Everyone, do yourself a favor. Watch Weird: The Al Yankovic Story. https://www.instagram.com/p/CkkCW8TtdMg/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=

I remember back in 2014 when I first discovered Pluto, I always wanted it to succeed because I thought it was a really inventive idea for consuming content online, back when linear pay TV was strong.

At that time it was just aggregating YouTube videos in a playlist, so I didn’t see how it could survive. Because it was easy to find the content elsewhere, I had to force myself to remember it existed. Luckily it found its footing in the years since and moved to licensing shows and movies in a more TV way, although with the rise of Netflix, I questioned if anyone would want to sit through commercial breaks.

Then when Viacom bought it in 2019, I really questioned the strategy, especially with other companies announcing SVOD streaming services, I figured the future was in paid services. However today, seeing the fatigue from consumers on subscriptions and its rising monthly cost, Pluto is in a fantastic position as a nice alternative to both subscriptions and endless content choice. The old school cable feel allows users to make decisions on channels rather than committing to a show, and gives that nostalgic feeling of discovering a new show or movie you wouldn’t have chosen on your own.

I’m glad to have been proven wrong as it’s now very much a service I can always find something to watch every time I open it.

Putting the sticker on the wrong way and ruining the joke must be one of those Jeep things I wouldn’t understand. https://www.instagram.com/p/Cka1BGHLdIV/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=

I know I'm a little late on this one, but my goodness this was annoying. I know the comment was spoken in jest, but still, there's no reason Apple shouldn't adopt RCS. And really, the only reason they don't want to is to shame non-iPhone users. Statistics released this month point to iPhones having a 50% market share in the US, and culturally speaking, the iPhone reigns supreme. You have to dig deep to find an influential person taking a mirror selfie with an Android phone. So while it isn't literally a monopoly, Android can be found on devices widely ranging in price, with some even more expensive than iPhones. But there are plenty of choices for far cheaper than Apple provides brand-new that are left out of the modern messaging loop. People with fixed or low income may not want to or cannot afford to be a blue bubble, and in this age where more higher quality and secure messaging exists out of the box for any Android phone, the same should be true on iOS.

And one last thing, should Apple adopt RCS, I don't even care if they keep communications from them green, just make it easy for people to communicate.

I’m a bit late on this one, but ViacomCBS has changed their name to Paramount, and I think it makes sense. The name change was due to the company intending to invest heavily into Paramount+, which a decade ago Clear Channel similarly did when they invested heavily into their iHeart Radio app, changing their company’s name to iHeart Media.

The name change was also made as Paramount has a high brand awareness of the brands under the ViacomCBS umbrella, because who besides me even knows what Viacom is. Plus, the Paramount name has been around for over a century and has a bit more of a higher value among consumers.

Not to mention, it will be easier to explain what is or at least should be on Paramount+. If Paramount owns it, it’s probably on Paramount+, as opposed to Viacom owning it, since no one knows what Viacom is.

The big question is what the future of linear will be for Paramount. Since the company is investing heavily into streaming, and even taking away future shows originally slated for linear to Paramount+, what will become of the once-strong lineup of linear networks that are now home to marathons of old shows and movies? Perhaps in the future when cable carriage agreements are far more lenient, maybe we’ll see the cable networks as live tabs on Paramount+, and they’ll just be more premium linear channels like what you get on Pluto TV.

Either way, the name change to Paramount is a welcome one, and one that if done correctly can help unify all the Paramount brands by more easily identifying the company behind the linear networks and the streaming services, so consumers have a better idea of finding what they like to watch.

Well, I knew T-Mobile wasn’t exactly making money with TVision, but I didn’t expect the service to only exist for five months. However, considering the fact I was paying $40 a month for a service YouTube TV charges $65 for, I knew something was up.

The good news for me is that because I was a faithful magenta viewer, T-Mobile partnered with Philo and YouTube TV and is offering $10 off if I sign up for either service, which means I’m back on my number one service YouTube TV.

Plus, I’m just glad T-Mobile is making it right by providing coupons. When PlayStation Vue shut down, there were no alternatives offered, so I appreciate this.

