What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

We've cut the cable (3 Viewers)

glock said:
All you OTA guys who are pleased with the channels you pull- according to the site that the FCC posted to help determine the viability of making use of DTV signals here, how many of the cannels you recieve fall under "Strong" and how many "Moderate?" Does "Moderate" translate into watchable or no???
Click to expand...
Depends on the quality of both your antenna and your tuner.

With a cheap antenna they were unwatchable. With an amplified Leaf antenna and a cheap tuner, they were watchable, but likely that during the show an episode of pixilation would occur once for a few seconds. With the amplified Leaf connected to a TiVo Premire, the Tivo's tuner rarely has any issue with them. A few seconds of pixilation happens about once a month.

I even have a borderline channel that comes in good on nights where the weather is clear. It's a low broadcast signal and the tower is about 50 miles from me. It broadcasts BounceTV. On those same clear nights I also get the major broadcasts from Dayton, Ohio (I am 25 miles northwest of Columbus).

 
NutterButter said:
Is ESPN even broadcast OTA? If all you're getting is CBS, ABC, NBC, Fox and some other smaller name channels not seeing too big of an upside since you're still missing out on a large portion of sports broadcasting with ESPN and those big networks carry very little worth watching other than sports.
Click to expand...
On an Xbox with a Live Gold membership ($60 per year) you can use the ESPN streaming app. Without a cable subscription login you can't stream any of their live sports broadcasts, but all of their news is available for streaming.

With the money I save it allows me to buy a MLB.Tv subscription. NHL, NBA, and MLS offer the same, but I don't care for those sports. Apparently people without DirecTV successfully bought NFL Sunday Ticket Online last year for $250, and rumor has it this year if one buys from Amazon the special 25 Anniversary edition of EA Sports Madden NFL for $99, you get NFL Sunday Ticket Online for free, even without a DirecTV subscription. I'm thinking about getting it, but to be honest, the four NFL games I get for free OTA each week were enough for me last year. If I had to see every game, $99 (or even $250) is better than committing to $1500 a year or so.

NCAA is a little harder. For football, the OTA gave me six to eight games free each week. I watched six of Ohio State's 12 games free on my couch. To see the Penn State game, I went to a sports bar and watched it while eating a decent meal. The other five games were against scrub teams, and weren't worth a dollar to me to watch them trounce on a weak team (or witness a major upset). So I just listened to them on the radio while watching a better game on the TV. But if you have to see every game of your favorite NCAA college football team, you either get cable/satellite, or watch via illegal means. NCAA basketball was tough. only got to see OSU free OTA five times or so.

Sports is really the only legit reason to have cable/satellite anymore.

 
Politician Spock said:
glock said:
All you OTA guys who are pleased with the channels you pull- according to the site that the FCC posted to help determine the viability of making use of DTV signals here, how many of the cannels you recieve fall under "Strong" and how many "Moderate?" Does "Moderate" translate into watchable or no???
Click to expand...
Depends on the quality of both your antenna and your tuner.

With a cheap antenna they were unwatchable. With an amplified Leaf antenna and a cheap tuner, they were watchable, but likely that during the show an episode of pixilation would occur once for a few seconds. With the amplified Leaf connected to a TiVo Premire, the Tivo's tuner rarely has any issue with them. A few seconds of pixilation happens about once a month.

I even have a borderline channel that comes in good on nights where the weather is clear. It's a low broadcast signal and the tower is about 50 miles from me. It broadcasts BounceTV. On those same clear nights I also get the major broadcasts from Dayton, Ohio (I am 25 miles northwest of Columbus).
Click to expand...
I'm just curious how accurate that site is- did you punch you info in there and see what it turned up?

 
NutterButter said:
Is ESPN even broadcast OTA? If all you're getting is CBS, ABC, NBC, Fox and some other smaller name channels not seeing too big of an upside since you're still missing out on a large portion of sports broadcasting with ESPN and those big networks carry very little worth watching other than sports.
Click to expand...
Also want to say, cutting the cord doesn't mean the shows you watch are limited to what the major broadcast channels carry.

My wife buys each season of Project Runway from Amazon.com. She watches each new episode streamed on demand the day after it airs. Do the same with Breaking Bad. If you add up all the series of shows you watch, and figure $30 to $40 to buy and stream each series, the total for the year will either be a fraction of what you pay for cable/satellite each year, or you spend the majority of your free time watching TV.

Cable/satellite is also full of rerun broadcasting, which makes up the majority of what is broadcast. If that is part of your TV watching, Netflix at $96 per year, or Amazon Prime at $79 per year is better than a cable/satellite subscription. Especially given streamed shows always start at the begging when you are ready to watch them,

We are entering an age where the only type of media that needs to be broadcasted is sports and news. Everything else is better accessed streamed on demand.

 
glock said:
Politician Spock said:
glock said:
All you OTA guys who are pleased with the channels you pull- according to the site that the FCC posted to help determine the viability of making use of DTV signals here, how many of the cannels you recieve fall under "Strong" and how many "Moderate?" Does "Moderate" translate into watchable or no???
Click to expand...
Depends on the quality of both your antenna and your tuner.

