A closer look at Fubo TV

I said recently that I would be looking at live streaming services. And it's only fair for you to know ahead of time that I don't regularly use a live streaming service. If you want to know why, read my recent post about that.

For now, I'm taking a look at one of the live streaming services: Fubo TV.

Fubo TV promotes itself as a sports focused service. The page banner even says "LIVE SPORTS & TV WITHOUT CABLE" listing sports before anything else. And they are a sports focused service.

Now, Fubo TV doesn't carry Bally Sports networks, so that is a gaping hole in their sports coverage. But, Fubo TV does have a lot of other options. Of course they have the ESPN networks and the Fox Sports networks. Be In sports, NBA, MLB, NFL, NHL, and lots of soccer (futbol) channels.

The interface looks good -- there's not a lot of difference between the interfaces of the major live streaming platforms -- as does the guide, which is a standard cable-like guide.

Since they focus on sports, the setup covers things like your favorite teams from a variety of leagues. I'm a college football fan, but there wasn't a way for me to pick my college team. For professional leagues, however, you do have that option, and your team's events do show up on the main page.

So, while they don't have all the sports channels, they have more than any other live streaming service. If you love sports, and missing out on Bally Sports networks, then Fubo TV may be right up your alley.

For $70/month you get a lot of channels.

A closer look at Vidgo TV

I said recently that I would be looking at live streaming services. And it's only fair for you to know ahead of time that I don't regularly use a live streaming service. If you want to know why, read my recent post about that.

For now, I'm taking a look at one of the live streaming services: Vidgo TV.

Vidgo doesn't get a lot of love from the Internet. Many reviews of live streaming services completely leave Vidgo out. There's not even a Wikipedia page for Vidgo. Yet, it's a legitimate live streaming service that offers a decent package, compared to some other services.

The pricing is $15 cheaper than YouTube TV, and $10 cheaper than Hulu+Live TV or DirecTV Stream. It is more than Sling TV, but it has more than Sling TV.

I counted 113 channels in the Vidgo Plus package, which runs $60/month.

A closer look at Hulu+Live TV

I said recently that I would be looking at live streaming services. And it's only fair for you to know ahead of time that I don't regularly use a live streaming service. If you want to know why, read my recent post about that.

For now, I'm taking a look at one of the popular live streaming services: Hulu+Live TV.

I've been a Hulu user for years, over 10 years in fact. However, I use the standard Hulu on-demand service. What I'm looking at today is the live streaming service.

Hulu+Live TV is not just the name of the service, it's a description of the service. You have Hulu, which is a very good on-demand TV service that carries current season content from many of the networks. Not all the networks, mind you, but many. It's $7/month and you can watch new content within hours of it airing live. Think of it like a DVR service for, well, everything.

Some content goes away after 30 days, but some stays around longer. A lot longer.

The other thing that Hulu+Live TV has is ... live TV.

Not only can you watch on-demand content from Hulu, but you can watch live TV from a bunch of channels. That bumps the price up by $63/month. While Hulu is $7/month, Hulu+Live TV is $70/month. But, you do also get Hulu along with it. And you get Disney+ along with it. And you get ESPN+ along with it.

So, it's not really Hulu+Live TV, it's Disney Bundle+Live TV. Which means the $14/month Disney Bundle is included in the $70/month price. Which means you're actually paying $56/month for the live TV part. And that's a better price than most of the live streaming services. If you would otherwise have the Disney Bundle, that is. However you look at it, it's one of the better pricings on a premium live streaming service.

So, what channels do you get? A lot.

A closer look at YouTube TV

I said recently that I would be looking at live streaming services. And it's only fair for you to know ahead of time that I don't regularly use a live streaming service. If you want to know why, read my recent post about that.

For now, I'm taking a look at one of the most popular live streaming services: YouTube TV.

The service is $65/month. That's a lot of money. Even so, it's not the most expensive service.

So, what do you get for the money? A lot actually.

What's the best live streaming service?

I've been streaming since for a decade and a half. I dropped cable in January 2011, and have relied on streaming as my primary source of TV content ever since.

The options in the early days of streaming were a lot slimmer than the options today. And, because of that, I learned that I didn't need a live streaming service.

First of all, the first live streaming service, Sling TV didn't launch until early 2015. I had already been doing without cable for four years by that time. I tried out Sling TV, and thought it was a fine service. But, I didn't keep it around, because I had learned that I didn't need it.

As a TiVo user, I was previously recording content, so I was used to watching shows after they aired. That means it was on-demand, with my TiVo recordings being the source. So, early on, I got used to on-demand content.

Hulu was around, and it was free. I was watching it on TV via a Microsoft Windows Media Server setup. On my Roku device, I watched the pay service Hulu Plus, which at the time was a separate catalog of content. Eventually, Hulu's free plan went away, and Hulu Plus became just plain Hulu. And I continued to watch it, as it was on-demand content, and how I was used to watching stuff already.

