channels


They're the same useless channels you get with psvue.

As others have said, psvue and dtvnow function the exact same as your traditional cable carrier. The programming is just delivered differently.
Posted by Vrai
Baton Rouge
Member since Nov 2003
3891 posts
Posted on 7/7/17 at 8:44 pm to
quote:

As others have said, psvue and dtvnow function the exact same as your traditional cable carrier. The programming is just delivered differently.


Yep. I watch like 6 channels on Vue
Posted by StraightCashHomey21
Aberdeen,NC
Member since Jul 2009
125393 posts
Posted on 7/7/17 at 8:52 pm to
quote:

this argument is clearly going above your head.

It's not about 720 or 1080. It's about the compression and bitrate of the picture. Streaming content is highly compressed.


I know exactly what you are talking about

But for the most part the difference in quality is marginal bw most providers.
Posted by 632627
LA
Member since Dec 2011
12717 posts
Posted on 7/7/17 at 9:03 pm to
Streaming content has significantly more artifacting than cable or satellite, and it's evident in fast moving programming, such as sports.

It's an inferior product.

Shall we also bring dvr technology into the conversation?
This post was edited on 7/7/17 at 9:14 pm
Posted by StraightCashHomey21
Aberdeen,NC
Member since Jul 2009
125393 posts
Posted on 7/7/17 at 10:26 pm to
quote:

Streaming content has significantly more artifacting than cable or satellite, and it's evident in fast moving programming, such as sports.

It's an inferior product.



It depends on what platform you are streaming from. Something like HBOGO puts out top notch quality.

But nice for you to bring sports into this. Once again streaming technology has caught up. Perfect example was this years Champions league final. Which was broadcast in 4K by British Telecom on youtube. While Fox was only able to push a grainy 720p redistribution signal over cable/satellite provides in america. Streaming is catching up and fast. But if you want to be stuck with the old times be my guest. While streaming has way more 4K content out there. While you might get lucky getting something in 4K on DTV here and there.
This post was edited on 7/7/17 at 10:28 pm
Posted by HubbaBubba
F_uck Joe Biden, TX
Member since Oct 2010
45703 posts
Posted on 7/7/17 at 11:56 pm to
quote:

Streaming content is highly compressed.
You're acting like an idiot. Everything except OTA is delivered as a compressed signal. Even then, that content is compressed in real time because of of multi-casting. Even Blu-Ray movies are compressed.

Real world, factor into cable and satellite the cost of monthly set top box fees, DVR fees, state and local taxes, franchise fees, and other regulatory fees.

My "bundle" for four TV's, with 50/50 Internet, HBO/Starz, and DVR service, with all the taxes and fees was close to $260 a month.

I changed my ISP to 200/20 service, purchased FireTV's and Fire sticks, added Playstation Vue, my locals are on it, but I have OTA antenna and combined the OTA signals with Internet using MOCA, and added HBO. My monthly cost is $125 a month, now.

The savings paid for my Fire devices within four months. That was 12 months ago, so my cumulative savings since then is over $1600.00.

On my Fire devices I have Plex, Kodi, Amazon, Netflix and plenty of other apps, such as Spotify, YouTube, etc.. Everything works from a single device. I can control with my phone, the remote or a bluetooth mouse and keyboard.

To me, I don't believe I could ever go backwards to the 1980's technology that you support.
Posted by FLObserver
Jacksonville
Member since Nov 2005
14438 posts
Posted on 7/8/17 at 5:30 am to
quote:

As others have said, psvue and dtvnow function the exact same as your traditional cable carrier. The programming is just delivered differently.

The thing that separates traditional satellite/cable from streaming for me is the extra fees that satellite has that streaming doesn't. With vue I didn't have to pay monthly for additional receivers. I could use devices I already had. I don't get 10 to 12 dollars extra monthly on satellite taxes and other bs taxes. The basic package I had with dish was like 40 a month but after taxes and extra receivers I was spending like 55. I have the basic vue package for 30 ,soon to be more, in 3 different rooms with basically all the channels I watched on dish for around 30 bucks that's it.that's why I like the streaming because government hasn't hit it with taxes yet but I'm sure that will change soon
This post was edited on 7/8/17 at 5:32 am
Posted by AlbertMeansWell
Member since Sep 2013
5555 posts
Posted on 7/8/17 at 8:01 am to
DirecTV has a great deal going where I can get their Premier package + 75mbps internet for $125 a month for 2 years.

The issue is, we are building a house across town and moving in later this year. The best internet speed in our new area will be 18mbps. So I will lose the fast speeds.
Posted by StraightCashHomey21
Aberdeen,NC
Member since Jul 2009
125393 posts
Posted on 7/8/17 at 8:06 am to
And that ATT internet has a data cap unless you get their gig down

18mbps is fast enough to stream even 4k content but if you have a family that streams more that one device at once it isn't going to cut it. Depending on the area at those speeds it's still DSL which is totally unacceptable.

Posted by 632627
LA
Member since Dec 2011
12717 posts
Posted on 7/8/17 at 8:28 am to
quote:

My "bundle" for four TV's, with 50/50 Internet, HBO/Starz, and DVR service, with all the taxes and fees was close to $260 a month.


