Onn testing part two

I just finished testing the Onn FHD Streaming Stick. It didn't go well. So, no Walmart streamer for me, right?

Not necessarily. You see, there are two Walmart Onn brand streamers. The Stick didn't do well, but what about the other device? Well, let's find out.

The other day, after I started testing the Onn stick, I saw a video about the Onn UHD Streaming Device. That's the other Onn streaming device. It's not a Stick, but it's not a large device. It's one of the smallest I've seen. I'll talk more about that in my review.

What? This isn't the review? Nope. It's my giving Onn a second chance.

How will it go? Well, based on the stick, I'm not confident about it. But I will give it an honest shot.

Like with other device testing, I'll try it for a week and see how it goes. I've actually started testing it. No preview, just letting you know that the testing is underway.

Based on the reviews I've seen elsewhere, I still have hope for an Onn device. It's not really a second chance, just a second device of the same brand.

We'll see how this device impacts My Streaming Life.

Watching Wimbledon

If you're a fan of tennis, then you likely want to watch Wimbledon. If you're a cord cutter, what do you do? Well, you can watch Wimbledon, of course.

You just need a live streaming service that carries ESPN and ESPN2. Or, you can save money and just subscribe to ESPN+ and watch it that way, according to the ESPN Website.

The entire tournament will be broadcast on the ESPN family of networks, as well as on ESPN+ and the ESPN App.

Normally, ESPN+ is a supplement to ESPN and ESPN2. But, for Wimbledon, it seems that ESPN+ is actually carrying the matches, according to that article.

This is actually a big deal, or so it seems to me. Wimbledon is a major sporting event, so I'm not surprised about the amount of coverage ESPN is doing. What surprises me is that ESPN+ is actually carrying the matches. You don't need the main ESPN service. At least, that's how I'm reading the article.

If ESPN were to offer a standalone service, that would be a big deal. This is a step in that direction.

A lot of people were thinking ESPN+ was  going to be a standalone service. And, yes, it is, but it's not carrying the big stuff, rather the supporting content. Until now. Wimbledon is a big deal.

I hope this is an indication that ESPN is looking to offer a standalone service. If they do, our Streaming Life will get so much easier.

The Onn Streaming Stick testing didn't last long

I posted recently that I was testing the Onn Streaming Stick from Walmart. When I test a new device, I always intend to give it at least a week of exclusive use, getting familiar with the device, and settling in on using it. Sometimes, though, it doesn't take a week. And, when it doesn't take a week, that's not a good thing.

You see, if something starts out really well, say I get my hands on a device I really like, I won't stop testing. I'll let the love affair run the full week, maybe even longer, before deciding on how much I'll use the device. I want to give it plenty of time for the ugly bits to appear. I want to experience the device under all circumstances. So, if I'm liking the device, I'll keep testing for at least the full week. Using the device daily, and I do use a streaming device daily, lets me get a good feel for it.

The testing of the Onn Streaming Stick didn't go a full week. That's a bad thing. The first issue was how sluggish the device was. To be fair, I'm used to using a higher powered Roku device, but have also used the Chromecast with Google TV recently, plus a few others I tested. My normal TV setup is just Roku and Chromecast with Google TV.

Setting up and downloading updates was actually pretty smooth. The device is an Android TV powered unit, and included the option to use an Android phone to set it up. However, I don't use an Android phone. Still, manual setup was easy enough. The only problem came when running apps for the first time. I had to configure each, signing in with my account, and then the app would run a bit sluggish. I wondered if it was because it was still running updates, so I waited, then restarted the device. It seemed to respond better, but it still seem sluggish compared to ChromecastGTV and Roku.

I ran into issues with the device hanging up. I wasn't sure if it was the device, or the service. I've used enough devices for long enough to know that sometimes it's not the device that's at fault, but network, Internet, or service that can cause problems. So, to troubleshoot, I eventually switched to Roku to access the same app and move or TV show. No problems using Roku. So, I'd restart the Onn Stick and try again. Sometimes, it would work for a bit then start acting all silly again, and sometimes the issue didn't reappear. If it was problematic again, I'd try Roku again, and if the issue wasn't there, I chalked it up to the Onn device, or the particular stream the Onn device was using.

Let me take a side trek for that point. Not everyone realizes that different devices can, and often do, use different streams from different servers. For example, if you are using Roku to stream Netflix, you may connect to one server (or set of servers). But, if from the same location, you use an Apple TV to watch Netflix, you may connect to a different server (or set of servers). And a different server/set if you use Fire TV. So, using an Android TV box, I could be getting my source content from a server/set that's acting up, while the Roku is getting it from a server/set that's working better. So, what looks like a device issue may actually be a service issue. That's why I'd try different apps. And, since this was an Android powered device, I'd try YouTube a lot for testing. As a reminder, Google owns both Android and YouTube. An issue with Android and YouTube could be a Google issue, but it seems more likely to be a device issue. And, I treated it as such in my mind.

