Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Apr 5, 2017.
Probably because they don't want to botch the rollout the way AT&T did with DIRECTV Now.
Probably so that they can feed you local commercials as many local cable companies do.
There’s a free 30-day trial.
That’s a nice long time to try out the service and see if it does everything you want from it. Just know that, as usual, signing up for the trial requires a credit/debit card and will result in a small, temporary authorization on that card.
Don’t sign up from someplace where you don’t live.
Location is a critical factor with YouTube TV. It determines whether you’re eligible to sign up for the service to begin with, and also which local ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC feeds you see. So don’t rush to activate that free trial if you’re traveling. YouTube says “we recommend waiting to sign up until you return home.”
You can watch on three devices at the same time.
That’s pretty decent among the pack of these internet TV services. Sling TV ranges anywhere from one to four concurrent streams depending on package, DirecTV Now limits you to two, and PlayStation Vue leads everyone with five streams at once.
There’s no Roku or Apple TV app yet.
YouTube has said that support for other platforms will arrive later this year. For now, you’ll have to use Chromecast (or own a Android TV) to stream YouTube TV on your living room screen.
Blackouts are still a headache, especially for sports fans — but also randomly.
YouTube TV faces the same inconvenient restrictions on where and how you can watch things — particularly sports — as its competitors. And Google is very quick to direct the blame on its programming partners and networks:
If you're trying to watch certain programs, like sports events, you may see a viewing restriction known as a "blackout." Blackouts are set by our content partners, like sports leagues or our network partners. They vary based on your current and/or home area, the content you're trying to watch, what platform or device you’re watching on, and possibly other restrictions made by our partners. Affected programs will be unavailable in YouTube TV. If a blackout is in effect in your location, we will do our best to let you know.
This doesn’t always just apply to sportsball, though. Remember when no one could stream the Golden Globes with Sling TV or PS Vue or DirecTV Now? So does YouTube, and it can’t promise that similar, random blackouts are out of the question here either:
You may occasionally see a total blackout of some programs on broadcast networks.
This happens because YouTube TV is an internet-based service, and digital streaming rights for certain programs are different than traditional TV rights. If a blacked out program appears in your Library, Home, or Live tabs, you'll see an icon alerting you that the program is currently unavailable.
Some content can’t be watched on phones.
This heads up mostly applies to Verizon’s long-running exclusive lockdown on mobile NFL viewing. You won’t be able to watch football on your smartphone. However, I’ve asked Google whether you can cast games to the TV screen to get around that. Either way, you should be able to watch from larger-screened devices like an iPad, Android tablet, or PC without issue.
Some content can’t be casted to the TV screen.
I’m less clear on where this restriction currently applies with regards to YouTube TV’s launch lineup of channels. But if you want an example of how granular broadcasters can get, here’s one: NBC cannot be streamed on TV set-top boxes with AT&T’s DirecTV Now service, a competitor to YouTube TV.
You’ll probably lose live access to ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC when traveling.
YouTube TV is launching in a fairly small list of cities: Chicago, Los Angeles, New York City, Philadelphia, and the San Francisco Bay Area. If you’re trying to watch from outside those locations, you’ll be unable to stream the big four broadcast networks live. You will be able to watch the cable networks that are part of YouTube TV without a problem. As for sports, YouTube says that “sports programming can vary widely based on location and content rights.” Good luck, friend.
Also, it won’t work at all internationally. YouTube TV is a US-only service for now. Overseas, you’ll have to stick with regular old YouTube.
Paying for YouTube TV doesn’t remove ads from everyday YouTube.
Okay so, YouTube TV includes YouTube Red’s content and original shows, but it doesn’t remove ads from regular YouTube videos. To do that, you’ve still got to pay $9.99/month for YouTube Red. Remember: YouTube Red includes a subscription to Google Play Music where the on-demand music app is available. Also, I feel like this is common sense, but paying for YouTube Red doesn’t mean you’ll magically avoid commercials when watching live TV.
That’s it for now. I’ll update this if I discover any other potential gotchas or frustrations with YouTube TV.
this is a joke right? I pay 17 euro's for many many channels..... $35!?!?? Hilarious.
I hear you about the local channels. In the Atlanta area, we only get the local FOX affiliate via DIRECTV Now.
There's a simple solution that will work fine for most people if they want to watch their local news, though: buy an HD antenna. An antenna can easily easily be had for as little as $20 and they go up from there depending on the range/type of antenna that is needed. Most people I've seen who use an antenna use the relatively small indoor antenna and they get most (if not all) of their local channels in 1080p.
If people don't care about seeing their local news and other local programming and they just want to watch the shows on the broadcast networks, all the major broadcast networks have Apple TV apps and many of them allow you to watch the latest couple of episodes of most of their shows with no TV provider account required.
One holdout I can think of, CBS, is more of a pain in the ass as they require that you buy a subscription from them if you want to watch almost anything, as far as I can tell. I bought the monthly CBS subscription so I could watch March Madness games and it worked fine on the Apple TV. The jury is still out on whether or not I'll keep paying for CBS every month.
I see the creaky old school system of broadcast-based video delivery has made another small step to try and hold the line against what most of us really want.
While a good start, they need to add more channels and release a Apple TV app in order for me to consider switching from Playstation Vue.
It's tempting to try out for the month, but with there only being an iOS app available, I feel that I wouldn't utilize it much without a tvOS app.
I pay $22 a month for a unlimited data on my phone. Probably best not to compare prices in different countries.
Someone is going to end up upset.
What I find interesting about this launch and now all the ITV providers is they still refuse to give into Viacom's demands. All that's happened is the consumers seemingly care less and less about their channels. What a completely flawed business strategy going against the writing on the wall that the networks are going to have to do business with the ITV providers or go away.
