Adventures in cord-cutting, a continuing series

I promised a follow-up about how my self-weaning off Dish Network and into the world of streaming went after a full season of college football.

The answer:  pretty good, and when you factor in the cost savings, even better.

I had a fairly robust satellite TV package, along with a relatively slow internet service account with Mindspring.  Between the two, I was spending roughly $200/month for a package that included ESPN, Fox Sports and the SEC Network.  I had service issues with both providers and that motivated me to make changes more than anything.

Here’s what I replaced them with:

  • A Comcast/Xfinity bundle that gave me basic cable, high-speed internet service and HBO, for $70/month.
  • Sony Playstation VUE, that gave me access to ESPN and Fox Sports, at a cost of $29.99/month.  A package including the SEC Network was an additional $5/month.

While I had to sign a three-year deal with Comcast to get the advantageous pricing, that decision looks better in the aftermath of the FCC ditching net neutrality.  Sony pulled a jerk move, bumping the cost of VUE another $10/month less than sixty days after I signed up.  The good thing about the streaming services like VUE is that you can sign up on a month-to-month basis, which made it easy to jump to Hulu’s new live TV service, which also costs $39.99/month, but gives you access to its library at no extra charge.  Hulu includes the SEC Network as part of its service, so that at least saved the added expense during football season.

Hulu is a bit of a pain to navigate, but everything I wanted to watch could be found with a little digging.  There’s also 30-day archive access to events, so I was able to watch the Rose Bowl broadcast when I got back from California.  (No, I didn’t feel the same way about the national championship broadcast.)

The one thing I miss from Dish is that it was very easy to jump between two stations you were watching at the same time, something that came in handy on a Saturday afternoon.  Moving from one game to another is clunkier on Hulu.  But that’s a relatively small price to pay for the overall improvement.

I would recommend finding the highest speed broadband access you can swing.  In addition to Hulu, I’ve also got Netflix and Amazon Prime for general entertainment.  I haven’t had a single issue with buffering the entire time since I’ve switched.

So, to sum up, my service problems, which were slow broadband and weather-related issues with satellite service, have disappeared, and I’m saving about $75 a month on TV and internet, combined.  Not too shabby.

One other non-television related matter to share:  if you have Comcast broadband service, you might want to check into their new cellphone service, Xfinity Mobile, which was recently introduced.  There is no access fee and unlimited text and calls are free.  The only thing you pay for is data, and there are two plans to choose from — a $12/gig option and an unlimited data $45 option.  (You can change on the fly.)  Best of all, it’s on Verizon’s network, which is what I had before, so I have the same service, but dropped my cellphone bill by about $65/month.

I can’t say it’s perfect, but it’s definitely good enough that I have no regrets making the move.  And the money savings are sweet.

Advertisements

68 Comments

Filed under GTP Stuff

68 responses to “Adventures in cord-cutting, a continuing series

  1. Rusdawg

    Have you tried YoutubeTV Senator? I switched to that from Vue and it is monumentally better. You can watch from 6 different devices at once, built in DVR, and the navigation is super easy.

    Oh yeah,,,,and you get all the channels you would want (ESPNs; SEC, FOXs, and NBC Sports) for $35.

    Like

    • I looked at it when I decided to dump Sony, but it wasn’t available in my area and it only worked on certain televisions. I was impressed with the DVR feature.

      Like

    • I just checked, and both of those issues appear to be addressed. I’ll check it out, thanks.

      Like

      • Chris Austin

        I use it and it is great. First major test was the SEC championship and it worked great. I use the Xbox to stream it but it is coming to the Roku (I will switch to that) and apple TV. Also you can get a 30 day free trial. Also you get the local channels which is awesome.

        Like

    • I use YouTube TV and love it. They just added a few channels. Price is currently $35/mo, going up to $40 on 3/13, but if you sign up before the price increase then your price will be grandfathered in, at least for a while.

      New channels are TBS, TNT, CNN, and one or two others I can’t remember.

      The DVR feature on YouTube Tv is pretty awesome.

      Like

    • Doggoned

      Thanks for the tip on YouTube TV. I’ve been going back-and-forth to Sling TV for a couple years now, but YouTube TV (new in my city) appears much superior on first look and has the channels I want without buying extra streams. Can’t wait to try out the DVR feature.
      Again, thanks.

      Like

  2. JasonC

    An extra $140 a month will help you to contribute more to the reserve fund! Win-Win!
    Seriously, thanks for the update.