With a cheap antenna they were unwatchable. With an amplified Leaf antenna and a cheap tuner, they were watchable, but likely that during the show an episode of pixilation would occur once for a few seconds. With the amplified Leaf connected to a TiVo Premire, the Tivo's tuner rarely has any issue with them. A few seconds of pixilation happens about once a month.

I even have a borderline channel that comes in good on nights where the weather is clear. It's a low broadcast signal and the tower is about 50 miles from me. It broadcasts BounceTV. On those same clear nights I also get the major broadcasts from Dayton, Ohio (I am 25 miles northwest of Columbus).
Click to expand...
I'm just curious how accurate that site is- did you punch you info in there and see what it turned up?
Click to expand...
Yes, it pretty much matches what my TIvo is experiencing when I view signal strength. You could experience lower results if you are in a valley, or your antenna is behind a forest or something. So it can't be 100% accurate. It doesn't know everything about your situation.

 
FWIW my OTA experience has been good. ABC uses a different antenna and is hard to get, but that is well documented and they are working to fix this long term.

 
Guess what. ESPN now considering allowing people to pay for streaming content without a cable package.

I never ever saw this coming.

 
culdeus said:
NutterButter said:
Joe T said:
culdeus said:
Guess what. ESPN now considering allowing people to pay for streaming content without a cable package.

I never ever saw this coming.
Click to expand...
lol. I hope this happens soon.
Click to expand...
This my be the last straw that forces the isps to start adding usage rates like phone providers do.
Click to expand...
Maybe. ATT Uverse flirted with the idea for awhile, but later backed down.
Click to expand...
Its just a matter of time. As they lose more and more customers, what other option do they have. Espn going independent would cause a major exodus. They control the pipe so why wouldn't they. The big phone providers did the same thing in unison.

 
NutterButter said:
culdeus said:
NutterButter said:
Joe T said:
culdeus said:
Guess what. ESPN now considering allowing people to pay for streaming content without a cable package.

I never ever saw this coming.
Click to expand...
lol. I hope this happens soon.
Click to expand...
This my be the last straw that forces the isps to start adding usage rates like phone providers do.
Click to expand...
Maybe. ATT Uverse flirted with the idea for awhile, but later backed down.
Click to expand...
Its just a matter of time. As they lose more and more customers, what other option do they have. Espn going independent would cause a major exodus. They control the pipe so why wouldn't they. The big phone providers did the same thing in unison.
Click to expand...
There is still alot of independent competition in the broadband space. It's not going to be nearly as easy as putting a hard cap on broadband data. Plus, streaming 720p is still peanuts in the scope of things.

Worst case they just charge you more for the internet you get. It's still a long way to go to add 100/month to internet access. That's a 300% increase for most people.

 
culdeus said:
NutterButter said:
culdeus said:
NutterButter said:
Joe T said:
culdeus said:
Guess what. ESPN now considering allowing people to pay for streaming content without a cable package.

I never ever saw this coming.
Click to expand...
lol. I hope this happens soon.
Click to expand...
This my be the last straw that forces the isps to start adding usage rates like phone providers do.
Click to expand...
Maybe. ATT Uverse flirted with the idea for awhile, but later backed down.
Click to expand...
Its just a matter of time. As they lose more and more customers, what other option do they have. Espn going independent would cause a major exodus. They control the pipe so why wouldn't they. The big phone providers did the same thing in unison.
Click to expand...
There is still alot of independent competition in the broadband space. It's not going to be nearly as easy as putting a hard cap on broadband data. Plus, streaming 720p is still peanuts in the scope of things.

Worst case they just charge you more for the internet you get. It's still a long way to go to add 100/month to internet access. That's a 300% increase for most people.
Click to expand...
The improvements in internet streaming are not the only reason that ESPN now has viable option to reach the majority of the country without cable/satellite companies. The local broadcast stations now have the ability to broadcast numerous sub-channels in their signal. I receive 25 stations broadcasted in my area, and two of the stations are only broadcasting one channel. The only reason cable/satellite is appealing is because popular channels like ESPN haven't told the cable/satellite companies to get bent. Given ESPN is cable/satellite's most expensive channel to include in their lineup, I'd bet ESPN is sick and tired of having them try to lower the cost. With new options for ESPN to reach the masses, they could do it without the cable companies being able to respond with the "bandwidth usage limits". The cable/satellite companies are loosing a lot of the leverage they use to have as the only means for a non-major broadcasting company to reach the masses.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Politician Spock said:
culdeus said:
NutterButter said:
culdeus said:
NutterButter said:
Joe T said:
culdeus said:
Guess what. ESPN now considering allowing people to pay for streaming content without a cable package.

