# Hulu+ ON Premiere Remains Nearly Worthless



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

I am an OTA only person and have been watching to see if Hulu/Hulu+ would be picking up any of the new summer shows from the basic cable networks so I looked around to see what I might be Interested in and came up with a pretty long list of potential shows I might like from SyFY, TNT, USA, etc. 

The Closer
Falling Skies
Rizzoli & Isles
Eureka
Haven
Warehouse 13
Alphas
Brun Notice
White Collar
Royal Pains
Covert Affairs
In Plain Site
Suits
NECESSARY ROUGHNESS
The Protector
So how many appear to have their new weakly episodes available through Hulu/Hulu+ throughout the summer?

Hulu only (not on Hulu+ and there for not available on TiVo): 

The Protector
Warehouse 13
Haven
Royal Pains
In Plain Site
Brun Notice
Some more shows indicate they will be available at some point 30 day delay etc.

On Hulu+ and available to watch on a TiVo Premiere:

*NONE!*

Guess Hulu+ on TiVo is really a big waist of $$ and certainly does not do much for me.

Thanks,


----------



## Philmatic (Sep 17, 2003)

How is this TiVo's fault?


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

Philmatic said:


> How is this TiVo's fault?


Where did I say it was TiVo's fault? My comments are about the Hulu+ service available on TiVo.


----------



## socrplyr (Jul 19, 2006)

atmuscarella said:


> Where did I say it was TiVo's fault? My comments are about the Hulu+ service available on TiVo.


I think the poster was referencing your title.
Stating that "Hulu+ ON Premiere Remains Nearly Worthless" indicates that Hulu+ on something else has value, which could indicate that it is Tivo's fault.


----------



## klj (Feb 26, 2010)

hulu+ is one of the biggest scams i have ever seen. has there ever been another product where you pay to actually get less than the free version?


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

socrplyr said:


> I think the poster was referencing your title.
> Stating that "Hulu+ ON Premiere Remains Nearly Worthless" indicates that Hulu+ on something else has value, which could indicate that it is Tivo's fault.


Well I guess technically Hulu+ on a computer does have more value than Hulu+ on a TiVo or other device. At least when you access Hulu+ on a computer it then also includes the shows on the free computer only Hulu show list.

But again I am complain about Hulu+ not TiVo. It also relates to the saga of Hulu+ becoming available on the Premiere. I remember all the complaints about TiVo not getting it fast enough - well now that we have it in my opinion we still have nothing as I can not see how the Hulu+ service is even worth $8 per month.

Thanks,


----------



## socrplyr (Jul 19, 2006)

atmuscarella said:


> Well I guess technically Hulu+ on a computer does have more value than Hulu+ on a TiVo or other device. At least when you access Hulu+ on a computer it then also includes the shows on the free computer only Hulu show list.
> 
> But again I am complain about Hulu+ not TiVo. It also relates to the saga of Hulu+ becoming available on the Premiere. I remember all the complaints about TiVo not getting it fast enough - well now that we have it in my opinion we still have nothing as I can not see how the Hulu+ service is even worth $8 per month.
> 
> Thanks,


Welcome to the internet. A few can make a loud noise. For some, it has value, others not so much... I think you will see similar things happen when Tivo enables the mythical second core... It does nothing... Same for finishing the menu system. A few complain regularly and loudly while the rest don't care or aren't missing out...


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

I agree. TiVo should not have wasted development effort on Hulu +.


----------



## TheWGP (Oct 26, 2007)

+1 - if you took the Hulu+ interface and plopped Netflix into it, that would have been much more useful. Hulu+ is nifty enough, but it's just not worth any money at this point. Hulu+ should really be named Hulu- I think. 

Not that Netflix is all that be-all-end-all or anything - but it's more useful.