    Like

  3. merk

    Cord cutting is good, but I think it will be a wash sooner rather than later. Pretty much every monthly service has been steadily increasing their rates as more people are change to using them. On the flip side, I also see cable companies increasing the rates for their internet service as more people drop the larger packages.
    My cable contract ends at some point this year, so I will probably drop the cable and pick up something else. I already have Prime and Netflix, so sounds like I will probably end up grabbing Hulu.

    Liked by 1 person

    • The other Doug

      I agree that cable companies are increasing the coast of internet access, but at the same time more and more cities are starting to offer municipal broadband. The city just North of mine (Longmont CO) started one and offers 1 gig for $50-$70 a month and the quality is incredible. That move has caused every city in the area to feel the pressure to offer better broadband.

      Like

    • Snoop Dawgy Dawg

      More important in this new world of streaming video than the increased monthly costs is going to be the data caps. HD streaming sucks up a bunch of data per hour. 4K streaming hoovers data like the NSA facility out in Utah. 4K streaming at current compression rates is around 7GB per hour of streaming. The various ISPs are tinkering with data caps, with increased rates after those caps are reached.

      To put it in context, 200-300GB is likely to be the standard base offering of data usage with your internet package in the foreseeable future. For the 300 GB package, that’s 43 hours of programming total in the month.

      Internet is cheaper for ISPs to deliver than cable TV, as internet does not have the base load subscription costs made payable to Disney, Fox, etc, so that gives them more profitable growth and control. That said, that they have the capacity to offer better, cheaper internet does not mean they will do so in this day of near monopolistic ISPs

      Liked by 1 person

      • 3rdandGrantham

        Well said. I also have data caps concerns. One thing they are doing in my area with monopoly coverage (Comcrap/DC suburbs) is providing you unlimited data if bundled with a cable package, but data caps if you’re doing internet only. Of course, friends of mine who live in more densely populated areas with several ISP options have no such worries and are paying a lower price than me. Amazing how competition works, ain’t it?

        I previously was a cable cutter (SlingTV) but went back to satellite, as for me personally, the savings weren’t worth the extra hassle. Maybe as tech improved I’ll give it another look when my Dtv contract expires next year.

        Like

        • Snoop Dawgy Dawg

          I just re-worked my package. with no premium channels, 300Mb down, plenty of channels I never watch, and no data caps, I’m at $150/mth + taxes. It’s not cheap, but were I to cut the cable portion, I don’t know that that speed is available, and with caps on top of that, it really puts pressure on content viewing, to save roughly 25 or so dollars a month, after adding in the streaming programming to have sports available.

          I don’t have the answer to any of this, but i’m thrilled there are a ton of people working at the solution. As of today, it is effortless to watch TV, movies, or gaming at my house. As my viewing habits change as my kids get older, I can see my structure changing as well.

          Like

          • Snoop Dawgy ….you’re worrying about a problem that ,if analyzed closely reveals is NOT really a problem. There is be some companies that will try to increase their profits by having a bait and switch , lose leader rate with data caps and then make their money off of increased rates on data above a minimum. This problem will rapidly resolve itself because as pointed out by you ,”Internet is cheaper for ISPs to deliver than cable TV”
            If the start up costs are lower for ISPs than more competitors will enter the market and either raise the amount of standard data or just make it unlimited. This whole “net neutrality” issue is hand wringing about a problem that has not occurred and due to the easy of entry into this market never will occur. The regulations proposed by the FCC will ,if history is a proper guide(and it usually is) will only slow down the markets and distort them in such a manner as to actually slow down both innovation and new entry into the ISP market. Thanks to all you early adopters ….I’ll stay tuned and eventually figure out what system works best for me.

            Like

            • Sanford222view

              It isn’t the start up costs that are lower for ISP’s (they still have to build a network which is expensive) it is the lack of ever increasing programming costs that make Internet more profitable. Satellite and cable TV providers incur programming rate increases annually that have eroded the margins in delivering video.