I never ever saw this coming.
Click to expand...
lol. I hope this happens soon.
Click to expand...
This my be the last straw that forces the isps to start adding usage rates like phone providers do.
Click to expand...
Maybe. ATT Uverse flirted with the idea for awhile, but later backed down.
Click to expand...
Its just a matter of time. As they lose more and more customers, what other option do they have. Espn going independent would cause a major exodus. They control the pipe so why wouldn't they. The big phone providers did the same thing in unison.
Click to expand...
There is still alot of independent competition in the broadband space. It's not going to be nearly as easy as putting a hard cap on broadband data. Plus, streaming 720p is still peanuts in the scope of things.

Worst case they just charge you more for the internet you get. It's still a long way to go to add 100/month to internet access. That's a 300% increase for most people.
Click to expand...
The improvements in internet streaming are not the only reason that ESPN now has viable option to reach the majority of the country without cable/satellite companies. The local broadcast stations now have the ability to broadcast numerous sub-channels in their signal. I receive 25 stations broadcasted in my area, and two of the stations are only broadcasting one channel. The only reason cable/satellite is appealing is because popular channels like ESPN haven't told the cable/satellite companies to get bent. Given ESPN is cable/satellite's most expensive channel to include in their lineup, I'd bet ESPN is sick and tired of having them try to lower the cost. With new options for ESPN to reach the masses, they could do it without the cable companies being able to respond with the "bandwidth usage limits". The cable/satellite companies are loosing a lot of the leverage they use to have as the only means for a non-major broadcasting company to reach the masses.
Click to expand...
Yup.

You can see why Directv was reluctant to let people use HBOGO. I've heard only 40% of HBOGO users actually pay for the service with a provider. The rest are just stealing it whether if it's their only option or not. Just a matter of time before HBOGO allows you to side load it.

 
Politician Spock said:
culdeus said:
NutterButter said:
culdeus said:
NutterButter said:
Joe T said:
culdeus said:
Guess what. ESPN now considering allowing people to pay for streaming content without a cable package.

I never ever saw this coming.
Click to expand...
lol. I hope this happens soon.
Click to expand...
This my be the last straw that forces the isps to start adding usage rates like phone providers do.
Click to expand...
Maybe. ATT Uverse flirted with the idea for awhile, but later backed down.
Click to expand...
Its just a matter of time. As they lose more and more customers, what other option do they have. Espn going independent would cause a major exodus. They control the pipe so why wouldn't they. The big phone providers did the same thing in unison.
Click to expand...
There is still alot of independent competition in the broadband space. It's not going to be nearly as easy as putting a hard cap on broadband data. Plus, streaming 720p is still peanuts in the scope of things.

Worst case they just charge you more for the internet you get. It's still a long way to go to add 100/month to internet access. That's a 300% increase for most people.
Click to expand...
The improvements in internet streaming are not the only reason that ESPN now has viable option to reach the majority of the country without cable/satellite companies. The local broadcast stations now have the ability to broadcast numerous sub-channels in their signal. I receive 25 stations broadcasted in my area, and two of the stations are only broadcasting one channel. The only reason cable/satellite is appealing is because popular channels like ESPN haven't told the cable/satellite companies to get bent. Given ESPN is cable/satellite's most expensive channel to include in their lineup, I'd bet ESPN is sick and tired of having them try to lower the cost. With new options for ESPN to reach the masses, they could do it without the cable companies being able to respond with the "bandwidth usage limits". The cable/satellite companies are loosing a lot of the leverage they use to have as the only means for a non-major broadcasting company to reach the masses.
Click to expand...
I don't see OTA as a quality viable option for a lot of people. I live 30 miles outside of NYC and the reception I'd get on most channels according to numerous sites would be poor.

 
culdeus said:
NutterButter said:
culdeus said:
NutterButter said:
Joe T said:
culdeus said:
Guess what. ESPN now considering allowing people to pay for streaming content without a cable package.

I never ever saw this coming.
Click to expand...
lol. I hope this happens soon.
Click to expand...
This my be the last straw that forces the isps to start adding usage rates like phone providers do.
Click to expand...
Maybe. ATT Uverse flirted with the idea for awhile, but later backed down.
Click to expand...
Its just a matter of time. As they lose more and more customers, what other option do they have. Espn going independent would cause a major exodus. They control the pipe so why wouldn't they. The big phone providers did the same thing in unison.
Click to expand...
There is still alot of independent competition in the broadband space. It's not going to be nearly as easy as putting a hard cap on broadband data. Plus, streaming 720p is still peanuts in the scope of things.

