Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

YouTube Looking To Launch Online TV Service Next Year With ESPN, ABC, and CBS (theverge.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the come-together dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Bloomberg reported in May that YouTube is working on a paid subscription service called Unplugged that would offer customers a selection of TV channels streamed via the internet. Now, The Information (Warning: source may be paywalled) is reporting that deals are starting to come together, and ESPN, ABC, and CBS are "firmly expected" to be available through the service. Other major broadcasters are expected to try and get involved with the service, but the report notes that YouTube may purposely choose to pass on smaller networks, like HGTV, to try and market YouTube videos instead. The question remains to be answered as to how YouTube plans to make anyone interested in its service. ESPN, ABC, and CBS are already offered through other online TV services, like Sling TV. CBS has its own standalone subscription service, and ESPN will soon have its own as well. Also, The Information notes that YouTube Red -- YouTube's existing subscription service -- isn't doing so well. Although, it's worth noting that service is completely different than what Unplugged is rumored to feature.

24 comments

  1. Youtube by tehlinux · · Score: 1

    Streaming in 480p because you only have like 10Gbps down.

    --
    Most linux users don't know this, but the man pages were named after Chuck Norris. Chuck Norris fsck'ing hates noobs!
    1. Re:Youtube by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually default most of my videos to 360p just because most times I don't care for quality.
      Very rarely do I hit the 480, and even rarer 720. (usually art, graphics or videos with loads of small text and details)
      It's not like I even have a slow connection or "bandwidth limits".
      I used to like, 2007, but I just kept it on because there's no point wasting bandwidth just because you can.

      Same reason I don't have lights on when I don't need them, or heating on when I can simply put a jumper / hoody on if it is rather chilly that day. /responsible-twat

      Although one thing I really hate with the new Youtube is the new interface for videos.
      Holy SHIT does it suck so much compared to the older one.
      And it is laggy as hell on older computers for some reason.
      A computer from 2007 I still use occasionally (netbook) suffers with that craptastic interface.

      Same with ANYTHING Google has changed in recent years, it has all gotten laggier and uglier for no sensible reasons I can see, and even more bloated on the resources because they have abused enclosures so much with their JavaScript.
      I have no idea why they keep doing this shit. JavaScript doesn't LIKE deep enclosures. It is a fundamental failure with the language that no amount of compiler optimization will deal with. (at least, no way I can see and I am an optimization wizard)
      Google Wave would have actually been usable if it wasn't for the enclosure abuse, as well as event handler abuse. (even Firefox!)

      It is the same reason things like jQuery are horrible for doing data / node / anything-heavy code.
      jQuery is fine for simple animations, element organization, generation, templating and styling, but it blows 10 kinds of ass for heavy use, just like basically every enclosure-heavy library.

  2. And no porn? Why?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ESPM mandatory rule of making a porn movie to get a degree didn't convinced Youtube to make a porn channel in Brazil?

    1. Re: And no porn? Why?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes there is, the summary even mentioned redtube. Oh, wait... they said YouTube red, never mind.

  3. It's not really "unplugged" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's not really unplugged when you are forced to buy your internet from the monopoly cable provider to get a line fast enough to stream online video.

    1. Re:It's not really "unplugged" by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      So true, so true.

      I get my internet from Charter Communications, so for just a few dollars more I can get cable television that looks great compared to YouTube.

      Of course I go one step further and get a package that includes the SEC network. If you can't watch Southeastern Conference football, you're not watching the best football in the country. :p

      Roll Tide Roll

  4. I already have a subscription by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I already have a subscription to ABC and CBS (+NBC, FOX). It's called "rabbit ears."
    ESPN I might pay for, if the trend towards putting most high-profile American sporting events on cable continues.

    Otherwise, I haven't had a cable TV sub in well over 15 years now.

  5. Who would be interested... by cmiller173 · · Score: 1

    The OP said "The question remains to be answered as to how YouTube plans to make anyone interested in its service. ESPN, ABC, and CBS are already offered through other online TV services, like Sling TV. CBS has its own standalone subscription service, and ESPN will soon have its own as well. "

    I wouldn't pay for a single network streaming service (i.e. CBS) but I might be willing to pay for a multiple network service if it is big enough and has most/many of the networks I want to see.

    1. Re:Who would be interested... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only network I want to pay for right now is the Golf Channel. I think my cheapest option would be the mid-tier Playstation Vue package.

  6. Why? by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

    I can already view CBS and ABC on the Internet on their own sites. I don't care at all about sportsball and the steroid using cheaters. So I really don't care about this.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    1. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not live, and only in certain areas. This is not for you.

    2. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Here we go again. One guy on Slashdot isn't the target audience, so it's stupid and nobody should use it. You're as relevant as the guy below who only wants the Golf Channel.

  7. maybe by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

    *If* the price is in the sub $8 range *and* there are no commercials, I might do it.

    But it is a non-starter otherwise. I can just watch these channels OTA right now for free and probably better quality that I could get streaming.

