# AT&T TV - recording sports



## dstout (Jul 19, 2005)

I don't see a way to add extra time to sports recordings. Is it there and I am missing it?


----------



## espaeth (Oct 14, 2003)

No option to extend recordings. Your best (and only?) option is to select the next program in the guide and record that as well.


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

AT&T TV really needs to do some simple tweaks to improve their cloud DVR. How hard is it to offer an option to extend the timer? Or have a single screen that shows all the recordings you have set in case you want to delete or edit any of them? Those are base-level features of typical cable/satellite DVRs.


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

NashGuy said:


> AT&T TV really needs to do some simple tweaks to improve their cloud DVR. How hard is it to offer an option to extend the timer? Or have a single screen that shows all the recordings you have set in case you want to delete or edit any of them? Those are base-level features of typical cable/satellite DVRs.


The second I agree they need to get on. The first no streaming service orders that


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

compnurd said:


> The second I agree they need to get on. The first no streaming service orders that


Maybe no streaming service offers that but AT&T TV is competing with traditional cable TV services like Xfinity TV with X1. So they need to offer something like timer extensions. (And, as far as streaming cable TV services go, YouTube TV automatically monitors events and adjusts DVR recording times to avoid cut-offs, e.g. when a game goes into overtime. Other cloud DVRs should be doing the same thing.)


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

NashGuy said:


> Maybe no streaming service offers that but AT&T TV is competing with traditional cable TV services like Xfinity TV with X1. So they need to offer something like timer extensions. (And, as far as streaming cable TV services go, YouTube TV automatically monitors events and adjusts DVR recording times to avoid cut-offs, e.g. when a game goes into overtime. Other cloud DVRs should be doing the same thing.)


YTTV may do it. However the reviews are horrendous


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

compnurd said:


> YTTV may do it. However the reviews are horrendous


Huh. I've only read good things about that feature, although I can't say I've read *that* many posts about it.


----------



## espaeth (Oct 14, 2003)

compnurd said:


> YTTV may do it. However the reviews are horrendous


The only real complaint I've seen is that it doesn't work like a standard "single queue" DVR; you can only mark items from your library as watched, not remove episodes after watching them. When it was first launched they were replacing some recordings with forced-commercial VOD versions, but that's no longer the case on any channel.

IMO, YTTV is hands down the best DVR offered by any streaming service available today. The knocks against the service would be the increasing cost, and picture quality seems to have taken a bit of a hit lately.


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

espaeth said:


> The only real complaint I've seen is that it doesn't work like a standard "single queue" DVR; you can only mark items from your library as watched, not remove episodes after watching them. When it was first launched they were replacing some recordings with forced-commercial VOD versions, but that's no longer the case on any channel.
> 
> IMO, YTTV is hands down the best DVR offered by any streaming service available today. The knocks against the service would be the increasing cost, and picture quality seems to have taken a bit of a hit lately.


Wasn't referring to DVR as a whole


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

NashGuy said:


> Huh. I've only read good things about that feature, although I can't say I've read *that* many posts about it.


Everything I see is that it is very very inconsistent


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

espaeth said:


> The only real complaint I've seen is that it doesn't work like a standard "single queue" DVR; you can only mark items from your library as watched, not remove episodes after watching them. When it was first launched they were replacing some recordings with forced-commercial VOD versions, but that's no longer the case on any channel.
> 
> IMO, YTTV is hands down the best DVR offered by any streaming service available today. The knocks against the service would be the increasing cost, and *picture quality seems to have taken a bit of a hit lately.*


I tried it a few months ago. PQ wasn't all that good then. Might be the best cloud DVR out there but I thought it paled by comparison to our D* DVRs.

Rich


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

Rich said:


> I tried it a few months ago. PQ wasn't all that good then. Might be the best cloud DVR out there but I thought it paled by comparison to our D* DVRs.


When you say YTTV's cloud DVR "pales by comparison" to DTV's DVR, I assume you mean for trick play controls. And unless your streaming device is doing a cache of the live stream (thereby obviating the need to interact with the server), trick play on a live broadcast is always going to be better with a traditional DVR. (On my Apple TV 4K, I use the Channels app to watch live OTA TV and it caches the live stream, making trick play controls just as responsive and exact as on a TiVo.)

On the other hand, let me know when any local DVR, such as a Genie, has unlimited tuners and unlimited storage space, like YTTV's cloud DVR...


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

NashGuy said:


> When you say YTTV's cloud DVR "pales by comparison" to DTV's DVR, I assume you mean for trick play controls. And unless your streaming device is doing a cache of the live stream (thereby obviating the need to interact with the server), trick play on a live broadcast is always going to be better with a traditional DVR. (On my Apple TV 4K, I use the Channels app to watch live OTA TV and it caches the live stream, making trick play controls just as responsive and exact as on a TiVo.)
> 
> On the other hand, let me know when any local DVR, such as a Genie, has unlimited tuners and unlimited storage space, like YTTV's cloud DVR...


Yes, I was talking about trickplay. During ball games. I know the cloud DVRs have unlimited this and that. I have no interest in capacity anymore. But I can tell you that when all I used was D* for watching TV I had a setup with 27 tuners and 25TBs of capacity. I gave that up a few years ago. Not "unlimited" but close enough for me.

Rich


----------



## espaeth (Oct 14, 2003)

Rich said:


> PQ wasn't all that good then.


