Cutting The Cord -- How to leave cable companies?

[Bryan]

Qello is a pay service, isn't it? Did you sign up without knowing what it was? (I had no idea what it was when Apple TV added a little while back).

What issues did you have?

[cybercoma]

I signed up for the free trial, which would have rolled over into a subscription if I hadn't cancelled it so quickly. The streaming is just lousy: frequent buffering and poor video quality. I'm on a fibreop connection with 80Mbps down. There's absolutely no reason I should be buffering or having a crappy pixelated low resolution image streaming to me.

[Boges]

Using a mobile app to control the extender is infinitely better than using a remote to search through videos on a native Apple TV, Roku, Xbox App.

You can use it as a second screen. With the Chromecast you can also search around for other videos while one is playing.

[Mighty AC]

When configured as a US device the Roku is quite useful and Apple TV is a fairly solid device but the Chromecast is better, for less than half the cost.

I've been using Plex to play my stored content via the Roku and Chromecast. It works well, my only complaint is having to abide by their file naming conventions in order for certain files to be found and cataloged successfully. Has anyone tried an alternative like MB3? I prefer XBMC but I don't believe it will work with the Roku.

Edited April 19, 2014 by Mighty AC

[cybercoma]

Using a mobile app to control the extender is infinitely better than using a remote to search through videos on a native Apple TV, Roku, Xbox App.

You can use it as a second screen. With the Chromecast you can also search around for other videos while one is playing.

You can connect a bluetooth keyboard to the Apple TV or you can use their Remote app from an iPhone or iPad to type. Makes searching a lot easier.

The YouTube and Netflix apps are pretty lousy on the AppleTV though. I'll give you that. Apple requires a minimalist approach to apps, so neither has been updated in quite awhile. Netflix doesn't even have the basic feature of starting the next show in a series for you. The PS4 has this functionality, so I almost prefer watching Netflix on there for television shows.

OS X Mavericks allows you to use the Apple TV as an extended desktop, rather than just mirroring (which you can also do with iOS), but I've not found the functionality to be all that great. Despite using an Apple Airport Express as a bridge to my fibreop router, I can't get my Macbook to keep a connection with the AppleTV when it's in extended desktop mode. Works perfectly fine mirrored though.

So there's certainly some of those headaches with it. It's far from perfect. The Chromecast sounds great though. We got the AppleTV as a gift and that's why we use it. I'm not sure I would switch, since it syncs up with all of my iTunes purchases in the Cloud. I have access to my music, television shows, and digital movies. Can I access that stuff with a Chromecast? If they have an easy way to do it, then I might even consider switching.

[cybercoma]

Looks like 25% of young adults (18-34) who subscribe to Netflix and Hulu do not have cable subscriptions. So even more of a problem than 'cutting the cord' are people who aren't getting connected in the first place. Cable companies are losing the next generation to online streaming.

Edited April 19, 2014 by cybercoma

[jbg]

Looks like 25% of young adults (18-34) who subscribe to Netflix and Hulu do not have cable subscriptions. So even more of a problem than 'cutting the cord' are people who aren't getting connected in the first place. Cable companies are losing the next generation to online streaming.

With their exorbitant pricing what do they expect?

[cybercoma]

I agree, jbg. Remember when television was free and commercials were minimal on pay TV? Nowadays, with the exception of channels like HBO, you get commercials AND you pay huge fees for cable/satellite. It's a bit unreal. It's like you're paying to be advertised to.

[jbg]

I agree, jbg. Remember when television was free and commercials were minimal on pay TV? Nowadays, with the exception of channels like HBO, you get commercials AND you pay huge fees for cable/satellite. It's a bit unreal. It's like you're paying to be advertised to.

My cable & internet bill if $154 a month. I don't use the "free" phone service that comes with it because of its insufferable quality.

[August1991]

Looks like 25% of young adults (18-34) who subscribe to Netflix and Hulu do not have cable subscriptions. So even more of a problem than 'cutting the cord' are people who aren't getting connected in the first place. Cable companies are losing the next generation to online streaming.

Well, not really.

To have access to the Internet with sufficient bandwidth for Netflix, Canadians must use a wire into their home: cable or telephone. So, Rogers, Videotron, Bell or Telus still get paid - even if you go with with an independent ISP who pays one of those wired people. Indeed, Netflix only gets about $8 per month while one of the four wired companies gets over $30.

And to think that Peladeau wants to be PM of Quebec.

