[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

Unlike Roku, Firestick (Amazon), Chromcast (Google), and Apple TV, all have an agenda that goes far beyond providing the best streaming device.

Exactly what is the Firestick (Amazon) agenda that goes far beyond providing the best streaming device and how does it make my streaming experience different than retiredguy's?

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by jedalton

With the fire stick you can side load a lot of programs you cannot do that with Roku especially streaming programs

Originally Posted by jedalton

If you had my streaming service for $35 a month you would get all that included with the service

I have not yet found a program that requires sideloading. I know there are a number of pirating apps but I prefer to stay on the legal side of streaming.

Given the choice between my conscience and your $35 pirating service, I choose my conscience.

[Runway48]

During our last stay in TV we rented a house with Apollo group TV app. Once I got used to it, I found it rather amazing. I could view almost anything from current movies to local TV broadcasts. And by local, I mean local anywhere across the country as long as I knew the station call letters, I could look at the local news from any station from California to New York. Having just paid my $350 monthly cable bill which supplies me with 500 channels of which I only look at about 6, I decided to look into apollo group tv. It requires a firestick or roku type device. It's incredibly inexpensive, less than $200/yr. When I look to cutting the cable, it seems I need to subscribe to a half dozen services to cover the cable offerings at which point the savings are not that great and there is a lot of redundancies. As the saying goes, "if it sounds too good to be true...." Does anyone have any experience with the apollo tv group app? Thanks.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Runway48

During our last stay in TV we rented a house with Apollo group TV app. Once I got used to it, I found it rather amazing. I could view almost anything from current movies to local TV broadcasts. And by local, I mean local anywhere across the country as long as I knew the station call letters, I could look at the local news from any station from California to New York. Having just paid my $350 monthly cable bill which supplies me with 500 channels of which I only look at about 6, I decided to look into apollo group tv. It requires a firestick or roku type device. It's incredibly inexpensive, less than $200/yr. When I look to cutting the cable, it seems I need to subscribe to a half dozen services to cover the cable offerings at which point the savings are not that great and there is a lot of redundancies. As the saying goes, "if it sounds too good to be true...." Does anyone have any experience with the apollo tv group app? Thanks.

1. 1. Legitimate rebroadcast services are only allowed to provide the local channels in your viewing area (I can get Orlando channels but not Baltimore channels)
2. 2. Network owners (ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, etc) are allowed to charge for rebroadcast of their content. This is why occasionally a channel will not be available on cable until the cable provider and the network agree on fees
3. 3. Hulu Live and YouTube TV are in competition with one another yet both feel they need to charge about $75/month for local channels
4. 4. Netflix, Max, and Showtime all need to charge $10-$20 per month to cover their costs for providing movie content
5. 5. The NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, and others all charge a significant amount for rebroadcast of their content
6. 6. If all the above is accurate then I should only be able to get one set of local channels which alone should cost about $75/month and any licensed content such as movies should come with additional costs with sports being very expensive
7. OR,
8. 7. all that is because most providers aren't as intelligent as the Apollo Group who can provide all of the above and more for only $100/year.

[Runway48]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

1. 1. Legitimate rebroadcast services are only allowed to provide the local channels in your viewing area (I can get Orlando channels but not Baltimore channels)
2. 2. Network owners (ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, etc) are allowed to charge for rebroadcast of their content. This is why occasionally a channel will not be available on cable until the cable provider and the network agree on fees
3. 3. Hulu Live and YouTube TV are in competition with one another yet both feel they need to charge about $75/month for local channels
4. 4. Netflix, Max, and Showtime all need to charge $10-$20 per month to cover their costs for providing movie content
5. 5. The NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, and others all charge a significant amount for rebroadcast of their content
6. 6. If all the above is accurate then I should only be able to get one set of local channels which alone should cost about $75/month and any licensed content such as movies should come with additional costs with sports being very expensive
7. OR,
8. 7. all that is because most providers aren't as intelligent as the Apollo Group who can provide all of the above and more for only $100/year.