The most useful app on my Tivo is pytivox... which isn't an app on the Tivo at all.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

I agree. This is just another example of Tivo trying to get a new logo put on the Tivo box. They could care less about what the product is or how they implement it. Most of the third party features are half baked but Tivo doesn't care. They just want to be able to put the third party logo in their marketing materials.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

TheWGP said:


> +1 - if you took the Hulu+ interface and plopped Netflix into it, that would have been much more useful. Hulu+ is nifty enough, but it's just not worth any money at this point. Hulu+ should really be named Hulu- I think.
> 
> Not that Netflix is all that be-all-end-all or anything - but it's more useful.
> 
> The most useful app on my Tivo is pytivox... which isn't an app on the Tivo at all.


The hulu+ application is similar among multiple devices. I know the one on my Premiere looks similar if not identical to the one on my PS3. The 360 does have a different version. I will use the one on my Premieres over the PS3. Although the same also goes for Netflix.

The apps on the TiVo work better since it's similar to how you view recorded programming on the TiVo. Plus the TiVo has Native resolution output which is a huge plus for me since I use an external scaler/processor in my main viewing area.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

I REALLY want Hulu to be a good product. I keep going back to it and hoping that it has improved....it hasn't.


----------



## Weagle (Nov 15, 2005)

Thanks for the insight, I saw it available and considered it but hadn't gotten around to trying it...I'll just pass on it for now...


----------



## DeWitt (Jun 30, 2004)

TV via the Internet is still a struggling not there yet proposition. An article from the NY Times this weekend on HULU's issues.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/b...as-tomorrows-tv-looks-boxed-in-today.html?hpw


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

DeWitt said:


> TV via the Internet is still a struggling not there yet proposition. An article from the NY Times this weekend on HULU's issues.
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/b...as-tomorrows-tv-looks-boxed-in-today.html?hpw


The future is now. You can get the vast majority of content from multiple sources. You will never be able to get it all from one source since there will always be someone willing to pay extra to get content first or have some kind of exclusivity agreement for a period of time. The best that we can hope for is to be able to get all content from multiple sources. But even that might never happen. Not when you have Premium channels like HBO that have a monetary incentive not to offer their programming. That way it force people to pay for a subscription. This is what I did recently with HBO to get "Curb your Enthusiasm".


----------



## innocentfreak (Aug 25, 2001)

aaronwt said:


> The future is now. You can get the vast majority of content from multiple sources. You will never be able to get it all from one source since there will always be someone willing to pay extra to get content first or have some kind of exclusivity agreement for a period of time. The best that we can hope for is to be able to get all content from multiple sources. But even that might never happen. Not when you have Premium channels like HBO that have a monetary incentive not to offer their programming. That way it force people to pay for a subscription. This is what I did recently with HBO to get "Curb your Enthusiasm".


The other question is will those companies allow their content to be listed alongside the content from other providers. We already see it eliminated on TiVos offered from cable companies where Netflix had to be removed.

From what I have read they are pushing for even more of a separate approach when it comes to Allvid. They seem to want a shopping mall experience where every store/content owners content is presented differently. Think of it like NBC content being presented like Hulu and then CBS like Amazon and then ABC like Netflix on the TiVo rather than the TiVo UI and TiVo search.

I would much rather have an experience like we have now with TiVo or to stick with the shopping comparison the experience you have when you go to Amazon.com.


----------



## DeWitt (Jun 30, 2004)

The issue has always been provider versus subscriber. In naivete people think oh if only i could have a cable provider that only charged me for the things I want it would save money. unfortunately we see over and over adding all the pieces up will cost more than the bundle. In a perfect future universe this will be clear, but in the cable dominated world we live in alternative delivery mechanisms are just experiments, not really there yet.

At least in some small parts of the US FIOS has brought competition, but Internet TV options are only just babies trying to find their way.

Will the Interet eventually render cable obsolete? it seems logical, but it is not anywhere on the near term horizon. Just look at the Netflix price increase if you are a doubter.....


----------



## Scyber (Apr 25, 2002)

Obviously it depends on what show you view, but Hulu+ can be used as a relatively inexpensive way to avoid/reduce tuner conflicts. If you have issues where 3 shows are airing simultaneously and one (or more) is available via Hulu+, its much cheaper to subscribe than to get another TiVo.