I think it depends on the channel. For channels that broadcast in 720P native (ESPN, FOX Sports, Sinclair/FOX Sports regionals, etc) there has never been a big difference in quality from the DIRECTV NOW days through services like Playstation Vue, Hulu Live, FuboTV, or YoutubeTV. With DIRECTV satellite using dynamic compression, most nights any of the streaming services offer noticeably better quality.

Where things get murky is the 1080i channels because of the processing to get interlaced video into full frames for streaming. So the NBC networks (NBC, NBCSN, Golf, Olympic channel, etc), CBS networks, and regional sports networks like Altitude, SNY, and YES broadcasting in 1080i require additional provider processing to get a streamable feed. That involves everything from low end approaches like blending the odd/even fields together and cutting the framerate to 30fps (ala Sling) to various motion-adaptive de-interlacing algorithms. Whatever voodoo BAMTech built for MLB.tv and NHL.tv is the absolute best at live sports de-interlacing, followed by the solution that ATT uses, then everyone else is downhill from there.



Rich said:


> Might be the best cloud DVR out there but I thought it paled by comparison to our D* DVRs.


There are many things I don't miss from the D* days: partial recordings due to weather, having to hope and pray that recordings I scheduled via the app actually made it to my receiver, and hoping I padded recordings enough to not miss overtime.

The best part about the YTTV DVR is the only reason to _not_ record something is to reduce the size of your library. There's no reason to not record entire leagues just on the off-chance you might want to watch one of the games on delay.

As of today, ATT TV is the hands down winner in video quality for 1080i sports channels. They're also the only live streaming service that's doing 5.1 audio. The biggest weakness of the service is the limited-functionality DVR and the extra delay in the streaming feeds; ATT TV is 25-30 seconds behing YTTV, which was 20-25 seconds behind D* satellite when I was comparing them side-by-side. On the plus side, at least ATT implemented series recording for sports leagues - with FuboTV you have to go through and manually select every single game you want to record.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

espaeth said:


> I think it depends on the channel. For channels that broadcast in 720P native (ESPN, FOX Sports, Sinclair/FOX Sports regionals, etc) there has never been a big difference in quality from the DIRECTV NOW days through services like Playstation Vue, Hulu Live, FuboTV, or YoutubeTV. With DIRECTV satellite using dynamic compression, most nights any of the streaming services offer noticeably better quality.


I wasn't comparing the PQ of D* to anything. I don't watch anything but news and sports on D*. I've been heavy into streaming for a few years now. I just read my post and I can see I could have done a better job of writing it. I was comparing the picture on YTTV to what I get on my ATVs when viewing the same content. I know that's not a fair comparison, just like comparing D*'s PQ to what I get streaming. Sorry for the confusion.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

espaeth said:


> There are many things I don't miss from the D* days: partial recordings due to weather, having to hope and pray that recordings I scheduled via the app actually made it to my receiver, and hoping I padded recordings enough to not miss overtime.
> 
> The best part about the YTTV DVR is the only reason to _not_ record something is to reduce the size of your library. There's no reason to not record entire leagues just on the off-chance you might want to watch one of the games on delay.
> 
> As of today, ATT TV is the hands down winner in video quality for 1080i sports channels. They're also the only live streaming service that's doing 5.1 audio. The biggest weakness of the service is the limited-functionality DVR and the extra delay in the streaming feeds; ATT TV is 25-30 seconds behing YTTV, which was 20-25 seconds behind D* satellite when I was comparing them side-by-side. On the plus side, at least ATT implemented series recording for sports leagues - with FuboTV you have to go through and manually select every single game you want to record.


The reason that ATTTV interests me is the PQ. I thought it was 1080p, like the ATVs. I have no issues with my D* DVRs, nothing to complain about. We rarely are bothered by rain-fade and the video and audio problems I suffered through for years have been dealt with by using SSDs rather than HDDs. My DVRs are as stable as my ATVs. Concerns about how full my DVRs are have gone away, all I record are ball games and some news. I don't have a library of archived shows on my DVRs because I watch the ball games and delete them, same with news. Live TV? Never watch it.

Rich


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

Rich said:


> The reason that ATTTV interests me is the PQ. I thought it was 1080p, like the ATVs. I have no issues with my D* DVRs, nothing to complain about. We rarely are bothered by rain-fade and the video and audio problems I suffered through for years have been dealt with by using SSDs rather than HDDs. My DVRs are as stable as my ATVs. Concerns about how full my DVRs are have gone away, all I record are ball games and some news. I don't have a library of archived shows on my DVRs because I watch the ball games and delete them, same with news. Live TV? Never watch it.
> 
> Rich


720P channels are just that. 1080I channels come in at 1080P


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

Directv is currently moving the recording manager on the Genie DVR to a different screen. Some of the UI elements between ATTTV and Directv follow each other. So it makes we wonder if additional recording options are coming to ATT TV. On the PQ side YTTV’s problem is there bit rate isn’t high enough


----------



## espaeth (Oct 14, 2003)

compnurd said:


> 720P channels are just that. 1080I channels come in at 1080P


I think Rich is referring to the box? The ATV will upscale everything to 1080p or 4k (depending on your ATV hardware version, and output resolution configuration). The ATT TV Osprey box will upscale everything to match the output resolution - although annoyingly for 4K it locks everything to HDR, so depending on your TV it will either look okay-ish to blown-out depending on how your display handles SDR content mapped into HDR color space.



compnurd said:


> On the PQ side YTTV's problem is there bit rate isn't high enough


I've been pulling the raw feeds using developer tools to try and narrow this down, and it's weird. ATT TV's H264 profile has a higher indicated peak bitrate than YTTV, but for all the streams I've looked at YTTV had a higher observed/actual average bitrate. So for a channel like NBCSN, ATT TV has an indicated peak bitrate of 9.56mbps, but ends up having an average bitrate around 5.4mpbs. YTTV has an indicated peak bitrate of 8mbps, but average bitrate has been around 7.3mbps.

