Do you have cable?

[Suellen]

well for us it was more that we watched about 10 maybe of the 200+ channels we had. Two of those we watched two shows a piece on. HBO and Showtime ~ and we paid big for those channels. For the two times a year we watched an active series. The following channels watched in the house make up the sum total of 130+$/month:

ABC (Free over air)
CBS (Free over air)
FOX(Fringe Only) (Can watch online... maybe rent if we want)
Disney (The girls own a lot of the shows they like already on DVD and iTouch)
NickJR *see above
Bravotv (Top Chef Only) ~ haven't figured this one out yet.
MTV ( my guilty pleasures) ~ these can all be watched online.

Everything else was just fluff. The tv was on to be on.

I'm not sure why anyone would get bad quality online.... I just don't know the answer to that ours if perfectly fine.

I'd consider going back to cable if they'd let me pick and pay for just the channels I want. I'd even consider paying a higher fee if we could get them commercial free. One thing I LOVE about the netflix shows and appleTV shows.

I should also mention we have had a first generation AppleTV for about 3.5 years nows.... there have been some shows come and some shows go from deals

ETA: We don't watch sports anymore. I used to before we had kids.... now not so much.

 

[bicker]

I'm not sure why anyone would get bad quality online.... I just don't know the answer to that ours if perfectly fine.

If you're not viewing HD programs on an HDTV, then I'd agree with you; it would be difficult if not impossible to see the difference. However, if you are viewing HD programs on an HDTV, you will see a very substantial difference in quality.

Broadcast capitalizes on a pre-determined amount of bandwidth, and generally it is more than enough to provide practically full HD resolution. For over-the-air broadcast, that's (keeping it as simple as possible) typically either 6 MHz (as in the case of our CBS affiliate here), or something closer to 5 MHz (as in the case of our NBC affiliate here, the rest of the bandwidth used for a sub-channel). For cable networks, since they don't suffer from atmospheric interference, it is generally either 2 MHz or 3 MHz, again sufficient to provide resolution that practically everyone would consider "perfectly fine".

By contrast, online streaming is dependent on available bandwidth in-the-moment, and that is a reflection not only of what the service provider is capable of supplying, but also what every intermediary broadband carrier, from the online streaming service provider all the way to your ISP, is capable of supplying, at that moment in time. As a result, online streaming generally provides a substantially downconverted stream.

Netflix, for example, has five different levels of quality that they provide, dynamically changing from one to the other based on the bandwidth reliability from them to you, at the time, constantly adjusting the image quality to maintain the streaming without interruption. What they're doing is employing lossy compression for the lower four levels of quality, resulting in loss of image clarity (i.e., loss of "definition").

With a small screen, or with a low-quality HDTV (such as newer 720p budget sets), you won't notice it, but online streaming is still, almost always lower quality than you can get either through broadcast or cable/satellite.

It should also be noted that until recently, online streaming services didn't support multi-channel audio, so there was an audio quality difference as well. Even now, many of the titles are still only providing dual-channel audio, resulting in an inferior viewing experience via online streaming.

I'd consider going back to cable if they'd let me pick and pay for just the channels I want.

That's really a specious argument. You're saying that you won't pay $120 for 500 channels, but you would pay $120 for the ten or twenty channels that you care about? Of course not. And that's really what it comes down to. Where consumers have the ability to select just the channels that they want to pay for, the break-even point - the number of channels beyond which the current package deals cost less than the paying for the channels a la carte - is six or seven channels (including local channels, by the way). Check NPS' prices for C-band service, for a good case study of this.

I'd even consider paying a higher fee if we could get them commercial free.

Of course, but do you really want to pay $10 per channel. I don't.

One thing I LOVE about the netflix shows and appleTV shows.

For now. While they're sucking us into this new service. Once we're addicted, expect either prices to skyrocket or monetization of the service, such as the adding of commercials perhaps, to take place.

 

[golfgal]

We have satellite after major issues with our cable company. I would have been happy to drop it altogether but DH is a TV junkie . He complains about the bill, I remind him how much I watch (about a hour every other week, MAYBE), end of conversation

 

[Suellen]

No I would not pay $120 or $130 a month for the 20 channels ~ it would have to be more reasonable. It would also absolutely have to be commercial free.

We do have HDTV and had the HD boxes. Personally I think the HD we got through our cable service was seriously lacking compared to what we get via antenna. I've never had HD satelitte so I can't comment on the quality there.

Not all channels or shows that we watched however came in HD ~ so it makes very little difference when I watch them online.... though the ABC shows I can watch on my iPad are HD when available and much sharper and clearer again than the cable box was.

As for cost of the Apple TV shows... they used to be only available for purchase at 1.99 per episode (or some other specific amount for the series) though now you can rent them for .99 ~ so all I've seen is the reduction of cost. Unless you still want to buy it in which case it is 1.99 ~ though I must say the ones we bought on the 1st generation we have never watched again.

Who knows... obviously it doesn't work for everyone. It works for us. Plus with an extra $1200/year ~ we can squeeze in another trip.

 

[bicker]

Yeah, everything looks crystal clear on a 9.7 inch screen.

 

[Suellen]

I should mention also that when summer comes well from about May-October ~ we watch very little tv.

I thought of another nice thing we have found with Netflix streaming (though you don't have to cancel your cable for this benefit) both our girls have iTouches and they can watch the netflix show of their choosing on it. No more fighting over Dora or Phinneas and Ferb.... they can each watch what they want.

The other added bonus is the TV is never on just to be on. It is on to watch something specific. My house is much quieter now! Well as quiet as it can be with a 5.5 year old and a 3.5 year old running around!!

