Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
"Need"?

I have been on Time Warners $10 a month cable for a few years now. It's mostly the channels I could pick up with an antenna and a couple more. I also have their ELP internet for $15 a month and it's good enough for Netflix and Hulu. Some Apple content skips for stuff I get through iTunes, worth having a cable/internet bill at $30 a month.

Must be nice. Locals only here are $29.95 a month, Internet another quick $20 and phone another $20. It's cheaper to have the lowest tier of cable package. Total scam.

For the OP. It's not there yet. I think they envision something similar to Hulu, but no one really knows where things are. There seemed to be a flurry of discussion over trying to get agreements for channels, but that's been largely silent now for a few months.
 
OP

You should check out Channels app. When you pair it with an HD antenna and a SiliconDust HD Homerun device. It adds live tv to your Apple TV.
 
Yup, been cable free for almost a year. My combo is the Nvidia Shield for live sports and movies and the ATV for everything else. Works fantastic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: satcomer
For me, cancelling cable was not about saving money. I think a lot of people do it for that reason, and then get frustrated when they learn content still costs money. Rather, I think the right reason to cut cable is to cut out commercials. Between MLB.tv, Netflix, Hulu Plus (commercial free), and HBO, I am certainly paying about as much as a cable package would cost. However, I am not wasting my time with commercials.

I imagine parents with kids would love this aspect of it. How awful are commercials targeted at kids these days? The commercials teach them to want and to beg for all sorts of junk. Imagine kids that aren't exposed to endless advertisement. I think it would be totally worth the extra cost for the parents.
 
We cut the cord, but Apple TV by itself is not enough. Fortunately Smart TV has Amazon Prime app. There are a few things I miss, but at the ridiculous price that Comcast was charging for a bunch of stuff I'll never watch, I can be patient.
 
  • Like
Reactions: satcomer
Thanks for your input. Honestly, I thought Apple Tv would be sufficient enough but after this I feel it isn't enough for my needs. The biggest problem for me is streaming sports; yes, I can mirror, and stream it through apple tv, but it is next to impossible to find a consistently working HD stream showing sports. So I guess, I'll have to stick with cable.

Cheers
Unfortunately, often a lot of the advice people give about dropping cable is based on what works for them, and not what would work for you.

Have you heard of PlayStation Vue? They don't have an Apple TV app (only on PS4, PS3 and Amazon Fire TV for now), but it will give you a cable login to sign into cable subscription authenticated streaming apps on your Apple TV for $30/month. For sports that would incluce WatchESPN, NBCSN Live Extra, Fox Sports Go, NCAA March Madness; all of which include live broadcast.

It's basically a $30 cable subscription, which for me would be significantly cheaper than either of the local cable companies (even with competition where I live, they both still suck), especially when you factor in all the added cost to traditional cable like: HD fee, DVR fee, device rental fee, do you actually look at your bill fee, etc. Also, like Netflix, Hulu, and HBO Now, there is no contract. So you can turn it on and off as you want.
 
Last edited:
Lots of answers to questions OP didn't ask.

OP, with few exceptions, if live sports is important to you, you need cable or SATT unless you can get the live sports you want over-the-air (with an antenna) or you want to go the pirate route.

With few exceptions, if seeing TV shows when they first air is important to you, you need cable or SATT unless the TV shows you care about can be had over-the-air or you want to go the pirate route.

So much of the "cord cutting" mentality revolves around sticking it to the "greedy" Cable company, though the Cable company is going to get theirs through the broadband fee anyway. The solutions often involve tradeoffs that may matter to some people. For example, some "solutions" trade off quality of picture or make you wait hours or days or seasons to get to see new shows. The app alternative tends to trade off on-screen guides which brings all available programming together at a glance instead of making one hop app-to-app to see "what's on now?" or requires someone to know what they want to watch and where they are likely to be able to find that show. DVR "solutions" tend to be less than SATT or cable DVRs in that they can't readily connect to every video stream available to you- just those compatible with whatever DVR alternative you try to make go. Some cord-cutter solutions require hopping box to box to be able to find what you want to watch because there is no "one box to rule them all" (like a SATT or cable box). And so on. Some don't care about such tradeoffs but others do. In general, it seems to work best for the tech savvy who doesn't mind jumping through the hoops to get to what they want. Those with families that aren't all tech savvy will feel pressure to just pay the money to make it easier for that family to watch what they want to watch in a simple, "just works" way.