Don't worry you're government is spying on you whether you use Google products or not.
This seems much better than SlingTV and Vue. Hope it comes to all cities/states in the U.S. soon.
$35/month and requires streaming through my phone?
Come back when there are real Smart TV app options.
Good information except this part is outdated. NBC can now be streamed at least on the Apple TV set-top box.
I guess, but that's something that makes more sense, and I think even now they're still updating it. It takes a massive amount of time to compile that much information, and since the very nature of it is location based (maps data), it makes complete sense.
18 million residents vs 318 million residents. Things work a bit differently in different countries.
Do you have any idea how many millions of dollars each local TV station brings in from advertising (on-air commercials) in a year? I do. It's a lot. How do you think they pay salaries for their entire news crew and still generate a profit? Advertising. Much of this advertising is from local businesses that only advertise in 1 market (not giant corporations that advertise nationwide). If deals aren't made to ensure that those advertisements get seen by the same amount of people after "cutting the cord", advertisers will stop spending money with the TV station if the commercials they are paying for stop yielding the desired results.
Don't get me wrong, I want all of the streaming services to offer local networks just as much as anyone. But those local affiliates (TV stations) are NOT owned by the major networks 99% of the time. They are AFFILIATES of the network and they pay the network to be an affiliate and to air their shows (think of it like owning a franchise restaurant where you pay the corporation to sell their products and to advertise for you and bring you brand-recognition). Point being, working out a deal with "NBC" corporate does not equal working out a deal with the local NBC station in Sometown, USA. They are not owned by the same people.
The fact that extremely pricey sports are included & no a la carte channels aren't an option means either:
1.) Google just doesn't get it (how consumer satisfaction works)
2.) In the loop of the media content providers (cable channels) &/or BDUs (broadcast distribution undertaking; a cable Comcast or satellite DirecTV) Mafia.
In Canada, we have had a la cart since December 2016. Also a "skinny basic" base option w/ local networks, 1 weather channel, 1 news channel (English & French), a Native interest channel & described video service all for $25/month max. No sports! No kids channels, no USA Network types.
How in the hell will you weed out crap channels if their piggybacking on strong cable channels? "Swim or Sink."
Google doesn't get it like traditional BDUs just don't get it.
I'm one of those New Yorkers who cannot get regular broadcast television in their apartments. I also gave up cable years ago because of Time Warner's maddening fee creep and terrible customer service. So YouTube TV is really intriguing--I've already signed up for a free trial.
I live at the edge of city limits in a decent sized college town with it's own TV stations. But they're pretty crappy towers, especially after the HD transition. The problem is that some stations are in the capital which is a neighboring town, and there are some hills between here and there and they're at a lower elevation. I can't even pick up CBS with Leaf's top of the line HDTV antenna, and I can't pick up some stations in town because the signal gets "blown out" or something (that's what the internet said when I looked up what is going on). Apparently if you use a really high powered antenna to try to get some stations, you have to get a lower powered antenna if the signal is too strong nearby, and then use some kind of switch to move between them for certain stations. But I can't even get CBS so I can watch football, which is the main reason. I was looking forward to watching the Royals in MLB.TV Premium, but when I tried it today I was blacked out. I hate all TV related companies and I'm seriously thinking about giving up on TV entirely.
--- Post Merged, Apr 5, 2017 ---
That's true, but it's on my to-do list to sign up for an encrypted VPN soon. I just need to do some more research about it.
--- Post Merged, Apr 5, 2017 ---
I don't disagree. They want to challenge the traditional providers, but they use the same model as you mentioned.
After 11.5 months of being cable-free and using strictly Netflix and Hulu, I am spoiled. I don't think I could ever go back to watching regular live TV. With all the commercials and ****** content (not all), it feels like a complete waste of time and I can't watch more than 30 minutes.
I jumped on DirecTV Now's Apple TV deal about 2 months ago. Mostly for the Apple TV, but also to give streaming live TV a shot. The service was fine - but I haven't watched it since the first week of having it. I just can't do it. So I'm done with TV until it becomes truly ala carte where you are able to pick and pay for ONLY what you watch. (which may never happen).
Still amazed at how long this has taken.
Here is an article from 11 years ago which describes YouTube as "exploding TV" and mentions how the SNL Lazy Sunday became popular through YouTube, not TV. http://adage.com/article/news/youtube-grows/113249/
Google could have been years ahead of the curve? Instead they felt threatened by Facebook, so tried to add social features and Google+ to YouTube. And now they see the success Netflix is enjoying and have launched this.
They seem to have demonstrated a worrying lack of vision for a company that's usually pretty innovative.
I would save exactly $12.50 by removing cable tv from my cable/internet bundle from Comcast here in south FL. It was the same when I lived up in NH. Im I the only one who would not benefit at all dropping cable and picking up one of these streaming services? I must just have terrible luck in the towns I choose to live in as far as Comcast costs?
Pretty good deal if it had Cartoon Network I'd jump on it.
You'll never get ala carte channels because of how channels work in the first place. The reason we have 100 channels with a cable subscription is because of how the smaller channels are bundled with the bigger channels. Companies make a ton of money from advertising across all those channels. Economies of scale and whatnot.
You wouldn't want to pay for just one or two channels because it would likely cost as much as getting 100 channels.
And like you said.... live TV really sucks... so why would you want channels anyway?
Channels are just an odd grouping of programming that is broadcast in a linear fashion 24 hours a day.
What you really want is on-demand content... not something that is on a schedule (DVR helps... but still)
Your best bet is to buy exactly the shows you want from iTunes or whatever. Then you're only paying for what you watch.