[overthere]

I agree, jbg. Remember when television was free and commercials were minimal on pay TV? Nowadays, with the exception of channels like HBO, you get commercials AND you pay huge fees for cable/satellite. It's a bit unreal. It's like you're paying to be advertised to.

I do not recall commercials ever being minimal in any format other than purchased premium TV.

A big, big problem for networks is the use of DVRs. Every channel is commercial free when everything is recorded first. Advertisers are increasingly aware of how much money they are wasting on broadcast TV and are switching their money to digital ads. Of course, those can also be edited.....

We are witnessing a change in TV similar to the transformation of the music business.in the last couple of decades.

Not everybody is going to survive, some big networks are going to adapt or die.

[Boges]

Hey now!

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/netflix-fee-hikes-coming-for-new-canadian-subscribers-1.2617798

Netflix has confirmed a price increase for new subscribers in the U.S. and Canada.

A company spokesman said it would be a "modest" increase of $1 to $2 and would go into effect this quarter (before June 30) for new Netflix members. For existing subscribers, the same increase is postponed for another two years.

Netflix stock, already one of Nasdaq’s high flyers, jumped 6.5 per cent today to $371 US after the streaming service announced it would raise subscription prices.

Can't really bankroll original programming for a measly $8/month can you?

$10/month still isn't much but I've been disappointed with the movies on Netflix lately. I don't really use it for TV shows. I will start watching Season 2 of Orange is the New Black in June.

This is an interesting throw-away line from the report.

Netflix says it has yet to make money on its collective international operations and predicts a loss next year as well.

So like Target, they have yet to make money outside of the US so far.

Edited April 22, 2014 by Boges

[cybercoma]

Well, not really.

To have access to the Internet with sufficient bandwidth for Netflix, Canadians must use a wire into their home: cable or telephone. So, Rogers, Videotron, Bell or Telus still get paid - even if you go with with an independent ISP who pays one of those wired people. Indeed, Netflix only gets about $8 per month while one of the four wired companies gets over $30.

And to think that Peladeau wants to be PM of Quebec.

I addressed this earlier. There was a phase where people just had pay television, but today we're transitioning from the phase where people have both pay television and internet service to a new era where people will just have internet service for their media.

[cybercoma]

We are witnessing a change in TV similar to the transformation of the music business.in the last couple of decades.

Not everybody is going to survive, some big networks are going to adapt or die.

Exactly so, imo.

[Bryan]

To have access to the Internet with sufficient bandwidth for Netflix, Canadians must use a wire into their home: cable or telephone. So, Rogers, Videotron, Bell or Telus still get paid - even if you go with with an independent ISP who pays one of those wired people. Indeed, Netflix only gets about $8 per month while one of the four wired companies gets over $30.

They don't need any of that. They just need a cell phone or a tablet. My LTE plan has unlimited data and unlimited tethering. I can (and do) use my phone to deliver internet content anywhere I need it.

[cybercoma]

I find cellular data lousy for streaming.

[Mighty AC]

I rarely do it, but I have used my phone as a wireless hotspot so a tablet could connect and stream shows via Hulu. It worked in a pinch.

[Bryan]

I find cellular data lousy for streaming.

That depends on your provider, and the device you're using. LTE is faster than most home internet connections.

[Boges]

Yeah LTE is really fast, very expensive though.

Now that the mobile contracts can be no longer than 2 years (in Ontario at least) instead of 3 they have to make their money back faster on the $700 phone so they've really upped the price of a mobile contract.

[kimmy]

Well, not really.

To have access to the Internet with sufficient bandwidth for Netflix, Canadians must use a wire into their home: cable or telephone. So, Rogers, Videotron, Bell or Telus still get paid - even if you go with with an independent ISP who pays one of those wired people. Indeed, Netflix only gets about $8 per month while one of the four wired companies gets over $30.

And to think that Peladeau wants to be PM of Quebec.

Like the New Jersey Auto Dealers' Association, the cable companies are extracting a bunch of money by providing access to content that they didn't create.

I recently figured out how much it cost me to subscribe to HBO Canada. It would boost my me cable bill by over $50 a month. First I would have to upgrade my basic cable to a deluxe package. Then I would have to rent a hi-def cable box instead of the base model I currently have. Then I would have to subscribe to a premium add-on package of which HBO Canada is just one channel. Game Of Thrones would wind up costing $15 per episode, most of which doesn't go to the creator of the content I want to watch.

