23 hours ago, sue said:

Sadly, the AFL is getting more technically adroit.  This year the AFL Live app really has stopped us casting from our Iphones and ipads to a TV for live broadcasts (unlike last year when it was just a tiny bit tricky to do so).  Though as far as I can see the claim that the picture is limited to the size of the device is still misleading because while the action fills an iphone screen, on an ipad most of the screen is taken up with stats and other guff.

So it seems it you want to see footy on a TV screen you have to sign up to one of Foxtel's wonderful services, get a package of junk you don't want for $15/month and then a sports package for even more $ which contains sports in which I have no interest at all.   Thanks AFL; from someone whose only interest is in AFL,  I love you.

I went the Foxtel option last year and split it with a mate. Cost me 15-20 a month.

4 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

As an aside - anyone have any suggestions on an internet provider who provides a high speed service at a reasonable cost?  I don't need a service with lots of bells and whistles, just high speed to enable HD transmission to home devices.

Choice of an ISP is very dependent upon your location and of course as to whether you have NBN and what type of NBN etc etc.

There is a wonderful forum called Whirlpool that has an enormous section on the choice of ISP's. If you have NBN make sure you select an ISP that has a good ratio of (forget what it is called but for the sake of discussion lets call them NBN lines) to users. There is one they recommend highly on Whirlpool in contrast to say Dodo that has a bad reputation in this area.

If you would like post some details of your set up ... ADSL or NBN etc and I am sure that the technically minded on the forum will come along and offer some help.

One other thing you need to bear in mind is wireless distribution within your house.

If you have a samsung s7 and a samsung 2017 tv you can just cast the game from your phone to the tv. Just make your playing the video on the afl app before you hit share.

Edited March 1, 20187 yr by Allen Jakovich

10 minutes ago, Allen Jakovich said:

If you have a samsung s7 and a samsung 2017 tv you can just cast the game from your phone to the tv. Just make your playing the video on the afl app before you hit share.

They’ll shut that loophole down now that you’ve announced it. People get paid for doing that!!

1 hour ago, small but forward said:

They’ll shut that loophole down now that you’ve announced it. People get paid for doing that!!

Thankfully... i am they...

On 25/02/2018 at 1:52 PM, Petraccattack said:

Cancelled the AFL app mid last season when they disabled the Chromecast loophole.

It was a  business decision by the AFL and Telstra, as the app is only supposed to be used on phone or tablet, but it probably cost them business ... how many people would have gone and subscribed to Foxtel after cancelling their app subscription?  I bet a very small percentage.

Instead of getting my money for the app, they now don't get  a penny out of me.  If they ever bring back the cast screen function,  I will sign up again.  

And they won't get you watching their games, either. That's the Mephistophelian conundrum for the AFL. Now that they've sold their soul to the devil which is not free-to-air, they have to do the devil's bidding.

I understand the AFL's desire for financial return from media rights, but the risk that people will not pay and stop watching games altogether must be highly concerning.

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

And they won't get you watching their games, either. That's the Mephistophelian conundrum for the AFL. Now that they've sold their soul to the devil which is not free-to-air, they have to do the devil's bidding.

I understand the AFL's desire for financial return from media rights, but the risk that people will not pay and stop watching games altogether must be highly concerning.

and don't forget money from the other devils - sports betting industry and one-armed bandits

3 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

and don't forget money from the other devils - sports betting industry and one-armed bandits

Point taken. But the difference with media rights over acceptance of money from sponsors, is that the media rights impact on whether people will get to see the game. I know that the only games I will see will either be live at the MCG or on free-to-air. The more there are restrictions (ie, costs) placed on my ability to watch the game, the less I'll watch. For many people that means they'll find something else to do with that time and may be lost to football altogether. The choice of sponsors may be distasteful to some, but it doesn't impact on the ability to watch the game.

