Fubo TV price changes aren't actually price changes

If you currently subscribe to Fubo TV on the $65/month plan, your price is going up on May 1. But there is not a price change. Let me say that again. If you're on the $65/month Fubo TV plan, you'll be paying more after May 1st, but Fubo TV is not raising prices.

How in the world are they managing that? Well, it's quite simple, really. They're doing away with the $65/month Starter plan, and moving all those subscribers to the $70/month Pro plan.

The Pro plan is already $70/month, and has been for a little while. But they're doing away with the smaller plan, and moving you to the higher plan. The Starter plan, the $65/month plan, is going away.

Now, you don't have to accept the move. You can simply cancel Fubo TV and pay nothing.

The bottom line is that if you're on the Starter ($65/month) plan, you'll pay more, because you get moved to an existing, and more expensive, plan.

That leaves YouTube TV as the final $65/month live streaming subscription service, the cheapest one with the four major network local channels.

Vidgo is still $55/month, but it only carries ABC and Fox locals. No NBC or CBS.

Sling TV is still $35/month, but no local channels, except in limited markets. Probably not yours. Certainly not mine.

Philo is still $25/month, but no locals.

Frndly.TV is still $7/month, and no locals.

So you certainly have options. If local channels are a must, and if  you don't have an antenna, within a month, YouTube TV will be the cheapest option.

If you do have an antenna, or can put one up, then you have even cheaper options.

Streaming is getting more expensive. Everything is getting more expensive. I'll blame much of the high inflation on the policies of the government. Of course, elections have consequences. This is one of them. But I do not blame the rise in streaming services on the government. I think that'll come, but this isn't it.

Your Streaming Life is getting more expensive, and it's more and more important that you look at what you're spending your money on and why. I'm staying on top of my expenses. I want to keep as much of my hard earned money as I can.

Beatles Rarities

This isn't really about streaming, but it came up because of streaming. Specifically, my Plex server setup, which not only includes my movie, TV, and video shorts collections, but also includes my music collection.

I don't have all of my music in Plex just yet. That's not really a priority, but I have some artists collections in Plex. Only three at the moment, two of which are complete: the Beatles, Elton John, and Eagles.  Elton John isn't complete, as I don't own all of his releases. But, most of what I own, at least the full albums, are there. But it's not Elton John I'm talking about today. It's the Beatles.

My collection is rather extensive. I own all of their music that's available via download, mostly iTunes, and all of their CDs. I used to own all of their albums. Okay, most of their albums. Via purchase, I owned all of their US releases except Introducing the Beatles, from Vee Jay records in 1964. Via CD, I own all of their Capital US releases, and their official catalog which is mostly UK releases.

I owned the stereo versions of their US albums, except Meet The Beatles; I had the mono release. I later bought the Beatles In Mono CD collection, which contained the UK official version of their albums in mono, which were the versions the Beatles considered official. They didn't care about stereo releases until the late 1960s. All of this to bring up that I had a version of all of their releases in some format or another.

When I began moving the content into Plex, I first moved the official catalog CDs. But I grew up in the US. To me, Meet the Beatles is a better album than With the Beatles, the UK counterpart. There's a whole story behind why they are different, and that could take days to explain. Essentially, the US label, Capitol Records, had a different philosophy about releasing music, and part of that was driven by the US standards vs the UK standards. I may talk about all that one day. Or not. Bottom line was most of the US releases were different from the UK releases.

Remember when I mentioned Introducing the Beatles on Vee Jay? There's a whole 'nuther story around that for another day (if at all). Oh, and a movie deal meant that United Artist Records got some tracks that Capitol Records didn't.

The end result of this is that when the Beatles broke up in 1970, there were 13 songs that had not been released on Capitol Records. Eight of them had never been released in any form at all on a Capitol album, though . Three were tracks that were in versions only available on singles in the US, one was on a charity album, and one was a B-side from a single.

In 1978, the UK label released a collection of non-album tracks called Rarities. In 1980, the US label (Capitol) released their version. Some of the UK Rarities had been released on albums in the US, but, as I mentioned, 13 songs were not available on any album. So, the easy thing would be to put those 13 on an album and release it, finalizing the Beatles catalog on album.

