This is topic Getting rid of cable tv and going to satellite or Boxee? in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=006456
Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 06-28-2011, 11:54 AM:
 
Has anyone here ditched cable tv and gone to satellite or a Boxee/Roku system? My parents got their latest Cox cable bill which came out to $173, and my dad finally had it. He's considering switching to a satellite tv system. Does anyone use one and have good or bad experiences with them? I am currently researching is a Boxee system. Has anyone set up their house with that?
 
Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 06-28-2011, 12:16 PM:
 
I had DirecTv for over 10 years, and only dropped it when I went HD because I don't have line of site to their HD satellite. I was very happy with their service, but be aware their customer service call center people are less than useless if you have a problem. They are not really cheaper than cable once your signup special package runs out, and they have an obnoxious early termination fee.

Roku (and other streaming) is not really ready for prime time, and unless you are computer/networking savy, can be a pain in the rear. I have a Roku, and when it works, it is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and when it doesn't, Roku/your ISP/Netflix all blame each other for the problem. Note that each type of device that streams netflix uses a different feed and CDN server, so something that streams perfectly on your PC may not stream perfectly on the Roku. In addition, the Roku box and the other stand alone boxes do not have much memory in them, good for about 30 seconds of buffering. This means that if you do not have a fast connection, or have a packet loss issues, playback will constantly be interrupted while it re-buffers. You will need a minimum of 8 mbps with minimal packet loss to stream HD (much less for SD).

$173 for cable tv? I pay that much for cable tv everything, cable phone, and cable internet. Are you sure your father is not including these other services. If so, you will still need to pay someone for internet and/or phone.
 
Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-28-2011, 01:28 PM:
 
I think we pay about $125 a month for phone, cable and internet. We have "basic enhanced" cable which includes stuff like TBS, MTV, ESPN and the like but doesn't include any movie channels.

We have cable from Cable Montana (which is a Nebraska company, go figure) and phone + internet from Range Telephone, which is a smallish company that has its home office right here in town. That's super nice...if I have a problem, I can walk into the office or call and they all know my name and can speak English! [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Mark Ogden (Member # 43) on 06-28-2011, 01:35 PM:
 
I have a Roku XDS box which is fed from a cable modem, the output of the modem feeds an Apple Time Capsule and a Cat 6 cable goes from the back of that to the Roku which is hooked up to my Sony XBR LCD display with an HDMI. It should be noted that the Roku XDS supports dual band wi-fi, as does the Time Capsule. As I mentioned in another thread, the difference in picture quality between these two methods is virtually indistinguishable.

On the whole I have been very pleased with the Roku. The HD reception thru it is at least as good if not better than the service from Cablevision itself. Our experience has been that once a stream is initiated, it very rarely stops to buffer. Depending on the service provider, there can be slightly more artifacting, the HD stuff we watch from Amazon, Crackle and Netflix is generally pretty solid but there are some niche players on the system who stream old public domain movies at very low rates that look like they were sourced from old VHS bootlegs, pretty unwatchable. There has been a continuing it-comes-and-goes issue with Hulu and audio/video sync, they know about it.

The only real disappointment we have had is that there really hasn’t been all that much to watch on it. Both Netflix and Amazon have pretty much oversold what is available streaming, IMHO. A lot of folks get the idea that nearly anything on cable is available thru it and that is hardly the case. We had the idea that we would dump cable and Netfilx physical disc delivery service, but so far we haven’t been moved to do either. It was cool to watch NASA TV live during the last shuttle mission, and it is interesting to look at some of the international stuff, but on the whole I don’t see it as a cable cutter just yet.
 
Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 06-28-2011, 02:37 PM:
 
I use an indoor antenna for HDTV broadcast and Netflix (both physical disc and streaming) for my non-broadcast-network needs. Over the air HDTV is glorious, if you live close enough to get the signals: looks better than cable HDTV due to the lack of compression to fit everything down the pipes.
 
Posted by Sam Graham (Member # 2889) on 06-28-2011, 03:04 PM:
 
quote: Mitchell Dvoskin
I had DirecTv for over 10 years, and only dropped it when I went HD because I don't have line of site to their HD satellite. I was very happy with their service, but be aware their customer service call center people are less than useless if you have a problem.
Agreed. I'm happy with DirecTV until I have to call customer service for something. They are mind-bogglingly ridiculous.

Fortunately, that only seems to be necessary once every couple of years.
 
Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 06-28-2011, 04:07 PM:
 
quote: Mark Ogden
The HD reception thru it is at least as good if not better than the service from Cablevision itself.
Resolution wise yes, but there is far more noticeable (on a 55" TV) compression artifacts via the Roku, and like cable tv, not all HD programming is compressed the same. Some look good, others not so much. Also, although the Roku XDS is capable of 1080p, Netflix is only supporting 720p via the Roku, and they are not supporting Dolby Digital 5.1 sound, only Dolby Digital PCM (pro-logic).

quote: Mark Ogden
Our experience has been that once a stream is initiated, it very rarely stops to buffer.
That is now my experience, but it took me 2 months of fighting with Roku/Cablevision/Netflix to identify and fix the constant re-buffering. Turned out to be mostly Cablevision's issue. I still get "Internal Netflix Error" every now and again, which is Netflix's way of saying that their server is overloaded and you can't watch a given show.
 
Posted by Rick Raskin (Member # 1561) on 06-28-2011, 05:29 PM:
 
I think that you'd have a pretty good satellite shot in Scottsdale regardless of which provider you choose. You may want to also consider DishNet. I think you can get some pretty good rates from them; at least that's what they advertize. I have had good experience with Direct TV at our Legion post. We went with them because they offer the NFL package.
 
Posted by Michael Gonzalez (Member # 593) on 06-28-2011, 07:33 PM:
 
I have a rooftop antenna for local HDTV and built my own Media Center computer for Netflix, Hulu and the like. I pay about 40 for the internet plus the 8 bucks for Netflix. Oh and I get the free espn3 as part of my internet access. So pretty happy here.
 
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 06-28-2011, 10:49 PM:
 
I used to have Dish Network's "HD Absolute" package. That plus the HBO channels and local channels in HD ran around $55 per month. Quite a bargain. But Dish got rid of the HD Absolute package. To keep my satellite bill near the $60 level I downgraded to the "Top 120+HD package, HD locals and kept HBO.

With as bad as the movie lineup has been lately, I may get rid of HBO and save an extra $14 per month. HBO's original series' and other non-movie programs are really the only reasons that make HBO worth having at all.

I, too, have an outdoor antenna that can be used to receive local channels over the air in HD. The image quality is indeed superior to what cable and satellite provides. Both Dish and DirecTV downgrade local HD channel quality. For instance NBC and CBS signals are dropped from true 1080i HD (1920 X 1080 pixels) down to anamorphic 1440 X 1080 "HD Lite."
 
Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 06-28-2011, 11:51 PM:
 
I had DirecTV from 2003 to 2010 (with an upgrade to HD in 2007) I was very pleased with their service and the cost seemed to be pretty on par with the alternatives. When we decided to sell the house in spring of 2010 I dropped DirecTv since I didn't know where the heck we would end up. Boy that wasn't easy since I was a model customer. They could not understand the idea that we didn't know at the time where we were going to move and the brow beatings were severe. We've not had pay television since. Sure once we got to our current place I put a 100 mile fringe antenna on the roof to pull in the Sacramento stations, but my wife watches whatever shows she's interested in on her laptop through HuLu and I either screen my prints, read a book, or occasionally plug the laptop into a cheap 720 video projector and we watch a show together. Rarely do we turn on over the air broadcast. We do have a Dell Optiplex that's been hot rodded with Windows Media Center and a digital TV tuner for those shows that we (she) really wants to watch or record via WMC DVR. My brother has the same kind of setup and his windows box is even more hot rodded than mine with Boxee, Hulu, and other streaming sources.
I realize that my lifestyle is unique and would not work for a majority of people, yet I can at least attest to the fact that the internet provides all we would want for current entertainment.
 
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 06-29-2011, 12:18 AM:
 
I know a few people who have "cut the cord" to cable/satellite and gone with the combination of OTA broadcast and Internet video streaming.

I've considered doing the same, but the situation (at least here in Lawton) has its own set of "gotchas." First, you lose a lot of live sports coverage. The folks I know who cut the cord don't care about sports so they're not missing anything. I would also have to ditch AT&T DSL and go with Fidelity Cable Internet, which I think is overpriced and not nearly as good as the cable Internet offerings from major companies like Cox, Time Warner, etc. But it's the only credible local alternative to AT&T DSL.

