YouTube TV announces limited multi-view channel beta (limited to pre-selected channels start, no beta sign-up - YTTV selects users)
YouTube TV announced a limited (non-signup - Google is selecting early access users themselves, behind the scenes) beta for a very hobbled (to start) multi-channel-multi-view support where they are server side rendering a preselected set of channels for multi-view.
aka - you can't select multi-view channels, only YouTube TV will present the channels that are available for multi-view, and this is exclusively for the NCAA tournament to start, for four simultaneous basketball games.
I always knew they were going to do this server-side since as they referenced in their post, if you do this client side, this would be limited to people with the latest hardware anyways. And that would shrink their potential total addressable market for a YouTube+ package where for $20/month extra, you get 4K content + multi-view.
Expect an eventual rebrand of their $20/month extra 4K content + multiview into a package with a YouTube+ name (same $20/month upcharge) once this is production ready. No way they're going to eat the server side costs of this implementation without getting some coin in return (that is some serious processing power to do this server side, correctly - muxing 4x720p streams into a proper 2160p multi-view).
March 15th, 2023 at 10:26 AM ^
What is the difference between server side and client side?
March 15th, 2023 at 10:29 AM ^
Client side - only people with the latest Roke, Apple TV, or Firestick and YouTube TV subscription can watch multi-view.
Server side - it's available for everyone with a YouTube TV subscription and works with crappy TCL TVs from five years ago that still have a working YouTube TV app, just expect it to be choppy.
March 15th, 2023 at 11:30 AM ^
It's all about who is consolidating the streams. Client side means that your TV (or Roku/Firestick/etc.) is taking the streams from multiple channels and displaying them together on your screen. Server side means that the actual cable/streaming service is taking different streams, putting them together, and transmitting them to you as one channel.
Client side is akin to the old picture-in-picture (PiP) mode that some higher end TVs offered. You could select a second channel to show alongside the primary channel you were watching. The advantage is that you could customize which channels were displayed, as well as potentially how they were arranged and in what ratio. The disadvantage is that you needed the hardware to allow this; not all TVs offered PiP, for example.
Server side is akin to how some sports broadcasts will show, in a smaller window, a stream from either another game or another camera view/angle for a time. The advantage is that you don't need any special hardware; that second stream is coming already integrated into your channel. The disadvantage is that you can't select what secondary stream to show, nor dictate how the streams are sized/arranged.
March 15th, 2023 at 11:32 AM ^
Client side means on the end user's hardware aka customer. Think of when you use a website, there may be actions that are in your browser only and a request/response are not sent back the host server). Server side means the work is done on the host server.
So the implication here is Google will use their hardware to do the hard work of splicing together these views into one picture and your tv, computer, etc. will just have to display that picture rather than piece all these streams together itself.
March 15th, 2023 at 10:26 AM ^
Gotta strike while the iron's hot!
March 15th, 2023 at 10:39 AM ^
get a deal to stream detroit sports and youtubetv would be actually perfect
Spot on, same sentiment over here in Seattle, if I had local sports on YouTube TV it would be the perfect streaming service...IMO
I cant watch the Kraken, or Mariners, and Im not going to freakin FuboTV or back to cable...so Ill just wait and go old school radio...while I sit in my rocking chair on the porch eating peanuts and drinking a budweiser
March 15th, 2023 at 10:54 AM ^
How does one find out if they've been chosen for this
March 15th, 2023 at 11:00 AM ^
Well, if you have to ask...
March 15th, 2023 at 12:50 PM ^
When I turned on my TV yesterday evening on the home page for Youtube TV it had a banner letting me know of this feature for the tournament so I guess I was chosen.
I was not chosen, but a YouTubeTV support forum I visited had an official representative drop in and post "If you don't have access then and want to test out multiview during March Madness, you can contact our live support team and they can help you out." So I did that this morning, and they said I should be activated within 24 hours. I haven't seen anything yet, but hopefully it'll be working for me by the time the first games kick off tomorrow.
