Are you fed up with Cable TV?

[tothedj]

I was reading a article on another web site talking about how many cable networks are running so-called
"marathons" of past shows either running or have ran in the past, in the third quarter of 2010, 741,000
subscribers pulled the plug on cable service, and as many know by now, rates are on the rise, again!,
which brings me to this question, "Are You Fed Up With Cable TV?", my answer is "yes" because we
should not have to pay for channels we don't want, let us choose what to watch.

 

[landtuna]

I dumped cable long, long ago because of their crappy PQ, downtime and cost. Went with both sat services for several years each but eventually dumped them too because I just didn't watch more than about five services and all the crap I didn't watch was costing me too much money.

If ala carte comes back I may rejoin - otherwise I'm done with cable and sat.

 

[sandiegoinexile]

Hmmmm, let's see. America is just now crawling out of the worst economic slowdown in 75 years. Is it any wonder that 750K households chopped the cable cord. The cable companies got all fat and happy in the 90s and 00s, consistently raising prices. At some point, nearly every customer considers his options, especially when programs are now widely available on the net/smartphones/DVD.

Very few consumers watch a wide variety of channels. Of course, the more persons in a household does multiply the number of channels actually watched, but when it comes down to buying food, paying the mortgage, upgrading your phone, or paying $$$$ to your cable company, the decision to drop the pricey cable with dozens of channels that no one in your household watches is a pretty easy one.

 

[Tom Wells]

I never ever had or would have cable, unless there were no commercials.

Television 'service" is not something that I would pay for. A television, yes.
But as long as we have a commercial broadcast model, let the advertiser carry the load.

Now, if the cable had a true analog RF wideband RF signal from an antenna farm in a location of my choice
with coverage from .5-108 mhz, I'd be first in line to sign up for THAT cable service.
But TV channels alone? Sorry. Life's too short to pay for cable TV.

 

[flytrap]

I was talking to my cousin last night and she is considering dropping her Direct TV because its too expensive. Vizio and other TV's and blue ray players now come with internet built in which lets you watch tons of TV shows and movies for free or you can rent movies from Walmarts VUDU service or Netflix. People are also getting add on boxes such as Roku and Apple TV so they can stream shows from their internet. I just recently found out about Boxee. which is another streaming box. You can get almost any network show that is on the internet plus VUDU, Netflix, and free stuff from youtube and numerous other apps that offer older movies and art house films for free. You can buy the box or you can get a computer you don't use anymore and connect it to your TV's HDMI or monitor cable to make your own box. It works pretty good.

With over the air picture quality being vastly superior to whats on cable, plus with all the extra subchannels available, I can't see why anyone would want to pay to get lousy service and poor quality when you can get local TV for free right right off the air. And the cable and satelite severes often don't even carry subchannels and low power stations. I'll stick to my outside antenna and my Boxee. I could care less about cable. I suspect the cable companies will lose even more subscribers as soon as people find out they have wireless streaming TV on their blue ray and new sets they bought on black friday.

 

[kenglish]

The FCC (Federal Computer Commission) has an answer to all your problems:

http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2010/db1123/DOC-303014A1.pdf

They are going to end OTA TV as soon as possible (a year or so), and make everybody watch on the Internet. So, your only worries will be:
1) Which ex-Cable Company will I pay for my broadband service?
2) How much will it cost me?
3) How much will formerly-Free TV programming cost me, when free is gone?

Of course, you will have the option of placing a huge VHF antenna on your house, so you can still receive the standard-definition channels that will still exist as very low power, "shared-but-innovative", channels

 

[BlueWanderer]

I'm more fed up with Ad Council's public service announcements, especially the ones about childhood asthma with a goldfish flapping around and the "Precious Cargo" booster seat ad. It's not the messages that bothers me so much, although they could have redone both of them especially the goldfish one, it's the heavy rotation on certain cable channels since September or October. I've notice they're not on the channel's national feed, so if you don't have Charter you more likely won't see these two ads. That awful nails-on-a-chalkboard sounding Smokey the Bear "matchsticks" PSA was in heavy rotation earlier this year, so I'm sure they find some other slightly annoying PSA to run into the ground after they're done with these two.

I think it's punishment for those who still watch the shows as they aired instead of getting a TiVo or some other PVR and skipping all of the commercials. I bet advertisers loved to hear that.

 

[kc1ih]

I think some of the cable/satellite channels are being killed by the cable/satellite companies DVS’s. Before the DVR the channels could get away with being repetitive because some people did not catch a show they wanted the first or second time it aired. Now with a DVR you record what you want and watch it when you want, so the same program repeating endlessly is just a waste for you.

 

[Markxxx]

Comcast is what made me hate cable.

I hade Prime Cable, no issues. They were bought by TCI, which also gave me no issues. TCI sold out to AT&T, which gave me no issues. Then Comcast bought AT&T out.

Every other month there were issues. How is it you can have no issues for years, then Comcast comes along and literally every other month they are going down, periods of black out.

As for doing away with OTA, the FCC did that for me. I can't get any DTV channels in my flat, 'cause Chicago buildings are too dense. Fortunately if I want to watch a show, I can walk over to the library and use my laptop there (it has a digital tuner).

I must say I don't miss TV that much. And I still can watch WCIU on analog 23, which comes in near perfect <sigh>

 

[azumanga]

I've notice [the PSAs are] not on the channel's national feed, so if you don't have Charter you more likely won't see these two ads.

Bright House in Tampa Bay also show PSAs on occasion in their local inserts, though they're few and far between -- most likely you'll find either a paid ad or a promo for Bright House's service or Bay News 9 (Bright House's news channel).