While I will miss the deal TVision gave me, TVision was nothing special. I liked that I could pause live TV during commercials. I liked the TVision Hub. And, I liked that channels were numbered and the remote could toggle up and down channels. However, I didn’t like the 100 hours of DVR. I didn’t like the lack of hardware support beyond Apple TV, Fire TV, and Android TV. And, I didn’t like the issues I initially experienced with the service, but were fixed by T-Mobile’s excellent customer service.

YouTube TV has always been my favorite, but its $65 price tag was just more than I wanted to spend. However, that $10 off coupon will certainly ease the pain.

With TVision gone, it leaves a handful of live TV services left, and proves that the future of sustainable live TV won’t be the cheap TVision prices cord cutters want. For value services, it’s back down to just Philo and Sling. And Frndly, sort of.

But not on Pluto TV? Seems like a missed opportunity for expanding Pluto’s reach, but oh well.

Why I Switched to Blogger

The purpose of my website is to combine a portfolio of my work with a media and tech blog, all while providing a way for people to contact me. The best way to do this is with a service like WordPress, Squarespace, Wix, Weebly, etc. The problem with these services is they all have a cost, which always tends to rise, and I’m not exactly making a ton of money here. 

So I’ve been exploring some of the free services available, like Medium, Substack, Tumblr, Google Sites, and Blogger. Here are some reasons why I didn’t choose the services that aren’t Blogger:

Medium is great for blogging and finding people, but I don’t care for how the partner program works, and I can’t create pages, which goes against my need for a portfolio, so I skipped that.

Substack is also great, but it’s more geared for writers who want to have a free and paid version of their blogs, and again, no pages.

Tumblr, well you’re reading this on a Tumblog, so I’m still using Tumblr, but more for sharing links and short articles. While Tumblr can create pages, and I can place an ad in the description to generate an income, it isn’t very elaborate. There is no email subscription, no sidebar to setup, and the search functionality is limited. It’s fine for small websites, but I need something a little bit more.

Google Sites was what I was using for the other functions not related to Blogging, because it’s free and works well enough. The problem is you can’t ad ads, and there is no blogging functionality. So, I had to use another service for the blog, which was not very efficient. The old Google Sites allowed for ads and blogging, but for some reason, it is absent on the new version. Perhaps if Google combines Sites and Blogger into one service, it’ll be perfect, but until then, I’m sticking with Blogger.

I chose Blogger for a few reasons. It allows me to place ads, create pages, email subscriptions, good search functionality, statistics, page redirection, sidebar customization, and the ability to edit the theme. Now, it isn’t perfect and there are several things I’d love to be able to change, but it is the most WordPress service without the WordPress cost. At least now, everything is under one website.

Things Paramount+ Will Need to Succeed

Really Good Marketing: Given what ViacomCBS wants Paramount+ to be, it makes a lot of sense to change the name from CBS All Access. That doesn’t mean the name Paramount+ perfectly explains the service. In addition to adding the ViacomCBS library to the service, Paramount+ is also advertised to take a more news and live sports approach than other services, and the Paramount brand has little to do with news and sports.

Deep Connection with Pluto TV and Showtime: Pluto TV has over 20 million users, and Showtime has some 28 million subscribers. There’s a Venn diagram somewhere here where these should all meet. I totally understand keeping the services separate, as explaining the three tiers of Peacock is a bit confusing, but there should be a connection in Pluto TV to Paramount+ and Showtime. ViacomCBS has stated that Pluto TV will remain free, and will act as a way to get people into Paramount+, so perhaps that means free episodes on Pluto, and then if you want to keep watching, you have to subscribe to the other service. ViacomCBS also said they intend to make Showtime the premium offering, so if they can bundle Paramount+ with Showtime at a price competitive with HBO Max, they have a decent strategy.

Linear Channels: Right now, CBS All Access and Showtime’s respective apps allow the user to watch the linear channels, without the need to enter your cable information. I think it’s important that as Paramount+ will act as the hub to view content from the ViacomCBS cable channels, they should also include a way to view the linear channels in the service. I feel like this could go against the carriage agreements with cable operators, but if Showtime and CBS can do it, I don’t see why they can’t add the cable channels.