As to the monetary motivation, I suggest looking at DISH's 3 year "price lock" for $49/month offer http://www.dishpromotions.com/dish-network/get-dish/dish-network-3-year-price-lock-offer/ which seems to be about the best option available for live sports and live shows without it running to more traditional cable price ranges. Pair that with an over-the-air antenna for highest quality locals. And their offer throws in one year of Netflix for free. Good HD quality. A unifying, all-possible-programming DVR. No waiting to see first run shows. Etc.

Every one of these threads crack me up. Here's a bunch of people frothing to buy anything and everything Apple dishes out and pay up the so-called "Apple Premium" (and easily justify anything & everything about every such purchase) but we can't seem to see much value in the SATT or cable TV package proposition (that is, until Apple rolls out some kind of TV channel/programming package via subscription and then we'll have no problem rationalizing that one). I just spent more than the cost of the typical SATT or cable MONTH to take the fam to see Batman v. Superman for about 2 hours but I'm apparently supposed to be appalled at getting about 108,000 hours of programming (200 channels with about 18 hours of programming times about 30 days) for less??? What a ripoff!!!:rolleyes: Now let me go wait in line to buy one $8 cup of coffee.;)

OP, isolating the part of your question about "is AppleTV good enough", I'd offer this (with apparently very similar programming preferences as you): AppleTV is an excellent augment to a good cable or SATT subscription package but not a replacement if one wants live sports and first run programming when it first runs UNLESS you can get those 2 wants fed by the more limited options that comes with "cord cutting". In short, if you can scratch both itches with the big 4 or 5 networks and live somewhere with good over-the-air reception of those networks, you might indeed be able to dump cable or SATT and go with an over-the-air solution + AppleTV. But as soon as some favored sports or show(s) are only available on a selection of cable channels, the workarounds are poor to nonexistent.

Beyond television, AppleTV is also fantastic for so many other things (music jukebox, photo albums on demand, home movies on demand, vodcasts, podcasts, video on demand, airplay, etc). If you are trying to rationalize buying one, you don't necessarily need to do so solely revolving around replacing a cable or SATT subscription with one. Instead, any/many of these other benefits might be enough to justify the relatively cheap expense of this little box.
 
Last edited:
I just spent more than the cost of the typical SATT or cable MONTH to take the fam to see Batman v. Superman for about 2 hours but I'm apparently supposed to be appalled at getting about 108,000 hours of programming (200 channels with about 18 hours of programming times about 30 days) for less??? What a ripoff!!!:rolleyes: Now let me go wait in line to buy one $8 cup of coffee.;)
For some people, dropping cable is about saving money because they can entertain themselves with Netflix or Hulu for less.

For me, I'm okay with paying for cable because, like the OP, I like to watch live sports. But that doesn't mean I don't hate their monopolistic and anti-consumer business practices. That's why services like Sling or PS Vue are interesting to me, because I get cable channels for less money with no contract and no additional fees and I don't have to deal with the traditional cable companies and all of their bs. (Okay, I do still have to pay them for internet, but it's significantly less complicated and less expensive.)
 
Lots of answers to questions OP didn't ask.

OP, with few exceptions, if live sports is important to you, you need cable or SATT unless you can get the live sports you want over-the-air (with an antenna) or you want to go the pirate route.

With few exceptions, if seeing TV shows when they first air is important to you, you need cable or SATT unless the TV shows you care about can be had over-the-air or you want to go the pirate route.

So much of the "cord cutting" mentality revolves around sticking it to the "greedy" Cable company, though the Cable company is going to get theirs through the broadband fee anyway. The solutions often involve tradeoffs that may matter to some people. For example, some "solutions" trade off quality of picture or make you wait hours or days or seasons to get to see new shows. The app alternative tends to trade off on-screen guides which brings all available programming together at a glance instead of making one hop app-to-app to see "what's on now?" or requires someone to know what they want to watch and where they are likely to be able to find that show. DVR "solutions" tend to be less than SATT or cable DVRs in that they can't readily connect to every video stream available to you- just those compatible with whatever DVR alternative you try to make go. Some cord-cutter solutions require hopping box to box to be able to find what you want to watch because there is no "one box to rule them all" (like a SATT or cable box). And so on. Some don't care about such tradeoffs but others do. In general, it seems to work best for the tech savvy who doesn't mind jumping through the hoops to get to what they want. Those with families that aren't all tech savvy will feel pressure to just pay the money to make it easier for that family to watch what they want to watch in a simple, "just works" way.