But online streaming services provide an alternative. You still have to pay Shaw for the bandwidth, but they no longer have the power to extract a toll from customers who want access to premium content (well, except for HBO anyway). You pay Shaw for bandwith, and you pay services like Netflix for content.

-k

[overthere]

Exactly so, imo.

I should have added something else- in addition to the sharp decline in fortunes imminent for network TV- to the comparison to the demise of the traditional music industry.

Cable companies.

They have a delivery system that is hard to get to many houses, and expensive. They charge increasingly high prices for content that is a) provided by networks that are in big trouble or will be soon increasingly available in wireless formats that don't need a coaxial connection or satellite link.

Most of the bigger cable companies are trying to stave off the changes by going vertical and controlling the content as well as delivery, producing or owning all elements. Rogers owns channels, sports teams, venues.

It won't matter. once a product gets on the Internet- bye bye control.

You pay Shaw for bandwith, and you pay services like Netflix for content.

or you just steal content, which much of a generation already does.

Netflix Canada is missing big chunks of content. So far that is keeping Shaw and others alive.

I expect an emerging trend will be intense competition for providing bandwidth. So far the big boys have had their way with us, but that may change now that it seems likely that a wireless digital world will require big pipes at low cost. To everybody, everywhere. Somebody somewhere in Canada will challenge the whole house of cards and shame the incestuous relationship of the big ISPs to CRTC and cable companies and phone companies to us, the consumer. I'm actually optimistic that in the near future the price of the commodity that matters- bandwidth- is going to get cheaper and perhaps dramatically cheaper.

[Mighty AC]

Most of the bigger cable companies are trying to stave off the changes by going vertical and controlling the content as well as delivery, producing or owning all elements. Rogers owns channels, sports teams, venues.

This allows them to play the exclusive delivery game. If you want Jays content you need a cable package with Sportsnet. The Leafs can be subbed into that formula in a few years. In the US Comcast acquired NBC Universal which is interesting considering they were one of the Hulu owners. Comcast is a silent partner in that venture with Disney and Fox for now, but I expect they don't like that portal very much. At least in the short term.

[August1991]

They don't need any of that. They just need a cell phone or a tablet. My LTE plan has unlimited data and unlimited tethering. I can (and do) use my phone to deliver internet content anywhere I need it.

And who has control of cellphone antennae: Rogers, Bell, Telus, Videotron.

Bryan, the technology of cellphones makes bandwidth still costly in Canada. It's cheaper to receive/send signals through wires and we only have three into our homes: cable, phone - and hydro. No joke: I'm waiting for Quebec Hydro to offer me Internet service. Wait... I also have a water pipe. Why can't I have access to the Internet through my plumbing? Or my gas connection?

In fact, I have five connections to my home: phone, cable, hydro, gas, water. Anyone of these connections could provide high bandwidth access to the, uh, information highway.

For the moment however, it's only two of the following: Rogers, Bell, Videotron, Shaw etc, And one of these two make the big bux.

IOW, all Canadians live in a world of a duopoly: phone wire and cable wire.

Our urban streets are filled with (ugly, overhead) hydro poles, phone poles, cable wires - and underground water mains and gas pipes. But the two companies putting an Internet wire into your home have, in effect, a license to make money and make your urban landscape ugly. However you connect to the Internet, wired phoned, cable - you go through one of two companies.

In the 1970s, the federal government (the federal Liberal Party) granted the cable licenses - from Danny Williams to Pierre Peladeau to Ted Rogers. I swear that Trudeau wanted to put the cats among the pigeons... IOW, Trudeau knew that he was making a few contrarians very rich - contrarians who would oppose centralized power!

Trudeau was a true federalist.

Edited April 24, 2014 by August1991

[August1991]

.....

or you just steal content, which much of a generation already does.

...

Overthere, even if you steal content, Danny Williams and Peladeau (or your ISP who charges you monthly to pay a cable owner) still makes money because you have to connect to the Internet.

[Clueless].

Edited April 24, 2014 by August1991

[Bryan]

And who has control of cellphone antennae: Rogers, Bell, Telus, Videotron.

I'm not using any of those. The options provided by those "Big Guys" are pretty limited here compared to the local company. Local guy has better service, better signal, wider coverage, and costs less.

Bryan, the technology of cellphones makes bandwidth still costly in Canada.

My cell phone internet costs me less than my cable-to-my-house internet, and it's significantly more convenient in that I can bring my connection with me wherever I go, and still use it as a wifi hotspot for any other device.