              Like

            • Snoop Dawgy Dawg

              I wasn’t arguing in favor of Net Neutrality or against. It’s a topic far too complicated for me to opine on. In reality, it’s a discussion of who pays for delivery of content. The content creator/aggregators(Netflix, Youtube) or content delivery(Comcast, AT&T). You are paying to get the bits and bytes to your house. The gist of Net Neutrality is which company you pay for that content delivery.
              for ease of access to the market, you are absolutely wrong, today, of the costs to bring an ISP to market. ISP is more than content delivery. It involves the fiber lines, hubs, centers, backbones, and data centers pushing the content. Unless an ISP has thousands of miles of trenches filled with fiber lines, then they do NOT have easy, cheap access to create a new business. I was referring specifically to the costs of delivery in an established network. To deliver 200GB versus 400GB of content, the actual cost to the ISP is nominal. That’s what I meant.
              The advent and roadmap for 5G internet access as envisioned by AT&T and Verizon is going to absolutely change every aspect of content delivery moving forward, costs to stand up that infrastructure, and competition from other parties. Without the need to access physical landlines/conduits/power poles, 5G will reach every house in an area with potential speeds in excess of what 99% percent of users get today. When 5G arrives, to quote a bad song, it’s going to come in like a wrecking ball to the wire-line industry as it relates to home users. This is great for home users as cost/GB of speed will become much, much cheaper. Who owns the spectrum will be the limiting factor, because an Amazon or Google won’t care about generating a profit from that content delivery, as they want you to have fast, consistent access to their content. Unless AT&T and Verizon own all the spectrum used, it’s going to be a major, major inflection point in the connectivity space for our country. The potential is that big.

              what that has to do with cord cutting? not a clue, but as this is an area I have some familiarity with, I thought I’d share.

              Like

              • Macallanlover

                Thanks for sharing. Agree that major expansion of 5G to more, and harder to reach homes, is a much better method than currently envisioned with running broadband via wires (if indeed that is what you are saying about the direction things will move.)

                I lived in one of the first total market expansions of broadband giving consumers lightening fast speeds with cable/wifi/phone to great prices. This was a about 7 years ago. Then I moved away and only had a DSL line to work with, I hated the step back, but I could not blame the providers at all. Many of my neighbors have though, they whine, write petitions, grumble. etc., but I cannot blame those big companies for not laying miles of line through a rural area to speed up my playing on the computer. They made the right decision, but technology will get us faster speed at a fair rate soon enough.

                Like

            • SpellDawg

              Ahhhh, if only it was that simple to start an ISP; there is no ease of entry in the majority of the US. The regulatory hurdles and financial-backing required (especially here in Florida), take a Herculean effort. Lobbyists for the big data providers boxed-out new competition long ago. Those same big data providers are the puppet-masters of Ajit Pai. I understand Net Neutrality all too well; there’s no hope in sight, only increased monetization of the majority of US subscribers by their ISPs. Lost cable dollars have to be made up somewhere….

              Like

              • Snoop Dawgy Dawg

                if you understand the intricacies of Net Neutrality, you’re betting than 99% of the people who have an opinion on it. that’s why I think 5G is going to be a big deal. It will be so much cheaper to deliver the availability of connections via 5G than having to deliver wires to every house in america, or to upgrade in place for denser areas to support faster speeds.

                I’m lucky Google Fiber announced they were coming to my area. Comcast and AT&T have been digging constantly to upgrade the pipes.

                Like

  4. ETDF

    Any other chord-cutters had buffering issues watching live sports via amazon firestick? Seems to happen most often on ESPN platform.

    Like

    • paul

      We cut the cord and use only HULU and Amazon Prime. I have a Cisco SG 200 8 port gigabit switch and my entire house is hardwired so all my TV’s are plugged in and I do not use WiFi for my signal. However, in the beginning I was having crazy bad issues with buffering. I tested all my wires and connections and that wasn’t the issue. I tested Comcast’s speed and that wasn’t the issue. I have the Blast package so I’m paying for a 100Mb connection. That isolated the router as the issue. I bought a new router that could process more data more quickly and my buffering issues almost entirely disappeared. I still have some issues with live TV on HULU. Especially during the Olympics. I agree that HULU’s most annoying problem is the menu structure. They try to construct a menu based on what you’ve watched before. However, if you go looking for something new it can be maddeningly hard to find. And because it is technically a Beta product, the menu changes from time to time and that can be annoying too. Overall though, I like the experience and I love, love, love saving money. Soon though, streaming will be the primary way most of us consume content and the prices are likely to rise. Not to mention we will see more commercials. I like that at least for now, I don’t see near as many commercials while streaming.

      Like

      • paul

        Oh, sorry, forgot to mention we use Roku. Two boxes and one stick. So far, the stick has been working fine but it does not have to compete with other TV’s on the Wifi. So that helps.

        Like

    • If you’re using WatchESPN, it’s just a garbage platform that everybody complained about during this past CFB season. I have multiple firesticks and had to flip to streaming live sports on the ESPN networks directly through PlaystationVue. It can be a bit of a pain if the event runs longer than it it scheduled on the guide, but the quality is immeasurably different. I think ESPN refuses to dump any money into WatchESPN to make it better since people aren’t paying exclusively for that service.