Here's how that would have looked:

1. Love Me Do - Original single version, different from the version on The Early Beatles.
2. Misery - Had been on Vee Jay's Introducing the Beatles, but was left off The Early Beatles.
3. There's a Place - Had been on Vee Jay's Introducing the Beatles, but was left off The Early Beatles.
4. From Me to You - Early single. Not included on other Capitol collections that included other early singles.
5. Sie Liebt Dich - German language version of She Loves You. The German language version of I Want to Hold Your Hand had been released on Something New.
6. A Hard Day's Night - Only US album release was on United Artists Records soundtrack to the movie.
7. Help! - Original single version. The version on the US Help! album included a James Bond style intro.
8. I'm Down - B-side of Help!
9. The Inner Light - B-side to Lady Madonna. Left off the Hey Jude album, which was a singles collection and included Lady Madonna.
10. Get Back (single) - Single version left off Hey Jude compilation. Different from the version on the Let it Be album.
11. Across the Universe (Wildlife) - Released on a charity album. Different from the version on the Let it Be album.
12. Let It Be (single) - Single version. Different from the version on the Let it Be album.
13. You Know My Name (Look up the Number) - B-side to Let it Be single.

Note that I said "would have" because this is not what Capitol did. Rather, they left off:

• From Me to You
• A Hard Day's Night
• I'm Down
• Get Back (single)
• Let It Be (single)

They added 

• And I Love Her - The German mix.
• I'm Only Sleeping - The UK mix; the US version was an early mix.
• I Am the Walrus - A combination of two separate mixes, creating a new mix.
• Penny Lane - A version that included a portion of a promotional mix (the trumpet version), creating a new mix.
• Helter Skelter - The mono mix that actually had been released on the mono version of The Beatles (White Album)
• Don't Pass Me By - The mono mix that actually had been released on the mono version of The Beatles (White Album)

They added the run-out from Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, which had been omitted from the US album. However, they didn't include it in the run-groove, but as a 27-second version of the intro and 2-second loop.

I disagree with creating brand new mixes and calling them rarities, so two of those are bogus right off the bat. Two had actually been released previously, so those was totally bogus. The other two were rare in the US, and I won't complain too much about them, but the five they omitted where major omissions, especially I'm Down, which had never been on any album on any label in the US.

From the time I heard of the UK Rarities album in 1978 until I heard of the release of the US Rarities album in 1980, I held out hope the Capitol LP catalog would finally include all the Beatles songs. But, it was not to be.

So, when I began putting my music into Plex, I decided to reconstitute the Rarities album, rather than transfer from vinyl to MP3. Well, as many as I could. A few had to be transferred from vinyl, but most didn't. I already had them on MP3 and simply edited the tags appropriately. That saved a lot of time. that actually led to something else which I'll cover another day.

For now, I was able to recreate my vinyl copy of Rarities and add that to Plex. And after much though, I created my own Bonus tracks. You know how re-releases of albums will include bonus track? Well, I added five bonus tracks to Rarities. The missing tracks from the Capitol album catalog.

I had actually done this before. My Rarities album was missing for a while, so I had recreated it years ago with what I had, and putting the five omitted songs in place of the six dubious ones (I didn't have the White Album on mono at the time). Finding my Rarities album allowed me to recreate an MP3 version. But the bonus tracks makes it more complete than the official one.

Thanks for taking the time to head down this side path of Beatles music. It's not streaming, but if it inspires you to add your music collection to Plex or another server setup that allows you to stream your personal music catalog from anywhere, then I've actually done a good thing. I like having my music available in my Streaming Life, and I hope you'll be able to have the same pleasure from yours.

My strategy for saving money on streaming services

I've mentioned this before, but I had a conversation along this line this week at work, and that has put it in the front of my mind.

One of the criticisms of streaming, at least as it has developed, is that by the time you subscribe to all the services you want, you end up paying more than cable. And that can be true. But it's not for me. So why is that?

Well, I subscribe to different services, but not year round. Oh, year round, I'll have something, but not everything at the same time. I'll subscribe to one service, keep it a month, watch all I want, then cancel.

Next month, I'll subscribe to another service, keep it a month, watch all I want, then cancel.

The next month, I'll subscribe to another service, keep it a month, watch all I want, then cancel.