What's interesting is ATT TV is 25-30 seconds behind YTTV, which is already ~30 seconds behind OTA feeds if I compare them side-by-side. If I had to guess, it's the extra time they give to video processing (from de-interlacing to compression) making the difference and not bitrate. Despite the bitrate being almost 2mbps lower, the ATT TV picture is the clear winner on quality.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

compnurd said:


> 720P channels are just that. 1080I channels come in at 1080P


The 720p Fox puts out for ballgames really sucks. Been that way forever.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

compnurd said:


> Directv is currently moving the recording manager on the Genie DVR to a different screen. Some of the UI elements between ATTTV and Directv follow each other. So it makes we wonder if additional recording options are coming to ATT TV. On the PQ side YTTV's problem is there bit rate isn't high enough


I really thought the PQ on YTTV was disappointing. Felt the same way about PS Vue when I tried it.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

espaeth said:


> *I think Rich is referring to the box?* The ATV will upscale everything to 1080p or 4k (depending on your ATV hardware version, and output resolution configuration). The ATT TV Osprey box will upscale everything to match the output resolution - although annoyingly for 4K it locks everything to HDR, so depending on your TV it will either look okay-ish to blown-out depending on how your display handles SDR content mapped into HDR color space.


Correct. I can't complain about the PQ I get from my ATVs. Give you an example of what I mean: I tried watching _Yellowstone _on D* (IIRC) when it first came out and quickly gave up on it because of the dismal picture. We were looking for something interesting last night on the Peacock app and my wife asked me about _Yellowstone_. I told her I had tried it and quickly gave up on it. We ended up trying it and, wow! What a difference in PQ! Always been a fan of anything with Costner and now I can appreciate _Yellowstone_. On my ATVs, simply the best streaming boxes out there, I think.

Rich


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Rich, I agree the ATV’s are the best streaming box out there. All the services are supported and the video and audio quality are top notch.

If the damned remote was better I would always use mine.


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

Rich said:


> I really thought the PQ on YTTV was disappointing. Felt the same way about PS Vue when I tried it.
> 
> Rich


I didnt really notice any issues.. But only used it for 2 days before we switched It wasnt as glaring as Dish


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

lparsons21 said:


> Rich, I agree the ATV's are the best streaming box out there. All the services are supported and the video and audio quality are top notch.
> 
> If the damned remote was better I would always use mine.


yup lol that fing remote. I really hope we get a new one when the new box launches


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

This $30 remote is for anyone who loves their Apple TV but hates its Siri Remote


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

b4pjoe said:


> This $30 remote is for anyone who loves their Apple TV but hates its Siri Remote


No better or worse than using my Harmony remote. No Siri support is a non-starter.


----------



## B. Shoe (Apr 3, 2008)

I don't despise the ATV remote. It's got some shortcomings, but I've learned how to optimize usage like any other system you'd have to learn. I'm a heavy Siri user, so that helps. Scrolling through channels on YTTV with the remote gets to be a chore, but I've stacked everything that I spend a large majority of time viewing near the top of the channel list.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

lparsons21 said:


> Rich, I agree the ATV's are the best streaming box out there. All the services are supported and the video and audio quality are top notch.
> 
> If the damned remote was better I would always use mine.


If the "damned" remote is used for what it's designed for I think it's superb. If you use it on a cable replacement app...well, that's not what it was designed for. Another reason I don't want to bother with a cable replacement service, I really enjoy my ATVs and their remotes. The remote ATTTV uses is one of the major things about that service that intrigues me, which is designed specifically for a cable replacement service. I have tried using the ATVs on CRSs and it wasn't enjoyable.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

compnurd said:


> I didnt really notice any issues.. But only used it for 2 days before we switched It wasnt as glaring as Dish


I found it rather "dull" picture-wise. No pop. Not a "glaring" problem but the more I watched the more it annoyed me. The same thing happened when I tried PS Vue.

Rich


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Rich said:


> If the "damned" remote is used for what it's designed for I think it's superb. If you use it on a cable replacement app...well, that's not what it was designed for. Another reason I don't want to bother with a cable replacement service, I really enjoy my ATVs and their remotes. The remote ATTTV uses is one of the major things about that service that intrigues me, which is designed specifically for a cable replacement service. I have tried using the ATVs on CRSs and it wasn't enjoyable.
> 
> Rich


Yeah, ATT TV's remote for their box is great in many ways.

Downsides are the general sluggishness of the box itself. Voice works fine once it decides to listen which can sometimes take awhile.

My biggest complaint with the ATV remote is with live streaming services as sliding across the touchpad, even at the slowest setting is too sensitive.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

B. Shoe said:


> I don't despise the ATV remote. It's got some shortcomings, but I've learned how to optimize usage like any other system you'd have to learn. I'm a heavy Siri user, so that helps. Scrolling through channels on YTTV with the remote gets to be a chore, but I've stacked everything that I spend a large majority of time viewing near the top of the channel list.