Worst case they just charge you more for the internet you get. It's still a long way to go to add 100/month to internet access. That's a 300% increase for most people.
Click to expand...
What's the competition you refer to? In my area of Northern NJ, there's cablevision and verizon and I guess whomever directtv and dish partner with.

It wouldn't be a 300% increase for everyone; Just for people with high usage. And that high usage threshold could easily be pretty low. Wasn't too long ago that you got unlimited data with phone. Not the caps they have are pretty ridiculously low. Can't see why the same couldn't happen with broadband.

 
NutterButter said:
Politician Spock said:
culdeus said:
NutterButter said:
culdeus said:
NutterButter said:
Joe T said:
culdeus said:
Guess what. ESPN now considering allowing people to pay for streaming content without a cable package.

I never ever saw this coming.
Click to expand...
lol. I hope this happens soon.
Click to expand...
This my be the last straw that forces the isps to start adding usage rates like phone providers do.
Click to expand...
Maybe. ATT Uverse flirted with the idea for awhile, but later backed down.
Click to expand...
Its just a matter of time. As they lose more and more customers, what other option do they have. Espn going independent would cause a major exodus. They control the pipe so why wouldn't they. The big phone providers did the same thing in unison.
Click to expand...
There is still alot of independent competition in the broadband space. It's not going to be nearly as easy as putting a hard cap on broadband data. Plus, streaming 720p is still peanuts in the scope of things.

Worst case they just charge you more for the internet you get. It's still a long way to go to add 100/month to internet access. That's a 300% increase for most people.
Click to expand...
The improvements in internet streaming are not the only reason that ESPN now has viable option to reach the majority of the country without cable/satellite companies. The local broadcast stations now have the ability to broadcast numerous sub-channels in their signal. I receive 25 stations broadcasted in my area, and two of the stations are only broadcasting one channel. The only reason cable/satellite is appealing is because popular channels like ESPN haven't told the cable/satellite companies to get bent. Given ESPN is cable/satellite's most expensive channel to include in their lineup, I'd bet ESPN is sick and tired of having them try to lower the cost. With new options for ESPN to reach the masses, they could do it without the cable companies being able to respond with the "bandwidth usage limits". The cable/satellite companies are loosing a lot of the leverage they use to have as the only means for a non-major broadcasting company to reach the masses.
Click to expand...
I don't see OTA as a quality viable option for a lot of people. I live 30 miles outside of NYC and the reception I'd get on most channels according to numerous sites would be poor.
Click to expand...
It would take a lot more than 30 miles to produce a poor signal. I live 30 miles northwest of Columbus Ohio, and with an amplified Leaf indoor antenna the signal is great.

 
I'm not sure if cutting the cord would be worth it for me. In my area we have Timewarner cable and fios tv fighting each othet for customers. We just signed a 2 year contract wuth Fios triple play for 69.99 a month.

 
Politician Spock said:
NutterButter said:
Politician Spock said:
culdeus said:
NutterButter said:
culdeus said:
NutterButter said:
Joe T said:
culdeus said:
Guess what. ESPN now considering allowing people to pay for streaming content without a cable package.

I never ever saw this coming.
Click to expand...
lol. I hope this happens soon.
Click to expand...
This my be the last straw that forces the isps to start adding usage rates like phone providers do.
Click to expand...
Maybe. ATT Uverse flirted with the idea for awhile, but later backed down.
Click to expand...
Its just a matter of time. As they lose more and more customers, what other option do they have. Espn going independent would cause a major exodus. They control the pipe so why wouldn't they. The big phone providers did the same thing in unison.
Click to expand...
There is still alot of independent competition in the broadband space. It's not going to be nearly as easy as putting a hard cap on broadband data. Plus, streaming 720p is still peanuts in the scope of things.

Worst case they just charge you more for the internet you get. It's still a long way to go to add 100/month to internet access. That's a 300% increase for most people.
Click to expand...
The improvements in internet streaming are not the only reason that ESPN now has viable option to reach the majority of the country without cable/satellite companies. The local broadcast stations now have the ability to broadcast numerous sub-channels in their signal. I receive 25 stations broadcasted in my area, and two of the stations are only broadcasting one channel. The only reason cable/satellite is appealing is because popular channels like ESPN haven't told the cable/satellite companies to get bent. Given ESPN is cable/satellite's most expensive channel to include in their lineup, I'd bet ESPN is sick and tired of having them try to lower the cost. With new options for ESPN to reach the masses, they could do it without the cable companies being able to respond with the "bandwidth usage limits". The cable/satellite companies are loosing a lot of the leverage they use to have as the only means for a non-major broadcasting company to reach the masses.
Click to expand...
I don't see OTA as a quality viable option for a lot of people. I live 30 miles outside of NYC and the reception I'd get on most channels according to numerous sites would be poor.
Click to expand...
It would take a lot more than 30 miles to produce a poor signal. I live 30 miles northwest of Columbus Ohio, and with an amplified Leaf indoor antenna the signal is great.
Click to expand...
Distance isn't the only factor. I entered my address on this site and its says I have poor reception for almost every station. :shrug:

I'm officially 32.4 miles from NYC.