You see where this is going, right? Let me offer some examples of how this might work.

According to one recent survey, here are the most popular subscription streaming services:

1. Netflix, 221.8 million worldwide, $20/month for UHD/4K.
2. Amazon Prime Video, over 200 million. $9/month for video only.
3. Disney+, 129.8 million. Includes Disney+ Bundle totals. $8/month, $80/year.
4. HBO Max, 73.8 million. Includes both HBO and HBO Max. $15/month for UHD/4K, $150/year.
5. Paramount+, 56 million. $10/month, $100/year.
6. Hulu, 45.3 million. Includes Hulu as well as Hulu+Live TV, and Disney+ Bundle totals. $7/month for basic Hulu, $70/year.
7. Discovery+, 22 million. $5/month.
8. Apple TV+, over 20 million. $5/month.
9. Peacock, over 9 million paid of 24.5 total. $5/month, $50.year.

Some of the services offer ad-free options. If the only difference is ads, I'm using the lower price. If the ad-free option has other features, I'm using the higher price. Ads alone are not driving this comparison.

Since I'm telling how I do this, I'm going to list a couple of things that may be different from your situation. I have Xfinity Internet service. That means I get Peacock Premium, which is the $5/month plan. For that reason, I'm excluding the cost of that from my comparison, as I have no cost involved.

Additionally, I subscribe to Amazon Prime, and have for years. I had Amazon Prime before they launched their video service. So, as that is a service I would have anyway, the video portion is actually a bonus, and no effective cost to me. As with Peacock, I'm excluding Prime Video for the same reason.

If you subscribed to the seven remaining services, in a year, you would pay $760/year using the annual plans where available, or $840/year if you used the monthly plans only.

However, if you used my method, you'd pay $140/year. Here's why.

As mentioned earlier, subscribe to one service for one month, then change the next month. One month, pick two of the $5/month services. Then, every service gets two subscription months a year, but over the year, I've watched all I want from the services. For $620 less. That's nearly $52/month cheaper.

The downside? Well, there are two. One is you actually have to do it. The other is for some content, you wait a month or more to watch it. Is the combined benefits from not changing subscriptions every month, and the immediacy of watching on-demand content worth $52/month?

If you'd rather pay $52/month more, go ahead. I'd rather not. And I don't. The goal is to enjoy your Streaming Life. If it costs you more to enjoy it, then it costs you more. But the $52/month savings makes it more enjoyable for me.

Nvidia Shield testing to resume ... soon

A few weeks ago, I mentioned that I was getting an Nvidia Shield -- finally! -- and would be trying it out. Well, I changed direction when I decided to try it as a dedicated Plex server. I didn't like how that went, and switched back to setting up a Raspberry Pi as a Plex server instead. That went well.

But what about the Nvidia Shield? Well, I still have it. I removed the family member's credentials from the device, did a factory reset, and have now set it up for me to use. And I will use it. Eventually.

You see, I have a day job. And sometimes the job runs into the night. Not as much as things used to, but still somewhat. Mostly a day job. But I do have that job. And I have some other projects I've been working on.

I'm setting up and using a Linux laptop because I never have before. I've done Linux desktop, but I've installed it on a laptop, and am trying that.

I'm also very happy with the family member's Plex setup using a Raspberry Pi, and I'm now looking to move my Plex content over to a Raspberry Pi as well.

And, I'm beginning to get a little burned out from trying to do multiple projects at the same time, so I'm gong to focus on just one and see it through to conclusion, then start another one. In the meantime, I'm taking breaks and watching some TV. I mean, I put all this time and effort into setting up for streaming that I might as well use some of that.

Right now, there are three things in front of me.

1. Using a Linux laptop as a primary laptop for a period of time.
2. Setting up a Plex server on a Raspberry Pi.
3. Using Nvidia Shield as a primary streamer for a period of time.

Sure, I could do all three at the same time. Or at least two of the three. But like I said, I'm starting to burn out a little, so I'll focus on one, along with simply enjoying streaming.

I don't know which I'll focus on starting this weekend. But I'll pick one and see it through. But whatever I do, I'm going to take my time and simply working it in to my Streaming Life. I'm neglecting that too much, and that will change.

April Fools Day

I really enjoy the April Fools gags that many Websites used to play on April 1st. I say used to play because the last couple of years I really haven't paid attention. But they used to be funny.