So, back to the testing. As I said, I used YouTube a lot in the testing, and I would have issues, particularly on fast forward and rewind. No such issues when I switched to Roku for the same video.

I also tested with Movies Anywhere. The experience was not as great as on Roku, because of how sluggish the device seemed, but the playback did work well.

Paramount+ was a problem. Fast forward and rewind would occasionally lock up the device.

Tablo was okay. I watched both live and recorded content without much issue.

Manually launching the screen saver didn't always work. I used the Backdrop screen saver, which is a bunch of pictures from Google. Landscapes, etc. Pretty high def images, so I'm thinking the underpowered device was the problem.

The other thing I tried was using the Chromecast feature. That was something I didn't really expect, but makes sense thinking about it. I was hoping it would work well. It didn't. The switchover went okay, but the control was the problem.

As a reminder, or if you weren't aware, the "casting" via Chromecast functionality uses the apps on the device. For example, the app on the phone actually launches the app on the streaming device, then loads the video, and moves to the same point in the playback. You could even turn off your phone, and the streaming continues, because it's not really using the phone anymore. Except you can use the phone to pause, rewind, or fast forward.

Anyway, it wasn't nearly as smooth as an actual Chromecast device. Not a terrible experience, but not a good experience.

Would I use this device regularly? No, not at all. It's already back in the box and ready for a shelf or drawer. I'll pull it out every month or so to run updates just in case it's a software problem and not a hardware problem. I don't expect that to actually make a difference, but just in case, I'll keep a check on it. For now, though, I don't plan on using the device.

Would I recommend it? Not really. I think a similar priced Roku Express would be a better option. But, will it do? Maybe. But no. This isn't a device I want in my Streaming Life.

Watching cable

I cut the cord in 2011, at the end of the college football season. Since then, I've watched cable ... not at all.

Well, that's not true. I actually watched cable this past week. Only, I didn't really want to. Let me tell you about it.

I took one of my grandson out of town to a baseball game, and stayed the night to visit an attraction in that city the next day. That night, when we got to the hotel and got ready to call it a night, my grandson, who is six, wondered what was on TV. Being a good Papa, I found the remote and turned on the set.

He asked me to find the kids shows. That makes sense, as he is used to the Apple TV that my son uses, and knew that the remote wasn't the same, and the display wasn't the same. So, he wanted me to find them. He really didn't know nor care that it was cable. It was TV, but it wasn't Apple TV, but he figured Papa knew how.

Well, yes Papa did because I remember the days of cable. It was different, using the cable guide, and only vaguely familiar. The remote wasn't exactly set up for it. Or there were no arrow buttons, but it was an Xfinity remote and the little Xfinity box, so yeah, they go together. Just not a good experience.

I didn't recall any issues with the Xfinity cable setup that long ago. Maybe it was awful the whole time, but I didn't know any better. Or, maybe this hotel just had same-branded but mismatched equipment.

So, assuming the equipment was mismatched and it should have had a remote with arrows to navigate the menu, how was the experience apart from that? Not good.

I am used to on-demand content. Sure, live sports, I get it. You're going to watch any live event in real time. But non-live content? A TV show? I don't want to join in the middle. But, with cable, that's what I had to do. And I didn't like it. That's why, way back when, I used a VCR to record shows, then replaced that with a TiVo. Then, I could watch a show in full if I didn't drop everything and turn on the TV to that show when it aired.

Now, with Hulu, Tablo, Air TV, and other I can watch on-demand, including not even having to set up the recording with Hulu.

Now, there are lots of people that like cable, and if you're one of them, and if you're happy with it, then you have exactly what you want. But, it's not for me. And that is something that I never really thought about when I decided to cut the cord.

You see, my goal was to save money. That's it. Nothing else. And when I ran the numbers and concluded that it was more cost effective to stream without cable TV, that was all I cared about.

Yes, I already was doing on-demand because of TiVo, and hooking up an antenna let me keep doing that, I never really considered how much on-demand would become important to me. It is. I really don't like the idea of having to watch content at a time others set. Yeah, live sports or news is one thing, but there really is no way to control that without a TARDIS, and I don't have one of those. No one does. They don't exist. Except on TV.

For regular TV shows, I don't want someone setting my schedule. If I can set my own schedule, I want to. Streaming lets me do that.

This whole thing about using cable in a hotel hasn't come up before because I don't go to a hotel to watch TV. But, I did this time because my grandson, the reason for the trip, wanted it. So, I finally watched cable.

Next time I go to a hotel and make the decision about cable -- that is, the grandchildren aren't wanting it -- I won't be watching cable. I won't be streaming either, because I don't go to hotels to watch TV. But, if I did want to watch TV, I'd put a Roku Stick or a Firestick in the suitcase. I'm not doing cable if I can help it. It's so last century.

My cable TV life is behind me. I'm living a Streaming Life, and I'm loving it.