 

[Suellen]

Yeah, everything looks crystal clear on a 9.7 inch screen.

Size of the screen doesn't matter much to me when I am the only one watching... especially when I am stuck in the car in the driveway while DD snoozes away in the back seat! Now I just pull out my iPad and catch up on an ABC show.

 

[bicker]

Yup and that really highlights how what you're going to use the service for really will make a difference with regard to whether you perceive it as being of high quality or not.

 

[hsmamato2]

we keep our dish for the DVR simple as that! We don't watch a lot of tv, get basic cable type channels, it's the DVR- taping,then watching when I feel like it.....priceless! TVGUY, HOW do I do it without the dish? probably WAY too technical for an average person to figure out...... if I could have it my way,I'd use a roof antenna and a homemade DVR setup,that's plenty for me!

 

[hsmamato2]

The other added bonus is the TV is never on just to be on. It is on to watch something specific.

that is why I love my DVR box......without that,I wouldn't pay for tv

 

[bicker]

(By the way, you can buy a DVR, rather than using one from a cable or satellite service provider. It runs about $499, and of course relies on over-the-air reception. So a DVR, alone, shouldn't be the reason why you continue to pay $50-$150 per month for cable/satellite.)

 

[hsmamato2]

that is EXPENSIVE!!!! sorry Bicker, but I only pay 35.00 per month for my service,if DVR were reasonably priced,I'd buy a separate box......

 

[bicker]

I just updated the price... It has gone down $150 since I had last checked.

So even at $35 per month you'd break even by next April, and you'd have what most people consider the best DVR on the market. Again, the point is that a DVR, alone, isn't a good-enough reason to continue paying monthly for cable/satellite.

By the way: Where do you get cable service with a DVR for $35 per month? I keep track of info like that. Thanks.

 

[hsmamato2]

gradnfatherd into dishnetwork basic lineup,dual dvr boxes (tv runs/tapes in two separate rooms)
that's part of the issue, it's all done for me, it's grandfathered in-(i.e. not going to happen again at that price) and the learning curve for a new setup we have to maintain on our own is...just not worth it right now.....however, I am interested in the setup you describe,where to get one,and how it all works..... maybe by next year I can wrap my mind around something new!
see...we'd have to buy a roof antenna,climb up and set it up (ack) and figure it all out. not likely to happen in the middle of winter.

 

[bicker]

gradnfatherd

Ah! That explains it. Thanks.

however, I am interested in the setup you describe,where to get one,and how it all works..... maybe by next year I can wrap my mind around something new!

Yup, and two or three years later you may have to. The FCC has realized that their efforts to open the set-top box market have failed, and so they're putting together Plan B (known as "AllVid"). One of the mistakes they know they made the first time was imposing the rules only on cable, rather than on cable and satellite. Effectively, these new regulations that they're considering could end up requiring all major cable and satellite services in the country to adopt a new "gateway" approach, that will require new boxes for everyone using cable or satellite (or new adapters, just like everyone using over-the-air broadcast needed new adapters, if they didn't have the very newest technology's tuners in their televisions). That's one reason why I'm holding off, and suggesting everyone hold off, at least for another year. (If the FCC hasn't made any progress on AllVid by the beginning of next year, then I suppose a lot of us are just going to have to figure that they'll never get their act together.)

 

[LuvCuteBoys]

I'm getting a weird vibe from this thread.


But anyway... I watch too much live TV to get rid of cable. Sports and Awards Shows are at the top of that list. Plus I watch Hollywood Dailies and several competition shows (DWTS, Top Chef, etc).

I will watch older TV shows on DVD if it was a show I didn't originally watch for whatever reason, but for the most part I watch shows within a day or two of them airing.

I'd give up food before I'd give up my entertainment budget. And I love food.

 

[Suellen]

I'm getting a weird vibe from this thread.

I was really just wondering if anyone had gone a different route than paying or why they hadn't ~ nothing weird about that... IMHO.

 

[RachaelA]

I'm getting a weird vibe from this thread.


But anyway... I watch too much live TV to get rid of cable. Sports and Awards Shows are at the top of that list. Plus I watch Hollywood Dailies and several competition shows (DWTS, Top Chef, etc).

I will watch older TV shows on DVD if it was a show I didn't originally watch for whatever reason, but for the most part I watch shows within a day or two of them airing.

I'd give up food before I'd give up my entertainment budget. And I love food.

This.

DH and I love sitting around watching HGTV and DIY for hours on the weekends (gotta enjoy the downtime before we have kids!). We also watch a bunch of random movies and stuff. I like the flexibility.

We are TV fiends. Our cable bill definitely reflects it!

 

[tvguy]

TVGUY, HOW do I do it without the dish? probably WAY too technical for an average person to figure out...... if I could have it my way,I'd use a roof antenna and a homemade DVR setup,that's plenty for me!

Well, I have a Dish DVR, but I just assume the DVR's they sell in the store work like the old VHS VCR's did. You program what channel you want recorded, and for how long. It's not as automatic as with the Dish, but VCR's worked (and still do work) just fine. Antenna in to the DVR, video out from the DVR to the TV.
I will mention that a year ago when my daughter went away to college, and had night classes, she was missing her favorite show. The dorm had cable, no cable box necessary, just plug it into the TV. I went to Goodwill and paid $6 for a top of the line used Sony VHS VCR so she could record her show.
So maybe the best solution is old technology, not new.

 

[browneyes106]

I have DirecTV. I don't think I'll ever get rid of satellite or cable. I like a variety of programming. I watch sports, documentaries, dramas on different on cable networks, a few reality shows, movies, stand up comedy specials and reruns of past shows that are on cable channels but haven't been released on DVD.