      Like

      • Bourbon Dawgwalker

        Agreed. WatchESPN app is garbage and constantly lags in and out. I don’t have that problem when streaming ESPN on YoutubeTV or Hulu.

        Like

    • Nil Butron is a Pud

      Cut the cord a few years ago and haven’t looked back. Got tired of the monthly cost plus the numerous taxes on my phone and cable bills (seriously, are there still any rural areas without access the days?). Went from $200+/month for TV, Internet & home phone to about $60/mo. for Comcast Internet, Netflix, Hulu & Prime. Pro tip: bring your own modem and router to the party. Cheaper in the long run. Also, Comcast uses their leased equipment to broadcast their “Xfinity WiFi Everywhere” BS. I just don’t like the idea of sharing my bandwidth/network with the neighbors even if they swear it’s segregated from yours.

      IN RE the FireStick buffering, there is a design flaw in the device where it generates a lot of heat that causes the processor to slow down. Search the worldwide inter webs and you’ll find the simple fix to it. Basically, pop it open, remove some insulation covering the chip, and drill holes in the case to ventilate. Further, the FireStick has minimal on-board memory so if you have a lot of apps loaded, it tends to slow it down. I just replaced my old FireStick with the FireTV and the speed increase navigating the menus is incredible.

      Also, definitely check your router. Upgraded speed to 60Mbps and my old router was rated at 60. Was only getting 20. Upgraded and now it runs like Roquan.

      Like

      • Dawgpa

        FYI… at my parent’s farm in south GA, they still have no access to DSL so yep there are still rural areas without access. ☹️

        Like

    • 3rdandGrantham

      As a bit of a tech guy who is in cybersecurity, one bit of advice I’d recommend is never, ever stream tv via WiFi. Instead, hardwire if possible, and use a powerline for TV’s not within convenient reach of your modem/router. And don’t bother running Ethernet cables all over your house. Something cheap/easy like this will more than suffice https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.amazon.com/TP-Link-Powerline-Adapter-Starter-TL-PA4010KIT/dp/B00AWRUICG&ved=2ahUKEwj7pNu7nrLZAhWiY98KHQPhB0IQFjAAegQICxAB&usg=AOvVaw3gTSD6IBpPxCCqlqx2WSyq

      I have 4 of these through the house and get far better reliability/performance than if I was relying on wifi, even though I have a high end, tri-band router with great coverage. Either way, stay off the 2.4 and use 5g only when possible.

      Like

  5. The other Doug

    Thanks for the update. I cut the cord 10 years ago in the dark ages, and one thing I’ve learned is to always keep your eye out for better solutions.

    I started having weird buffering last year, and I finally solved it by adding a mesh network. In layman’s terms we (family of four with two teens) had so many devices (26) pinging our wifi that it caused delays. I bought the google wifi setup and love it. The best unexpected feature is an app on my phone that allows me to make one device the priority or more importantly turn off access to certain devices like my kids stuff for a defined amount of time. I don’t even need to be home to shut down their phones when it’s time to do homework! 🙂

    Like

    • Family of four with 26 devices on wifi? That’s impressive. Is that IoT stuff, too (thermostats, outlets, etc.)?

      Like

      • The other Doug

        it’s a combo of internet of things like the thermostat but also an alexa, 3 chromebooks, a laptop, a desktop, 4 phones, 2 rokus, 2 chromecasts, a wii, etc.

        I was shocked how many things we had hooked up to the wifi. Anything that is on will periodically ping the wifi just to see if there is anything new, and my old wifi router couldn’t manage/prioritize those pings.

        Like

        • paul

          This is one of the many reasons why the internet of things is a bad idea. One of the benefits of all the recent hacks and high publicity issues surrounding internet security is that we’ve started to question the whether or not the internet of things should ever really come to fruition. The short answer, in my opinion, is no.

          Like

          • AthensHomerDawg

            Boom. MY nephew who was a HS dropout for a while, lived with us for a year could hack anything anytime.
            Spent time at Silicon 42 and finished at Cornell. He now works with Google. Anyhow, he told me every wifi deivce has a number that is on a list. That list grows everyday. The people that have that list are not the people you want to have your info…..and they can control you device. Don’t get me wrong…. no one is interested in watching me while Im here at GTP or mowing my front yard. Still it makes you think.