When they designed the remotes and boxes I don't think they considered using ATVs on cable replacement apps. IIRC, the CRSs didn't even exist until a couple of years ago. I can understand people complaining about ATVs on cable replacement services but when used on sites such as Netflix they work very well.

Suppose you buy a Lincoln Towncar. You drive it for a year or so and find out all your friends are getting into off-road activities. Not to be ignored you take the Lincoln off-road and find out it's not made for that. Would you complain about it and keep on using it in that manner or would you get rid of it and get a vehicle you could take off-road? You need a remote and a box made for a cable replacement service.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

lparsons21 said:


> Yeah, ATT TV's remote for their box is great in many ways.
> 
> Downsides are the general sluggishness of the box itself. Voice works fine once it decides to listen which can sometimes take awhile.
> 
> My biggest complaint with the ATV remote is with live streaming services as sliding across the touchpad, even at the slowest setting is too sensitive.


I don't know what to say about the settings, I have to have mine on the lowest setting and I have no issues with them. I don't use the pad very much anymore but I would miss it if it disappeared.

Rich


----------



## espaeth (Oct 14, 2003)

Rich said:


> I tried watching _Yellowstone _on D* (IIRC) when it first came out and quickly gave up on it because of the dismal picture. We were looking for something interesting last night on the Peacock app and my wife asked me about _Yellowstone_. I told her I had tried it and quickly gave up on it. We ended up trying it and, wow! What a difference in PQ!


To tie this back to the reason this thread was started, I think this is a great example of why ATT TV's current DVR implementation isn't good enough. By sticking to just implementing recording based on program guide time slots they cover episodic content very well, but that's the content that is moving away to other services.

Why would I DVR standard TV shows if I could get them in higher quality without commercials through services like Peacock, Hulu, Netflix, or CBS:AA? Who has the best trickplay implementation becomes moot when there are no more commercials to skip.

The thing the DVR is going to keep being important for is live events like sports, and for that manual time extensions were always a crude implementation because it requires you to guess what the future will hold. As YoutubeTV has been able to demonstrate, there are a number of things that can be used to automatically adjust program times. Most major sports have live stats that you can see on various websites - if the game is still building stats, clearly it's still going on. The next level would be to scrape the video feed for things like time clocks and score bugs.

Last year YoutubeTV implemented a DVR feature called Key Plays ( View sports stats and key plays - YouTube TV Help ) where you can jump to specific time points in a game recording based on stats. Want to see a hit, run, or double play in a baseball game? Just click through the list of key plays and you can see what happened. Just recently they've upgraded that feature to "Key plays to live" where it shows all the key plays that have happened so far in the game in order, and then joins the game in progress. It's basically an automatic highlight reel to get you caught up to the game as you start watching.

Meanwhile, I've paid for a month of ATT TV Now to give a fair assessment of the service -- and so far when I've tried to add series recordings for F1 races, it's showing me program titles from ESPN Deportes even though it's really recording from ESPN/ESPN2, the practices and qualification broadcasts worked just fine, but the race itself was unwatchable for the DVR and kept throwing errors. It's been rather disappointing on the functionality front, but for the live feeds they definitely have the best 1080i to 1080p video processing of the live TV services.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

espaeth said:


> Why would I DVR standard TV shows if I could get them in higher quality without commercials through services like Peacock, Hulu, Netflix, or CBS:AA? Who has the best trickplay implementation becomes moot when there are no more commercials to skip.


Same question I've been asking for a few years. And the reason I don't have as many DVRs as used to have.

Rich


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

espaeth said:


> To tie this back to the reason this thread was started, I think this is a great example of why ATT TV's current DVR implementation isn't good enough. By sticking to just implementing recording based on program guide time slots they cover episodic content very well, but that's the content that is moving away to other services.
> 
> Why would I DVR standard TV shows if I could get them in higher quality without commercials through services like Peacock, Hulu, Netflix, or CBS:AA? Who has the best trickplay implementation becomes moot when there are no more commercials to skip.


Convenience. That's one of the reasons, and it is a pretty good one. Watch or record a show all inside one app, only one UI to deal with. That makes for ease and convenience.

Right now Peacock doesn't do next day or even next week on their channel sourced shows. Hulu does for quite a few channels, Netflix doesn't at all generally delayed a year. CBS:AA is next day for CBS shows, I'm wondering just how well that will hold up for the newly added content.

While you can build up a long list of things to watch by using free/low-cost subscriptions, you can only do it if you are comfortable with switching apps and/or boxes.

But right now, because of the lack of new episodes/shows it just doesn't matter much. When things normalize I have to wonder how all of it will end up.


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

lparsons21 said:


> No better or worse than using my Harmony remote. No Siri support is a non-starter.


I haven't actually bought that. I got an email about it. It looks interesting. It is a trade off of Siri to get rid of that silly touch pad. I have found nothing from any service where I like that touch pad.


----------



## espaeth (Oct 14, 2003)

lparsons21 said:


> Right now Peacock doesn't do next day or even next week on their channel sourced shows.