More New and Old Content from the Linear Channels: For example: CBS All Access currently has a button titled Comedy Central, where you’d expect to see Comedy Central’s library of content (at least I expect to see all the stuff they own). What you won’t find are recent shows like The Other Two, South Side, Awkwafina, and others because those are all on HBO Max, the streaming home of South Park, a deal that cost WarnerMedia some $500million, for most likely the next three years. The deal for those shows took place before the merger of CBS and Viacom, where Viacom felt it was better to take advantage of lucrative deals with competitors. Not a good move with hindsight. Plus, The Daily Show is a big hit for Comedy Central and would probably draw in a large streaming audience, so why aren’t new episodes on CBS All Access? I’m assuming it’s in ViacomCBS’s carriage agreements, but if South Park can air episodes the next day, I don’t see why they can’t do that with the rest of the shows.

A Lot of Luck: This is the main issue. Media analysts have speculated that Paramount+ has a difficult road ahead, and I have to agree. The game plan for ViacomCBS’s future is in using its IP to create content for other platforms, and creating content for its linear and streaming services, primarily in the form of movies. 100 some odd movies will air across MTV, Comedy Central, and Paramount Network, and it is assumed that these will also make their way onto Paramount+. In addition to the rest of the Paramount/ViacomCBS library that isn’t on another platform, and the original series that are slated to premiere on Paramount+, I’m just not sure this will be a huge reason for many to subscribe to the service.

Some Feedback for HBO Max

Add the linear HBO channel to HBO Max: I don’t know how CBS and Showtime can do this with their standalone-not-associated-with-a-cable-login apps, but if they can do it, why can’t HBO? With so many live events and shows that really work well when watched live, it would make so much more sense.

Move the HBO Max Hubs to the Top: Not everything can be Netflix, so I don’t think every service should replicate Netflix’s design, which is what HBO Max does. Something smart with CBS All Access (soon to be Paramount+) is they have the brands that people associate with at the top of their service, like CBS, MTV, Nickelodeon. By doing this, it gives the user an idea of what will be on the service. Right now, HBO Max does have something like this called HBO Max Hubs. However, it is located at the bottom of the page and navigation bar. I believe the brands associated with WarnerMedia are a strength to the service, and since most people don’t know what WarnerMedia owns, it would make sense to make that the first thing they see.

Add More Linear Content to HBO Max: There’s no shortage of HBO content on the service, but not a lot of new content from the Turner channels, like no Conan, no Eric Andre Show, and no new Samantha Bee. If this is an issue with carriage agreements with the cable operators, fine, but hopefully this can be added in the future.

Lower the Price: CBS All Access and Peacock offer an ad-subsidized version for a lower price, and Peacock even has a free version to hook people in, with free on-demand and live channels like Pluto TV. I’m sure HBO is seen as too premium a brand to offer anything for free, and I know they have made a name for themselves by being ad-free, but $14.99 is a little steep in comparison. Anyone who has been an HBO subscriber certainly won’t mind the price now that they’re getting a lot more content, but if their goal is to pull in Disney+ levels of subscribers, they’re going to need to do something.

Get on More Platforms like Roku: This is the main issue. Something I didn’t foresee with the streaming revolution is something from television’s past: carriage disagreements. Since HBO Max’s introduction, it has not had a place on Roku, and only recently appeared on Fire TV. I don’t know which side is to blame here, but it has caused me to set my Roku and Fire TV aside for an Android TV device, like the new Chromecast and my TVision Hub. However, most people aren’t crazy like me, and since Roku is the number one streaming platform, this is a major reason why many people aren’t jumping on HBO Max. 

Initially I did question how T-Mobile was allowed to have the Vibe and Live package separation, and just assumed they had a similar deals like Sling. It would appear they actually weren’t supposed to do that. 

Please don’t ruin TVision, media companies. I really like the service.

I’ve Been Using TVision For an Hour, and I Already Love It

Let me start out by saying I love T-Mobile, but even if this service had no association with the magenta company, I’d still love TVision.

I’ve used several online cable services. Here’s a list of those and what I thought of them:

Sling: This is the one I’ve used the longest, since 2016, and the one I tend to return to. Why? It’s the cheapest. I started using it initially because it was first. Since 2016, the interface has barely changed, the features haven’t kept up with the competition, and has a buggy feel. But that price...