1 minute ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Point taken. But the difference with media rights over acceptance of money from sponsors, is that the media rights impact on whether people will get to see the game. I know that the only games I will see will either be live at the MCG or on free-to-air. The more there are restrictions (ie, costs) placed on my ability to watch the game, the less I'll watch. For many people that means they'll find something else to do with that time and may be lost to football altogether. The choice of sponsors may be distasteful to some, but it doesn't impact on the ability to watch the game.

maybe not on the ability, but maybe on the desire. when you add up all the devils some people reach a tipping point. like a rotting apple

On 02/03/2018 at 3:50 PM, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Point taken. But the difference with media rights over acceptance of money from sponsors, is that the media rights impact on whether people will get to see the game. I know that the only games I will see will either be live at the MCG or on free-to-air. The more there are restrictions (ie, costs) placed on my ability to watch the game, the less I'll watch. For many people that means they'll find something else to do with that time and may be lost to football altogether. The choice of sponsors may be distasteful to some, but it doesn't impact on the ability to watch the game.

Well said La Dee

On 25/02/2018 at 11:44 AM, Lucifer's Hero said:

That is a good offer dc.

Yesterday I signed up for a two week free trial of Foxtel Now (transmitted via internet rather than cable).  Its a similar deal to above without the $100 install fee and not restricted to 'basic entertainment' - can choose one from 5 'base' pack options.  It worked straight away on a Tablet (download their app first) and Smart TV (with a very old and very basic modem).  No buffering at all.  And I will hopefully connect the Tablet to my 'Dumb' TV as soon as I purchase the right cable/adapter.  

Foxtel Now can be installed on multiple devices (have forgotten how many) so can watch the Dees on mobile phone when out and about without any hassles. 

For me $39/m is good value as get the 'Lifestyle' base pack and get to watch a lot of international sports and major sporting events eg World Cup, Olympics etc etc

@sueif the cost is an issue maybe get Foxtel Now and share your subscription (give your log on details) with a couple of friends/family and they might contribute to your cost.   As far as I know, there is nothing that says that Foxtel Now on mobile devices can only be used at a given address, in fact that would defeat the purpose. 

I haven't tried it yet but Foxtel Now doesn't have the same restrictions as the AFL app being cast to a TV.  Like you, I was against subscribing to the Foxtel monopoly but it is now so flexible that I find it is worthwhile.

Unfortunately foxtel now doesn't provide this deal to android mobiles ☹

Howdie @MarkMacca

After much searching I found a link to what I purchased (first with 2 week free trial).  It is here https://www.foxtel.com.au/now/shop.html

 

 

On a related note my Samsung Tab 4 10" (2016) Tablet and my Samsung Galaxy 7 (2017) phone could not be streamed to a TV because Samsung have removed the MHL facility on those devices and made them non compatible with Chromecast (which was a bit of a shock).  When I contacted them they rather curtly said 'you should have checked the specifications before buying'.  

Hopefully, the Foxtel link above helps you find the service but check that your mobile devices can cast to your TV - this is where the two weeks free trial is handy - there is time to iron out technical issues before having to pay.

 

Edited March 9, 20187 yr by Lucifer's Hero

The degree of incompatibility in the phone market sometimes astounds me.

Love or hate Microsoft when they were dominant everyone built to be compatible with the microsoft interface which was made freely available to developers.

Because I travel I use a "cheap" Chinese phone (Xiaomi) which is actually one of the world's most popular brands but for reasons beyond me it will not connect to my laptop when I want to transfer photos. I do it via Dropbox but why can't they all talk to each other.

I worry that we are going to a large number of non compatible interfaces.

20 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

The degree of incompatibility in the phone market sometimes astounds me.

Love or hate Microsoft when they were dominant everyone built to be compatible with the microsoft interface which was made freely available to developers.

Because I travel I use a "cheap" Chinese phone (Xiaomi) which is actually one of the world's most popular brands but for reasons beyond me it will not connect to my laptop when I want to transfer photos. I do it via Dropbox but why can't they all talk to each other.

I worry that we are going to a large number of non compatible interfaces.

add a free android file manager from the android store

12 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

add a free android file manager from the android store

thanks DC ... can you give me an example of one please when you have time ... a post or PM whichever is fine

cheers

26 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

thanks DC ... can you give me an example of one please when you have time ... a post or PM whichever is fine

cheers

I've got 'MyFiles'. Can't remember why - think it topped some free file managers list at one time

2 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

On a related note my Samsung Tab 4 10" (2016) Tablet and my Samsung Galaxy 7 (2017) phone could not be streamed to a TV because Samsung have removed the MHL facility on those devices and made them non compatible with Chromecast (which was a bit of a shock).  When I contacted them they rather curtly said 'you should have checked the specifications before buying'.  

