I'm still confused. My pricing here shows that internet alone would be $70 (what you'd need to enable other things like ROKU and a FireStick), so the difference for us (because we have the Fiber 100 + TV option) is $90. So the possible saving for going to streaming would be the difference between all those streaming services and the extra $90 we pay. Right? If all those other streaming services are free beyond the upfront cost of the hardware, that's a potential savings of $90 a month, $1,080 a year), but if they cost anything, that would cut into the savings, right?

While I can see how one might save the difference (up to $90 a month is you don't rent a movie), I don't see how anybody "cuts cable" because none of those other service work without some sort of ISP.

Well, right. You still need internet access, so there's always a cost of some sort. The exact amount of those savings depends on what other services you're paying for so you're correct that it may be less than $90/month. (That said, keep in mind that cable companies are also notorious for adding a ton of fees on top of their listed rates, so that might influence things too.)

For me, I'm saving maybe $30-$40 per month by doing DSL ($60) plus Hulu with Live ($50) plus Netflix ($10) compared to what I was paying for DirecTV back in the day ($150ish total), but frankly I just can't stand watching live TV anymore. Once you get used to watching everything on demand, it's kind of weird to have to wait for something to come on at a particular time (sporting events aside). I always feel a bit lost in hotel rooms these days.

Cool. And I agree totally. Perhaps I'm closer to being a luddite than I thought because using the FireStick (even though I used it yesterday to watch a movie that was mostly over on GF!!!) keeps me in the "TV" world. Even though my complaints about GF's "shutter lag" on their goofy remote are well documented. As for the "1000Mbps" - pffffft, I'm a network engineer, they need to try and sell that shit to somebody else. Hell, all but a two devices in my house are "wireless", so those are defendable "legal" sales numbers only. Again, pfffffft..

Oh, did I forget my endless whining about missing Pic-in-a-pic (with recording)? LMAO :thumb:

So maybe I'll look into these other options.

He's probably got tons of downloaded movies that he wants to stream. Arrrrgghhh matey! :D

In all seriousness, Cave, you should look for a small NAS with HDMI and video decoder. Save's the trouble of trying to build a tiny PC and they are purpose built for video streaming and such.

You are confusing Google Fiber TV with the general Google Fiber internet service. Most here are just using their internet along with other services like SlingTV/YoutubeTV/HuluLiveTV. Which would be a replacement for your Google Fiber TV instead of an addition.

And FYI... the 1000Mbp connection isn't necessary for streaming and Google doesn't make that claim. I'm not sure WTF you're talking about there.

Picture in picture? LMAO... seriously?

exactly. The 100Mb internet package is more than enough for a handful of devices to stream 4k simultaneously.

I'm not confusing anything you ****ing idiot, we just broke down the difference between the ISP side of the "cable" companies and their TV offering. You know, the whole "$90" deal! Reading is fundamental!

And yeah, PIP was/is sweet.. Well, for those of us who can multi-task.

Now run along kid, go dig-up some fake science about global warming..

You previously claimed that you'd need the $70 Gigabit plan for streaming. But that's incorrect, which was my point. And also something a supposed network engineer would understand.

Ah, so you're making a big deal over the $50 100Mbps data-only plan over the $70 1000Mbps data-only plan. Gatcha. What a moron...

Stick to global warming fantasies.

The average HD 1080p stream takes like 12-14Mbps or something like that. It isn't huge.

Media Player on Windows 7 works fine for OTA DVR. If you can track down a media player remote that works with it, it is even better.

It's what I've been using for years. They discontinued the channel guide. But I just enter time and channel. You can set it up to record same time each day/week.

I tried cutting the cord a year ago. I dropped cable and went to Playstation Vue because of its built in DVR feature and used a Mohu Leaf antenna for local channels. I convinced myself for a few months that it was great, but after a while, I realized that I was only saving about $20/month and there were some channels that I couldn't get on PS vue that I found myself missing (History being one of them). The other issue was the hassle of having to switch between inputs and the little glitchy issues with PS Vue. Nothing huge I know, but just minor inconveniences that bothered me that I didn't have to deal with before. I moved to a new house and was able to get into an AT&T deal that included Uverse and 15mbps internet for $119/month for 2 years. I jumped all over this and life has been normal again for the past two years, but next month is the end of the two years. Luckily, Cox Cable is now offering a promo where you get 60 mbps internet and Contour TV for $114/month for 3 years! So I'm switching to that....and in 3 years, I'll either switch back to ATT or to Dish...whomever has the best promo at the time. So as for right now, I'm done with cutting the cord.

After a coupe of years of Google Fiber I'm considering going back to Time Warner (now Spectrum) if they're willing to cut a sweet deal. I miss BeIN Sports and their Italian Serie A soccer. Not to mention PICTURE IN A PICTURE! And yes, the History, Science, Military channels are a must...

And not dealing with GF's shutter-lag remote would be nice too.

Cox and Uverse are your options? You poor ****er.

As much as I like the "out of town" feel of watching a hotel room TV (with local news), I generally pack my Roku.