I was never that much of a prankster. Oh, I did a few. Not a lot, but a few.

One of my favorites was taping down the switch hook. For you kids, that's the little white post that the handset rested upon. Pressing it down mean the phone was "hung up." Raising the handset caused the switch hook to rise, taking the phone "off the hook." You had a dial tone. And if you don't know what a dial tone is, go as a grown up.

Anyway, at work, our desk phones way back in the ancient times had the switch hooks that I'd tape down. Then I'd call the unsuspecting person. They'd go to answer the phone, holding the receiver against their ear, but the phone would keep ringing. We all laughed.

Another was taping the mouse wheel. For you kids, a computer mouse once had a rubber ball that rolled along a table or mouse pad -- laser was future tech -- and the movement of the ball was translated to mouse movements. But, tape it down, and the mouse cursor wouldn't move. We all laughed.

And, people used to leave their computers unattended. That was a mistake on April 1st. I had a WAV file of Yosemite Sam yelling "Great Horny Toads!" I'd load it on the victim's computer, then change their email sound from a simple chime to that. Then when the victim returned to his desk, we'd all send him emails. And a constant stream of "Great Horny Toads!" one after the other, would be heard all over the office. We all laughed.

It was a simpler time. But it was fun. Stupid, but fun. And all in good fun.

What's all this got to do with streaming?  Nothing. April Fools!

No, what I'm doing is saying how much fun it used to be, and I hope there are some streaming related gags happening today to brighten my Streaming Life. You see, I read the news. I could use a good laugh.

Finding Fire TV apps on Fire TV

One of the most frustrating things about Amazon's Fire TV devices are the fact that it's extremely difficult to find the apps you want in the device. I've taken to just going to the Amazon Website and searching for the apps, then adding them from the Website.

Oh, sure, there are apps available, but honestly, I do not find it a pleasurable experience. Quite the opposite.

Perhaps I'm just experiencing holdover from my general dislike for the Fire TV interface, along with the difficulty browsing Fire TV content on the device or on the Website.

I always hated that each season of a show was listed as a separate entry. I'd be scrolling through the content, and there would be Star Trek Season One (for example). Then more stuff, then Star Trek Season Three. More stuff, more stuff, Star Trek Season Two.

Don't get me wrong, I like the original Star Trek. I have since September 1966. But each season as a separate entry only junked up the browsing of content. Because it wasn't just Star Trek. It was every show. If a show ran 10 seasons,  there were 10 entries. If another show ran 7 seasons, there were 7 entries. From these three shows alone, what should be three entries would be 20 entries. Like I said, just junking it up.

My takeaway from that was that the Amazon interface was full of stuff it didn't need to have. It was overcrowded, making things harder to find. And maybe I still carry a grudge.

I find searching for apps on Fire TV to be a bother. I hate the interface. Maybe I shouldn't, but I do. And I'll take the blame for being unreasonable. But I want Amazon to take the blame for being cluttered and crowded. That's why I will occasionally use a Fire TV device, but it's not a regular part of my Streaming Life.

Meet the new Roku, same as the old Roku?

There was a brief bit of excitement recently because Roku accidentally published a piece of content that listed a Roku model number that didn't exist. Of course, that began the whole "Are new Roku devices coming??!!?!" kind of thing.

I like Cord Cutters News. Luke did a great job with it, and since he sold it, they've carried on doing good work. They are a great go-to resource. But, they are in the business of making money, so they gonna clickbait, or make things out a little more than necessary.

That may be a little harsh, partly because I think we all do that from time to time, and they really are not nearly as bad as most Websites. And, perhaps they don't even intend to do it, but it does creep in. Or, it appears to me that it does.

Specifically, CCN had an article recently that covered a listing of a previously unheard of Roku model:

The model, 4802X, doesn’t correspond to any currently available devices within Roku’s lineup, which includes the top-end, 2020-era Ultra (listed as model number 4800X) and the Walmart-exclusive Ultra LT (listed as model number 4801X). The blog post has since been updated to remove the mention of the mystery model number.

This was probably an error by Roku, but a real model number. The error was likely it being listed when it shouldn't have been, as it's not been released. At least, not yet. I don't think it was an incorrect model number, just an accidental spilling of the beans.