While OTA broadcast HD channels typically look better than the signals from digital cable/satellite, the quality of programming on the major OTA broadcast channels mostly sucks. There's too much reality TV, game shows, talent shows, etc. "Unscripted" programming has taken over much of the airwaves and even a lot of the bandwidth on cable and satellite.

I could still end up cutting the cord on pay TV anyway. I miss a lot of prime time TV working out at the gym or riding my trail bike in the park. I could end up just doing more of that.
 
Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 06-29-2011, 01:07 AM:
 
quote: Mike Heenan
cable bill which came out to $173, and my dad finally had it.
I used to have a $130 TV bill and a $100 cell phone bill per month. I finally had it. I cancelled my TV and I got a new phone.

No more $130 bill at the end of the month and my cell is now $35

I only have 5 tv channels. CNN, CBC, CTV, Global and TSN. I am happier than ever.
 
Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 06-29-2011, 09:31 AM:
 
I also have a rooftop antenna. No cable. No satellite.

Frankly, if my wife didn't want it, I might not even have a television. Even then, we watch, maybe ten hours of television per week. I don't see any justification for paying $100 a month for something you don't even use.

Hey, Tom! For that $230 per month you could have bought a new car! If you saved that money up, you could even take a vacation in Las Vegas with hot and cold running hookers and all the trimmings! [Wink]

Seriously, it's funny how you get addicted to television. It's even funnier how other people react when you tell them you don't have cable and you don't watch much television, besides. They don't understand and I've even had a couple of people who became almost hostile to the concept.

Once you've been "off the grid" for a while you don't even miss it very much. Like I said, it's nice not having that extra bill to pay every month where the money could have been spent elsewhere.
 
Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 06-29-2011, 11:39 AM:
 
I should have clarified in my original post that the $173 bill was for cable, internet, and phone. We already saw one way to get the bill lower, which would be dropping the internet speed to the next tier down. And I was also thinking that I could add a third line onto my cell phone bill that I share with my mom, and port over their home number to that cell phone, and then cancel the phone service for them. But I would have to check their home phone usage to see if it's cost effective or not to share minutes between 3 accounts.

I consider myself tech savvy, and while I don't have a boxee set up myself, I get my tv shows from... errr I guess we can't probably discuss that here. [Smile] I think my dad might be able to figure out Boxee/Roku/whatever, but my mom... nope. So I'm thinking the best route for them would be to ditch their curent cable plan, add on a third line to our cellphone plan to preserve their home number, get a basic satellite package or antenna for the local channels, and subscribe to the cable internet service. This might save them about $60 to $70 a month.
 
Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-29-2011, 11:39 AM:
 
I know a couple here (farmers) who don't have a television. I asked, what do you do in the evenings after work? He shrugged and said: "Eat dinner, read, relax, go to bed." I guess that's all you need! [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 06-29-2011, 12:08 PM:
 
quote:
Hey, Tom! For that $230 per month you could have bought a new car!
No new car. I just pocket the money, I save it up. My truck is fully paid so I don't have payments on that, no need to take on new payments or anything like that.

quote: Randy Stankey

Seriously, it's funny how you get addicted to television. It's even funnier how other people react when you tell them you don't have cable and you don't watch much television, besides.
you are right, people really are addicted to tv. I don't know about your area but I bike and walk alot to the store for coffee, food and snacks. Walking talks 5 minutes, I notice it mostly on my bike, but when see the these cars/truck/suvs hauling around and wasting all that gas you really notice how lazy and addicted people are.

Also, listening to the radio can very rewarding and enjoyable.

quote: Randy Stankey
They don't understand and I've even had a couple of people who became almost hostile to the concept.
You are right, they don't understand the concept. My favourite is the people who "think" they need a land line in case there is an emergency.

quote: Randy Stankey
Once you've been "off the grid" for a while you don't even miss it very much.
I have been "off the grid" for tv and expensive phones since the recession in 2008. I have to say, I love it.
 
Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 06-29-2011, 12:29 PM:
 
quote: Tom Petrov
My favourite is the people who "think" they need a land line in case there is an emergency.
I'm afraid I have to say I'm in that crowd. However, I will say that I don't believe that any SINGLE form of communication is the answer. The best solution is to have more than one form of communication so that you have backups.

However, if you keep a land line phone for the purpose of emergency communication, make sure it is POTS service via copper wire and not that fiber optic crap. POTS over copper is powered from the central office. If your household electricity goes out there is still the chance that phone service will still operate. If you have FIOS (fiber) service, it depends on power from your household supply. There is battery backup but that's only supposed to last 48-72 hours.