Thanks for your reply,

With cable I feel like I am paying for a lot of content that I don't use or want. I don't watch a lot of TV. With apollo I was able to dial in what I wanted. While in TV this winter I was able to check on the local reporting of nasty weather back at my home in NY as well as the local take (as opposed to national new reports) on issues that may be affecting my son in California. My only complaint was that there were sometimes buffering issues. But I wasn't sure if that was a problem with Apollo or with the local ISP. And while we don't watch most of the recent movies, we were able to watch Oppenheimer in the comfort of the living room. I may give it try before cutting the cable. Interestingly they want you to pay with cryptocurrency. Which I can do through paypal. But it's different. While I get your comment about conscience, I don't think there is a lot of conscience in the cable companies. Competition is fundamental to our very successful capitalistic society. Others may change in the face of it.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by dhdallas

What are "fine" passwords? What kind of smart tv did you buy? Mine are all Roku enabled TV's and are easy to setup.

"Find"... You really couldn't figure that out?

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by dhdallas

FireSticks are cheap because they are made to drive business to Amazon. Roku is the best.

I've never had an ad for Amazon on any of my Firestick loaded TVs. Where did you get that info?

[JoMar]

Originally Posted by MidWestIA

Just get the you tube tv app has most channels

The operative work is "most", which is not all. History channels for live broadcasting not available. Whenever you go to streaming you need to know what you don't get and/or what you can live without.

[Dorebea]

Alternately you can use a Firestick for the "one and done" setup. Similar to Roku.

[Nell57]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

Switched over to streaming this year and loving it and saving lots of $$. Bought 6 Roku devices last year during 50% off Christmas sale, 3 each for each of our homes. Everything has the exact same interface. Now have YouTube TV, Netflix, Prime, and Peacock (free with Xfinity internet) and the best part is we can watch everything at either home under the same subscription. Screw Comcast, we were paying almost twice as much and could only watch at one home.

I do the exact same thing.
6 TVs , two different homes, all different brands. And by now they are all at least 7 years old. Originally they had a total of 13 different remotes. (Not sure what all we had going on)
After my husband died I put ROKU on all of them, so they all operate exactly the same. Six TVs …..six remotes. I am now the master of my TV life.
I agree with everyone who says to buy one brand and stick with it for all your TVs. When I start replacing TVs I’ll definitely do that.
But with Roku everything has worked flawlessly for 7 years. Changing TVs just seems like too much trouble.

[jedalton]

not true, you can't sideload many apps on Roku like you can with firestick.

[jimmy o]

Originally Posted by Topspinmo

Cable TV came out around 1970 or earlier.

I don’t think he was talking about that old of TV. Like comparing model T ford to 49 ford. I think he was referring to 49 ford when comparing to Tesla.

Yes I agree with you. But to set record straight. The first so-to-speak cable station was “On-tv”. Launched in1977. It was a box that had to be wiggle-tuned (if that’s such a word) to only a handful of available programs. It was cool, but it also needed constant tuner fidgeting.

[harby]

I understand how confusion you r with sticks for old or new smart tv sets...I did install with fire stick with my (recently becoming old) tv set to get tv streaming...it works well as if I have a new smart tv set, smile. For our improved FL room (formerly lanani room), I decided to install onn (sell at Walmart) for half price with our oldest tv set, it runs well. Or you may find Fire Stick at Home Depot for $30 or so...maybe the sale is over? Enjoy shopping...glad that you ask for The Villagers' recommendations.

[Two Bills]

Seeing all this information, I think I am ready to get rid of my B&W tv and upgrade to a color set.
Don't think I would go as far as having a tv that's smarter than I.
What's with all these remotes and sticks people use with their sets?
Sounds very dangerous!

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by Two Bills

Seeing all this information, I think I am ready to get rid of my B&W tv and upgrade to a color set.
Don't think I would go as far as having a tv that's smarter than I.
What's with all these remotes and sticks people use with their sets?
Sounds very dangerous!

Gotta ask do you still have commodore 128?