And I think OP is being a little overly dramatic about the downsides of this. Sure, it's limited to pre-selected channels for now, and only certain hardware for now, but this is just an initial limited release for testing. Presumably it'll get opened up to more customization and more hardware as development continues. I'll be shocked if they launch NFL Sunday Ticket this fall without the ability to customize which games you get to watch for that. This is presumably just a test run to work out the kinks ahead of time for that.
March 15th, 2023 at 11:00 AM ^
I'm sorry, in layman's terms, is this basically they are just doing a quad-box of four NCAA tourney games all in 4K?
March 15th, 2023 at 11:35 AM ^
That's right, but they've decided to do it such an expensive way that they won't let people even apply to be user testers.
March 15th, 2023 at 12:06 PM ^
I thought the OP said 4x720?
None of the NCAA tournament games will be broadcast in 4K.
CBS and Turner networks broadcast in 1080i or 720p. I believe YTTV may upscale this to 1080p.
If YTTV does implements the multi-view correctly, they will take the 1080i and mux it into 720p, or take the 720p channel directly. They'll then aggregate four 720p streams and display them in quad view to fully take advantage of a 2160p frame.
If you do not do it this way (and you build the multi-view from 360p or 480p stream), you will get a crappy/pixelated multi-channel view.
But when you go single-view, I think they will display it in 1080p, upscaled (YTTV has been doing this for CBS since the NFL season), but the raw video input is 1080i.
I know way too much about this crap.
March 15th, 2023 at 12:13 PM ^
I don’t understand much of the OP.
March 15th, 2023 at 12:21 PM ^
Its not all that exciting, nor threadworthy. YouTubeTV is testing out functionality so all four NCAA tourney games happening at the same time taking up 25% of your screen (think picture-in-picture but +2 more pictures), so someone can enjoy the novelty of seeing all four games at once for approximately 90 seconds before they inevitably make whichever game is most competitive full-screen.
Youtube TV is actually taking the opportunity to beta test this now, so they have time to fix the bugs and receive feedback before the NFL season kicks off this fall which they now have the rights to.
This is not an opinion, this came directly from Youtube TV.
I just don't think a significant number of people want to watch 4 sporting events at once and those who do will watch Red Zone. This feels like a thing people will say "oh, cool" and put on for twenty seconds and see what game is most competitive and flip over to. 99.999% of the sports watching public is not going to watch 4 small screens with different games and audio from only one/none for any significant period of time.
True, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't make it one of their primary advertising lures to attract new customers.
Exactly, like the lucrative Bar and Restaurant scene.
March 15th, 2023 at 12:17 PM ^
I’ve been seriously considering cutting the cord and trying YouTube TV. It seems as that I can get all the channels I currently get through it. Are there any Cons to YouTube TV?
March 15th, 2023 at 12:25 PM ^
The main con is switching channels isn't instantaneous. Depending on your internet it lags. Not a serious problem because Youtube tv gives you the option to return to where you left off.
If your a gambler the lag is the only downside IMO.
I cut the cord Monday. Yesterday I signed up for YouTube TV. I got a 14 day free trail. After that the price is $54.99 a month for 3 months, then $64.99 a month after. So far it’s not bad. I watched the Michigan game with no issues.
I really liked it but left when they lost Ballys. For me that would mean no local baseball, no regional hockey. If they get those back, I'll jump on board again immediately. Spectrum just jacked my rates up again.
March 15th, 2023 at 12:19 PM ^
Kinda unrelated to the actual topic but is anyone else a bit underwhelmed by 4K so far? I mean when it was first rolled-out I expected a visual transition similar to the one when we moved from standard definition to high def back in the early 2000's. But at least to my eyes, 4K is nicer but not so much nicer that it justifies the extra dollars I'm paying to both Netflix & YouTube TV for their 4K programming. And the fact that a sportscast in 4K is still so "special" to warrant it's own channel and about a week of "coming soon" ads is also a bit disapointing.
I'm sure glad I didnt buy the 8K TV last year, there is literally nothing being broadcast in that medium yet.