 

[johnnyu]

I live in Hanover, Pa. I moved to Pa. from Maryand in 1976. So, it is important for me to have Baltimore channels. ( Wish I had DC channels also.) Everybody I know with the dish advise me that they do not have any Maryland channels. I can't live without my Maryland channels so the dish is not an option.

 

[Neel]

I'm feeling the same way about cable and after reading everyone's posts here, I'm glad to see I'm not alone. I feel like most of the channels are a waste and when I actually get time to watch something, there's nothing of interest on.

I find myself using the internet more and more to watch TV shows. My only issue is that there is absolutely no OTA reception where I live so I have to have some form of cable/satellite for the time being.

 

[radiojomo]

Remember, cable TV is a luxury.
The big secret fee that people usually don't notice are receiver/DVR fees, think about it, you pay $5 for a regular receiver per month, probably around $7-$10 for a DVR per month and you probably have more than 1 TV, leading to even more costs. Times this across the period of your two year contract, times it even more if you stick with the company, and then if you decide to ditch, they almost always make you return the equipment! What gives!

 

[quadraphonic]

We cut the satellite a couple months back, because it cost too much for what we were getting.
Between Netflix and 10-20 channels OTA depending on conditions during a rescan, we don't miss much that was on. What we used to watch is online, if it's not, oh well.
My parents also cut their cable last year, and they don't watch anything but DVD movies these days, a couple of them a week.

 

[philosofy]

Until I can get someway to watch live sports in HD via the net I'm keeping my setup. Its one of the few luxuries that we still have right now.

 

[mjlarochelle]

The only thing I would miss without cable would be live sports. Other than that most of what's on cable is also available through the Internet.

 

[KML0224]

My limited basic cable bill with Comcast here in New Britain, CT comes to $19.78. I don't use any kind of converter. I have a 26" Sanyo LCD HDTV. Besides the so-called P.E.G. channels, I also get NECN (New England Cable News). QVC, TBS and the locals are in HD. The World Series and the Super Bowl are still on "free" TV. I'm still able to see WWE Raw on somebody's internet feed or at WWE's website the next day, so it's no a total loss. If it's a pay-per-view show of theirs that I was at, I'll just buy the DVD when it's released, since I already saw the show live.

 

[BlueWanderer]

Cable TV maybe a luxury, but in my area OTA reception is poor so it's a necessity in order to follow local news without reading a newspaper or be online. Also, not everything I'm interest in watching is easily available on the Internet.

Maybe I did go a little too far in complaining about PSAs. I guess after putting up with the Smokey the Bear "matchsticks" ad for months, then seeing a goldfish up close flapping around while children are speaking with that horrible cutesy accent in the background you tend to lose patience with PSAs real fast.

 

[rwells2265]

There is only one thing standing between me and dropping what I believe to be a near-complete wasteland that's called cable. 

That one thing is called "a wife."  And I love her too much to live without one.   ;D

I would love nothing more than to buy that OTA DVR I've read discussed elsewhere on this board, and run local channels off the air via DTV - while keeping a "lifeline basic" package as backup, as reception of our OTA locals isn't 100% perfect on all our stations ... plus, to be able to keep the bundled rate for broadband.

Which brings me to the 800# elephant in the room: the only option for many to receive higher-speed broadband is the cable company.  In my case, Comcast.  A company with enough brute force to make it difficult for folks with bright ideas like dropping cable and going with Apple TV, Netflix, etc.   The technology is already there to throttle back traffic based on server ... I'm sure you know where I'm going with this.  

I have one other option: AT&T DSL (setting aside the fact that the fastest DSL speed is hard-pressed to keep up with the bandwidth needed for larger online video).  I can get 6 megabit service .... provided I also pay AT&T for regular phone service!  They offer naked DSL, but at a speed of 1.5 mbps.  Landline?  Paying for long distance?  Telemarketers/political/survey calls?  Don't think so.

So we have the big problem of the "new media" being controlled by those companies desperately clinging to the "old media" and conducting what amounts to blackmail.

If Apple, Netflix, Google, or others are to have a prayer in this environment ... something is going to have to give!  Either allow other services to offer broadband over existing cable infrastructure (while paying those who built/maintain those networks, of course), or get to work developing a good high-speed wireless broadband ... and even a faster, more reliable satellite internet.

/rant

--Russell

 

[landtuna]

I have one other option: AT&T DSL (setting aside the fact that the fastest DSL speed is hard-pressed to keep up with the bandwidth needed for larger online video). I can get 6 megabit service .... provided I also pay AT&T for regular phone service! They offer naked DSL, but at a speed of 1.5 mbps. Landline? Paying for long distance? Telemarketers/political/survey calls? Don't think so.

I have Qwest DSL at the 1.5 Mbps speed and have had no streaming issues. My service (as measured by Qwest and others) runs a consistent 1.4xx Mbps downstream and .8xx Mbps upstream. I could upgrade to 7 Mbps for a few bucks per month more but so far it isn't necessary.

I also have landline service. For long-distance I use either a calling card (when away from home) at a cost of .02 cents/minute or Google Voice (at home) which is free. I've had no problem with either.

Several years ago I placed my number in the Do Not Call list and, aside from a very few local companies who obviously are not checking the list, have had no telemarketing calls. Before the list was implemented we had hundreds. I do get political calls (mostly robo or recorded messages) and non-profits calling but maybe only twice per month on average.

I have always considered the interruption of cell phone calls worse than what they are supposed to prevent - and at exorbitant cost - so I don't carry one. We have an answering machine on the landline so I can choose to be available when I want.