As to the monetary motivation, I suggest looking at DISH's 3 year "price lock" for $49/month offer http://www.dishpromotions.com/dish-network/get-dish/dish-network-3-year-price-lock-offer/ which seems to be about the best option available for live sports and live shows without it running to more traditional cable price ranges. Pair that with an over-the-air antenna for highest quality locals. And their offer throws in one year of Netflix for free. Good HD quality. A unifying, all-possible-programming DVR. No waiting to see first run shows. Etc.

Every one of these threads crack me up. Here's a bunch of people frothing to buy anything and everything Apple dishes out and pay up the so-called "Apple Premium" (and easily justify anything & everything about every such purchase) but we can't seem to see much value in the SATT or cable TV package proposition (that is, until Apple rolls out some kind of TV channel/programming package via subscription and then we'll have no problem rationalizing that one). I just spent more than the cost of the typical SATT or cable MONTH to take the fam to see Batman v. Superman for about 2 hours but I'm apparently supposed to be appalled at getting about 108,000 hours of programming (200 channels with about 18 hours of programming times about 30 days) for less??? What a ripoff!!!:rolleyes: Now let me go wait in line to buy one $8 cup of coffee.;)

OP, isolating the part of your question about "is AppleTV good enough", I'd offer this (with apparently very similar programming preferences as you): AppleTV is an excellent augment to a good cable or SATT subscription package but not a replacement if one wants live sports and first run programming when it first runs UNLESS you can get those 2 wants fed by the more limited options that comes with "cord cutting". In short, if you can scratch both itches with the big 4 or 5 networks and live somewhere with good over-the-air reception of those networks, you might indeed be able to dump cable or SATT and go with an over-the-air solution + AppleTV. But as soon as some favored sports or show(s) are only available on a selection of cable channels, the workarounds are poor to nonexistent.

Beyond television, AppleTV is also fantastic for so many other things (music jukebox, photo albums on demand, home movies on demand, vodcasts, podcasts, video on demand, airplay, etc). If you are trying to rationalize buying one, you don't necessarily need to do so solely revolving around replacing a cable or SATT subscription with one. Instead, any/many of these other benefits might be enough to justify the relatively cheap expense of this little box.

I think the stick point right now is to really take advantage of apps you also have to be a subscriber. Then you have to sign in to all those apps which is a pain, especially if you have multiple devices. CBS has the right idea, but the wrong price. It's completely insane to charge $6 a month for one network. They Get about $1 a month from the multichannel providers. If I could pay a buck a channel, subscribe to NFL game pass and maybe MLB if they build an app we'd spend about $30 a month on top of phone and Internet which would save us over $100 a month. Directv is our only choice, but the cable co here should it ever reach us is just as bad if not worse (see rates I mention above).
 
We're never going to get the bulk rate ("about $1" in your example) in an al-a-carte world where people pick & choose their channels. You can't use such math to compare $1 vs. $6. The driver of business change is the opportunity to make MORE money, not less. So CBS is pricing it where they think it needs to be. If enough of "us" buy, they are right at $6. If not, they might adjust. Else, if you want to spin the math that way, why can't we get iPhones at the retailers (discounted) price or at the carrier's (discounted) price? How about Macs, iPads, etc? If Apple can sell us through the middlemen and give the middlemen a cut, why not sell us at the middleman price if they are selling us directly?

I don't think the stick point is having to also have a cable or satt subscription. The problem is referenced above: how do the content owners and distributors make MORE money doing what "we" want versus sticking with the "as is" model? Answer: "we" have to get over the cheaper/deep discount dreams and cough up that "more money" so THEY are motivated to deliver it as we want it. As long as "we" are demanding/expecting some "new model" at some fat discount off of what we pay now... and some of "us" want that commercial-free too (killing another lucrative source of OPM-paid subsidy revenue)... THEY have zero motivation to give "us" what "we" want.

I want to be able to buy the next iPhone, my next Mac, etc for 80-95% off normal Apple prices. That would be great for me. But obviously, they doesn't make much business sense for Apple. Now apply the same idea to the TV content business. Just because they are not Apple doesn't mean they can give away their product at huge discounts and that magically works for them.
 
Last edited:
There are a lot of points made in this thread, but it really boils down to this, at least today: There is (likely) no way to (legally) duplicate what you can get via cable/satellite and reduce your cost at the same time.

