Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Hulu on Disney+ Beta Launches for Bundle Subscribers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Been waiting to see how it would integrate. At the moment in "beta" it simply shows the shows in the same format as any other category, and removes all the menu options and no live time. So as dumb downed as it gets. Presumably this is just for the first beta. But for active Hulu users its a much worse experience at discovering content.
Don't forget you have to pay for Internet, too. In my case, I was paying well over $230 a month for Comcast to have Internet & TV. While still paying for just the Disney+ no ad plan. I switched to just getting Internet from Comcast ($100 a month exactly) and now use Hulu Live with the Disney+ & ESPN bundle. Even with the price of that going UP, I'm still paying $186 a month total. I get HBOMax from my AT&T plan, don't watch Netflix, and then get AppleTV+ from my AppleOne sub.
Another great thing about streaming is that some channels will show no ads. CNN's streaming channel shows a banner that says Commercial in Progress, which is super awesome.
Some people with cable complain that they pay for channels they never watch.
But the same is true with streaming: you will only consume a fraction of the available content. And constantly subscribing and unsubscribing as you chase your interests is like clipping coupons: who has time to figure that scheme out? I watch a full season of a show (time permitting), cancel until next season, then re-subscribe for the next season (if I haven't lost interest) - and I need to keep track of all that? No thanks. So yes, I pay the price for being lazy and not clipping coupons.
In the end we make decisions (sometimes dynamically) about what is important and what we can live without.
For specific shows and movies, streaming make sense. But for broader variety and live tv, cable still makes sense even over the live streaming services which do not have as many channels. Unless you can live without something or are willing to have a separate service for something like PBS and MeTV. There is always a compromise because nothing is a complete replacement for cable.
But the same is true with streaming: you will only consume a fraction of the available content. And constantly subscribing and unsubscribing as you chase your interests is like clipping coupons: who has time to figure that scheme out? I watch a full season of a show (time permitting), cancel until next season, then re-subscribe for the next season (if I haven't lost interest) - and I need to keep track of all that? No thanks. So yes, I pay the price for being lazy and not clipping coupons.
In the end we make decisions (sometimes dynamically) about what is important and what we can live without.
For specific shows and movies, streaming make sense. But for broader variety and live tv, cable still makes sense even over the live streaming services which do not have as many channels. Unless you can live without something or are willing to have a separate service for something like PBS and MeTV. There is always a compromise because nothing is a complete replacement for cable.
I agree.
Maybe this is negative of me, but I feel like the only way out of the tunnel is the (at least partial) collapse of the space. There's just too much content being produced and available. Studios have been spending Millions and Billions on create content that either is 1) Only interesting to a certain percentage of the user base and/or 2) Can't physically be watched because there's no time to add in more shows. Few (if anybody) has ALL the streaming platforms, and they're constantly cannibalizing users' time from eachother. I feel that the industry is maxed out. Disney is already scaling back content for 2024 because of flop after flop, and I expect others to follow. With less new content, it's hard to justify spending top dollar for primarily older catalogues from multiple services. I don't think that model is sustainable for much longer... maybe 5 years or so. I think things will slump back to some form of aggregated service (like cable/satellite) but in a streaming form that contains multiple content providers at a higher price to consumers. My best guess is somewhere in the $50 or so range.
It *is* an antitrust issue because Disney owns two streaming services and is using that to charge users more and avoid competitionRemember parts of Fox went elsewhere so its no longer an antitrust issue.
Also note that there are many large companies owning film studios, not just Disney.
Great idea. Because when governments interfere in free markets, things always work better. Said no one ever!
I don’t understand why they didn’t do the opposite. Put Disney plus into the Hulu app.
Agree, and this was starting to be said about cable/satellite TV even before streaming. 50 years ago, 10 to 15 TV channels was the norm, this grew to 20 to 30 channels in the 1980s, 30 to 40 channels in the 1990s and now the norm is close to 200 channels... PLUS streaming services... PLUS online videos (YouTube), etc.
There are way more content options these days and that’s a reason why today's shows, on average, can't get near the ratings shows did decades ago when viewing choices were much more limited.
Hulu is due to be sunsetted in 2024. Hulu is only used in USA and Japan. It will never be used internationally like, Netflix, Disney +for example. Disney owns 2/3 of Hulu with Comcast only the last third. Disney plans on buying out Comcast stake when the contract expires in 2024.
not to mention a serious lack of creativity. We're living in an age of sequels and remakes. Gone are the days of quality, original stories. Honestly some of the most creative people are those that are producing content for youtube and NOT part of the Writers Guild.
I’m being a little snarky. I still have cable in addition to Disney+, Hulu, and Peacock. I’m close to ditching cable.
People, usually older generations, have been saying that sort of thing for ages. A lot can depend on when someone grew up (nostalgia) plus the fact many television shows are written towards a "younger" demographic (advertisers seek) and reflect changing cultures, interests, etc. which older generations don't necessarily connect with.
I'd say that's at least partly because you are able to be far more selective and cherry pick what you view on YouTube. The average person would find the vast majority of content on YT "unwatchable" garbage. What they do find of interest, which can obviously vary by individual, represents a tiny fraction of what’s on the site.
Internet is an extra cost but something most people already have for reasons other than streaming content i.e., they'd be paying for it whether they subscribed to streaming services or not.
Moot point. Need an ISP in addition to the tv service anyway. I dumped DirecTV which was up at $170 a month. My streaming services cost me half that.
I get that. But from my perspectives of the GUI, and their beta test. I think Hulu should have been the base, with Disney plus and ESPN+ if they decide to keep it, integrated in with Hulu. Especially with the fact that Hulu with live TV. Is on Hulu.
Disney will be absorbing the last example of its 21st century studio purchase that it was unable to do because Comcast wanted Hulu to operate until their contract expires in 2024. The Disney + interface in all other countries has this mature content shown under Star. This Hulu addition is just an effort to get Hulu subscribers that also use Disney + use to one app to connect to, in addition to the separate Hulu app.
Broadly, Star contains Disney's more adult-orientated content that goes beyond its traditional family-friendly image, created by its studios like ABC, FX, Searchlight Pictures, and 20th Century Studios.
For content licensing involving Hulu rebroadcasting not of the above, it hasn’t been discussed where it will end up. Comcast might get it.
see https://deadline.com/2023/12/comcast-disney-hulu-mike-cavanagh-1235650499/
Last edited:
Disney said that it wants to better understand consumer needs
get rid of location restrictions!!!
get rid of location restrictions!!!
Since this beta ends March 2024, I am curious how long the HULU name usage (USA/Japan only) will continue after the feature restrictions due to licensing cease? Also how long separate services are allowed to run as Hulu is integrated/absorbed? My guess is they will make use of the whole 2024 year to work out the current separate offerings availability.
Note: Hulu + Live TV and Premium add ons will still only be available within the Hulu app, along with the full SVOD content library.
Even after the beta period’s completed? I’ve been wondering how they’d integrate Hulu live into the Disney+ app. If there’s still a need for a Hulu app for that, why integrate the apps at all?
For the USA, Paramount does CBS station live, Peacock does NBC stations live, I would expect HULU merge > Disney + would have all ABC owned stations to be accessible live eventually.