My bundle, same amount of tvs, 45mb internet, no hbo, but one year NFL Sunday ticket is $97/month inclusive of all taxes and fees. HBO would cost me an extra $15. They also gave me a $350 gift card to sign up, bringing my effective monthly price for the next 2 years close to $80.

Sure, if my monthly cost was $260 I'd go to a streaming service. But I live in an area where I have 4 tv options (dtv, dish, spectrum, uverse) and 2 internet providers (spectrum and uverse). Even without a "new customer promo" that will expire in 2 years, the spectrum standard rate is for a full bundle package is about $127 inclusive of fees. The competition in the area keeps the carriers honest.

Regarding picture quality, watch a football game on directv and watch one via a streaming service, there's a noticeable difference.

Lol at dvr tech systems such as the hopper and genie being "1980s" technology.

The only advantage of cord cutting is lower pricing IF you can't get the lower costs elsewhere. Some of the guys here speaking in absolutes that streaming service is better than traditional cable/satellite, or streaming is cheaper 100% of the time for everyone than traditional are just wrong. Everyone's situation and needs will be different. There will be those that are better off cord cutting, and those that get better value from a bundle. The OP in the thread started by that avid cord cutter was excellent; he loves it but admits its not for everyone.



Posted by 632627
LA
Member since Dec 2011
12717 posts
Posted on 7/8/17 at 8:39 am to
quote:

The issue is, we are building a house across town and moving in later this year. The best internet speed in our new area will be 18mbps. So I will lose the fast speeds.


Depending on your needs/uses, 18mbps may still be viable. It's fine for basic web browsing, or downloading/streaming on one device at a time.

For a larger family, may be tough.
Posted by HubbaBubba
F_uck Joe Biden, TX
Member since Oct 2010
45703 posts
Posted on 7/8/17 at 9:45 am to
quote:

Lol at dvr tech systems such as the hopper and genie being "1980s" technology.
Sorry, I meant 1970`s technology. It may be "updated" technology, but it's still a set-top box, circa 1970's.

I appreciate your steadfastness in support of it though. Reminds me of my dad telling me how it was in the old days and how he liked it that way.
Posted by StraightCashHomey21
Aberdeen,NC
Member since Jul 2009
125393 posts
Posted on 7/8/17 at 10:04 am to
quote:

Regarding picture quality, watch a football game on directv and watch one via a streaming service, there's a noticeable difference.


A number of factors come into play with picture quality watching football. Not all games have the ideal set up. Just watching red zone you can tell that how some games look better than others.

I can tell you right now streaming on NFL game pass will get you just as good a quality when it's on maximum settings.
Posted by whodatfan
Member since Mar 2008
21324 posts
Posted on 7/8/17 at 10:09 am to
quote:

Sorry, I meant 1970`s technology. It may be "updated" technology, but it's still a set-top box, circa 1970's. 

I appreciate your steadfastness in support of it though. Reminds me of my dad telling me how it was in the old days and how he liked it that way.


You are a fricking idiot. It's no different than a PlayStation box, a Roku box, a fire stick/tv, etc. All physical devices to provide a service. But keep thinking you are making cool, witty retorts. It's funny.
Posted by 632627
LA
Member since Dec 2011
12717 posts
Posted on 7/8/17 at 10:19 am to
quote:

You are a fricking idiot. It's no different than a PlayStation box, a Roku box, a fire stick/tv, etc. All physical devices to provide a service. But keep thinking you are making cool, witty retorts. It's funny.


he's also the one that's bragging about paying $125/month and rigging together 3 different devices to get what I pay $97/month for with one service, which also includes whole home dvr. I also own multiple roku's and am able to use the youtube app, watchespn, pandora, etc. Oh and the directv boxes also have those same apps built in. Pretty good for 1970s tech.

Posted by GurleyGirl
Georgia
Member since Nov 2015
13162 posts
Posted on 7/8/17 at 10:32 am to
quote:

Doubt it Stop promoting big cable companies by trying to play down streaming and being pro data cap.


Stop telling me what to do when you don't know what you are talking about. I'm just sharing facts. I'm in no way promoting big cable companies. Frankly I think they are legit monopolies. We definitely don't have enough TV and internet options in our area; no fiber and Cox is the only game in town for cable. But streaming is not a practical alternative from our perspective. We either download or rip content and play it off an entertainment server as opposed to streaming. Streaming has too many dependent variables/potential points of failure to be reliable. And if you think ISP prices are going up now, just wait until 200 million people are trying to stream 4k content all over the U.S.
Posted by StraightCashHomey21
Aberdeen,NC
Member since Jul 2009
125393 posts
Posted on 7/8/17 at 10:32 am to
quote:

You are a fricking idiot. It's no different than a PlayStation box, a Roku box, a fire stick/tv, etc. All physical devices to provide a service. But keep thinking you are making cool, witty retorts. It's funny.


The difference is you own those devices and they serve multiple functions that works with a variety of services

Most cable boxes are rented and only work that provider.
first pageprev pagePage 5 of 7Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram