Anyone tried Youtube Tv and can compare it to Tivo?

Discussion in 'TiVo Coffee House - TiVo Discussion' started by omelet1978, Mar 18, 2019.

  1. Jan 30, 2020 #401 of 1763
    saeba

    saeba Active Member

    221
    71
    Oct 12, 2004
    Atlanta...

    Advertisements

    And my point is that I suspect the vast majority of people already have sufficient bandwidth to support streaming and can leverage the internet connection they already have at no additional cost. According to Pew and NCTA analysis, 80% of Americans have broadband internet access at home - Broadband by the Numbers | NCTA — The Internet & Television Association.

    As to high speed, it really depends on how many simultaneous streams, what content, etc.

    The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recommends internet speeds of 12-25 Mbps for families with multiple internet users or for frequent online streaming.

    That isn't exactly high-speed in today's world. Other guidance:

    In general, to stream most videos in standard definition, you’ll need internet speeds of at least 3 Mbps. You need at least 25 Mbps for 4K streaming video on your computer or Ultra HD enabled devices. Some streaming services suggest faster speeds, such as Fubo TV which suggests minimum speeds of 40 Mbps.

    see: What Internet Speed Do I Need? | FAQs On Internet Speeds
     
  2. Jan 30, 2020 #402 of 1763
    dlfl

    dlfl Cranky old novice

    9,105
    814
    Jul 6, 2006
    Dayton OH
    I’m sure there are, although I think:
    1. Many of the people in that category don’t have any (higher cost) option for true HSI.
    2. Many others already have true HSI because it’s the minimum service offered by their ISP. For example, the minimum offered by Spectrum at my location is 100 Mbps.
    3. Many others have already upgraded to HSI to support multiple viewers of Netflix and/or Amazon streaming.

    Obviously the correct way to apportion internet cost for a cable-TV replacement (like YTTV) is the cost of upgrading internet speed above what one already has. But in many cases this can’t be done (#1 above) or is zero (#2 and #3 above).
     
  3. Jan 30, 2020 #403 of 1763
    saeba

    saeba Active Member

    221
    71
    Oct 12, 2004
    Atlanta...
    That should be changing in the near term. With low-latency satellite options and 5G coming there should be competitive options for all of the US. Time will tell if and when these technologies deliver on their promises.
     
    dlfl likes this.
  4. Jan 30, 2020 #404 of 1763
    lparsons21

    lparsons21 Active Member

    746
    242
    Feb 17, 2015
    For rural customers with no access to HSI today, odds are that if the low-latency satellite works as well as the hype suggests, it will be in place and working much sooner than 5G will be there.

    Reading the tea leaves and looking the history of how the cell providers roll out new technology, 5G will show up in the cities first and then slowly roll out to lesser populated areas. IOW, 5G is at this stage a great thing for click bait articles to talk about and not much else. And going forward, won’t be a player for more rural customers for a very long time. I mean, even today some rural customers can’t even get cell service.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
     
    dlfl and osu1991 like this.
  5. Jan 30, 2020 #405 of 1763
    pl1

    pl1 Well-Known Member

    1,419
    60
    Jan 17, 2007
    MA

    Advertisements

    ̶R̶e̶g̶a̶r̶d̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶b̶u̶f̶f̶e̶r̶,̶ ̶I̶ ̶h̶a̶v̶e̶ ̶j̶u̶s̶t̶ ̶f̶i̶g̶u̶r̶e̶d̶ ̶o̶u̶t̶,̶ ̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶i̶f̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶ ̶c̶h̶a̶n̶g̶e̶ ̶c̶h̶a̶n̶n̶e̶l̶s̶ ̶w̶i̶t̶h̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶r̶ ̶r̶e̶m̶o̶t̶e̶ ̶c̶h̶a̶n̶n̶e̶l̶ ̶u̶p̶/̶d̶o̶w̶n̶ ̶b̶u̶t̶t̶o̶n̶,̶ ̶Y̶T̶T̶V̶ ̶r̶e̶t̶a̶i̶n̶s̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶b̶u̶f̶f̶e̶r̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶a̶l̶l̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶c̶h̶a̶n̶n̶e̶l̶s̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶ ̶s̶e̶l̶e̶c̶t̶.̶ ̶I̶ ̶d̶o̶n̶'̶t̶ ̶s̶e̶e̶ ̶a̶n̶y̶ ̶l̶i̶m̶i̶t̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶n̶u̶m̶b̶e̶r̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶c̶h̶a̶n̶n̶e̶l̶s̶ ̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶w̶i̶l̶l̶ ̶b̶u̶f̶f̶e̶r̶ ̶(̶o̶n̶c̶e̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶ ̶s̶t̶a̶r̶t̶ ̶w̶a̶t̶c̶h̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶e̶a̶c̶h̶ ̶c̶h̶a̶n̶n̶e̶l̶)̶.̶
    ̶
    ̶
    ̶
    ̶
    ̶I̶f̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶ ̶c̶h̶a̶n̶g̶e̶ ̶c̶h̶a̶n̶n̶e̶l̶s̶ ̶b̶y̶ ̶b̶a̶c̶k̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶o̶u̶t̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶"̶L̶I̶V̶E̶"̶ ̶g̶u̶i̶d̶e̶ ̶(̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶s̶e̶l̶e̶c̶t̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶a̶ ̶c̶h̶a̶n̶n̶e̶l̶)̶ ̶o̶r̶ ̶b̶y̶ ̶a̶r̶r̶o̶w̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶d̶o̶w̶n̶ ̶t̶w̶i̶c̶e̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶"̶c̶h̶a̶n̶n̶e̶l̶s̶"̶,̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶ ̶l̶o̶s̶e̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶b̶u̶f̶f̶e̶r̶.

    I Can't successfully repeat my findings. It seems to lose the buffer after a few minutes.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2020
  6. Jan 30, 2020 #406 of 1763
    NashGuy

    NashGuy Well-Known Member

    4,142
    2,055
    May 2, 2015
    Well, let's assume that a person is going to have home broadband anyway. (That describes the vast majority of Americans who want to subscribe to a cable TV bundle that costs $50 or more, I believe.) So then the honest way to compare costs would be to look at the cost of standalone broadband plus the separate cost of YouTube TV vs. the cost of a bundle of broadband and a comparable TV bundle from your cable/telco/fiber provider.

    Here's what that looks like in my area if you use Comcast as your local broadband/cable TV provider. I'm using regular non-promo pricing here, which is what you would pay if your initial new customer promos had expired and you didn't bother or were unable to negotiate any new discounts.

    All Comcast
    Internet - Performance (100/5): $73
    TV - Extra: $70
    TV - Broadcast TV Fee: $15
    TV - RSN Fee: $8
    TV - DVR Fee (60 Hrs): $10
    Bundling Discount: -$20
    Total: $156

    Comcast Internet + YouTube TV
    Internet - Performance (100/5): $73
    TV - YouTube TV: $50
    Total: $123

    Now, those two TV services aren't totally equal but I went with the closest thing Comcast has to YTTV, which is their Extra package plus the DVR add-on (60 hours of cloud storage, retained for 1 year). Extra has a few channels that YTTV doesn't have (including channels from A+E, Hallmark and Viacom), although YTTV may include a few things that Extra doesn't have. And, of course, YTTV gives you unlimited cloud DVR storage (retained for 9 months) with individual user profiles, which is better than Comcast. In both cases, you're providing your own streaming devices and using their app (although YTTV gives you a lot more device choices than Comcast, which restricts you to Roku and certain smart TVs). Comcast does offer the option of renting their X1 4K HDR boxes, custom-designed for their own TV service, for $5/mo each. As best I can tell, you can stream Comcast TV to multiple screens in your home at the same time for no additional charge, just as you can with YTTV. (Under their new pricing scheme, Comcast isn't charging based on service to each outlet/screen but rather based on the number of X1 boxes you rent from them, which can be anywhere from 0 to 6, I think.)