 
NutterButter said:
Politician Spock said:
NutterButter said:
Politician Spock said:
culdeus said:
NutterButter said:
culdeus said:
NutterButter said:
Joe T said:
culdeus said:
Guess what. ESPN now considering allowing people to pay for streaming content without a cable package.

I never ever saw this coming.
Click to expand...
lol. I hope this happens soon.
Click to expand...
This my be the last straw that forces the isps to start adding usage rates like phone providers do.
Click to expand...
Maybe. ATT Uverse flirted with the idea for awhile, but later backed down.
Click to expand...
Its just a matter of time. As they lose more and more customers, what other option do they have. Espn going independent would cause a major exodus. They control the pipe so why wouldn't they. The big phone providers did the same thing in unison.
Click to expand...
There is still alot of independent competition in the broadband space. It's not going to be nearly as easy as putting a hard cap on broadband data. Plus, streaming 720p is still peanuts in the scope of things.

Worst case they just charge you more for the internet you get. It's still a long way to go to add 100/month to internet access. That's a 300% increase for most people.
Click to expand...
The improvements in internet streaming are not the only reason that ESPN now has viable option to reach the majority of the country without cable/satellite companies. The local broadcast stations now have the ability to broadcast numerous sub-channels in their signal. I receive 25 stations broadcasted in my area, and two of the stations are only broadcasting one channel. The only reason cable/satellite is appealing is because popular channels like ESPN haven't told the cable/satellite companies to get bent. Given ESPN is cable/satellite's most expensive channel to include in their lineup, I'd bet ESPN is sick and tired of having them try to lower the cost. With new options for ESPN to reach the masses, they could do it without the cable companies being able to respond with the "bandwidth usage limits". The cable/satellite companies are loosing a lot of the leverage they use to have as the only means for a non-major broadcasting company to reach the masses.
Click to expand...
I don't see OTA as a quality viable option for a lot of people. I live 30 miles outside of NYC and the reception I'd get on most channels according to numerous sites would be poor.
Click to expand...
It would take a lot more than 30 miles to produce a poor signal. I live 30 miles northwest of Columbus Ohio, and with an amplified Leaf indoor antenna the signal is great.
Click to expand...
Distance isn't the only factor. I entered my address on this site and its says I have poor reception for almost every station. :shrug:

I'm officially 32.4 miles from NYC.
Click to expand...
I find that hard to believe. But I will take your word for it.

 
Getting ready to watch a great day of college football matchups from my couch in my "No Cable/No Satellite" home.

At noon I have:

UCLA @ Nebraska on channel 6-1
Southern Miss @ Arkansas on channel 6-2

At 3:30 I have:

Tennessee @ Oregon on channel 6-1
Alabama @ Texas A&M on channel 10-1

Tonight I have:

Ohio State @ California on channel 28-1 :thumbup: GO BUCKS!!!!
Notre Dame at Purdue on Channel 6-1

Yeah, I know you cable/satellite guys get more games, but to get the above for free is plenty for me. When I spend money to watch football, it's because I'm either going to the game or I'm going to a sports bar to eat and drink while I watch the game. I also have no remorse about going to a game, or going to a sports bar, and not watching all the games I paid for on cable/satellite that day.

 
upgrading to the new commcast x1 thing, dropping my bill by 60 in the process for 2 years, i am sure it will suck

 
Fo those that make fun of the folks who have 86'd cable for more reasons than just $$$ although that is a good reason but I want to tell you my experience with Comcast as I was scheduled to have them come out over this weekend.

I had them back before I bought this house and a couple times when I had to replace my MC/Debit card as happens about once every couple years, slightly different number, Comcast on autopay, I forget to update the card info...day after they disconnect me. They don't re-connect me when I explain what happened, they'll get around to it when they feel like it basically. And returning the equipment and everything down here in Miami is a real #####.

I decide finally to have them hook me up at least for football season so I can watch everything at home on Sundays if I want. So I do the triple play for $120...$140 after taxes and such, tech comes out at 1:00 on Saturday...the box is on a power line behind the house and there are some tree limps around it, no one had cable prior to us since 2008 or something. he basically says he can't do it, Comcast will need to send a crew blah blah blah...OK

I had decided not to let them run my credit as I have been buying homes and I just don't want a lot of hits on my credit report. So I thought it was fair to simply give them a $50 deposit which is credited back to me in 6 months on my account, seemed pretty fair to me. I give them the debit card and then they also have the card on file so i don't need to worry about sending in silly checks.

Well the guy didn't connect me so I called on Monday, seemed like it was gonna be a hassle and I was super nice to the tech guy, never made him feel bad about not wanting to jump up where the box was located...well I started thinking maybe I should try one of the other providers, maybe it was a sign that they did not hook me up.