But is this really a big deal? Isn't a new Roku device supposed to be a big deal? Well, not always. Sometimes Roku releases a new device that it already released. Let me explain.

I first encountered this back in, oh, I don't know, 2011 or 2012; before the Roku 3 was released. I had a Roku 2 XS, model 3100, that I had purchased in June 2011. I liked it. It wasn't my only Roku, as I had bought it to replace an older device I had purchased in 2010. I was new to streaming, and was very interested in what Roku offered. I wanted to learn all I could, and added Roku devices to other TVs by buying newer ones and moving the older ones to other TVs.

Along then, I decided to try the device that was a step down from the Roku 2 XS, the Roku 2 XD (model 3050). Roku offered a refurbished one, so I bought one. Turns out, it was simply a Roku 2 XS with a different model number, and a lesser remote. I shut down my Roku 2 XS and paired it remote to the Roku 2 XD. It worked. I then bought a Roku 2 XS remote and when it arrived, I had effectively two Roku 2 XS devices. Internally, these were the same device. The only difference was the remote that was included in the package. Oh, and the XS or XD molded into the top of the casing. Same device, two different model numbers.

Next time I encountered that was when I bought a Roku 2. Not the model 2720 -- I never owned one of those -- but the updated model 4210 released in 2015. The specs on it looked really good, comparable to the Roku 3, so I bought one. And, sure enough, it was a Roku 3. I already had a model 4200 Roku 3, and the new 4210 Roku 2 was the same device on the inside. The only difference was the 2 molded into the casing, and the included remote. In fact, someone could buy a Roku 3 for $99.99, or buy a Roku 2 ($69.99) and a Gaming Remote ($29.99) for a total cost of $99.98. That would mean they would have the same Roku device (despite the different model numbers), the same remote, and a spare IR remote for 1¢ less than the cost of a Roku 3.

Not only were the 4200 and 4210 the same device, but I later found out the updated Roku 3 model 4230 was the same device, just with a better remote. Both Roku 3 and the last Roku 2 were al the same device, just with different remotes and model numbers.

And, again, Roku did this in 2018. The previous year's Roku Ultra model 4660 got an upgrade. The device didn't change, but they put a better set of earbuds in the cardboard box and changed the model number to 4661. That was the only change. The 4660 and 4661 were the same device.

There are actually a couple of examples more. Maybe more than a couple. I'm not doing a research paper on this, I just ran across this in my everyday life.

So, this new Roku Ultra model 4802? I expect it's the same as the 4800, but some accessory will be different. But, I don't have any way of knowing that. And, I could be wrong.

You see, there also exists a Roku Ultra LT model 4801 that Walmart carries. It's a little different than the 4800 model Ultra. Yes, the remote is different, but the 4800 has a USB port (3.0) and Dolby Atmos support, which the 4801 does not have.

And, if you look at other devices, particularly the "+" version of devices, some are the same with the only difference being the remote, but some have true differences with the devices, even though the model numbers are nearly identical.

This difference in devices with such similar model numbers seems to invalidate my general approach. However, overall, it's a good guide. And, I'm expecting the 4802 to be the same as the 4800, if it's a new addition to the Roku lineup. It could be another retailer exclusive.

So, no I don't really know what this new 4802 Ultra will be. I expect it's nothing really new. But it may be something special, and something that I'll want to include in my Streaming Life. But it may be a bit before we find out.

MeTV to Frndly.TV

I've been a fan of MeTV for some time. I'm in the demographic, so that makes sense.

Now, I don't watch it a lot. I don't just put the TV on any channel and watch. But, I know many that do, and MeTV is what they are after.

For cord cutters, putting up an antenna has been the only way to get MeTV. Until now.

Frndly.TV, which I'm also been a fan of for some time, finally secured MeTV in it's lineup, according to a post on Facebook.

We’re excited to announce that we’ve added two new channels – MeTV and Story Television! MeTV is one of the most requested channels! We’re excited to bring this to our all of our customers, without raising our prices :0)

That's good news. Now, if you have an antenna, this doesn't bring anything new to the table. But, if you don't have an antenna, and you want to watch classic TV, this is a big deal. And, considering that Frndly.TV has plans as low as $7/month for 30 family friendly channels, it's an even bigger deal.

