AMC+ again

Some months back, I looked at subscribing to AMC+. I was undecided about it. They were running a really good special that worked out to around $2/month for a one year subscription. Regular price is around $9/month. I considered it because three months at regular price is more than one year at the discount. But, I couldn't decide, which means I actually did decide, because the special went away, meaning I decided no.

Fast forward to this month. A family member likes Outlander, an AMC show that is apparently a big hit. The only thing I know about it is a lead character is a Scotsman during the Jacobite Rising, and he's named after a Doctor Who character and actor. Yes, Jamie Fraser is named for Fraser Hines' character of Jamie McCrimmon, who met the Second Doctor (Patrick Troughton) at the Battle of Culloden. Jamie was one of my favorite Doctor Who characters, so when some other TV show named a character after him and the actor who played him, I became aware.

Anyway, she likes the show, and I said I would subscribe. Well, I went to subscribe, and I couldn't. That wasn't really a bad thing, because it turns out I had already subscribed. Remember when I said I couldn't make up my mind and then waited too late? Yeah, that's how I remembered it, but that's not how it happened. Turns out I had subscribed for a year for $24. So, I didn't need to spend $9/month for the next three months to have Outlander for her to watch. I had it all along.

Which means that I had it all along. I could have been watching it and trying it out. Well, last weekend, I did. I started watching Ragdoll, a British series. It's interesting. I'll watch some more, just to give it a full examination.

I'm not sure how I'll like it overall. I mean, I've had it for about four months and didn't remember. So now I have some catching up to do. I'll watch it for a bit, and decide if I want to keep it after November. I doubt that I will, simply because of the way I rotate subscriptions, but it is something I will consider.

All these months, my Streaming Life could have had AMC+ in it. Boy do I feel silly.

Roku and Private Channels

For a while, Roku allowed a group of apps that didn't go through Roku's app certification process. They still do, but with enough restrictions that you can say that they don't. Let me explain.

First, understand that Roku doesn't refer to apps by the term "apps." Roku calls them "channels," but they're apps. You call them apps. I call them apps. Roku calls them channels. In Rokuland, channels = apps. Mostly.

Roku allowed Private Channels, also called Non-Certified Channels, on the platform. But here's the thing. Private/Non-certified Channels/Apps were not supposed to be forever and ever. You see, Roku wants to do this little thing called making money.

Apple makes a lot of money from services and subscriptions. Most of their money isn't from selling Macs or iPhones. It's from the services that come along with that. Apple gets a cut of any sales or subscriptions purchased through their App Store. And that is the source of most of Apple's money.

Roku is similar in that it makes money from sales and subscriptions through its system. Roku Pay, as they call it, allows you to easily purchase or subscribe to content. It also makes it easier for Roku to get a cut of that sweet sweet subscription money.

To get an app in Roku's Channel Store, the developer must offer purchases and subscriptions through Roku Pay. Now, this does not mean the user can only subscribe via Roku Pay. The user could still subscribe directly to the service using their Web browser, for instance, and use those credentials to log in to the app and use the service on Roku. But, Roku requires them to include Roku Pay as an option. Private/non-certified apps don't go through the certification process, and Roku gets nothing from them.

So why would Roku even allow private/non-certified apps? Well, now they don't. Not really. But they did in order to allow the developer to put the app out there and work all the bugs out before getting it certified and into the Channel Store. It was a huge unrestricted beta app program.

Here's where it all fell apart. App developers would develop apps (duh) and put them into the private/non-certified app library. Users could enter a code and install the app on their system. That's great, right? Well, not for Roku. Remember, Roku is in business to make money. Same reason everyone in business is in business. And these private/non-certified apps don't generate money if they never get certified and moved into the Channel Store.

So, why didn't these developers move their apps into the Channel Store? Three main reasons.

1. Laziness. They didn't go through the trouble of coding the app to the standards Roku set forth. Some private apps actually caused problems for some Roku devices. Some couldn't be removed from the devices. Standards reduced the threat of apps causing problems. Plus they ensure Roku Pay works and Roku gets its share of subscription money.
2. Greed. If the app is moved to the Channel Store, they have to include the ability to use Roku Pay. That means Roku gets a cut of the subscriptions. If the app isn't in the Channel Store, then Roku doesn't get a cut. The developer gets around it, mooching off of Roku's platform.
3. Incompetence. Some app developers simply can't code well enough to get their app into the Channel Store. If coding was easy, everyone would do it. But it's not. And for some, it's too hard. Sometimes, the developer doesn't want to go through the trouble (see Laziness) but sometimes the developer just isn't good enough of a developer to make it happen. The tough word for this is incompetence.
4. Other. Probably other reasons too. So more than three, but I only went into three. Sue me.

What Roku did was to revamp their system. They still allow non-certified apps, but they call them "beta apps" and there are a lot of restrictions.

