Wanting to cut the cable cord, need advice

msg

I just received an email from Hulu this week. They're now offering a commercial free option. It's $12/mo. Now if they would just make more episodes of shows available - all episodes for all seasons. IMO that would make this a more viable alternative. I for one have been spoiled by streaming/on-demand access, and there's not really any going back for me anymore.

Nightfall

I hypothesis that Hulu has commercials to offset the cost of getting new episodes the same night they air. It's odd that some shows only have the latest couple episodes while other shows have a large episode selection.

I still like Hulu though. It's the only way to legally stream shows the same night they air. Netflix takes a LONG time after a season ends to put it up. By then nobody at work wants to talk about it anymore.

EndersShadow

Nightfall wrote: »

I hypothesis that Hulu has commercials to offset the cost of getting new episodes the same night they air. It's odd that some shows only have the latest couple episodes while other shows have a large episode selection.

I still like Hulu though. It's the only way to legally stream shows the same night they air. Netflix takes a LONG time after a season ends to put it up. By then nobody at work wants to talk about it anymore.

I believe Hulu is owned by a couple of the network TV companies (NBC, Fox and Disney) and so that is obviously their platform of choice to release content to first.

Rex81

I was thrilled to see Hulu's commercial-free option. I signed up right away and it's great. Now, of course there are exceptions. A few shows that I don't watch are excluded from this and still show commercials. But overall, I'm happy.

Jimbo18

Just one more device to help cut the cord - Roku 4 available for pre-order from their website. Besides the faster processor and voice search, it now allows for streaming 4K content. Not that there's a lot of it out there, but that should increase.

https://www.roku.com/products/roku-4

$129.99

cnh

DSkip wrote: »

I have a feeling streaming 4k is going to get a lot of people riled up when they realize their network isn't capable of it.

Most Americans will find it near impossible to stream that amount of Data. Have to agree.

We were paying almost $200 a month for cable and internet, etc. Cut (most of) the cord a few weeks ago. Use local powered antenna but only get 5 channels doing that and NOT PBS because the transmitter is too far away? No indoor powered antenna is going to get you more than 30-40 mile reception, if that. If you're not in sight of a metropolitan area, good luck! We're NOT! Oh, I bought my own cable modem too!

PBS has a free APP that allows you to watch one day behind. So CBS we get from the antenna, everything else that might be viewed comes through Hulu using Chromecast or the PS3 (also some interesting educational/science program on PLUTO TV app). Doubled the internet speed and cut the bill below $90. Still with the most despised company in the U.S., TW (oh, I kept one TV on a $10 a month feed for network and PBS, also phone service included in that bill above). Cable prices are getting "ridiculous". Spending over $2-3,000 a year would be money best put to use elsewhere.

All this programming will default to internet streaming soon, anyway. And cable companies will try to survive by doubling and quadrupling internet fees? So we'll be paying $200 a month for internet. lol These guys NEVER lose!

Willow

We dropped cable almost 5 years now. We only use Netflix and one other internet method of obtaining a couple shows. Like most we were paying close to $200 for maybe 5 channels watched. Kids love Netflix shows. If Netflix doesn't have it it's either on a DVD/BR or somewhere else on the WWW

Jimbo18

cnh wrote: »

DSkip wrote: »

I have a feeling streaming 4k is going to get a lot of people riled up when they realize their network isn't capable of it.

Most Americans will find it near impossible to stream that amount of Data. Have to agree.

We were paying almost $200 a month for cable and internet, etc. Cut (most of) the cord a few weeks ago. Use local powered antenna but only get 5 channels doing that and NOT PBS because the transmitter is too far away? No indoor powered antenna is going to get you more than 30-40 mile reception, if that. If you're not in sight of a metropolitan area, good luck! We're NOT! Oh, I bought my own cable modem too!