            Like

      • 3rdandGrantham

        We have around 25 on our network, and it’s just my wife/me with two toddlers. When you add up things like wifi thermostats, Alexa, printers, etc it really adds up quick. Heck, even our sous vide cooker has WiFi built in.

        My general rule if thumb is, when you have more than 10-12 on your network, either go mesh or a tri-band router that can handle the load.

        Like

  6. The other Doug

    Has anyone tested different streaming hardware (playstation, roku, chromcast, etc) and different streaming services to see if there is a difference in quality?

    I’ve been using a roku and sligtv the last few years and I’m wondering if there is something better.

    Like

    • Holiday Inn Bagman

      Sling may have improved but for the longest time it only supported 30 frames per second which is not fast enough for HD sports – I.e you see the ball “jump” on a throw or a guy go all matrix when making a cut. The service and your player should support 60 FPS to get higher quality. I know Playstation VUE and Directvnow support the higher levels. I bought a newer roku in the last year that supports 4K so it’s fine. Older models however may not be able to. I was able to get high quality HD streams on a mid-grade internet speed all season. My only gripe is the sound quality is not as good on streaming, less ambient crowd/band sounds and more announcers.

      Like

    • Bourbon Dawgwalker

      You get what you pay for with streaming devices. The $29 sticks don’t have near the video processing power as something like a Apple TV 4K, Nvidia Shield, or the gaming systems (PS4 or XboxOne). I have cheap devices on TV’s I don’t care about, but if I want to watch a game I stream through a high end device. You will notice a difference in the details as well as speed when loading new videos.

      Like

  7. truck

    You had me at “cost savings.”

    Like

  8. Keese

    I just signed up for direct tv now with the free Apple TV offer. Plan to get the new att fiber for internet they just wired in neighborhood for internet which offers gig speeds.

    Like

  9. I had DirectTVNow and Hulu on my Xfinity 100 Mbps connection for the Rose Bowl and the title game. DirectTVNow locked up for the Rose, so good thing I had Hulu. Hulu kept buffering for the title game, so good thing I had DirectTVNow which worked fine that night. In short, neither were reliable and both made me nervous. I picked a bad year to cut the cord. In my opinion the streaming services, including the ESPN app, could not handle the volume of the BIG ames. Much was made of this on the internet and twitterverse.

    Like

    • illinidawg

      Yep, I won’t take a chance on that happening. I have Dish a the PIP option is really important to me as is the 2 TB recorder.

      Like

  10. Jarred Bussert

    I use fiber + firestick w/ Hulu and still got a lot of buffering issues w/ live sports. Already have a mesh network so may look into replacing modem although I believe some of it is the firestick and hulu.

    Like

    • paul

      Buying a better router solved 99% of my buffering issues. I’m using two Roku boxes a Roku stick and I subscribe to HULU. Before upgrading the router, watching live sports on HULU was sometimes impossible due to the constant buffering.

      Like

  11. JN

    I think this fits well here…

    Like

  12. For those that are within ~30 miles of tv broadcasters, remember that you can get free local broadcast stations with an antenna. I just installed a $40 antenna in my attic, and I can get all of the Atlanta affiliates — ABC, Fox, NBC, PBS, CBS — in better quality than cable (uncompressed 720p at a minimum) for free. I am about 37 miles from the farthest Atlanta tower, so I got a powered amp to ensure quality reception… your mileage (and tree cover) may vary.

    I have Xfinity’s 150/20 package, but I had buffering trouble with ESPN’s streams on many different devices. I think they have server-side issues with high-demand content on their WatchESPN platform, which makes me curious what changes will be made when Disney rolls out its own streaming service.

    Another way to solve the flipping back and forth between games is to bring in a second tv. I used my Hartman fund donation to buy a second tv to bring in the living room for gamedays so I can watch two games at once. I’ve even brought in a third when three ranked games are all in prime time. It might seem difficult to keep up with three games at the same time, but you would be amazed at how much down time there is in a football game.

    Like

    • Snoop Dawgy Dawg

      on New Year’s day, I had 2 TVs set up to watch the afternoon slate of games. One of them was through an Xbox WatchESPN app. It was grainy, blocky, and constant buffering. I don’t know if that’s an xbox or watchespn app issue. I assume a little of both. That singular instance is keeping me with full cable/internet for now.

      Like

    • Sanford222view

      The WatchESPN app has issues and I don’t think they are investing much effort in addressing them as was mentioned above. Your best bet is going to be PlayStation Vue or YouTube Live for a quality ESPN streaming experience.