MHL still works on Galaxy Note 3 (got it in 2014).

On 2/25/2018 at 1:12 PM, Diamond_Jim said:

Crystal balling the sports and general media of the future fascinates me.

The foxtel price point is interesting.

One has to wonder if they reduced their internet service to say $10 a month if they would not increase their subscription rate five plus fold. Given their method of delivery the marginal cost of servicing increased customers would be very low.

Their take up rate in Australia has always been abysmally low and without sport I suspect it would be close to zero.

As many have mentioned it is only a matter of time before the various sports start directly marketing their coverage to consumers. Not sure if it would work in a small market like Oz. At present the AFL gets paid around $200 million a year for the rights. Assuming a million subscribers that would give a break even point of in excess of $200 per subscriber given production costs etc.

It is also not hard to imagine that in the near future the internet rights to sport will exceed the traditional TV rights from a value viewpoint.

 

All the people currently on bigger deals would be peeved and quite rightly.

Anyone without Foxtel now (and that includes me) has been holding out for a long time and will need a better/special deal to get on board. I just don't think it will get much cheaper than the above deal though.

1 minute ago, Clintosaurus said:

MHL still works on Galaxy Note 3 (got it in 2014).

Yes, it works right up to Galaxy 7 (and Tab 4 Tablet). 

Forgot to mention the recent Samsung devices will stream to a Samsung TV but not to other brands.  Its a ploy to force people to buy Samsung TV's. 

I just wish they would say this somewhere in their specs rather than have purchasers waste money on their devices.  I will look more seriously at non Samsung brands for future purchases - not happy when producers take away functionality and not disclose it adequately.

3 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

All the people currently on bigger deals would be peeved and quite rightly.

Anyone without Foxtel now (and that includes me) has been holding out for a long time and will need a better/special deal to get on board. I just don't think it will get much cheaper than the above deal though.

Its called 'monopoly pricing' jr!

If it wasn't for sports I doubt if many would buy Foxtel, especially with Netflix around.  After a 2 week trial period I have found very little on Foxtel worth watching.  Programs are nearly all reruns and reruns of shows that were aired on FTA years ago or second rate shows that didn't make it to FTA. 

I finally relented to sign up to Foxtel only because I didn't want to miss any part of what is hopefully a great season for us, when I can't get to a game live.

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

I've got 'MyFiles'. Can't remember why - think it topped some free file managers list at one time

thanks..I'll have a look at it

Call me old but the channels of 7 are showing 10 of our first 22 games on FTA without knowing at this point of time what coverage Casey games will get.

There is a lot to be learned from watching all the other opposition sides on FTA also .

I figure if I don't watch all the carp on the paytv then I'll be mentally better off too.

Also what does it cost to replace all of your modern devices when you launch them into space when watching our beloved dees ? 

Have been looking at this 5G which is to be rolled out at years end.

From my minimal research it will first be available in the home through a modem service and then later will be rolled out to handsets.

The suggestion from Verizon is that the plans will be uncapped as far as data is concerned unlike the present 4G plans.

The speeds that are talking of are amazing. Apparently Vodafone have already tested in ti in Oz at a repeated 5Gbps and they expect the industry norm to be around 10Gbps.

This just blows away the NBN speeds.

As a wireless delivered service there may be coverage issues but it certainly sounds like the future if the price and coverage are right.

http://au.pcmag.com/news/50494/verizon-no-4g-level-data-caps-for-5g-home-service

Below is an article that describes the roll out plans for Australia

https://www.finder.com.au/5g

 

at this point i can only get an adsl1 connection in inner city melbourne

it's absurd

9 minutes ago, DemonAndrew said:

at this point i can only get an adsl1 connection in inner city melbourne

it's absurd

This could be the answer DA who knows.

I think coverage will be the issue.

According to the Verizon article line of sight is best but it says they might do a little better.

I can imagine that it might be like the old TV antenna days where you saw places with extra long TV masts.

Up until my research I was not excited as I thought the plans would be capped like the present Telstra smart phone plans at around 6Gigs. If they have decent caps (some talk of 200G per per month) then TV watching at 4K level becomes a reality.

NBN isn't even due to be started in my area until end of 2019 and because I am on a big block the odds are I will be treated as a special case and put to the end of the line. That means 2021 or thereabouts