If you cut the cord, you will have to make concessions about what you watch and/or when you watch it. Further, you will have to change the way you watch.

You will not have a simple guide showing you 100s of channels, neatly organized by start time. You will need to search multiple providers, log into different apps, remember which content is on which provider, etc. Time to watch House of Cards...is that Amazon? No Hulu? Oh wait, that's a Netflix production. Shoot, I cancelled Netflix last month in favor of subscribing to HBO Now.

Going to a streaming box is not necessarily a simple step for a lot of people (especially those with many family members).
 
I plan to cut the cord in a couple of months when my satellite contract ends. I'm currently paying $1,500/yr for service that includes HBO.

I will get Netfiix and HBO Now subscriptions that will total about $25/mo, and I'll watch OTA broadcast TV.

What is the best DVR-type solution to pair with the Apple TV?
 
Just hold down the Siri button and say "House of Cards".
I believe you may have missed my point.

And if you did not miss my point, then please consider any of a 1,000 other examples where Siri would not bring you to the proper content.

Or, even more likely, how to find the correct content when Siri brings up options for "Mouse Scars" instead of House of Cards.
 
Cord cutter here. I am not missing cable at all, actually I think that my life has improved (and that of my two kids).
What I do, I subscribe to Netflix for a few months, and watch the things I want (HoC etc.). Then I cancel for a few months, let them put new content, then re subscribe to Netflix. Same thing with Hulu. I save a few bucks a year doing that.
I also have Amazon prime, which I need because because I order a ton of stuff from them... it alredy paid for itself. too bad there is no ATV app... :mad:
And I pay for MLB TV which is a great app.
 
Count me among the cord cutters. We have a 4th gen and 2 3rd gen boxes, and have been cable free (almost) for about two years. Comcast offers internet bundled with HBO Go in our area, which is what we get for about $60 a month. We also have an off-air antenna to our TVs, and make pretty extensive use of the iTunes Store. We also do what I like to call "login barter" and have Hulu, Netflix and some cable content. This has done the job very well for us, it passes the "wife test" and there is plenty of great age appropriate commercial free content for our 2 year old daughter.
 
OP

You should check out Channels app. When you pair it with an HD antenna and a SiliconDust HD Homerun device. It adds live tv to your Apple TV.

This.

Or go with the HD Homerun Prime and a CableCard. I replaced my 4 Verizon STBs ($55/month) with this setup. It'll pay for itself in 8 months and save $600/year after that, and I finally have one box to rule them all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: satcomer
This.

Or go with the HD Homerun Prime and a CableCard. I replaced my 4 Verizon STBs ($55/month) with this setup. It'll pay for itself in 8 months and save $600/year after that, and I finally have one box to rule them all.
Me too.
[doublepost=1459434733][/doublepost]
Staples seems to always have 20-25% off iTunes gift cards
Not sure they have them year around. But I got some at either 15% or 20% discount from Target, Best Buy and Staples on and around Black Friday. I got enough to last a full year. So, next Black Friday will add more if needed. You can now get HBO Now, Showtime and more via iTunes Subscriptions. Besides renting and buying movies on iTunes. All at 15-20% discount by doing this. Takes a little investment but well worth it if you use iTunes a lot.
 
If you must have Cable TV, there is a great way to run everything through your Apple TV. HDHomeRun Prime, a Cable Card, and the Channels app (getchannels.com). Allows you to watch live cable TV (or if you have an OTA antenna, there are HDHomeRun models that work with the antenna)

Side benefit: the HDHomeRun Prime has 3 tuners that can be shared among any device on your home network. So one HDHomeRun Prime can potentially run live TV for three separate Apple TV's at once.
 
To all those who think a real cable can't be done over the internet - check out PS Vue. It's the first, nationwide real cable replacement on the market and is doing some amazing things. Don't know why apple couldn't figure it out. Maybe their size working against them.

wJ4R0xk.png
 
To all those who think a real cable can't be done over the internet - check out PS Vue. It's the first, nationwide real cable replacement on the market and is doing some amazing things. Don't know why apple couldn't figure it out. Maybe their size working against them.

Apple is either trying to create an experience that isn predetermined on how programs were offered before and being more accessible without restrictions to time constraints or scheduled programming, that and the way certain channels handle their shows syndication or contracts with networks could have determined how and where they wanted to distribute their programs.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.