YouTube TV: Had the price not increased $15, I’d still be using YouTube TV because I loved my month with YouTube TV. I joined when ViacomCBS announced its channels would join the service. Upon the announcement, I assumed the price would jump $5-10, but going from $50 to $65 was just too much at the time. It’s too bad, because it has the best DVR, smooth interface, and personalized recommendations for individual profiles. It was so good.

Philo: I tried to live with Philo simply for the price: $20 a month, but the lack of channels really made it difficult. If not for the lack of channels, the service is smooth, the DVR is great (although you can’t skip commercials on live) and I really liked it.

AT&T TV Now: Expensive garbage.

Spectrum TV: Although I’d love to leave Spectrum for T-Mobile Home Internet, I am a bit of a Spectrum defender. I’ve personally had Spectrum since 2016, and in that time, I’ve had ZERO issues. Not with traditional cable, not with internet, and I’ve never used the phone service. Still, as much as I find Spectrum’s TV service inoffensive, I can’t say the same for their pricing model. Couple that with the lack of a cloud DVR, and I can’t say I’ll be subscribing to Spectrum TV anytime soon.

There are others, but they’re just too pricey or lack features/channels I like. So, when I found out about TVision, I was initially skeptical, but in my hour of use, I can safely say TVision takes the best of YouTube TV and gives some improvements. Here’s a list of things I like:

Channel Numbers: I know most people don’t have a streaming device with channel up/down and number buttons, but my TiVo Stream 4K does, and TVision uses it. Sling and YouTube TV use the channel up/down buttons as well, but TVision channels are numbered, so if you decide to take the time to memorize the lineup, you can easily tune to the channel you want.

Great DVR: There’s more to a DVR than storage size. Yes, TVision’s DVR is only 100 hours (compared to YouTube TV’s unlimited size with programs that expire after 9 months), but TVision allows you to pause live TV and pause and fast forward commercials, which seems to be a feature only in existence on YouTube TV and TVision. Sling and Philo force you to sit through the ads, unless you’re watching a recording. TVision acts like a traditional DVR, which is a major plus: something I missed when I went back to Sling. Plus, the DVR gives you the ability to fine tune recordings, something I’ve never seen on another online service: I can set what channel the show records on, setting only new or any airing (that part is common) and I can set how much extra time before and after to record. Awesome.

There’s a Clock in the Corner: Back in the day when everyone had a cable box, it was easy to see what time it was at a glance. That glance is gone, but at least the on-screen interface includes a clock, which makes me very happy.

Profiles: Something I also missed when I went back to Sling was having personalized profiles. I can have my recordings and recommendations separated from other users, which makes me happy.

Great Interface: TVision is separated between a Home screen, with recommendations and subscription overview, and then the Guide, Shows, Movies, DVR, and Search. It’s all very easy and I like it a lot.

In short, if you have the ability to get TVision (only T-Mobile users at the moment have access), get it. It’s fantastic. It takes all the good of YouTube TV at a lower price, with improved features. I’m excited about linear television again!

Reasons Why SiriusXM Needs to Keep The Billy Joel Channel Forever

As someone who has been fascinated with satellite radio for the longest time since the days prior to the Sirius and XM merger, I have always had an interest in the specialty channels SiriusXM runs. One channel I have loved these days that has seen limited month-long runs since 2016 is the Billy Joel Channel. Between 2016 and 2019, I spent my life hours a day in the car, and when the Billy Joel Channel was on, the radio almost never left the channel. Then after a month, the Billy Joel Channel transitions into another limited run station, and I become an angry young man and had to say goodbye to Hollywood Billy. In an effort to convince the executives of SiriusXM to keep running on ice the Billy Joel Channel forever, here’s a list of reasons why this is the time they should consider keeping the faith channel.

I've been a near lifelong fan of Billy Joel, but the channel has allowed me to discover so many songs I had never heard before and fell in love with.

I love hearing Billy’s stories of how he created the songs, or collaborated with other artists.

I’m more likely to stay on the SiriusXM band in the car, or play the SiriusXM website/app when Billy’s channel is running.

Initially I thought it was an issue of the schedule not being large enough to run indefinitely, but I’ve heard pieces of the Garth Brooks channel, and it’s a similar format, so why can’t we have Billy? You gave Dave Matthews and his Band a channel, so I think there’s room for the Piano Man.

