OT - Cable Alternatives

[Thumper]

I think I missed it, what are you using as your streaming device?  Did you do the Amazon fire stick, or something else?  As you're keeping tabs, would love to hear your (and everyone else's) opinions on the various hardware devices, as well as the streaming service they access with it.  From various anecdotal accounts I've read, some services tend to work better with some hardware, and not as well with others.  Makes sense, as the streaming services tend to provide app developer toolkits to the hardware manufacturers, which then receive varying levels of commitment (presumably based on other agreements between the various companies).
From my perspective, I've been pleased with the various streaming services (Amazon, WatchESPN, and Sprectrum App) using my Roku Express hardware over my Spectrum broadband internet.  The Samsung SmartTV native apps are ok but somewhat less pleasing.  And any time I'm forced to use the web browser through either of those hardware platforms, it's a fairly unpleasant User Experience.

I've had AppleTV, Chromecast, Firestick, and a few Roku models.  I've kept the Roku Ultra and a TV with built in Roku and given everything else away.  My wife really hated the AppleTV remote and then they quit supporting Amazon Prime so that went away.  Chromecast really relies on your phone as a remote and Google quit supporting Amazon Prime so those went.  Amazon Firestick won't support a YouTube app (nor YouTube TV, I've heard) so that one is gone.
Roku has a lot going for it.  The voice search searches across several platforms including rental sites like Vudu.  The hundreds, maybe thousands, of Roku channels are amazing.  Many people like my grandson do not subscribe to any service and just use the free channels available.  I used to use a VPN service that let me pick my IP address from several different countries.  I found I could pick an England IP address and then watch all the BBC channels live.  I no longer use a paid VPN but it was nerdy fun.

[FearlessF]

I just checked my stuff. Speed is at 128 MB/sec and 26 MB/sec for download and upload. That seems really fast.

that is VERY fast, you won't have any trouble streaming to multiple devices

[betarhoalphadelta]

I think I missed it, what are you using as your streaming device?  Did you do the Amazon fire stick, or something else?  As you're keeping tabs, would love to hear your (and everyone else's) opinions on the various hardware devices, as well as the streaming service they access with it.  From various anecdotal accounts I've read, some services tend to work better with some hardware, and not as well with others.  Makes sense, as the streaming services tend to provide app developer toolkits to the hardware manufacturers, which then receive varying levels of commitment (presumably based on other agreements between the various companies).

I'm personally a fan of Roku. Part of this is personal prejudice but that I've heard backed up elsewhere, and that is this: 
Most of the other devices are tied to a service. Amazon Fire TV/Stick, Google Chromecast, Apple TV, etc. Each of those services has a vested interest in prioritizing their own apps and content over competing apps/content. I.e. Amazon doesn't want to build an app for Apple TV, because they'd just as soon see Apple TV fail. 
Roku, as a standalone company, is best positioned to be service-agnostic. They have no incentive to prioritize any particular provider, and they know that the device is their only income stream, so they need to have compatibility and apps across ALL providers to remain relevant since they're not selling content on the side. 
Also bolstering their case is that they have the largest market share of all devices. So while I'm sure Apple/Amazon/Google would love to not support Roku, they can't. Unlike the old Blackberry / WindowsOS phone days when anything that wasn't Android/iOS wasn't supported by app makers because they didn't have the market share to justify it, Roku has the market share to justify development. So app makers HAVE to support Roku if they want traction.

[Mdot21]

you just need really fast internet, a firestick, and a google/youtube search on what to do with that firestick. that's it.

[FearlessF]

fully loaded Kodi boxes with a criminal ecosystem really scare the crap out of the content providers and cable companies

they are legal until you start downloading illegal content

http://androidpcreview.com/best-fully-loaded-kodi-box/

http://www.thedragonbox.com/

http://thetickboxtvreview.com/

[FearlessF]

This past summer Morning Consult surveyed 18-29 year olds and received an interesting response from this generation of streaming millennials.   The survey showed that 57% of this demographic agreed that there are too many streaming services. Including pay and free services, there are well over 1000 streaming services on Roku alone, with new ones getting added every day. It appears from this survey that the barrage is starting to wear on  the tech savvy generation.