The free tier doesn't get next-day shows, but the premium and premium(no ads) tiers do. The wife really likes watching World of Dance which has frame-rate issues on Hulu, so she's been thrilled with it now being on Peacock. Same deal for Titan Games, and although video playback was fine on Hulu, on Peacock it has 5.1 audio now.



lparsons21 said:


> While you can build up a long list of things to watch by using free/low-cost subscriptions, you can only do it if you are comfortable with switching apps and/or boxes.


The nice thing about the "TV" app on the Apple TV is that it integrates with CBS:AA, Hulu, Peacock, Disney+, Amazon Prime, and HBO MAX. Once you find a program the first time (which, admittedly, can be annoying), we've really enjoyed being able to just pick things out of "Up Next" and having it automatically jump straight to that show in whatever app happens to have it.

It's not perfect, but I do like the promise this configuration shows.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

espaeth said:


> The free tier doesn't get next-day shows, but the premium and premium(no ads) tiers do. The wife really likes watching World of Dance which has frame-rate issues on Hulu, so she's been thrilled with it now being on Peacock. Same deal for Titan Games, and although video playback was fine on Hulu, on Peacock it has 5.1 audio now.
> 
> The nice thing about the "TV" app on the Apple TV is that it integrates with CBS:AA, Hulu, Peacock, Disney+, Amazon Prime, and HBO MAX. Once you find a program the first time (which, admittedly, can be annoying), we've really enjoyed being able to just pick things out of "Up Next" and having it automatically jump straight to that show in whatever app happens to have it.
> 
> It's not perfect, but I do like the promise this configuration shows.


My bad on CBS and next day airings. Since there isn't anything new or even interesting to me on any of the broadcast stations, I hadn't really noticed. Inane game shows and 'contest' type shows are of no interest to me at all.

The TV app on the AppleTV is pretty good though oft times the show's sourcing is a bit odd. It sometimes, but not always shows some series I'm watching on Netflix, but since they don't actually integrate Netflix, it shows source as a purchase/rental item from Apple. But it isn't just with Netflix shows, it happens with others too though not as often. I tend not to use it as I usually binge watch various things.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

b4pjoe said:


> I haven't actually bought that. I got an email about it. It looks interesting. It is a trade off of Siri to get rid of that silly touch pad. I have found nothing from any service where I like that touch pad.


I don't use the pad very much either. I would not like to see it disappear, though. When you need to get to the end of a program that pad gets you there faster than any remote I've ever used.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

espaeth said:


> The nice thing about the "TV" app on the Apple TV is that it integrates with CBS:AA, Hulu, Peacock, Disney+, Amazon Prime, and HBO MAX. Once you find a program the first time (which, admittedly, can be annoying), we've really enjoyed being able to just pick things out of "Up Next" and having it automatically jump straight to that show in whatever app happens to have it.
> 
> It's not perfect, but I do like the promise this configuration shows.


Apple isn't perfect but Apple comes closer to perfection when it comes to streaming boxes than anybody else, in my opinion. I think they'll get the app straightened out. I didn't like the early generations of the ATVs but they fixed everything and we ended up with the best box out there. They will fix the app, it has annoyed me too at times.

Rich


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

Rich said:


> I don't use the pad very much either. I would not like to see it disappear, though. When you need to get to the end of a program that pad gets you there faster than any remote I've ever used.
> 
> Rich


Ideally they could keep the track pad but put actual physical directional buttons on the outer edge of it.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

b4pjoe said:


> Ideally they could keep the trackpad but put actual physical directional buttons on the outer edge of it.


I've never said the remote was perfect, it could be better. That remote was not designed for use with cable replacement services. That is a problem every maker of streaming boxes is gonna have to face. I'd like to see a larger Apple remote. Adding a Sidekick to the Apple remote makes the remote much easier to use and has programmable buttons that add to the remote's functionality. I'd like to see an Apple remote that has those features. And that size.

Rich


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

As it is now it isn't that great for streaming services and navigating through the icons. First swipe you go 4 icons too far. Then two not enough in the other direction. Then it goes up/down instead of sideways. Never to the right place without great effort. The track pad that is just barely bigger than a postage stamp isn't great for precise navigation anywhere.


----------



## espaeth (Oct 14, 2003)

b4pjoe said:


> As it is now it isn't that great for streaming services and navigating through the icons. First swipe you go 4 icons too far. Then two not enough in the other direction.


The ATV Siri remote should have come with some sort of tutorial or manual. Swiping is the most frustrating way to navigate with that remote - you can use it like a standard D-pad instead. Just touch the top/bottom/left/right of the track pad (without clicking), and you can move exactly 1 step in the cardinal direction you choose.

Once I figured out the D-pad navigation thing, the Siri remote has become my favorite remote to use.

Edit: adding video demo:


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

Yes I am aware of the directional D-Pad without clicking. I am not fond of it either.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

espaeth said:


> The ATV Siri remote should have come with some sort of tutorial or manual. Swiping is the most frustrating way to navigate with that remote - you can use it like a standard D-pad instead. Just touch the top/bottom/left/right of the track pad (without clicking), and you can move exactly 1 step in the cardinal direction you choose.
> 
> Once I figured out the D-pad navigation thing, *the Siri remote has become my favorite remote to use.*
> 
> Edit: adding video demo:


When used strictly for streaming sites it is my favorite too. For linear TV I prefer the "old" D* remotes. Yes, a tutorial years ago would have been helpful. I'm pretty comfortable with them now.