Don’t Ask Me Why, just do it.

First Seeso in 2017, now Quibi is the latest high profile streaming service to shut down. Quibi had a lot going for it: many high profile media companies investing in the platform, bringing tons of great content while setting itself apart by having episodes only last less than 15 minutes for our short attention spans. Unfortunately, the platform was designed to be viewed exclusively on mobile for the on-the-go user, which is dumb by itself, but couple that will the pandemic causing users to be stuck at home, few found a reason to pay monthly for a service that can’t be viewed on a television. 

Had Quibi not been mobile-centric, could its massive content be enough to entice consumers? With the launches of Disney+, Peacock, and HBO Max, we know consumers have room in their wallets for another streaming service, but it’s unknown if investors would’ve believed in Quibi had it not had its unique mobile-only model. Short-form entertainment coupled with news programs and documentaries set Quibi apart from other services. It’s a shame they made you watch them in portrait orientation.

Why Comedy Central is cancelling Tosh.0

So, technically it isn’t cancelled. Tosh and Comedy Central have hinted it will go somewhere else (perhaps the Tosh.0 marathons on MTV2 indicate a possible home (I doubt it due to MTV2′s low viewership with an expensive show like Tosh’s)), but it follows a trend of other Comedy Central live-actions series that have either been cancelled or relocated. So why? Here’s a few things to consider:

Brand Repositioning: Comedy Central is shifting programming to adult animation, topical live-action Daily Show style shows, and “movies.” 

Why animation? Since South Park is Comedy Central’s bread and butter, they are intending to use that strength by adding more animation. And not just any new animated shows, but reboots of Beavis and Butthead, Ren and Stimpy, and Jodie, a spinoff of Daria, which is a spinoff of Beavis and Butthead. Make no mistake, Hollywood hasn’t run out of ideas, they just know the public is more likely to tune into a reboot than an original show. Also, let’s ignore the fact that no other animated show on Comedy Central has been successful (except for Drawn Together?), even syndicated animated shows are only played in the mornings or at 4:30am.

Why topical live-action? It’s cheap. Not to mention because it’s topical, it’s more likely to be viewed live than a generic talk show. Plus, if the format is topical, there doesn’t need to be a prop department, or a large team of writers. The show can be much smaller scale, thus cheaper, thus a better gamble.

Why “Movies?” A television series requires commitment. A series is an expensive gamble that rarely results in a hit show, and then when the show fails, the channel has to continue to air new episodes contractually. A movie or one-hour special is a better financially, adds more content to the channel weekly, and more importantly, adds a lot of content to Paramount+, ViacomCBS’s streaming service. With MTV and Paramount Network following the new movie strategy, that’s a lot of valuable content for Paramount+, which will set the service apart.

Cost: I discussed this briefly above, but Tosh and the show aren’t cheap. The show has a crew of writers, a prop department, and has been on the air for over 10 years, meaning they’ve all received some healthy raises. So, pricey. Now, South Park is also very expensive (and absolutely not going anywhere), but it has more...

Viewership: Tosh.0 has done better than other shows for the channel, but it doesn’t pull in the same numbers it once had. For a weekly show that gets under 400,000 viewers, that may not be sustainable.

Is It Stream-worthy?: I don’t think so. Look at The Joel McHale Show with Joel McHale on Netflix which only lasted one season. Those who loved The Soup on E! would’ve also loved that show, but it didn’t gain traction. Although I’m a big fan of talk and unscripted shows, I just don’t know if they work on streaming platforms. Although old episodes of Tosh.0 are on CBS All Access and Pluto TV, I just don’t see ViacomCBS picking up Tosh.0 in their streaming service as a show that will bring in consumers, but who knows.

Coronavirus Financial Issues: Honestly, I think it all comes down to this. David Spade spoke about the cancellation of his late night Comedy Central talk show Light Out while on Howard Stern, stating that due to concerns over ad sales during the pandemic, they had to cancel his show. I’m wondering if the same is true with the rest of the Comedy Central shows that were cancelled. Sure, they weren’t ratings leaders in total viewership, but they brought in some of the youngest viewers on television. However, if ad sales are down overall, couple that with the lack of viewership, it’s just not enough to sustain. Prior to the pandemic, Tosh was in a multi-year deal with Comedy Central to keep his show on the air for another few years, with a first-look deal for any show he may produce. Comedy Central was certainly trying to keep Tosh, unfortunately it seems financial problems made that impossible.