I call into Comcast and go thru a 30 minute exhaustive process to get to a final billing person who tells me I will get a check in the mail in 4-6 weeks. Are you kidding me? I flip out a V/MC for you all to show up, you don't fulfill your end of the agreement, I call and cancel the services on Monday although I really feel like cancel is the wrong word since I never had it to begin with. I cannot believe they make me wait 4-6 weeks, I'm calling Citibank to reverse the charge but what a lot of aggravation over $50. It's not that I need the $50 right away, it's the principle of the whole thing and just fuels my hatred for these companies like Comcast.

I need a stronger internet signal. I get a decent 5-8mbps thru my Clear Spot which is a wireless internet and I can take it with me everywhere down in Miami/Ft Laud, I really like the service but in the house I need a stronger signal for things like Roku and Netflix. I was even gonna tell Comcast just give me the 50mbps speed internet for $49.99 a month and call it a day.

6 weeks to have to wait on a lousy $50 deposit I gave them in good faith to connect my service...what a slimy low down no good rat of a company. Lesson learned again unfortunately.

 
Moved to another city and decided to try cutting the cable again. The bad news is that even though we're in a good location in the city, we sit in a valley and can't get any network stations. The good news is that our basic internet gets nearly 100Mbps.

 
Politician Spock said:
glock said:
All you OTA guys who are pleased with the channels you pull- according to the site that the FCC posted to help determine the viability of making use of DTV signals here, how many of the cannels you recieve fall under "Strong" and how many "Moderate?" Does "Moderate" translate into watchable or no???
Click to expand...
Depends on the quality of both your antenna and your tuner.

With a cheap antenna they were unwatchable. With an amplified Leaf antenna and a cheap tuner, they were watchable, but likely that during the show an episode of pixilation would occur once for a few seconds. With the amplified Leaf connected to a TiVo Premire, the Tivo's tuner rarely has any issue with them. A few seconds of pixilation happens about once a month.

I even have a borderline channel that comes in good on nights where the weather is clear. It's a low broadcast signal and the tower is about 50 miles from me. It broadcasts BounceTV. On those same clear nights I also get the major broadcasts from Dayton, Ohio (I am 25 miles northwest of Columbus).
Click to expand...
Making notes here, was wondering if this was worth the money. Do you pay monthly for the TiVo? I am picking up 3 PBS channels including "Create" which IMO blows away the food network if you actually in interested in real cooking. I got NBC/CBS/ABC/Fox/WB/CW/ION/METV/COZI...what else can I get over the air? I have the basic Leaf

 
At the end of the day I still need a fast internet connection, gonna try U-Verse although I'm sure Xfinity is faster but I haven't been screwed over 2-3 times by AT&T in the last 15 years. My Clear hot spot just isn't gonna be enough for what I need. Took me 4 hours to download a Breaking Bad episode last night...that's not good.

 
Question for some of the cable cutters - 2 things have been holding me back, live sports and constantly switching TV/app inputs.

Looks like live sports may cover itself if ESPN streams (and hopefully NBC Sports and Fox Sports follow). But what about the TV inputs - are you constantly switching your TV between Xbox, OTA, and any other HDMI inputs you have? And then within some of these inputs, are you constantly switching the various apps, like Xbox running ESPN, HBOGO, Amazon, etc. I assume the answer is "yes, and its worth the savings" but figured I would see how some of you have set this up. Hopefully I am missing out on some magical box that can pull all these sources together and do the switching for me as I choose what I want to watch.

 
Next Gen consoles are going to be all in one. You'll have two inputs - gaming console and Antenna imo.

ETA: as opposed to current gen consoles not... what can't you get on 360 or PS3 that you'd want?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So I ordered U-Verse high speed and I have some tips for anyone that might go that route. I just wanted internet and also a phone line because my cell phone of course gets awful reception in the house. The big obstacle was the $100 they wanted for instillation and I balked.

The fellow from U-Verse was pretty much gonna hang on me when I said "Can't I speak to a supervisor or someone who is "authorized" to hit a button and make that go away? I even said I would pay the $50 for the technician but the $50 activation fee was gonna keep me from doing business with them. Why should I pay you to activate me for the right to take my money every month? It's ludicrous.

I am then directed to the retention department where I got a very nice lady and I will be happy to give you her extension if you think you might want their service. Now, I know from being on the phones myself that a retention department probably is a terrible place because you have hostile angry customers. I let her know I was a new customer so I just wanted some help and I could not have been nicer to her and got her from being ho hum to really wanting to help me.