Rich


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Rich said:


> When used strictly for streaming sites it is my favorite too. For linear TV I prefer the "old" D* remotes. Yes, a tutorial years ago would have been helpful. I'm pretty comfortable with them now.
> 
> Rich


It isn't my favorite by a long shot. Too blasted small and topped with an overly sensitive touchpad just makes it a PITA to use. In fact I'm more often using my FireTV Cube 2nd Generation because it has all the same apps available, a couple by sideloading, that I can get on the AppleTV. Speed of operation is actually quicker for most everything too. And the remote is great! The only downside is that the AppleTV+ app doesn't do Atmos or 4K on the FireTV but since that is one of my least watched services, even that isn't an issue.


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

lparsons21 said:


> Right now Peacock doesn't do next day or even next week on their channel sourced shows. Hulu does for quite a few channels, Netflix doesn't at all generally delayed a year. CBS:AA is next day for CBS shows, I'm wondering just how well that will hold up for the newly added content.





espaeth said:


> The free tier doesn't get next-day shows, but the premium and premium(no ads) tiers do.


Peacock's free tier does include next-day access to NBC primetime series that are in their first season only. (It may also include same-day or next-day access to certain NBC news shows too, including NBC Nightly News and Meet the Press.) I think NBC was already doing this to some extent in the past with the NBC app; while most content there requires a cable TV login, new shows desperate for viewers were sometimes free for anyone to stream. The broadcast nets are finding it increasingly difficult to create new hits any more.

And, yes, Peacock's premium tier includes next-day access to all of NBC's primetime series. (Although so does Hulu, for a few more years anyhow.)

As for all those new series from Viacom channels that are being added to CBS AA, they've confirmed that they're past seasons only. Apparently CBS will remain the only channel that sees its current content immediately added to the app. ViacomCBS seems to think that they can make CBS AA a top-tier streaming service without cannibalizing the cable channel bundle. I'm skeptical.



espaeth said:


> The nice thing about the "TV" app on the Apple TV is that it integrates with CBS:AA, Hulu, Peacock, Disney+, Amazon Prime, and HBO MAX. Once you find a program the first time (which, admittedly, can be annoying), we've really enjoyed being able to just pick things out of "Up Next" and having it automatically jump straight to that show in whatever app happens to have it.
> 
> It's not perfect, but I do like the promise this configuration shows.


Yeah, I'm a big believer in universal content-centric "umbrella" UIs like Apple's TV app. I think they're the future of video. Comcast is trying to do the same thing with their X1 and Flex UIs. Convenient aggregation, organization and tracking of content from all the different sources you use is the name of the game.

Looks like Google's forthcoming revamped Android TV UI that will supposedly debut on their own device will be similar. They're reportedly courting the major apps to support it. Hopefully they get Netflix on board. So far, they're the lone holdout on Apple's TV app.

Google's next streaming device will shake up the Android TV world

P.S. On Apple TV, if you know the name of a series or movie, you don't need to scroll around looking for it. Just click the Siri button and say the name and it will pop up inside the TV app. From there, you can read about it, add to your Up Next queue or begin watching.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

lparsons21 said:


> It isn't my favorite by a long shot. Too blasted small and topped with an overly sensitive touchpad just makes it a PITA to use. In fact I'm more often using my FireTV Cube 2nd Generation because it has all the same apps available, a couple by sideloading, that I can get on the AppleTV. Speed of operation is actually quicker for most everything too. And the remote is great! The only downside is that the AppleTV+ app doesn't do Atmos or 4K on the FireTV but since that is one of my least watched services, even that isn't an issue.


Wasn't that you a couple months ago that was complaining about the Cubes?

Rich


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Rich said:


> Wasn't that you a couple months ago that was complaining about the Cubes?
> 
> Rich


Yep, I had a 1st gen and the speed difference and performance overall is hugely better in the Gen 2's.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

lparsons21 said:


> Yep, I had a 1st gen and the speed difference and performance overall is hugely better in the Gen 2's.


I have the second generation Cube and I don't see any difference in performance. When they came out the reviews said we wouldn't see much difference.

Rich


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Rich said:


> I have the second generation Cube and I don't see any difference in performance. When they came out the reviews said we wouldn't see much difference.
> 
> Rich


Can't help what you and some reviewers see, I just know the when I got my 2nd gen it was a very noticeable speed bump.


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

espaeth said:


> you can use it like a standard D-pad instead.


I did not know that. Thanks



Rich said:


> I prefer the "old" D* remotes.


The old brick ones? Yeah I liked those better as well. The transport buttons were laid out better.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

TheRatPatrol said:


> The old brick ones? Yeah I liked those better as well. The transport buttons were laid out better.


Yup, I think the older remotes are the best remotes I've ever used for traditional TV viewing. And the newer peanut looking, goofy remotes? The remotes I have complained about since I got one? I think they are the second-best remote for traditional TV viewing that I have ever used. Yeah, I was wrong about them.

Rich


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

b4pjoe said:


> Yes I am aware of the directional D-Pad without clicking. I am not fond of it either.


When "swiping" try not taking your finger off it. Just moving your finger about works well generally. Small movement should move to another row or colum. And if you need to lift your finger up off the pad, then place it back down on the opposite side of the pad and move your finger again. Simply swiping does make it more difficult to control how far it goes.