• Developers can have only 10 beta apps at a time.
• Only 20 users can have any one beta app at a time.
• Each app has a life of 120 days, then *poof* it goes away.

I personally think the 20 users restriction is too low, but it is what it is.

So if your precious app that you need or your entire world falls apart and you find yourself on the ledge of a building, now you know why.

Oh, and if your Streaming Life depends on non-certified Roku apps, you're doing it wrong.

Another Plex server

A while back I replaced my Plex server. Funny thing is that a family member also needed a Plex server replaced. I had actually begun working on hers, then some major things happened, I got sidetracked, and only recently went back to it.

Well, that didn't go well. The device was toast. I need to replace it. And spending another bit of funds for another computer didn't sound enticing. Then it hit me. I was experimenting with a Raspberry Pi as a streaming device. But what about as a Plex server?

I did some digging, and found that, sure enough, people have run Plex on Raspberry Pi. So, I had my second project to do.

I found instructions on setting up Plex on a Raspberry Pi running Raspberry Pi OS (formerly known as Raspbian). It's based on Debian Linux, and works pretty well. The instructions, however, didn't.

The other thing is that all sources I found indicated I should run Plex on a 4 GB device. Mine was a 2 GB device. So I ordered a 4 GB device. It came in, but wouldn't run. So back it went.

Now, I have to say that CanaKit, from whom I bought the Raspberry Pi, made the return and replacement really easy. I was not happy about having to replace it, but the actual replacement was easy, and I give them credit for making it right and doing it quickly.

So, installing Plex on the Raspberry Pi was quite aggravating. The instructions provided by several different sources all led to errors. And I blame myself for that. Well, them too.

It's been years, many many years, since I used Linux command line. I'm obviously forgetting something very basic about it, because the instructions simply don't work as is. They're assuming I'm doing something that I'm obviously not. Either they are assuming something they shouldn't assume, or I'm overlooking something basic that I shouldn't overlook. Maybe both.

Anyway, I decided to simplify the process. I installed Ubuntu Linux on the 4 GB Raspberry Pi. It does fine. And I was able to install Plex with little issue. So, I set it up, added some content to a USB flash drive, and whaddaya know? I had a Plex server running on a Raspberry Pi.

Now the plan is to change things over from my Plex account to hers, then add an external drive to the Raspberry Pi. The final step is to rebuild her library. I have a list of most of the content she owns. I have many of those same movies, shorts, and TV shows myself, so those will be easy to copy from mine to hers. She owns her own copy of them, so I can simply save some time by using a copy of mine. The other content, I'll have to burn from DVD or something, and add them to her library.

I've been running it for a couple of days now with some content, and it seems to work well. I'll run it for a week or two, just to make sure, but if all goes well, I'll have a working Plex server that costs a lot less than what I spent a few months ago.

I wish I had done this then. I would have saved a lot of money. A lot of money.

Now, I can't say with certainty that this will be a good, viable alternative long term. But things are looking well so far. This may be one of the best additions to my ... well, a family member's ... Streaming Life.

NBC leaving Hulu? Maybe.

There is a report that NBCUniversal will be pulling at least some of its content from Hulu this fall. Why would they do that? Well, there is that little streaming service that NBCU owns called Peacock. At least, that's the word from The Hollywood Reporter.

Starting this fall, new episodes of NBCU shows like Saturday Night Live, The Voice and American Auto will no longer be available to stream on Hulu the day after they air. Hulu will still have access to other NBCU shows like Law & Order: SVU, This Is Us, The Mindy Project, 30 Rock, Parenthood, Friday Night Lights and Will & Grace.

So, if the report is accurate, only some content is leaving. At least, initially. And it's stuff I don't watch anyway, so it really won't impact me, at least at first. But it will impact others.

I'm really not surprised to see this, but I understand why NBC hasn't pulled its content yet, and isn't pulling everything.

Hulu was originally a joint project by NBC, ABC, and Fox. They were separate companies then, and each owned a third of Hulu. Now, Disney owns both ABC and Fox, leaving NBC as a minority owner.

I've always liked Hulu. Well, kinda. When it started, it was a free service only available via a Web browser. They launched a pay service called Hulu Plus, and the library was split across the two services. If a show was on Hulu, it wasn't on Hulu Plus. And if a show was on Hulu Plus, it wasn't on Hulu.

After a while, that stopped being the case and Hulu Plus was rebranded as simply Hulu. Oh, and the free part of the free Web service went away. The entire service became a pay service.

They added live TV a few years ago, bringing back the "plus" name somewhat, calling the service Hulu+Live TV.

As I said, I'm not surprised by the move, and I really would rather they not do that, but I understand they want to promote their own service, and I'm glad they're not taking everything. And, it looks like they'll still have older content available.

I new the day was coming, and while the day is still in the future, I now know approximately when it will happen. This change is my Streaming Life won't be welcome, but I'll live.