As the  OTT service market expands, the content is scattering, causing users to keep adding services to get the content they want. One thing that OTT providers have been unable, or unwilling to do is consolidate more content into a single service. 73% of the millennials surveyed stated that they  they wished all the shows they wanted to see were available on a single service.

[betarhoalphadelta]

That may be true, but those 1000 streaming services are not all created equal... Most of them suck.

I'd also point out that a lot of those streaming services are the "long tail" of content that would NEVER show up on mainstream services in a meaningful way. Much like the rise of Amazon made it possible to find/buy books that you wouldn't really find in your typical Barnes & Noble because they were too obscured, these services get you access to obscure content that won't ever be a part of Netflix's standard catalog [and wouldn't ever be available on cable].

They complained when they couldn't get a la carte programming, and were forced into bundles. Now they're outside the bundle and it's harder to find the content they want, and paying for some of these services individually can be a hassle. They just want one easy solution, but they don't want that easy solution to be cable because they don't want to spend $100/mo.

So of course people are going to complain. They want all the content in the world, easy to find, and at ultra-low cost. They found out that unicorn doesn't exist, and they're not happy about it.

[Entropy]

I have a spectrum router... and also a netgear nighthawk 6 router... so I have two options.  

When I said do I trust putting more on wifi, I was talking about being 100% tied to Spectrum for my entertainment options.  I wasn't intending on conversation to be about routers, but rather trust in Spectrum to stay up consistently and not to throttle my service (which I'm convinced they do..).  

I like what I'm reading.  Just not sure.  I wish I had google fiber..

[FearlessF]

no, thank you

if your service provider sucks, many do, then your experience will be lacking

[betarhoalphadelta]

When I said do I trust putting more on wifi, I was talking about being 100% tied to Spectrum for my entertainment options.  I wasn't intending on conversation to be about routers, but rather trust in Spectrum to stay up consistently and not to throttle my service (which I'm convinced they do..).  

Well, aren't you 100% tied to Spectrum for your entertainment options now? Aren't you getting your cable through Spectrum? 
Heck, it's like some of the people who have a land line "for emergencies", without realizing that unlike the old days when phones were line-powered, their phone service is through their cable bundle and requires a modem. You lose electrical power, and that "emergency" phone line doesn't work any more. 
I think in some ways your entertainment options today all flow through a single provider. In fact, diversifying through streaming might be better because as long as your internet is working, you can get around a Sling outage by watching Netflix, or Amazon, etc...

[OrangeAfroMan]

I found the NRA channel on my youtube tv channels list.  Scary, demented stuff there, even if you're an all-in gun nut.  It's straight up Lifetime Channel-psychotic programming, for guns.

The sexy-time channels look hilarious, btw.  

[FearlessF]

Well, aren't you 100% tied to Spectrum for your entertainment options now? Aren't you getting your cable through Spectrum? 

true, but RF CATV is more resilient than the higher frequencies required for cable modems.  Sometimes it's simply old crap modems or the previously mentioned modem/routers with crap old wifi.
from my experience cable modems are more solid than DSL modems, but there are many factors. 
The biggest problem with cable modems that doesn't affect CATV is the shared bandwidth.  During peak usage you can pay for a 300Meg service but be limited to less than 5 meg.  Peak usage on my network is between 8:30pm and 10:30pm.  Sunday evenings are usually the highest of the week.

[betarhoalphadelta]

Hmm. Fair enough. Have you measured speeds that low in your neighborhood, even during peak? I haven't noticed any problems with streaming in over three years (and two houses) with Cox... 

[FearlessF]

no, but I've heard the horror stories.

Usually upgrades can be done at the CMTS and the node to add more bandwith by combining more channels.  But, once leaving the node onto the coax cable that bandwidth is shared down that leg of cable that can branch off to cover a neighborhood or two or a portion of a small town.  Not uncommon to have 600 meg downstream available on that "leg" or cable route. Before streaming video, bandwidth was very bursty and could be oversubscribed.

With more streaming, 600 Meg on a leg that serves 600 homes can overload the system.