PBS has a free APP that allows you to watch one day behind. So CBS we get from the antenna, everything else that might be viewed comes through Hulu using Chromecast or the PS3 (also some interesting educational/science program on PLUTO TV app). Doubled the internet speed and cut the bill below $90. Still with the most despised company in the U.S., TW (oh, I kept one TV on a $10 a month feed for network and PBS, also phone service included in that bill above). Cable prices are getting "ridiculous". Spending over $2-3,000 a year would be money best put to use elsewhere.

All this programming will default to internet streaming soon, anyway. And cable companies will try to survive by doubling and quadrupling internet fees? So we'll be paying $200 a month for internet. lol These guys NEVER lose!

cnh, do you own a Roku? If you have one TV on cable, you can add some of the on demand type shows to another tv with the Roku. Doesn't have to be the Roku 4, the Roku 2 is about 2/3 the price and is very fast now that they upgraded the chip.

Besides the PBS app, the History Channel has a channel on the Roku that you can access if you have a cable subscription. They give you a code to enter on your cable account and you can watch whatever they have available. There are several other channels that do the same thing, Lifetime, Fox, CBS, NBC, Fx, and probably several others.

I no longer have a cable subscription, so can't use them, but you should be able to. They aren't live, but do have backlogs of shows, and most have whatever has recently aired. If I could get one tv with basic channels for $10 a month, I would certainly do that myself.

I pay $70 for internet and phone with Charter Comm. but also have Netflix and, for the short term, Sling TV, which I won't keep once my 3 mo. commitment is over.

rooftop59

Jimbo18 wrote: »

cnh wrote: »

DSkip wrote: »

I have a feeling streaming 4k is going to get a lot of people riled up when they realize their network isn't capable of it.

Most Americans will find it near impossible to stream that amount of Data. Have to agree.

We were paying almost $200 a month for cable and internet, etc. Cut (most of) the cord a few weeks ago. Use local powered antenna but only get 5 channels doing that and NOT PBS because the transmitter is too far away? No indoor powered antenna is going to get you more than 30-40 mile reception, if that. If you're not in sight of a metropolitan area, good luck! We're NOT! Oh, I bought my own cable modem too!

PBS has a free APP that allows you to watch one day behind. So CBS we get from the antenna, everything else that might be viewed comes through Hulu using Chromecast or the PS3 (also some interesting educational/science program on PLUTO TV app). Doubled the internet speed and cut the bill below $90. Still with the most despised company in the U.S., TW (oh, I kept one TV on a $10 a month feed for network and PBS, also phone service included in that bill above). Cable prices are getting "ridiculous". Spending over $2-3,000 a year would be money best put to use elsewhere.

All this programming will default to internet streaming soon, anyway. And cable companies will try to survive by doubling and quadrupling internet fees? So we'll be paying $200 a month for internet. lol These guys NEVER lose!

Besides the PBS app, the History Channel has a channel on the Roku that you can access if you have a cable subscription. They give you a code to enter on your cable account and you can watch whatever they have available. There are several other channels that do the same thing, Lifetime, Fox, CBS, NBC, Fx, and probably several others.

I no longer have a cable subscription, so can't use them, but you should be able to.

i am pretty sure that you have to have a cable subscription with that channel as a part of the package. Otherwise you could get the $20 a month basic package and stream all kinds of stations on the roku or fire tv for example...

Jimbo18

rooftop59 wrote: »

i am pretty sure that you have to have a cable subscription with that channel as a part of the package. Otherwise you could get the $20 a month basic package and stream all kinds of stations on the roku or fire tv for example...

You are correct but he stated that he has a subscription for one television.

Jimbo18

I just saw this morning that HBO NOW has been added as a "channel" on the Roku. I can see me adding that for this season of Game of Thrones at least.

rooftop59

Jimbo18 wrote: »

rooftop59 wrote: »

i am pretty sure that you have to have a cable subscription with that channel as a part of the package. Otherwise you could get the $20 a month basic package and stream all kinds of stations on the roku or fire tv for example...

You are correct but he stated that he has a subscription for one television.

Yes but only local channels. You only get it if it's in your package.

And HBO now is great but it's $15 a month. I have it right now as a part of my cable package but honestly I watch Amazon and Netflix a lot more...