With that said, I don't believe any one remote is perfect for everyone. I think this one needs some tweaks, and I think they should have two versions or a second version you can by that uses arrow, ffwd and skip keys and maybe a small trackball.

My biggest complaint is that I think it should be shaped differently. But I find overall it's more streamlined than any other and effective, if you can get used to the track pad well enough. Adjusting its sensitivity also can help for different people.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> When "swiping" try not taking your finger off it. Just moving your finger about works well generally. Small movement should move to another row or column. And if you need to lift your finger up off the pad, then place it back down on the opposite side of the pad and move your finger again. Simply swiping does make it more difficult to control how far it goes.
> 
> With that said, I don't believe anyone remote is perfect for everyone. I think this one needs some tweaks, and I think they should have two versions or a second version you can buy that uses arrow, ffwd and skip keys, and maybe a small trackball.
> 
> My biggest complaint is that I think it should be shaped differently. But I find overall it's more streamlined than any other and effective, if you can get used to the trackpad well enough. Adjusting its sensitivity also can help for different people.


I just ordered the Function remote for the ATV. This $30 remote is for anyone who loves their Apple TV but hates its Siri Remote It must be popular, there's a wait. I like the Siri remote, just want to see if the Function remote serves any purpose.

Most of the complaints I've seen about the Siri remotes seem to be centered around using them on cable replacement services. Which they are obviously not meant for. The Function remote doesn't look like it would be useful as a remote for a cable replacement service either. No number pad, for one thing.

The sensitivity settings should not be ignored, you pointed them out to me years ago at a time I was ready to ditch the Siri remote because of the trackpad. I've had no other problems with the remotes since then. Of course, they could be better. I'd think you could say that about any remote.

Rich


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

Rich said:


> Most of the complaints I've seen about the Siri remotes seem to be centered around using them on cable replacement services. Which they are obviously not meant for. The Function remote doesn't look like it would be useful as a remote for a cable replacement service either. No number pad, for one thing.


None of the major streaming devices have remotes that are especially great for use with streaming cable TV services. If that's what you're after, you have to go with a service that offers its own Android TV device with custom remote, like Sling (AirTV Mini), AT&T TV or the forthcoming TVision.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

NashGuy said:


> None of the major streaming devices have remotes that are especially great for use with streaming cable TV services. If that's what you're after, you have to go with a service that offers its own Android TV device with custom remote, like Sling (AirTV Mini), AT&T TV or the forthcoming TVision.


Preaching to the choir. I am aware of all that.

Rich


----------



## dstout (Jul 19, 2005)

I recorded both of the Braves/Reds games this week. The recordings had time added to them.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dstout said:


> I recorded both of the Braves/Reds games this week. The recordings had time added to them.


You did not add some time to the recording? The HR added it without you telling it to?

Rich


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

This is the "AT&T TV - recording sports" thread so I think he is talking about the AT&T cloud DVR. Not a DirecTV HR DVR.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

NashGuy said:


> None of the major streaming devices have remotes that are especially great for use with streaming cable TV services. If that's what you're after, you have to go with a service that offers its own Android TV device with custom remote, like Sling (AirTV Mini), AT&T TV or the forthcoming TVision.


The oddity in that mix is the ATT TV device. You get one with a sub to ATT TV and you can buy more if you want to. But with ATT TV Now you don't get one and cannot buy one from ATT even though the two services are only marketing differences apart. Both use the same app, the box works just fine with either.


----------



## espaeth (Oct 14, 2003)

lparsons21 said:


> Both use the same app, the box works just fine with either.


They still prevent live channel FF/RW with ATT TV NOW accounts using the Osprey box, because they can.

That's the most obnoxious part about any of the ATT offerings. It's not that these are technology limitations; they are designing their services to be intentionally punitive unless you choose the option that gives them both the most money and the most control.


----------



## techguy88 (Mar 19, 2015)

espaeth said:


> They still prevent live channel FF/RW with ATT TV NOW accounts using the Osprey box, because they can.
> 
> That's the most obnoxious part about any of the ATT offerings. It's not that these are technology limitations; they are designing their services to be intentionally punitive unless you choose the option that gives them both the most money and the most control.


So I reactivated my AT&T TV Now Max package to test a few things with one of my beta Osprey boxes:

AT&T TV Now accounts can take full advantage of Osprey/AT&T TV devices just like active AT&T TV accounts. I can RW & FF live sports with the remote just like if I was watching a sporting event on my Genie HD-DVR & Genie Mini clients.
On Apple TV & Roku you can't RW & FF live programming however you can use a simple trick (similar to D*'s HD receivers on a Whole Home DVR). Set any show (sports, TV show, movie, etc.) to record then give it 30 to 45 seconds and go into your List and watch the program via the Cloud DVR. Now you can RW/FW during the live program but delayed by a few seconds. Roku supports the preview window however Apple TV does not. 



lparsons21 said:


> The oddity in that mix is the ATT TV device. You get one with a sub to ATT TV and you can buy more if you want to. But with ATT TV Now you don't get one and cannot buy one from ATT even though the two services are only marketing differences apart. Both use the same app, the box works just fine with either.


You would think with HBO Max not being on Fire TV & Roku they would allow AT&T TV Now subscribers to buy the AT&T TV device at full cost while allowing AT&T TV customers do buy at full cost or installment plans. However this is AT&T we are talking about here 

I mean you have AT&T TV Entertainment (IIRC) and for 1 month I have AT&T TV Now Max and you are spot on. You and I can do exactly the same things on the Osprey/AT&T TV device. At least there is one good thing. If someone ever decides they don't want AT&T TV and wants an AT&T TV Now package those customers can still use the Osprey devices either way.