I would still use my TiVo to record shows over the air, or to watch live local channels through TiVo with an antenna. I never found a use for Sling TV, or any other live streaming service, until football season rolled around. Then, I'd subscribe, watch the games, then cancel. I still do that.

So, what's the best live streaming service? For me, for most of the year, it's none of them. I don't have the need for one. I watch on-demand from Hulu, unless it's a show I purchase from Amazon or Apple, then it's on-demand from my personal library.

But, that's because my watching habits, wants, and needs lean to not having a live streaming service. So, I don't spend the money on something I don't need. But you aren't me. You may feel you need a live streaming service. Or, at least watch live TV.

If you want live TV, put up an antenna if you can. If you can't, there are some live streaming services that carry local channels. And even if you do have an antenna for local channels, if you really want to watch other channels, there are live streaming services that carry a lot of cable channels.

Over the next several days, maybe weeks, I'll look at the major live streaming services, and give my thoughts on them. But, I want you to know up front that none of them are my choice. But maybe one will be your choice. If it improves your Streaming Life, and you're happy with the cost, then you've done what's good for you.

Watching the NBA finals

This one snuck up on me. The NBA finals are underway. I knew they were coming, but as I don't watch NBA regularly -- that means "at all" -- I wasn't paying that close attention to it. But, my son loves watching the NBA, and he'll talk about the playoffs from time to time. And he's a great source for reminding me about upcoming major sporting events in sports I don't follow. And that's most sports.

This past couple of weeks, though, a few things interfered with our regular get-togethers and talks. That means he didn't remind me about the NBA finals. Not his fault, of course, but mine. I should follow things closer. Even though I don't follow the sport, a lot do, and streamers that are NBA fans want to watch the finals. And the fact that I haven't posted about it, means I've fallen down on the job.

Boston is up 1-0 in the series, having taken the first game from Golden State, 120-108. Game two is tonight, Game 3 is Wednesday, Game 4 is Friday, with potential Games 5, 6, and 7 being the 13th, 16th, and 19th.

All the games are on ABC, so it won't be hard to find. But if you're a streamer, what are your options?

• Antenna. Most people have a local ABC affiliate. And the game will be available free over the air to anyone who has an antenna and is close enough to an ABC affiliate's tower. Most people are close enough (not everyone, of course), so that's actually an option many don't think of.
• Vidgo ($55/month) carries local ABC content. It's the cheapest streaming service that carries ABC. It also carries Fox, but doesn't carry CBS or NBC.
• YouTube TV ($65/month) also carries local ABC content. It's the cheapest live streaming service that carries all the major broadcast network local channels.
• Hulu+Live TV ($70/month) also carries ABC and the other major affiliates. It included the Disney Bundle in its package.
• DirecTV Stream ($70/month) is another option for ABC and all the major networks. It has Bally Regional Sports Networks in their $90/month plan.

If you're looking to include the NBA finals in your Streaming Life, you have plenty of options.

Back to Apple TV

Roku has been my streaming device of choice for years. I've used others, but Roku has been the one I've used the most. Apple TV has been the one I've used second most, though lately, I've not touched it.

I did touch it when I set up my new TV and reconfigured the network and attached device. I disconnected it, along with everything else. So far, I've reconnected Roku, since it's a Streambar, functioning as both a Roku device and a sound bar. I've reconnected my Fire TV cube, because when I disconnected it, the way some things were run, I left in place, so there was no need to re-run any cables, as they were still there. Plugging it up was super easy, barely an inconvenience.

The Google/Android TV devices haven't been connected, since the Sony TV is also a Google TV device. So that leaves Apple TV. And that's what I'm working on this weekend. Well, other stuff too, but that is one of the tasks.

I really like Apple TV, and am a little surprised that I haven't used it much. That changes this weekend. I feel like I'm welcoming an old friend back into my Streaming Life.

My Google TV quandary

I mentioned recently that I was getting a new TV.

I also mentioned that I had the new TV and that it had taken my focus from a couple of other things.

Well, all that is so. But after a week, I'm not still setting it up.

Well, the TV is set up, but the stuff connecting to the TV isn't. Not all of it, anyway.

You see, the new Sony TV is an Google TV device. And that's the quandary. Do I set up one of my existing Google TV devices?

I have a Chromecast with Google TV device, and I have an Nvidia Shield device. Both are Google TV devices. Yes, the Nvidia Shield is technically an Android TV device, but they're both the same thing underneath. It's practically a distinction without a difference.

Anyway, the Google TV interface of the Sony TV is fine. It works as I would expect. In fact, if you bought one, you really wouldn't need a streaming device. It uses one of the Big Four.

There are plenty of smart TV that are lesser devices, and I always put a streaming device on them. In fact, I haven't bought a TV that wasn't a smart TV since I started streaming. And I've never used the interface within a smart TV. I've looked at them and dismissed them as inferior, mostly because in my opinion, they are. I've connected Roku, Apple TV, Fire TV, or Android/Google TV devices to them. But for this Sony TV, I won't recommend adding a Roku. Unless you just like Roku and it's on all the other TVs. But the Google TV interface is fine.