Another advantage of Hulu+ is that you can easily wait on new shows to see if they are renewed for a 2nd season before watching.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

Scyber said:


> Obviously it depends on what show you view, but Hulu+ can be used as a relatively inexpensive way to avoid/reduce tuner conflicts. If you have issues where 3 shows are airing simultaneously and one (or more) is available via Hulu+, its much cheaper to subscribe than to get another TiVo.
> 
> Another advantage of Hulu+ is that you can easily wait on new shows to see if they are renewed for a 2nd season before watching.


Really? Did you notice how many of the summer shows I listed were available on Hulu+ without a computer? Just in case you missed the 1st post it was *0* out of 15

Last year nearly all new shows were *not* available on Hulu+ unless you were using a computer so how does that become a third tuner?

My understanding is that more shows are going to be available next year on Hulu+ without a computer but that is still to be seen.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

DeWitt said:


> Will the Interet eventually render cable obsolete? it seems logical, but it is not anywhere on the near term horizon. Just look at the Netflix price increase if you are a doubter.....


Netflix didn't really raise their prices. They changed their business model. They are hoping to become a streaming only service someday. This is a big step in that direction. How many people will be dumping their DVD plans? Only time will tell.....


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

Scyber said:


> Obviously it depends on what show you view, but Hulu+ can be used as a relatively inexpensive way to avoid/reduce tuner conflicts. If you have issues where 3 shows are airing simultaneously and one (or more) is available via Hulu+, its much cheaper to subscribe than to get another TiVo.
> 
> Another advantage of Hulu+ is that you can easily wait on new shows to see if they are renewed for a 2nd season before watching.


Hulu plus costs $8 per month. In 5 years you could have paid for another lifetime service Premiere with the subscription fees. Plus a lifetime service Premiere will probably still have a resale value of a at least couple hundred dollars.


----------



## David Platt (Dec 13, 2001)

atmuscarella said:


> Really? Did you notice how many of the summer shows I listed were available on Hulu+ without a computer? Just in case you missed the 1st post it was *0* out of 15


So because Hulu doesn't have the 15 shows that you arbitrarily selected, it doesn't have any value for anyone. Is that right? You do realize it has dozens of other shows?


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

David Platt said:


> So because Hulu doesn't have the 15 shows that you arbitrarily selected, it doesn't have any value for anyone. Is that right? You do realize it has dozens of other shows?


I am sure Hulu+ has some value to some people. I don't see it but I am sure some people do.

However I was responding to a post that indicated it could become a backup tuner when you want to record 3 things instead of 2. For that to be true it actually has to have current episodes of current TV shows available. Which for the most part it does not.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

David Platt said:


> So because Hulu doesn't have the 15 shows that you arbitrarily selected, it doesn't have any value for anyone. Is that right? You do realize it has dozens of other shows?


He didn't arbitrarily select them. Those make up most of the summer schedule. His point is that Hulu doesn't have much of what is currently airing.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

atmuscarella said:


> I am sure Hulu+ has some value to some people. I don't see it but I am sure some people do.
> 
> However I was responding to a post that indicated it could become a backup tuner when you want to record 3 things instead of 2. For that to be true it actually has to have current episodes of current TV shows available. Which for the most part it does not.


I think that many people might wait a month before watching a program that they actually recorded. It's still somewhat like a third tuner, but with a delay. It also catches programs that you could have recorded but never scheduled.

At $8 per month, you could pay off a second lifetime premiere in 5 years and have 2 extra tuners that can record a wider selection of programs.


----------



## Grey Griffin (May 24, 2007)

The main problem with Hulu + is they don't seem to offer any new cable shows, all their new shows are from the networks. The way it's set up right now it doesn't really help with "cutting the cord." It's more for someone who has neither cable or OTA.


----------



## David Platt (Dec 13, 2001)

aadam101 said:


> He didn't arbitrarily select them. Those make up most of the summer schedule. His point is that Hulu doesn't have much of what is currently airing.