    As you can see, you're saving about $33 per month by going with YTTV over Comcast TV. (Note: I rounded all figures above to the nearest half-dollar.) If you were using your own TiVo for DVR service with Comcast (and assuming you had already paid for lifetime TiVo service on that unit), then the difference would be down to only $23 per month. Still though, nothing to sneeze at.

    As I've said before, my hunch is that YTTV will add at least a few of those missing channels this year but also increase their price to something like $60. But even if they do that, they'll still be the better deal in this comparison.
     
  7. Jan 30, 2020 #407 of 1763
    trip1eX

    trip1eX imo, afaik, feels like to me, *exceptions, ~aprox

    4,570
    734
    Apr 2, 2005
    No what I think is you are picking and choosing what is overpriced based on your own whims. :)
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2020
  8. Jan 30, 2020 #408 of 1763
    pl1

    pl1 Well-Known Member

    1,419
    60
    Jan 17, 2007
    MA
    Also, if you are willing to lower the speed of your Internet with Comcast, The lowest price is $49.00 with no taxes for:

    Internet Plan: HSD Performance Starter
    Download Speed: 25Mbps
    Upload Speed: 3Mbps

    So, In my case, my bill went from $143.00 for Comcast vs. $100 for YTTV & Comcast Internet.
     
  9. Jan 30, 2020 #409 of 1763
    foghorn2

    foghorn2 Well-Known Member

    1,499
    461
    May 4, 2004
    Las Vegas
    Everyone's calculations will differ. Glad there's choices now, eventually I hope we get closer and close to Allah cart :D
    So far sling is the closest to that. Youtube is still bundling way too much together just like cable.
     
  10. Jan 30, 2020 #410 of 1763
    trip1eX

    trip1eX imo, afaik, feels like to me, *exceptions, ~aprox

    4,570
    734
    Apr 2, 2005
    Sure if you are that person who only gets internet from 4g then yes. Are you that person? ;)

    But that person can also do the "cost of a cheap cellular plan + broadband vs cost of an expensive cellular plan" math to see if they would even have to factor in the extra cost of broadband. IT might not add additional cost because it can be offset by dropping down to a cheaper cell plan. They can go to a cheaper cellular plan because they will be offloading a lot of data usage to wifi when at home.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2020
  11. Jan 30, 2020 #411 of 1763
    mdavej

    mdavej Well-Known Member

    3,742
    1,410
    Aug 13, 2015
    Please tell all us rubes paying $50 for 70 channels and unlimited DVR what you're paying and what you get for your money. You seem to be recommending a la carte which doesn't exist. So how do I do better than $50 in the real world for the same content I had on cable?
     
  12. Jan 30, 2020 #412 of 1763
    saeba

    saeba Active Member

    221
    71
    Oct 12, 2004
    Atlanta...
    Good point. We use Google Fi for mobile with a "pay as you use" cellular data model at $10/gb of data. However, we primarily use WiFi (at home and at work) and very little data so our monthly phone bill for the two of us is generally under $50/month (w/unlimited calls and texts). So we have a cheap mobile plan by leveraging our internet connection.
     
  13. Jan 30, 2020 #413 of 1763
    lparsons21

    lparsons21 Active Member

    746
    242
    Feb 17, 2015
    Yep, calculations will differ with whatever selections one wants. In my case I looked at what shows I wanted to watch, and I can get a few locals OTA. What I found that works for me is :
    Hulu no ads = $12
    CBS no ads = $8.34 (if paid annually)
    Currently that covers all the shows current and some older seasons.
    Netflix = $16 Covers other older seasons and more
    Amazon = $0 Since I had it before video for the shipping

    So about $47 to cover the TV shows on nearly all the channels out there. Notably missing is sports, but while I do watch some, I’m not what you’d call a fan. And live events, but I never watch anything live anyway, so I’ll see them delayed as I do now. It should be noted that I have those subs even though I have a cable subscription right now. I’ll be making a change soon, but an OTT service won’t be part of the picture because since I can get and watch the shows delayed a day or two with those, I don’t need it.

