(12-04-2014 09:23 AM)cajunhawk2 Wrote:  Thanks to Apple TV, Roku, & Amazon Fire...those of us who feel weird about staring at a laptop or tablet can watch online from the comfort of their big screens.

We've cut cable and this is what I've been doing for 3 years, looks great on my 65"

I never watch on my computer.

(12-04-2014 08:48 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 06:21 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Posted it just because I knew you'd follow me like puppy. You must be new to this board cord cutting is a regular topic. As for stock,don't give two sheets.

I know what you're getting at; just want to hear you finally just come out and say it. You must be a lawyer (or legally trained) because you are an expert at beating around the bush.

There's no beating around the bush here.

Cord-cutting is a frequent topic here and we've taken note that ESPN is buying a LOT of online content (MAC and Major League Soccer most recently).

There is talk Fox is hiring a lot of online people as well to build out their infrastructure.

Me personally? I think ESPN (and eventually Fox) are angling toward increasing carriage fee income from online properties and want to bloat your internet bill the same way they bloated cable.

But if that's what you wanted me to come out and say, there was no point in that because it's been discussed heavily here. If you think there was something else in play please enlighten me as to what I'm thinking I'd be delighted to learn what it is.

If I'm a cable company, I embrace the change. Why bother owning and doing upkeep on boxes if your customers will do it for you? Besides people are going to want to pay extra for faster speeds, especially if I condition that faster speed on your "free" subscription to WatchESPN and HBOGo.

(12-03-2014 05:57 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 05:53 PM)Wedge Wrote:  The trend is going to be people watching on their phones and tablets more, and sitting in their living room watching the big screen less.

Comcast and AT&T aren't worried, though. They'll be providing the high-speed LTE and/or wifi that we use to watch on our phones and tablets.

I don't know demand for large TV's still up there. I watch our games on the big screen via apple tv, I watch other games on iPad. I never watch Netflix on anything but the big screen. My wife counts as online viewer because she uses HBOGo on Apple TV because she hates Direct's on-demand interface.

Yep. Smart TVs will replace every TV eventually. Watch what you want to watch when you want to watch it and without having to save it on your DVR. Watch games on CBS, ESPN3 or you school's site the same place.

(12-04-2014 11:31 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  There's no beating around the bush here.
Cord-cutting is a frequent topic here and we've taken note that ESPN is buying a LOT of online content (MAC and Major League Soccer most recently).
There is talk Fox is hiring a lot of online people as well to build out their infrastructure.
Me personally? I think ESPN (and eventually Fox) are angling toward increasing carriage fee income from online properties and want to bloat your internet bill the same way they bloated cable.
But if that's what you wanted me to come out and say, there was no point in that because it's been discussed heavily here. If you think there was something else in play please enlighten me as to what I'm thinking I'd be delighted to learn what it is.

I just don't get it. Content is content not matter the medium used to distribute it. The cable company is going to provide that content to your router and if anyone gets too uppity, they'll just buy out the technology and ramp it up to all their customers. And isn't 4G LTE expensive and they slow you down once you hit your limit (3-6 GB). I just don't see how all that content is going to be carried over cell towers, maybe I'm wrong but it seems as more adopt the more expensive it's going to become. Then we'll be right back where we are now.

Someone above explained all his work-arounds to save $50-$70 a month. I think a dollar or two a day is worth the convenience of having everything pumped in over one line. I mean, it doesn't look like a game-changer to me.

p.s. I thought you started this to support your 'branding' v. 'market' arguement (btw, I still do )

(12-04-2014 12:33 PM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 11:31 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  There's no beating around the bush here.
Cord-cutting is a frequent topic here and we've taken note that ESPN is buying a LOT of online content (MAC and Major League Soccer most recently).
There is talk Fox is hiring a lot of online people as well to build out their infrastructure.
Me personally? I think ESPN (and eventually Fox) are angling toward increasing carriage fee income from online properties and want to bloat your internet bill the same way they bloated cable.
But if that's what you wanted me to come out and say, there was no point in that because it's been discussed heavily here. If you think there was something else in play please enlighten me as to what I'm thinking I'd be delighted to learn what it is.

I just don't get it. Content is content not matter the medium used to distribute it. The cable company is going to provide that content to your router and if anyone gets too uppity, they'll just buy out the technology and ramp it up to all their customers. And isn't 4G LTE expensive and they slow you down once you hit your limit (3-6 GB). I just don't see how all that content is going to be carried over cell towers, maybe I'm wrong but it seems as more adopt the more expensive it's going to become. Then we'll be right back where we are now.