Most of the summer schedule? Really? There are so many other shows on than those. That list isn't even a fraction of the summer schedule.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

atmuscarella said:


> I am sure Hulu+ has some value to some people. I don't see it but I am sure some people do.
> 
> However I was responding to a post that indicated it could become a backup tuner when you want to record 3 things instead of 2. For that to be true it actually has to have current episodes of current TV shows available. Which for the most part it does not.


That really depends on what shows you watch. Many of the shows my girlfriend and I watch together are also available on Hulu+ a day or so after the originally air.(during the normal TV season)(I haven't checked it for any of the Summer shows)


----------



## Scyber (Apr 25, 2002)

atmuscarella said:


> Really? Did you notice how many of the summer shows I listed were available on Hulu+ without a computer? Just in case you missed the 1st post it was *0* out of 15
> 
> Last year nearly all new shows were *not* available on Hulu+ unless you were using a computer so how does that become a third tuner?
> 
> My understanding is that more shows are going to be available next year on Hulu+ without a computer but that is still to be seen.


Well I did start my post saying "obviously it depends on what shows you view". I don't doubt that Hulu+ isn't the best for the summer schedule since a majority of Hulu+ content comes from Fox, ABC, & NBC. Summer schedules nowadays are typically dominated by the cable networks. During the "regular" fall/spring seasons, there is alot more content available next day on Hulu+. Here is a quick list of some of the shows my family watched last season:

American Dad
Bones
The Colbert Report
The Daily Show
Desparate Housewives
Family Guy
Glee
House
Law& Order SVU
The Office
Outsourced
Parenthood

There were a few others that I can't recall offhand.

Oh and one other thing, during the summer when you don't have to worry about conflicts and/or there isn't anything worthwhile on Hulu+, you can simply put your subscription "on hold" and then resume again later. based on they way it currently is setup, I'm probably gonna have my subscription on hold for at least 3 months out of the year.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

David Platt said:


> That list isn't even a fraction of the summer schedule.


Well, I am pretty sure it is a fraction......

There's not that many new summer shows to begin with. The fact that Hulu+ is missing at least 15 of them seems like a waste.


----------



## David Platt (Dec 13, 2001)

aadam101 said:


> Well, I am pretty sure it is a fraction......
> 
> There's not that many new summer shows to begin with. The fact that Hulu+ is missing at least 15 of them seems like a waste.


 Yeah, definitely a fraction. You got me there.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Scyber said:


> ........................Oh and one other thing, during the summer when you don't have to worry about conflicts and/or there isn't anything worthwhile on Hulu+, you can simply put your subscription "on hold" and then resume again later. based on they way it currently is setup, I'm probably gonna have my subscription on hold for at least 3 months out of the year.


Really?! I didn't know that. Thanks!:up:


----------



## minimeh (Jun 20, 2011)

It must just be me, but IMHO the biggest issue with Hulu+ is $8 / month *and* forced commercial interruptions. No thanks. Canceled my trial subscription after the first hour.


----------



## I WANT MORE (Oct 13, 2009)

I will be canceling mine as well.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

minimeh said:


> It must just be me, but IMHO the biggest issue with Hulu+ is $8 / month *and* forced commercial interruptions. No thanks. Canceled my trial subscription after the first hour.


Without the commecials the cost would be more than $8. I don't mind the 30 second ones, but the 60 to 70 second commericals are too long. But at least it's typically only a few minutes for each hour long show.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

aaronwt said:


> Without the commecials the cost would be more than $8. I don't mind the 30 second ones, but the 60 to 70 second commericals are too long. But at least it's typically only a few minutes for each hour long show.


Those 60-70 second commercials are a real pain.

Not really long enough to get up and do anything and if you are watching Hulu on a devise like TiVo no way to "change the channel".

For the month I had Hulu+ I used it very little on my Premiere because you were basically trapped into watching the commercials. It is a little better if you are watching on an HTPC you can drop out of full screen and look at another web site and will still hear the commercials so you know when to go back.


----------