    --
    My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    1. Re:maybe by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      espn 1/2/3/u/etc costs about $8 an sub.

  8. Network stations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Sling TV only offers ABC and CBS live streaming in only ~8 cities. Anywhere else and you just get day-after streaming a la Hulu. Which means no sports. If YouTube offered actual live streams of these, that would be big.

    1. Re:Network stations by sglewis100 · · Score: 1

      Same with PS Vue. Not sure 100% on the count of 8, but it's around there. My understanding is it was relatively easy for these guys to cut a deal with the networks. Which is why you get On Demand the next day wherever in the States you live. It's been torture to cut deals with the Affiliates. So if you live in an area where the network owns the local affiliate, you're good. For example, in Miami, on Vue, we get live NBC, CBS and FOX. ABC is an actual affiliate, so we get OnDemand only. This actually works perfect for us, since there's enough news between the half a dozen or more cable news networks, plus the nightly and Sunday morning news shows on NBC, CBS and FOX to tide us over. And ABC sporting events tend to be live streamed on WatchESPN, so we can even watch basketball, college football, etc.

      I suspect in the next year or two you'll see affiliates start to cut deals with guys like Sling, Vue, Apple, Hulu, SFN, etc... as the quality and quantity of programming of originals on Hulu, Prime and Netflix continues to explode, people are going to be more and more willing to live without traditional network shows. My children already don't really have a concept of TV as something different than Netflix. And we travel with a Roku stick when we go to hotels, because they really don't understand why they HAVE to watch commercials anymore. If the affiliates want to survive in their present form, they better license their stations, and quick. Because the monopolies are slowly ending. (And yes, I understand we're still stuck with one or two options for Internet service, but the television monopolies are coming to an end rapidly).

    2. Re:Network stations by Jhon · · Score: 1

      "Sling TV only offers ABC and CBS live streaming in only ~8 cities."

      And NBC. And Fox 11 (in Los Angeles).

  9. My Over The Air Antennae Has Better Resolution by zenlessyank · · Score: 1

    than Yu-Toob. I also know you guys hate split headings into comments, so I am going to try to stop that. I think I am addicted to it. I may need some meetings and a white chip!!!

    1. Re:My Over The Air Antennae Has Better Resolution by antdude · · Score: 1

      But can you get ESPN OTA? :P

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  10. I'm surprised cable companies by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    Aren't doing more to stop this. I just cut the cord because my kid's off to college and I don't care about sports. The nerd stuff (read: anime) I watch is all online. Yeah, I pay $75/mo for decent internet, but for a while they were getting $150 mo outta me. Yeah, most of the mid west has data caps, but how much longer will they tolerate that?

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:I'm surprised cable companies by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      Aren't doing more to stop this. I just cut the cord because my kid's off to college and I don't care about sports. The nerd stuff (read: anime) I watch is all online. Yeah, I pay $75/mo for decent internet, but for a while they were getting $150 mo outta me. Yeah, most of the mid west has data caps, but how much longer will they tolerate that?

      Probably a lot longer - why do you think there are data caps to begin with? Or they know that evening time will be standard TV watching hour, and throttle all video streaming services the same so the only quality you get will be standard def.

      Though, them being able to get out of ESPN is also good - I'm sure Disney bundles the Disney channels with ESPN - if you don't force every subscriber to get ESPN then the Disney channels cost more. ESPN and other sports are the most expensive subscriptions with ESPN easily costing $5+/subscriber/month. Contrast with say, History or Discovery, which are around 25 cents/subscriber/month, and if you take every channel in each respsective network, it probably totals just about a buck a month.

  11. So that whole set top box squabble... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This seems like a major move toward nullifying Comcast v. FCC/Wheeler in the set top box unlocking confrontation!

  12. Because Sling TV not all there yet by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

    I used Sling TV last fall to watch NFL games. The Roku version of their software was buggy, crashed occasionally, and wasn't optimized enough to run well on the Roku 2. Worst of all, they tried to fill the commercial breaks with ESPN's own frat-boy commercials for itself. They would repeat the very same commercial two or three times, or cut one off half way through to start playing another one, then return the the second half of the first commercial. I'd rather watch the REAL commercials than the incessant, poorly executed fake commercials.

    So I'd give Sling TV a D on implementation. If YouTube can do a better job, I'll definitely switch!

  13. Unplugged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. They (ESPN, ABC, CBS)
    2. Are removing their television channels (Syfy Benelux, 13th Street Benelux, Animax)
    3. From international cable providers (UPC, Ziggo, Caiway) with similar services (Caiway Multiscreen TV)
    3. Even from normal dvb-c (https://caiway.gebruikers.eu/forum/viewthread.php?thread_id=1747).

    Now i understand why.
    To see these channels, you will be forced to sign up.
    I guess that is the reason why they believe that it will work out for them in terms of profit.
    Maybe a good idea to boycot them (ESPN, ABC, CBS) and to switch to torrents.