Someone above explained all his work-arounds to save $50-$70 a month. I think a dollar or two a day is worth the convenience of having everything pumped in over one line. I mean, it doesn't look like a game-changer to me.

p.s. I thought you started this to support your 'branding' v. 'market' arguement (btw, I still do )

You are wrong. Cord cutting is a frequent topic on this board, post had nothing to do with my other beliefs.

Watching a game on a 60 inch HDTV is always better!

(12-04-2014 12:33 PM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 11:31 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  There's no beating around the bush here.
Cord-cutting is a frequent topic here and we've taken note that ESPN is buying a LOT of online content (MAC and Major League Soccer most recently).
There is talk Fox is hiring a lot of online people as well to build out their infrastructure.
Me personally? I think ESPN (and eventually Fox) are angling toward increasing carriage fee income from online properties and want to bloat your internet bill the same way they bloated cable.
But if that's what you wanted me to come out and say, there was no point in that because it's been discussed heavily here. If you think there was something else in play please enlighten me as to what I'm thinking I'd be delighted to learn what it is.

I just don't get it. Content is content not matter the medium used to distribute it. The cable company is going to provide that content to your router and if anyone gets too uppity, they'll just buy out the technology and ramp it up to all their customers. And isn't 4G LTE expensive and they slow you down once you hit your limit (3-6 GB). I just don't see how all that content is going to be carried over cell towers, maybe I'm wrong but it seems as more adopt the more expensive it's going to become. Then we'll be right back where we are now.

Someone above explained all his work-arounds to save $50-$70 a month. I think a dollar or two a day is worth the convenience of having everything pumped in over one line. I mean, it doesn't look like a game-changer to me.

p.s. I thought you started this to support your 'branding' v. 'market' arguement (btw, I still do )

This has generally been my thinking on this - the savings aren't great enough yet (and my calculations are usually less than $50 per month) to justify the hassle. Prefer using one box and punching in channels I have memorized than using the variety of competing options that is the alternative. Worth noting I have FIOS which is generally amazing; if I was stuck with just an obsolete cable company I would probably have cut the cord by now.

Granted I also avoid Netflix, Hulu, Amazon etc. for the same reason many people like them - too many options and potential for time wasting. I like being limited to what's on at the moment or on my DVR.

This all comes to personal preference. If I owned a business, I would own software that would tell me, who was watchinf sports and TV shows on my time. Pink slip time, if you are!

(12-03-2014 05:23 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Traditional viewership was down 4% last quarter, online up 60%.
http://m.wsj.com/articles/tv-viewing-sli...1?mobile=y

Why exactly is it that ESPN is stockpiling so much content for ESPN3?

Wait until Comcast and Sony OTT arrive. TV viewership for the under 35 set will nosedive

(12-04-2014 10:12 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  I purchased a Roku 3 a few months ago. Between the ISP, Magic Jack (for phone), Watch ESPN, Ballstreams, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime and an over the air antenna I'm saving about $50 / month compared to a comparable package "deal" from TWC (minus all the crap I don't want to waste my time flipping through).

Get the G-BOX Q (I just bought one):

"More Features than Roku and Apple TV Combined Looking for more than just a simple streaming box? The Q does it all."

http://www.ebay.com/itm/NEWEST-Matricom-...184wt_1155

It just came out and has XBMC, which allows you to watch almost ever channel (from all over the world) for free over the internet—including pay per view.

If you have a tablet or smart phone, download the Android app (for free), and you should be able to stream it to your TV through Roku 3:

http://kodi.tv/download/

I have a guy at my job who knows all about XBMC, so he is adding tons of add-ons to my G-Box Q. I will be able to watch the latest moves in theaters.

Yeah but XMBC sports? Several degrees less than HD. Comcast OTT will be available of Roky and will cost $30 a month and will include ESPN channels

(12-04-2014 04:10 PM)panama Wrote:  Yeah but XMBC sports? Several degrees less than HD. Comcast OTT will be available of Roky and will cost $30 a month and will include ESPN channels

Read the specs on the G-Box Q.... Moreover, you have to add certain channels that you want. My friend can add any sports channel that I want. He showed it to me on his phone! In fact, we briefly watched a movie on his phone that just came out in the theaters. Consequently, this is my last month with Directv....

(12-04-2014 04:07 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 10:12 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  I purchased a Roku 3 a few months ago. Between the ISP, Magic Jack (for phone), Watch ESPN, Ballstreams, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime and an over the air antenna I'm saving about $50 / month compared to a comparable package "deal" from TWC (minus all the crap I don't want to waste my time flipping through).

