Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

YouTube TV

tv.youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 292 posts

Re: YouTube TV

#231

Post by myrandomcomment »

ipozgaj wrote: post #172

People commenting that $35 is too much for the content included - if you want an equivalent set of channels from Comcast/XFINITY, it will cost you almost 3x more. So it's a non brainer for me, and the fact I don't have to deal with Comcast is worth even more than saving ~60% of my monthly cable bill.

This of course is only true if you pay for cable TV.

I have Netflix and Amazon and the reset of the internet. I had a HDHomeRun hooked to an over the air but since I moved I have not hooked that up again yet as I need a huge mast to get reception.

You can use a VPN like service to get world wide streams also.

I do pay Comcast for a business internet connection to keep away from the data caps however.

Re: YouTube TV

#232

Post by WayneBro »

toxican wrote: post #43
WayneBro wrote: post #3

Wow, so is this the official beginning of the age of decentralized cable-companies? As a cable cutter, one thing I am really looking forward to is the day that I can flip channels again very easily, without having to think about what I am doing.

This doesn't seem like anything more than what Sling has been offering for years....Am I missing something?

I never used Sling and I practically forgot about it since I learned of it long time ago. I think it one point I heard some rumors that it was dead.

Anyway, can you just flip channels with it, like cable? Perhaps I will check it out.

Re: YouTube TV

#233

Post by mikekchar »

myrandomcomment wrote: post #229
mikekchar wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who has lived in many different countries, I find this stuff so frustrating. When I was living in England, my wife and I wanted to watch Japanese anime (in Japanese). Luckily Crunchyroll exists and it has quite a large amount of content for a very low price (I think we were paying 4 pounds per month). But now that I'm back in Japan, we want to watch shows from BBC... basically not possible legally. I reall…

You can watch iPlayer via a VPN or DNS service like unblock.us (do not know if they have service in Japan). Note to the BBC - I would be to pay 3x the license fee to be able to watch on the internet with a subscription from outside the U.K. I bet if you opened it up world wide you would make more money then you do on the all the U.K license fees.

Even the BBC isn't powerful enough to do this. I can't remember who it was but one of the heads of the BBC said for a long time that content on BBC should be available for free everywhere. He reasoned that it was already paid for. It's one of the reason that they do so much free software development.

One of the shows that I want to watch is Match of the Day. Not sure what the situation is like now, but when I was in the UK the BBC was having a huge problem trying to negotiate the rights to put it on the iPlayer (strangely MOTD2 was OK ???). It would be impossible if they needed international distribution :-(

Re: YouTube TV

#234

Post by kaishiro »

martinald wrote: post #194
nemothekid wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Live TV isn't competing against TBP. You can't watch sports or other live events on TBP. Why would you sign up for a live TV service, if you prefer to watch things on demand on TPB? For any live TV offering they are competing against traditional cable providers. Netflix is already on their way on figuring out the "on-demand" content space. If you look at the blog post, 3/4s of the channels offered are either sports o…

You'd actually be surprised how good bittorrent live video streaming has got. I checked it out and it was pixel perfect 720p HD - absolutely fine for sports. But yes, it's still niche, but wow it has moved on a lot. The program I used was called acestream.

This is still only true if you have the pipe. Attempting this from Melbourne and the streams still fall on their face.

Re: YouTube TV

#235

Post by petra »

kevincennis wrote: post #213
LargeCompanies wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Loved Aereo! Though and as of now your hard wired Internet provider makes it impossible to have just affordable Internet without having some type of TV package. Any streaming service who doesn't also provide Internet service is highly disadvantaged! I been paying $55 for 12 months for Internet and a few local and cable channels. Now that's expiring it went up to $70 a month but Internet alone is either $50 for 6Mbps…

You'll be happy to know that the Aereo crew (myself included) is currently working on a fixed wireless ISP using millimeter waves and some very fancy active phased array technology. Still doing crazy stuff with antennas. https://starry.com/internet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7YYAc9rq4g

And naturally, live TV, i.e. multicast, is easy and almost free for any wireless system, for example Starry or Google WebPass. And offers a good launch point for wireless internet services.