I have a cell phone, a land phone and a radio scanner. One of these days I'm planning on getting my ham radio license.
 
Posted by Rick Raskin (Member # 1561) on 06-29-2011, 03:48 PM:
 
Mike: Have you spoken with Cox Cable about this? Sometimes cable companies will cut a deal if you are considering cancellation.

I'm not so sure that adding a third cell phone number would be cost effective because the LEC may charge to forward the phone number.

All considered, if Cox won't deal then consider Sat TV, POTS over copper with DSL (if they'll sell it to you).

In my area they are offering FiOS TV, Internet & Phone for something like $99/month with no long term contract. FiOS has a backup battery as Randy stated. However, if you experience numerous outages greater than a few hours hours you should probably be considering a backup generator.
 
Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-29-2011, 06:49 PM:
 
quote: Tom Petrov
My favourite is the people who "think" they need a land line in case there is an emergency.
I'm in that crowd too. It's all in what your needs are. Around here, the electrical service is flaky at best. Our infrastructure is about 80 years old. We get about 30 to 40 power outages a year, anywhere from 2 seconds to 6 hours (thankfully, most are in the 2 second range).

Cell service in Colstrip (38 miles from here) was down for almost 2 days during the recent flooding while landlines stayed on, even with sporadic power failures. Between the house and 2 jobs, I'm almost always near a landline and it's the first phone I always reach for to make a call. For one thing, it sounds a lot better.

Tom, you are too fond of generalizing. You need to think of other peoples' situations besides your own before you make flip comments like the above.
 
Posted by Mark Hajducki (Member # 1732) on 06-30-2011, 05:10 PM:
 
I am not able to get broadband internet without a landline.

If the local cable company served my flat (they seem to have forgotten that they laid cable in my bit of the street) they offer internet without phone, but would add a surcharge almost equivalent to the cost of line rental.
 
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 07-01-2011, 08:49 AM:
 
I have my land line phone downgraded to the bare minimum (no long distance, minimal local phone use). I may still get rid of it to save the few bucks and have AT&T do a "dry loop" where I'm just getting data over the line for DSL. And then I may drop the "DSL Pro" thing back down to the basic tier of DSL service. Both measures will free up an extra $20 per month.
 
Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 07-01-2011, 11:54 AM:
 
Your local AT&T store will do a package: cell, dsl over wire, and satellite for one price. Daughter has that package in the house that once belonged to her grandmother.

Funny thing: I had removed the phone wire since she had no plans for a landline during a remodeling project. They had to reinstall it for the dsl. I don't feel TOO bad about that, the first one had been put up in 1946. louis
 
Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-01-2011, 06:44 PM:
 
Mike... I'm right up there with your farmer buddies. I haven't switched a TV on in over three weeks now. Only thing I miss... Pawn Stars and Pickers...

Mark
 
Posted by Peter Berrett (Member # 672) on 07-17-2011, 07:50 AM:
 
Hi

I live in Australia and recently bought a Roku XDS. i haven't cut my cable because my wife uses it but I would get rid of it in a heartbeat.

Because a lot of content is limited to the US only I subscribe to unblock-us.com (i.e. I use a VPN). As I am now a virtual US citizen I get heaps of US content. I really like watching the vidcasts from TWIT and Rivision3 and can even watch the vidcast I contribute to, Amateurlogic via the Itunes channel.

One additional advantage is that the movie selection on Crackle (free Sony movies) is slightly different if you use a US VPN. The VPN is activated by simply changing the DNS settings so it is easy to switch back to being Australian should I want to.

One other bit of software which is well worth getting if you own a Roku is Playon. The Roku has one fault which is it can't play flash streams but the playon software which you run on your computer at the same time you are watching tv opens up a whole world of extra channels for you to watch.

I really think that the Roku is the way of the future and that normal tv channels won't be around much longer.

cheers Peter
 
Posted by Mike Carro (Member # 232) on 07-17-2011, 09:37 AM:
 
Cox will indeed lower your bill if you call and ask for customer retention department. I've been with them for over 15 years and all you have to do is say you're fed up with the lousy service(at least in my area)and say you're thinking of going to satellite. They'll lower it about 10%. Squeaky wheel gets the grease.
 
Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 07-17-2011, 11:05 AM:
 
I just tested out an internet stick.

For $29 I get the exact same service as land based cable internet at $53. I will be cancelling my land based internet this week.
 




Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2