So, there’s a few reasons why the show is leaving Comedy Central, and all of them indicate the changing media landscape. I was honestly surprised to see Tosh.0 get cancelled as I would have thought it would remain to keep familiarity with the channel, but I guess not. I’m hoping Tosh can find another home, because where else can I hear him make fun of Comedy Central executives?

Pros and Cons After One Day with iPhone

I’ve switched from the Samsung Galaxy S10e to iPhone 11. It’s been almost five years since I’ve daily driven iOS, and here’s a few things I like and don’t like.

Pros:

Silent switch on the side, I’ve missed that for some time.

Lightning fast Face ID (still would like a fingerprint reader especially when masked).

System-wide dark mode.

Great Bluetooth settings, I like that I can easily see the battery on a Bluetooth device with the battery widget.

Better third-party app support: apps just seem to work better on iOS.

Cons:

Notifications are weird: I have no idea that I have notifications until I pull down the notification tray, and then when I do, there doesn’t seem to be a great organization in place, and when I try to clear it, instead of just swiping, I have to swipe and then click clear.

UI oddities: On Android, the home button stays in the same spot no matter what orientation the phone is in. Not true with iOS, which moves the gesture bar to wherever the bottom of of the phone is. I prefer the former because no matter where you are, the gesture remains consistent. Plus, when the phone is on, the left top corner has the time, and the right corner has the cell and WiFi signal strength graphs, and the battery symbol. Then when the user pulls down the Mission Control tray, the signal information moves to the left, and the battery expands to show percentage and if an alarm is set, and there’s no time. That’s just strange, but it’s all the fault of the gigantic, ugly...

Notch: Phone companies are attempting to make screens as border-less as possible, but no one has the answer for the front-facing camera, sensors, and earpiece location. Apple chose a notch, which I find tremendously ugly. Now the notch may be the best option in terms of function (not to mention it gives the iPhone an unmistakable face), but the form is just off-putting.

Keyboard: On Android, I had a number row, a period and comma button on both sides of the keyboard, and a persistent dictionary area at the top of the keyboard, always waiting to auto-correct. Without these features on iOS, I’m far slower at typing.

Waiting for Animations to Complete: iOS has smoother animations than Android, like when opening or closing an app, but iOS forces you to wait through that transition before anything can begin. Sure, iOS is prettier, but everything else is just annoying to sit through.

Custom ringtones: With Android, I can download the custom ringtones I’ve made, go through the file manager, and place them where they need to be. On iOS, I either need to buy them or download iTunes... ugh I shudder to think of that nightmare.

I know it sounds like I’m nit-picking, or perhaps overly critical, but believe me I could write up a good list of cons for Android as well. Overall, I’m pleased with iOS, honest. I’m basically using the same apps I did on Android, the phone is just a different color and brand, and for some reason, I feel like I’m better than everyone.

Why I Cancelled YouTube TV

I made an article a week or so ago in defense of YouTube TV’s price increase, a stance I still stand by. Many users online are understandably upset about the new price, and that’s reasonable. Some articles are taking the discussion a bit further by suggesting that the price increase betrays the initial goal of YouTube TV and cord-cutting as a whole by offering content at remarkably low prices, which I disagree with.

YouTube TV’s goal was to make live TV better, and they succeeded. The service is generally regarded as the best online live TV service because it has the local channels, the guide is customizable, the DVR is at least as good as a traditional DVR in functionality (something no other online live TV service can say) and gives you unlimited storage with individual recordings lasting for 9 months, and the experience is at least as good as your cable service and probably even better. I call that a success.