March 15th, 2023 at 12:24 PM ^
I definitely watch the 4K feeds whenever available (there was one Michigan game on Fox last football season where 4K was running a solid 20 seconds ahead of the HD channel which was odd) and I can tell a slight difference, but you're obviously very correct that its not the seachange SD to HD was.
Some of those nature documentaries on like Netflix in 4K are really cool and accentuate the differences more than a football game.
March 15th, 2023 at 12:45 PM ^
Bingo. I've put on some nature footage video from YouTube shot in 4K and it's absolutely breathtaking.like 93 minutes of open ocean and then I'll watch a Netflix movie in 4K and I'm like "well that was nice".
The problem is my desire to watch shows like 93 minutes of open ocean is about 3 minutes.
I wouldn't watch open ocean but I remember an underwater nature "film" when I first bought a 4K screen and that was pretty OMG. Now, am I ever going to watch it again . . . ?
It's all about bitrate, the optics of the camera (field of view), etc. There are many variables that come into play.
The only entity to do it 'right' thus far is ESPN. ESPN 4K broadcasts are incredible. Fox comes close with their 1080p upscaled to 4K.
March 15th, 2023 at 12:32 PM ^
I do find the obsession with 4K strange given that I feel like I remember reading that the perceived difference between 4k and 1080p is pretty small on the size of TVs one typically has and at the distance that one typically watches it...
ESPN in 4K is incredible on my LG OLED C1.
Std Def was like 350K pixels. 1080i (HD) is roughly 2 Million pixels. 4K is roughly 4 Million pixels. So the jump from Std Def to HD was roughly 5X and the jump from HD to 4K is roughly 2X.
I also think that the law of diminishing marginal returns applies to both the resolution and the refresh rate (60 Hz vs 120 vs 240 do appear qualitatively different although the biggest difference is between 60 and 120).
I thought the same thing. And my 50 year old eyes can hardly tell the difference. And I am sure 4K uses more data, so if that affects your internet plan, that would be a detriment also.
March 15th, 2023 at 12:21 PM ^
This makes me miss PSVue even more.
Of course, YouTube TV would have to provide channels worth watching.
I find it difficult to find even one channel worth watching at any given time on that platform as it now stands.
If it wasn't for Fox Sports and BTN (largely Fox owned) which don't have a streaming service like the other major networks, I'd just sh*t-can the whole thing and make do with a combination of Pluto (for local news and entertainment), Paramount+ & Disney+.
I was thinking about switching to YTTV about a year ago (from DirecTV satellite), and a friend talked me out of it based on picture quality for sports/fast motion. I do watch on a projector, so the screen size would show differences. Anyone have any direct experience with these 2 options?
Absolutely no issue with sports. In fact the picture quality is so much better than Dish Network.
Thanks, I appreciate the note! I would like the convenience of everyone in the family getting their own unlimited DVR. So if PQ is just as good (DirecTV is pretty good), I'm likely in.
Ok, so I'm a little confused and a little old. Nothing the OP said really makes sense. Can someone explain what this means in plain english.
March 16th, 2023 at 12:45 AM ^
How does this offering compare to sportsurge.net?
Just got the email that the price is going up to $72 per month. I always pause my account until football starts but I might look into other options for Sept 2nd.
Yeap, I got that same email. Surprised to see such a big jump. $64.99 to $72.99.
FWIW I just got picked to test it, pretty damn cool. Can choose which volume feed I want and can switch.
March 17th, 2023 at 11:19 PM ^
While they MAY charge for it, it won't be for server side costs. They need to aggregate the feeds once , or possibly once per major distribution centers, depending on how their topology is, compared to the million of subscribers they can then send it out
They may decide to charge because nearly 100% of their revenues go to the content providers. However, they are still in a mode of trying to gain market share, and I suspect they will give this away for free. Especially given it is useful for the first few days of the tournament
My guess is this is really the beta/first step in providing similar function for Sunday ticket. With probably some optionality there too. Direct/ATT provided this for streaming, but it was aggregated client side and was problematic. My guess is they are going to go for significant WOW with it moving to them and offering a significantly better experience than direct to attract a larger audience