Although right now on eBay one can buy a beta Osprey for less than a new AT&T TV device. Right now prices are going for $50 - $80 for just the box, power adapter & remote. Both function the same the only thing you don't get from getting an Osprey box on eBay is the 24 month warranty. This is a good listing from eBay with the current version of the remote.


----------



## espaeth (Oct 14, 2003)

techguy88 said:


> AT&T TV Now accounts can take full advantage of Osprey/AT&T TV devices just like active AT&T TV accounts. I can RW & FF live sports with the remote just like if I was watching a sporting event on my Genie HD-DVR & Genie Mini clients.


I don't really want to dig out the box and activate another month of NOW, so maybe you can answer this: apparently they enabled a buffer, but it's limited 90 seconds now?

I believe on ATT TV proper it's still limited to 30 minutes.


----------



## techguy88 (Mar 19, 2015)

espaeth said:


> I don't really want to dig out the box and activate another month of NOW, so maybe you can answer this: apparently they enabled a buffer, but it's limited 90 seconds now?
> 
> I believe on ATT TV proper it's still limited to 30 minutes.


lparsons21 can verify if AT&T TV has a 90 second or 30 minute buffer I'm not entering into a 2 year contract just to test that out ROFL. AT&T TV Now has a 90 second buffer when using Osprey (wasn't like that the first time I tested out the service originally Now had a 30 minute buffer.) I was unaware of the buffer being changed recently. However they didn't disable RW then FW on live channels you can still do that with Osprey. You just can't RW/FW live channels on other devices like Apple TV & Roku (IIRC it has always been that way.)

Although I'm the type even with D* if it is a program I know I will watch either live or slightly after the start time I will set it to record and wait about 15 minutes after it starts just so I can FW through commercials. So the limitations really don't impact me.

Since I have the Apple TV+ bundle of CBS All Access & Showtime I usually wait for CBS AA to make the latest episodes of Big Brother available then watch them that way since I don't have to worry about FW through commercials.


----------



## dstout (Jul 19, 2005)

b4pjoe said:


> This is the "AT&T TV - recording sports" thread so I think he is talking about the AT&T cloud DVR. Not a DirecTV HR DVR.


Correct AT&T TV. When I was playing the game I could see it had more than the 3 hour window in the recording.

In the past I have had to play whatever was in the next time slot when a game went over 3 hours.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

techguy88 said:


> lparsons21 can verify if AT&T TV has a 90 second or 30 minute buffer I'm not entering into a 2 year contract just to test that out ROFL.


I'll fiddle with it later today and report back. Since I'm not big on sports I've never paid much attention to the buffer.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

ATT TV with the ATT box does have a 30 minute buffer.


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

espaeth said:


> That's the most obnoxious part about any of the ATT offerings. It's not that these are technology limitations; they are designing their services to be intentionally punitive unless you choose the option that gives them both the most money and the most control.


They're *really* incentivizing folks to take a 2-yr contract. AT&T TV Now is only for folks who won't take a contract (and who seek it out, given that they don't really advertise it any more). But in exchange for that freedom to drop and pick up service on a month-to-month basis, you forego all the perks AT&T TV offers: a big first year discount on your monthly rate, a free custom box and remote, a much longer live TV buffer, and a $200 Visa gift card at sign up. And you get a year of free HBO Max on all but the cheapest AT&T TV package, plus 3 free months of Showtime, Starz and Epix (while AT&T TV Now only gives you one free month of HBO Max with any package). And AT&T TV has a 14-day initial window where you can cancel if you don't like it and get your money back with no commitment.

I mean, they're basically doing everything they can go beat consumers over the head and say "Don't sign up for AT&T TV Now, sign up for AT&T TV!" There's really not that many folks for whom AT&T TV Now makes sense, IMO. I guess for people who want to subscribe a few months here and there for sports channels, some of which they can get via AT&T TV Now but not from YTTV or Hulu Live.


----------



## dstout (Jul 19, 2005)

lparsons21 said:


> ATT TV with the ATT box does have a 30 minute buffer.


The Braves/Reds game from Wednesday was over 4 hours.


----------



## espaeth (Oct 14, 2003)

dstout said:


> The Braves/Reds game from Wednesday was over 4 hours.


The buffer we're referring to is when you fire up a channel and start watching, how long can you pause before it starts playing again, or how far can you rewind after you've been watching for a while. (On "live" channels, not on a DVR recording)


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

espaeth said:


> The buffer we're referring to is when you fire up a channel and start watching, how long can you pause before it starts playing again, or how far can you rewind after you've been watching for a while. (On "live" channels, not on a DVR recording)


There was a question earlier with regarding to padding a recording


----------



## techguy88 (Mar 19, 2015)

espaeth said:


> The buffer we're referring to is when you fire up a channel and start watching, how long can you pause before it starts playing again, or how far can you rewind after you've been watching for a while. (On "live" channels, not on a DVR recording)


With AT&T TV Now you can pause a stream longer than 90 seconds however due to the cap on the buffer if you resume then try to pause again just a few seconds later it won't let you if there is more than 90 seconds in the buffer.


----------