      Like

  13. Chickamona

    How fast is the internet you all are using? I’ve switched over to all atreaming all the time and I’m at 100 mbps allegedly, though, it rarely delivers above 35 mbps. Considering a switch over to faster provider.

    Like

    • Sanford222view

      I would be calling your provider if you are only typically getting 35% of your speed. Although it could be when you are running your speed test. If video is streaming on a few devices while you are performing your speed test it will not show you the full speed. Remember, that 100 Mbps is being shared by all the devices connected to the service.

      I added the Google WiFi meshed network to my home as others have mentioned and really like it. The feature to set a device as a priority for a period of time is great especially when you are streaming a game to a TV and want to make sure that device gets the bandwidth needed for an enjoyable viewing experience.

      Like

    • Russ

      If you check your speed online, be sure to use a variety of sites as some (most?) ISPs will prioritize a request from some of the sites (Speedtest being the most obvious one). This will make your results look overly optimistic.

      Like

  14. MGW

    The clunky navigation and the fact that I couldn’t get the any of the HD antennas I bought to pick anything up sealed it for now – went with Dish for 2 years. Antenna wouldn’t have been a problem if I could get the main networks but unless you live in a major metropolitan area they generally don’t carry them on the streaming services. You get all sorts of Fox, NBC, and CBS channels, just not regular ole Fox, NBC, or CBS.

    Will reevaluate before the 2020 season. I figure it’ll be mostly sorted out by then. Of course it’ll probably also be just as expensive as cable or satellite by then but whatever.

    Like

  15. Squatchdawg

    I did exactly the same thing and also went with Hulu live. Oddly enough the only issue I had was buffering on live CBS and ESPN (rarely) games. I figured the technology just wasn’t there yet but maybe it’s my WiFi.

    However I discovered I was still getting basic via the cable lines (we’re using cable for broadband) so I ran it to my AVR via my TV and now have the best of both worlds.

    Leave it to cable TV to keep pumping it to your house even after you turn it off.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. PTC DAWG

    One. Big. Hassle.

    Like

  17. DirecTV for me with AT&T Fiber … all of that and my family gets unlimited mobile data with AT&T. It’s worth not having the hassle of bouncing among providers.

    Maybe that means I’m an idiot stuck in the Stone Age of content delivery. I prefer to say, “It’s one less thing to think about.”

    Like

  18. dawgfan

    If you have an unlimited cellular data plan with ATT you can get the $50 directtv now package for $25. It includes local ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC.

    Like

    • dawgfan

      We have Charter 60 Mbps as our ISP which has worked great with the Directtv and Netflix. We saved well over $100 per month cutting the cord. Also there are no contracts and I can cancel any of it at any time. All I need to do is get the satellite dish off my roof.

      Like

  19. AusDawg85

    WTF….I clicked on GTP and ran into the tech forum on Stingtalk??

    Like

  20. No One Knows You're a Dawg

    Thanks for this. I’m in the same situation now that you were in before cutting the cord and am looking around at different options.

    A decent summary I’ve found for cord cutting options is this from Wirecutter:

    https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/how-to-cut-the-cord-and-what-to-do-if-you-cant/

    Like

  21. Athens Dog

    I’m too lazy……………….

    Like

  22. SpellDawg

    You can’t always get what you want, but you can try sometimes….
    Thanks for the follow-up Senator! I’m purchasing an HD antenna that should get me the local channels I need. I have FIOS available, so fiber for 100mb down is only $30 a month for the first year. I have the feeling I’ll have to bounce back and forth between contracts with them and Comcast ever year or two, if I want to keep my costs down. Sigh….

    Like

  23. CB

    You would have been less pleased had you attempted to stream any of the playoff games on ESPN. Other than that it’s the smart move.

    Like

  24. Signal Dawg

    I was worried about the jumping from game to game too but the ESPN app on the appleTV is pretty nice. You can use their multicast feature and have up to 4 windows at once (I usually only do two). If you want to go full size with one of the games you click on the window you want and it expands to full screen. The other window is playing unseen in the background so there isn’t any loading time when you switch back and forth. Just another tap of the button lets you go back to multicast and you can jump to the other window really easy. If you have a subscription to one of the other services like Hulu, Vue, or YouTube, I think you can use that login to access live content on the ESPN app.

    I have an xbox also that I’ve tried to use the ESPN app on and it just wasn’t as good. A lot of the same problems the other guys were having. On the appleTV I rarely have problems. And that was on fiber optic lines with up to 100mbps. Just upgraded to a gig so I can stream more 4K stuff. Excited to try that out.

    Like