The problem comes with the channel lineup. The service initially cost $35, and you couldn’t subscribe unless YouTube TV had agreements with the local channels in your market. Even if they did, some notable cable channels were missing, like Turner channels TBS, TNT, TCM, CNN, and Cartoon Network, as well as the Discovery channels, like Travel, HGTV, and Food Network, and they didn’t have any PBS channels which is still the case on other live TV services. With every addition of channels came a price increase. First $5 more, going to $40 a month, then $10, to $50 a month. Which brings us to a few weeks ago with the addition of the Viacom channels Nickelodeon, Comedy Central, MTV, and others, bringing the cost up $15, to $65 a month. This was the last straw for a lot of users, so much so that YouTube TV’s support page indicated the increased call volume. While Viacom is the easy target here, YouTube TV has stated in the past, much like Sling, they still haven’t turned a profit, so while $50 to us was a better price, I’d have to imagine that at some point, YouTube needed to increase the price to survive (or to give Google a justification to let it continue to live), so that price was bound to go up anyway, regardless of the addition of more channels, compared to other live TV services like AT&T TV Now’s similar price increase sans more channels.

The problem with live TV in general is the more channels you want, the more it costs. Cable providers pay the cable channels in order to add them to your lineup. Meaning a service like YouTube TV is the middleman between you and the live channel you want to watch. The cost for live TV only gets higher when you factor in the retransmission fees for the local channels, the higher rates sports channels like ESPN charge, and of course the bundled channels that you are forced to get. If you want Comedy Central, you must carry CMT. If you want ESPN, you better carry Freeform.

Few cable providers have been able to break the business practice of bundling. Sling is one of them, giving you the option of a few base packages. One comes with ESPN and the other Disney-owned channels, and the other comes with the Fox and Comcast owned channels, each at $30, or you can get both for $45. Then you can add other packages like Comedy, Kids, News, Lifestyle, Movies, and even more Sports, all costing around $5 each, with the extra Sports package at $10. You don’t get any locals with Sling, but that $30 base price may be enticing, so long as you don’t compare it to the feature set of YouTube TV. Spectrum also offers a few a la carte options, but their service doesn’t have a DVR, and you have to have Spectrum internet to get it.

YouTube TV comes with features that other services can barely match. If you option up Sling to match the channel lineup of YouTube TV, with the enhanced 50 hour DVR (without the ability to skip live commercials, only DVR’d ones), the price is $62 a month, and now you have to figure out how to get your local channels. The same goes for Hulu + Live, which starts at $54, then you add the enhanced DVR which totals up to $64. If you really want to save a dollar or two, be my guest, but if you are looking for a true cable alternative that can match the experience you had with traditional cable, YouTube TV is it. It may cost the same as the introductory rate of cable, but at $65 for YouTube TV, there is no introductory rate, and you don’t have to rent equipment or worry about what devices it supports. It works, and it works well.

All that being said, I asked myself whether or not I was getting the full $65 use out of YouTube TV, and I found that I really wasn’t. Especially when the shows I wanted to catch up with the next day had clips officially uploaded to YouTube, it really made me question why I was paying for YouTube TV in the first place. I’ve said before that I like the feeling of live TV, both from the perspective of being indecisive with on-demand services, I can just put on a channel and it’s already playing something, coupled with the feeling of connectivity with other people watching the same thing at the same time somewhere in the world.

While Pluto TV, Peacock’s “channels” tab, and other similar channel services are pretty good at matching that live TV feeling, especially for free, I still like having some traditional live TV channels, but maybe not for $65. So, I went back to Sling with their base Sling Blue package at $30. I was going to go with Philo, even though it has the superior experience, there were a few channels I like having that are on Sling. Plus, I have an HDHomeRun connected to my antenna for the local channels so I can get all those across my devices.

At $65, it’s understandable that YouTube TV’s users aren’t happy with the price. It’s fair to have the opinion that it costs too much, an opinion that I share considering how often I actually watch TV. But when you compare the cost to similar online live TV services, and then compare it to traditional cable and satellite providers, not only is it a better deal for the lineup and features which don’t require any additional upgrades or rentals, but it’s a solid service for those who came from cable looking for the best cable experience without the cable. Its goal of providing a superior live TV product has been met, now if they can just work on offering packages like Sling to bring the cost down and provide an a la carte service, I and many others will be much happier. I believe this may be something in the works, as when the Viacom channels were added, some of ones missing like MTV2, Nicktoons, MTV Classic, and the other upper package staples were explained to be added at a later date. This either means they will be added to the lineup as is (hopefully without another price increase), or YouTube TV will introduce a package system. So, stay tuned.