Get the G-BOX Q (I just bought one):

"More Features than Roku and Apple TV Combined Looking for more than just a simple streaming box? The Q does it all."

http://www.ebay.com/itm/NEWEST-Matricom-...184wt_1155

It just came out and has XBMC, which allows you to watch almost ever channel (from all over the world) for free over the internet—including pay per view.

If you have a tablet or smart phone, download the Android app (for free), and you should be able to stream it to your TV through Roku 3:

http://kodi.tv/download/

I have a guy at my job who knows all about XBMC, so he is adding tons of add-ons to my G-Box Q. I will be able to watch the latest moves in theaters.

I'm familiar with xbmc / Kodi. I've installed it and add ons before to my PC. Honestly the quality is kind of lacking, legality is questionable at best and I'm not convinced it's very secure. Good luck with that.

(12-04-2014 04:13 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 04:10 PM)panama Wrote:  Yeah but XMBC sports? Several degrees less than HD. Comcast OTT will be available of Roky and will cost $30 a month and will include ESPN channels

Read the specs on the G-Box Q.... Moreover, you have to add certain channels that you want. My friend can add any sports channel that I want. He showed it to me on his phone! In fact, we briefly watched a movie on his phone that just came out in the theaters. Consequently, this is my last month with Directv....

There is the issue of legality. If a movie just came out in the theater how are you watching it online?

I will wait for OTT

(12-04-2014 04:44 PM)panama Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 04:13 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 04:10 PM)panama Wrote:  Yeah but XMBC sports? Several degrees less than HD. Comcast OTT will be available of Roky and will cost $30 a month and will include ESPN channels

Read the specs on the G-Box Q.... Moreover, you have to add certain channels that you want. My friend can add any sports channel that I want. He showed it to me on his phone! In fact, we briefly watched a movie on his phone that just came out in the theaters. Consequently, this is my last month with Directv....

There is the issue of legality. If a movie just came out in the theater how are you watching it online?

I will wait for OTT

precisely. smh...

(12-04-2014 12:33 PM)FIUFan Wrote:  ...Someone above explained all his work-arounds to save $50-$70 a month. I think a dollar or two a day is worth the convenience of having everything pumped in over one line. ...

I agree.

I just hate to pay for content I despise. If Directv would only charge me for the channels I want and block the rest, I would be peachy keen.

Now that would be a game changer.

(12-04-2014 04:44 PM)panama Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 04:13 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 04:10 PM)panama Wrote:  Yeah but XMBC sports? Several degrees less than HD. Comcast OTT will be available of Roky and will cost $30 a month and will include ESPN channels

Read the specs on the G-Box Q.... Moreover, you have to add certain channels that you want. My friend can add any sports channel that I want. He showed it to me on his phone! In fact, we briefly watched a movie on his phone that just came out in the theaters. Consequently, this is my last month with Directv....

There is the issue of legality. If a movie just came out in the theater how are you watching it online?

I will wait for OTT

I don't know how it works, but I know it works. Moreover, you can legally buy the box or down load the app, which is all I need to know. I don't make or sell the boxes. Furthermore, the app is available to anybody, so the developers aren’t attempting to conceal the app.

(12-04-2014 04:52 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 04:44 PM)panama Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 04:13 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 04:10 PM)panama Wrote:  Yeah but XMBC sports? Several degrees less than HD. Comcast OTT will be available of Roky and will cost $30 a month and will include ESPN channels

Read the specs on the G-Box Q.... Moreover, you have to add certain channels that you want. My friend can add any sports channel that I want. He showed it to me on his phone! In fact, we briefly watched a movie on his phone that just came out in the theaters. Consequently, this is my last month with Directv....

There is the issue of legality. If a movie just came out in the theater how are you watching it online?

I will wait for OTT

I don't know how it works, but I know it works. Moreover, you can legally buy the box or down load the app, which is all I need to know. I don't make or sell the boxes. Furthermore, the app is available to anybody, so the developers aren’t attempting to conceal the app.

So far they haven't been sending the people watching outlaw streams to Federal Pound Your Ass Prison, just the people sending it on the stream.

(12-04-2014 01:27 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Someone above explained all his work-arounds to save $50-$70 a month. I think a dollar or two a day is worth the convenience of having everything pumped in over one line. I mean, it doesn't look like a game-changer to me.

Work arounds? Once it's set up it's done. It's as easy to use as I'd have with traditional phone and cable. The only difference is what device is actually "delivering" the media to my television... the over the air antenna or the box. Other stuff like DVD or Blueray player is unnecessary at this point since my movies are streamed now so that's actually less "hook up clutter".

Roku or Hulu, Netflix, or whatever you'd want a subscription for debits straight from your debit card or whatever. After that it basically works just like the apps on your phone. I thought the same thing as you at first but it's actually very simple and straight forward.