Frndly.TV actually added another channel, Story TV, to the lineup as well. And three other channels that are part of the same ownership group will be added soon.

In addition to MeTV and Story TV, the streaming service will also add Heroes & Icons (H&I), DECADES, and Start TV to the lineup, with the rollout happening over the next several weeks.

I've been happy to have Frndly.TV as a part of my Streaming Life for a while now. And they've making it an even better value now.

Plex on Raspberry Pi deployed

I mentioned before about managing a Plex server for a family member. It went out, and was in need of replacing. It was serious. So, rather than buy or put together a Frankenstreamer, I decided to do a little of both. I decided to use a Raspberry Pi as a Plex streaming server.

Well, I ran into some troubles, and combined another project I was trying with resolving my family member's Plex issues. I decided to try an Nvidia Shield as a Plex server. It went well. At first. Then it began to need to be booted every three days or so.

Along this time, I resolved my KVM switch issues, so I was able to run both Nvidia Shield and Raspberry Pi in parallel. And I resolved the Raspberry Pi issues (actually, an update to Ubuntu fixed it).

When everything settled, the Raspberry Pi turned out to be the way I went. Whatever was causing instability with Nvidia Shield may be worked out, but for now, Raspberry Pi, running Ubuntu, is the Plex server I'm using.

And I'm happy with it. I think she'll be happy with it. She was surprised to see the size of it, but a little excited to have it back. Of course, setting it up was easy. Well, I had to move everything from my house to hers, but I did bring everything except the monitor. I got the official Raspberry Pi keyboard, mouse, power supply, case, fan, everything. I used her existing monitor from the dead Windows machine and didn't set up the Raspberry Pi monitor (yes, there is one of sorts).

No, I didn't use the existing keyboard and mouse, because the Raspberry Pi one stands out, being white and red. I wanted it to be clear what was what. The monitor wasn't an issue, just the keyboard and mouse, so that's how I resolved that. It didn't cost that much more to go that route, and having the entire setup (except the monitor) being Raspberry Pi branded made it look really official. So, it wasn't necessary, but it's how I went.

So, how's it going? Well, I set it up Friday, and it ran fine through the weekend. We'll be keeping an eye on it to ensure it works as expected. But so far, her Streaming Life includes a working Plex server again, and that was the goal.

Major League Baseball still doesn't want my money

I've been streaming regularly since 2010, with occasional streaming in the years before that. While many have only recently become streamers, I've been doing it for a while. And my son even longer, as he's the one who got me looking into it as a serious alternative back in 2008.

The point is that streaming is not a new thing. It's bigger than it used to be, and will be even bigger as time goes on. Since it's not a new thing, there really is no good reason for the major sports leagues to not accommodate streamers. But that's where we are. And for years, I've been wanting to give Major League Baseball my money. But they don't seem to want it.

I'm a fan of the Atlanta Braves. I've been in Georgia longer than they have, but I've come to appreciate those newcomers to my state. And if I want to watch a Braves game, I have to either go to the game, or have a pay TV service that carries them. As a Braves fan, I'd like to be able to watch them streaming via a service such as MLB TV. But, the games are blacked out in my area. Doesn't matter if the Braves are at home, or on the road, even on west coast, I can't watch a Braves game live via MLB TV.

And it's not just me. A lot of people in a large area can't watch the Braves live on MLB TV.

If I could, I'd watch the Braves with an MLB TV subscription, but blackouts means I can't. So, ever since I started streaming, I've wanted to subscribe and watch. And since MLB TV streamed its first game in 2002 (yes, 2002), they've know about streamers and how much we'd like to watch our teams live. And 20 years later, blackouts still top that.

I know there are business decisions that are locking down the games to pay TV services, but the bottom line in that nobody in five full states, most of another, and half of another still, can't watch Braves games live with MLB TV.

I suppose I could use a VPN on my network to get around such things, but I won't. The terms of service are what the terms of service are. And if they don't want me to watch the games streaming, I won't. I won't watch them any other way, either.

And that's how it's been for the last few years. I've not watch much baseball, because they don't want me to watch it the way I want to watch it. They want to make my Streaming Life difficult. So, I'll keep my measly $140.