She waived all of the $100 not just the $50 connection fee, she hooked me up with the fastest speed they got, 45mbps and a guarantee it's within about +/-1 on the speed which I was surprised. I am on a 1 year contract which I don't like but I got the internet for $40 and then a land line with unlimited long distance for another $30, somehow getting them both saved me $31 off the rack rate. She wanted to throw in the cable for me with a DVR and a bunch of bells and whistles but the reason my wife and I are doing it this way is we have lost a lot of weight not watching TV outside of when we really want to loaf some on the weekends. We are very active during the week and some days the TV isn't even turned on.

The seal the deal for me was that this operator gave me her direct extension, she's been with the company for 7 years, I've never had anyone in a retention department give me their extension, she must also make money on sales. She said if I need anything to call her...I was shocked. U-Verse is not everywhere so I'm sure their regular DSL is the suxor but I'm happy to be getting a faster ISP. She said call her when my contract is done and we will do something else.

So the lesson here folks is never take no from someone who is not authorized to give you a yes.

One last request form any of you. If you know of a wireless internet like "Clear" which is now Sprint and if they can offer up speeds anything around 20-30, I would like to know about it. The little hot spot I have is wonderful in conception, just isn't fast enough to run an entire entertainment center. It's fine when i am streaming youtube, football games, but it stinks for Netflix an such. I like the unlimited for $49 a month, other companies like Verizon and Sprint have this service but they charge a lot of money per GB and that is lousy. Folks are getting bills for $150-$200 a month.

Love this thread, appreciate all the good stuff. I had a website to share and I apologize if these are repeat posts.

http://cordcutterheaven.blogspot.com

 
Mulletzilla said:
Question for some of the cable cutters - 2 things have been holding me back, live sports and constantly switching TV/app inputs.

Looks like live sports may cover itself if ESPN streams (and hopefully NBC Sports and Fox Sports follow). But what about the TV inputs - are you constantly switching your TV between Xbox, OTA, and any other HDMI inputs you have? And then within some of these inputs, are you constantly switching the various apps, like Xbox running ESPN, HBOGO, Amazon, etc. I assume the answer is "yes, and its worth the savings" but figured I would see how some of you have set this up. Hopefully I am missing out on some magical box that can pull all these sources together and do the switching for me as I choose what I want to watch.
Click to expand...
I have a 5 port HDMI switch. It is designed to automatically switch the port for you based on which device powers on. It works like a charm -- with the exception of Roku - because Roku is always on. If I'm on XBOX and turn off XBOX it will go over to the Roku port. However, if I'm watching Roku and turn on XBOX, it doesn't switch for me.

Another option for folks is that if you have comcast internet, the signal is the same. I added a splitter and got an additional 15 or so channels (Locals, PBS etc... -- becuase I can't get OTA where I'm at).

Just this month, I ended up adding basic cable to my internet bill b/c it was only $4 extra. So, I technically have plugged the cord back in -- at least until this promotion period ends.

 
Mulletzilla said:
Question for some of the cable cutters - 2 things have been holding me back, live sports and constantly switching TV/app inputs.

Looks like live sports may cover itself if ESPN streams (and hopefully NBC Sports and Fox Sports follow). But what about the TV inputs - are you constantly switching your TV between Xbox, OTA, and any other HDMI inputs you have? And then within some of these inputs, are you constantly switching the various apps, like Xbox running ESPN, HBOGO, Amazon, etc. I assume the answer is "yes, and its worth the savings" but figured I would see how some of you have set this up. Hopefully I am missing out on some magical box that can pull all these sources together and do the switching for me as I choose what I want to watch.
Click to expand...
I would love it if I had one box that did everything that my Tivo, my Roku and my xBox do... but that's just not the case today. However, it's pretty clear that most of these device manufactures see that the single box is where this is all going.

This is where each device succeeds and where it fails;

1) Tivo:

Success: Best DVR for OTA signals. Microsoft Media Center is good competition, and avoids the $15 monthly subscription fee for Tivo. But if the monthly subscription fee is what pushes one to buying a Windows computer to do Media Center, then just buy Tivo's lifetime subscription, which makes the acquisition cost of each nearly equal. Tivo is easier to use, and isn't a virus threat on your network.

Failure: streaming apps downright stink, and are very limited. This may change with the new Tivo Roamio, which is a new platform that perhaps is a better platform for streaming apps, but I haven't used one so I can't speak from experience. My experience is with the Tivo Premier, and the apps suck. So if Roamio has better streaming apps, then this is a huge improvement, and may make the Tivo the closest to being the one device people want.

2) Roku.

Success: The number of streaming apps are huge. Hundreds and hundreds of apps to conect to streaming content. No other device come close.

Failure: No DVR. So to watch OTA requires switching to something with an antenna.

3) xBox.

Success: Apps are absolutely beautiful and easy to use. I wish apps on Tivo and Roku were as well developed as xBox streaming apps.

Failure: No DVR. And despite apps being awesome, there are very few apps compared to Roku.

Tivo and xBox seem to be heading towards the one magical box. I don't see Roku attempting to do anything with DVR.

 
I updated to iOs 7 yesterday and downloaded the NBC app. It appears to have free episodes of some (most? all) of their shows. Definitely check it out, since it doesn't ask for a cable provider or anything. For those who cut the cable and can't get OTA, this could help.

 
I don't really care about switching boxes since I have a Harmony remote.

The only thing that keeps me on cable at this point is live sports.

 
17seconds said:
I don't really care about switching boxes since I have a Harmony remote.

The only thing that keeps me on cable at this point is live sports.
Click to expand...
In a perfect world, all local free OTA broadcasts would be nothing but live sports and news.

Everything else we watch on TV is better when viewed on demand. There's really no need to broadcast a sitcom, or drama, or documentary, etc, etc... any more.

 
So if I purchase an XBox and one of the Madden NFL Sunday Ticket codes off ebay, will I be able to watch all the NFL games through the XBox? If no, is there a way to get sunday ticket (or similar) on the TV without dish, directtv, or cable?

 
Random said:
So if I purchase an XBox and one of the Madden NFL Sunday Ticket codes off ebay, will I be able to watch all the NFL games through the XBox? If no, is there a way to get sunday ticket (or similar) on the TV without dish, directtv, or cable?
Click to expand...
No not the games that are broadcast locally. You can't do that with any internet option, but you could get an over air HD antenna and watch your local stations, which would have all the MNF, SNF, and locally broadcast games.

 
Random said:
So if I purchase an XBox and one of the Madden NFL Sunday Ticket codes off ebay, will I be able to watch all the NFL games through the XBox? If no, is there a way to get sunday ticket (or similar) on the TV without dish, directtv, or cable?
Click to expand...
Not exactly sure about through the xbox. But, I have one of those sunday ticket codes and I use my laptop with a cable running to the HDMI of my TV to watch all the games.

I'd imagine you can do it through xbox too, that just isn't my experience.

THe quality has been great after week 1. Week 1 was brutal to watch games with that setup (some have said b/c it's free for everyone in week 1) and that subsequent weeks have had less demand.

 
Quez said:
Random said:
So if I purchase an XBox and one of the Madden NFL Sunday Ticket codes off ebay, will I be able to watch all the NFL games through the XBox? If no, is there a way to get sunday ticket (or similar) on the TV without dish, directtv, or cable?
Click to expand...
No not the games that are broadcast locally. You can't do that with any internet option, but you could get an over air HD antenna and watch your local stations, which would have all the MNF, SNF, and locally broadcast games.
Click to expand...
MNF is on espn so he wouldn't be able to get that with an antennae, really only SNF. He'd have to pull MNF from the watch ESPN app

 
Quez said:
Random said:
So if I purchase an XBox and one of the Madden NFL Sunday Ticket codes off ebay, will I be able to watch all the NFL games through the XBox? If no, is there a way to get sunday ticket (or similar) on the TV without dish, directtv, or cable?
Click to expand...
No not the games that are broadcast locally. You can't do that with any internet option, but you could get an over air HD antenna and watch your local stations, which would have all the MNF, SNF, and locally broadcast games.
Click to expand...
I have the antenna for local stations. But I dont think I get the MNF, isn't it on espn or nfln?

 
Is there a cliffs notes version someone can post to go from Dish to no Dish? What tools, equipment, etc. I'm assuming it involves an antennae and tuner? All best practices are appreciated.

 
pizzatyme said:
Is there a cliffs notes version someone can post to go from Dish to no Dish? What tools, equipment, etc. I'm assuming it involves an antennae and tuner? All best practices are appreciated.
Click to expand...
Here's the process I followed in picking an antenna:

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=632032&hl=

Essentially, you need to figure out how strong the signals are in your area, then pick an appropriate antenna. If you can get away with an indoor model, great. If not, hope you can put one in the attic. If not, you're stuck with the roof most likely.

Just install the antenna and wire coax cable from it to your TV, pretty much. If you want to go to multiple TVs, you might need to tie into your current Dish coax network, which might require a booster. A booster might be needed anyway.

That's for the antenna half of things. You've probably already got something that can stream Netflix/Hulu - an Xbox, Wii, many DVD/Bluray players, more and more TVs. If you don't have anything, the cheapest and probably best option right now is a Roku, which is just a box you connect to the internet and to your TV to get streaming services on your TV.

The biggest problem is ESPN. You can get limited ESPN through an Xbox, but I don't think there are any other devices that will stream it.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

playin4beer
Any real estate experts in the house?
Replies
11
Views
442
Ministry of Pain
Ministry of Pain
H
Streaming TV advice - Primary home - rental home
Replies
17
Views
812
houston
H
Lehigh98
The Battle Against Teens and Screens
Replies
17
Views
629
Jayrod
Jayrod

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Top