Re: YouTube TV

#236

Post by petra »

kevincennis wrote: post #136

Former Aereo engineer here. First off, there are really two main reasons for someone not to have a cable subscription: 1. They don't care about the content 2. Price sensitivity At Aereo, we saw these sort of mix together to create hugely elastic demand. For a while, we offered a $1 "day pass" that would give you access to live TV for 24 hours at a time. During the Super Bowl and various award shows, we had crazy numb…

Actually this offer is : 3 concurrent users for $35/month. Assuming that for many people, a single stream is enough,shared among friends it's $12/month.

That's pretty reasonable.

Re: YouTube TV

#237

Post by cloudwalking »

kevincennis wrote: post #215
kevincennis wrote: post #136

Former Aereo engineer here. First off, there are really two main reasons for someone not to have a cable subscription: 1. They don't care about the content 2. Price sensitivity At Aereo, we saw these sort of mix together to create hugely elastic demand. For a while, we offered a $1 "day pass" that would give you access to live TV for 24 hours at a time. During the Super Bowl and various award shows, we had crazy numb…

Just to clarify a bit: I do think OTT is going to win out in the long run. But that's really just the underlying technology. The tough part is getting rid of the bundle. I'm not so sure that'll happen, although I really hope it does. All of these giant media companies would much rather sell you 10 channels for $20 than a single channel for $5. If a la carte starts happening in a serious way, it's going to be a huge w…

Bundling is actually win-win in practice. The economics work pretty well, which is why it's so persistent. It's a bit complex, take a look: http://cdixon.org/2012/07/08/how-bundling-benefits-sellers-a...

Re: YouTube TV

#238

Post by sdm »

shaunol wrote: post #81

This is a cool idea but it still falls very short by not serving users outside of the US. To the point where the welcome page doesn't even acknowledge that there may be global interest: https://tv.youtube.com/welcome/ (enter your ZIP code, no country picker ... YouTube, you do realize you're on the internet, right?) Does YouTube care about getting content to the world? Or just getting as many of their fingers in the…

This has always been Google's problem; it really only cares about the US. Which is not surprising given how it has historically acted as an arm of the US government. We saw this before in the iPhone vs. Android battle, it took years for Google to allow developers outside of the US (and a handful of others) in to be able to make paid apps even though Android phones where available in those markets. But when the iPhone in any country, developers from that country were immediately able to sell app in the Apple app store. This is one of the big thing that keeps us off of Google's Cloud offerings. With Google, if you're not in the US you're at best a second class citizen. With AWS you don't get that feeling at all. Even Google's founders are avowed American-supremacists, so it shouldn't come as any surprise.

Re: YouTube TV

#239

Post by golergka »

sdm wrote: post #238
shaunol wrote: post #81

This is a cool idea but it still falls very short by not serving users outside of the US. To the point where the welcome page doesn't even acknowledge that there may be global interest: https://tv.youtube.com/welcome/ (enter your ZIP code, no country picker ... YouTube, you do realize you're on the internet, right?) Does YouTube care about getting content to the world? Or just getting as many of their fingers in the…

This has always been Google's problem; it really only cares about the US. Which is not surprising given how it has historically acted as an arm of the US government. We saw this before in the iPhone vs. Android battle, it took years for Google to allow developers outside of the US (and a handful of others) in to be able to make paid apps even though Android phones where available in those markets. But when the iPhone…

> it has historically acted as an arm of the US government

> Google's founders are avowed American-supremacists

Pretty strong claims. Got any arguments to back them?

Re: YouTube TV

#240

Post by staticelf »

riskable wrote: post #32
halayli wrote: post #15

Being asked for a zip code shows that not even youtube is able to change the old broadcasting business model. The day will come when TV streaming businesses takes over and removes the virtual location barriers set by the industry.

No kidding. The moment I saw the zip code requirement I knew it was going to be pointless. Not only that but $35? Come on. There's not $35 worth of programming there. It's just the same old dumbed down broadcast TV that has been in decline for over a decade. Compared to Netflix, Amazon, and even YouTube shows ABC, NBC, Fox et al just plain suck. As proof, after watching an awesome trailer for some new sci-fi show you…

I don't understand, you can just torrent it for free?
Post reply on HN