And, that means I have both a Chromecast with Google TV and an Nvidia Shield device that aren't connected to anything. Yes, I did connect my Roku Streambar, and use that device for my day to day streaming. I also added my Fire TV Cube. I haven't added my Apple TV just yet, but I will. I want my TV to have all of the Big Four connected, but I don't need to add any Android/Google TV device to accomplish that.

Now what am I going to do with my Google TV devices? I'm sure I'll figure something out. Probably put them on spare TVs, which is something I don't normally do, as the secondary TVs usually just have Roku on them. But I'll relegate the Google TV devices to secondary TVs.

I suppose there are worse things to have to worry about. Maybe my Streaming Life has reached the point where I'm looking for problems. I shouldn't, though. The problems will find me soon enough.

Tablo dropping the ability to skip commercials

I'm a fan of Tablo. I like what it does.

I have a network-connected Tablo device, the Quad Tuner device that allows me to watch live TV over my network to any connected device. That means I can watch live TV or recorded shows from any Roku, Fire TV, Google/Android TV, or Apple TV device on the network.

And, off network, I can watch live TV or recordings on any of my non-Roku devices via Tablo Connect. For some reason, Roku doesn't support Tablo Connect, or Tablo Connect doesn't support Roku. One or the other. Or both.

Tablo Connect is a feature you can use if you have a Tablo subscription. It's $5/month, $50/year, or $180/lifetime. I have the lifetime subscription. You also get the 14-day guide. Without a subscription, it's a one-day guide and no out-of-home streaming. I prefer the 14-day guide, and the ability to watch out of home on occasion.

Tablo has another subscription though. Or had. Or has but soon to be had. Lemme explain.

Tablo Premium Service is $2/month, or $20/year. It skips commercials. And it works mostly. Almost all recordings I've done do skip the commercials. However, I found out that it really isn't that important to me, so as the one-year term came to an end, I canceled.

Apparently, not everyone used the feature, either because they didn't know about it, didn't understand it, or didn't care about it. I ended up in the third group. Regardless of group, the demand for the service was underwhelming, so Tablo is ending the service.

The engineering, support, and cloud computing resources required for Automatic Commercial Skip have been significant and the uptake on the Premium Service subscription has not been as strong as we’d anticipated.

For this reason, we made the difficult decision to sunset Automatic Commercial Skip to focus on higher demand features.

I'm not sure if NextGen TV (ATSC 3.0) is a contributing factor. I understand there are some technical challenges that Tablo has faced, causing them to delay new NextGen TV devices.

So, if you use the service, and keep the subscription active, you'll keep the feature. But if you drop the service, then after July 19, 2022, you lose it for good.

It was not a factor in my Streaming Life, so I didn't use it, and as a result, won't miss it. But if you use it, or want to try it, you have a month and a half to decide. If you like it, keep it. They'll continue to support it. But drop it, and it's gone.

Starz being sold to Roku?

There is speculation that Starz will be sold to Roku this summer. Lionsgate, which owns Starz, announced last year that it was looking to spin off or sell Starz this year.

According to a report in Variety from last November, Lionsgate began shopping he service and looking at spinning it off as a standalone company:

... Lionsgate announced that its board of directors has given the greenlight to its management team to explore spinning off or selling its Starz division. The company Lionsgate spent $4.4 billion to buy Starz in 2016, a move that expanded its television operations, but one that also added to its debt load.

Now comes word that Roku is one of the companies interested in purchasing Starz. Variety reported last week that the streaming platform already has a relationship with Lionsgate and Starz, and that could make it a smooth transition, should the platform purchase the service.

Among the suitors are Roku and Apollo Group, which have teamed on a bid to acquire a minority stake in Starz.

On the earnings call Thursday, CEO Jon Feltheimer said Lionsgate is aiming to announce its plan for Starz by the end of this summer and that the company expects a transaction could close as early as the first quarter of calendar year 2023.

If this happens, I certainly hope that Starz isn't limited to Roku devices or the Roku Channel for a standalone subscription. Rather, it would be good to continue to offer it as it does, plus keep a standalone app, at least for non-Roku devices.

Adding older Starz content to the ad supported Roku Channel would be a boost for Roku Channel, should that happen. And it may make it easier to get Roku Channel on other platforms. While Roku is the largest platform, having a presence on its competitors' platforms would be an increase in ad revenue from Roku Channel.

I don't know if Roku is being slack in getting apps developed for the other platforms, or if the other platforms simply don't want Roku Channel on their platforms.

If the former, this may help with that, if they get some qualified programmers for those languages/platforms. If the latter, this may be leverage in helping get Roku Channel on the missing platforms.

In the end, if your Streaming Life is easier on account of this, then this would be a good thing. While Starz isn't quite the stature of HBO or Showtime, it's a good streaming service and cable channel. I'd like to see it succeed and gain a wider market.