    Of course the downside is that I won’t have a ‘channel guide’ nor DVR service, but in reality so what? Since with an OTT service DVR is still streamed and those streams are already available, why add a step?


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
     
  14. Jan 30, 2020 #414 of 1763
    KevTech

    KevTech Active Member

    474
    240
    Apr 15, 2014
    Seattle
    If you are doing all your TV through YTTV plus all your internet use you may well go over the cap so add in another 50 a month for unlimited data if you are in an area with the 1TB data cap.

    That would bring the cost to 173 a month.
     
  15. Jan 30, 2020 #415 of 1763
    trip1eX

    trip1eX imo, afaik, feels like to me, *exceptions, ~aprox

    4,570
    734
    Apr 2, 2005
    If are watch OTA and borrow DVDs from the library then subtract out $173 and that would bring your streaming, broadband and cabletv costs down to $0/month. ;)

    Disney+ is overpriced!!! :)
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2020
  16. Jan 30, 2020 #416 of 1763
    Aaron Malloy

    Aaron Malloy Active Member

    248
    193
    Oct 30, 2019
    I'm simply saying, yet again, that $50 only sounds like a deal because we've been completely over-paying for that content for way too long. I think most cable content is crap, so it really as no value to me at all. And more than a 1/4 of the offerings on YTTV are simply OTA channels you can get with a good antennae for free.
     
    foghorn2 likes this.
  17. Jan 30, 2020 #417 of 1763
    trip1eX

    trip1eX imo, afaik, feels like to me, *exceptions, ~aprox

    4,570
    734
    Apr 2, 2005
    Yeah and some of us are simply saying compared to what?

    Just because you don't want the content on YTTV doesn't make it over priced.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2020
  18. Jan 30, 2020 #418 of 1763
    NashGuy

    NashGuy Well-Known Member

    4,142
    2,055
    May 2, 2015
    Yes, that's a good point. I personally wouldn't go over the 1 TB cap because I already stream a lot of what I watch via various on-demand apps (and use OTA for the rest) and I've never hit half that. But switching from Comcast's own cable TV service to a streaming cable TV service like YYTV definitely would cause some households (especially families) to exceed their data cap when they otherwise would not. It's something to be considered.
     
  19. Jan 30, 2020 #419 of 1763
    saeba

    saeba Active Member

    221
    71
    Oct 12, 2004
    Atlanta...
    Yes, way back in May 2019 and in this forum thread, you (@NashGuy) posted the following guidance for evaluating choices:

    1. Does it have all the channels I really want?
    2. Because I won't be getting a bundle discount for TV + broadband from the same company, will I end up paying as much or more in total?
    3. Will I end up exceeding my broadband data cap since I'll be streaming everything I watch?
    4. Can I get used to watching all my TV through an app on a streaming device as opposed to a regular cable box (or TiVo) with its full-featured remote?
    5. Will the cloud DVR experience on the OTT service (amount of storage, length of storage, ability to FF through ads, trick play performance) be as good as on my cable DVR (or TiVo), or at least be "good enough"?​

    Well stated. We seem to be circling back through the same points in this thread over and over again.
     
    NashGuy likes this.
  20. Jan 30, 2020 #420 of 1763
    trip1eX

    trip1eX imo, afaik, feels like to me, *exceptions, ~aprox

    4,570
    734
    Apr 2, 2005

    I think the other thing to consider is what does a service like a YTTV do better than cable+Tivo? What features/advantages does it provide that cable+Tivo doesn't or can't?
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2020

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements