Connect with us

Technologies

YouTube TV vs. Hulu Plus Live TV: The Pros and Cons of Each Streaming Service Rated

Hefty cable bill? Here are two premium live TV options which can save you money without missing out on the content you love.

We’re all watching more TV, and with sports such as NBA basketball and NHL hockey getting to the sharp end of their seasons, it’s a great time to consider a live TV streaming service. At CNET we’ve tested six of the major services, and our two favorites for premium users — cord-cutters who don’t mind paying a bit more for a full package of channels and features — are YouTube TV and Hulu Plus Live TV

These two cost more than most streaming services but they’re still cheaper than cable. A premium subscription lets you cut the cable TV cord while keeping features like an advanced DVR with program guide and extensive on-demand content. Both services offer a large selection of live channels, such as CNN, ESPN and TNT, as well as local stations ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC and more. You can access them via media streamers such as RokuAmazon Fire TV or Apple TV, your game console or your smart TV itself.

youtube-tv-cnet-2021-hulu-tv-screenyoutube-tv-cnet-2021-hulu-tv-screen
Sarah Tew/CNET

In general, we like YouTube TV best, because of a handful of important channels that Hulu lacks, including your local PBS station. It’s also $5 less expensive at $65 per month. However, Hulu also has an excellent selection of channels and adds a gigantic catalog of on-demand shows and movies as well as the Disney Bundle — Disney Plus and ESPN Plus — included in the $70 price.

Here’s how they stack up.

Sarah Tew/CNET

With an excellent channel selection, easy-to-use interface and best-in-class cloud DVR, YouTube TV is the best cable TV replacement. It offers a $20 4K upgrade, but the downside is there isn’t much to watch at present. If you don’t mind paying a bit more than the Sling TVs of the world, YouTube TV offers the highest standard of live TV streaming.

Read our YouTube TV review.

 

Hulu/Screenshot by Ty Pendlebury/CNET

Hulu’s greatest assets are the integration of a full complement of live TV channels with a massive catalog of on-demand content, and all for the one price. Hulu’s channel count is solid, including some must-have programming. Its price $70 includes Disney Plus and ESPN Plus. Starting Dec. 8, Hulu will change its Live TV packaging to include Disney’s new ad-supported plan for the $70 price, and offer higher-priced choices for people who don’t want to watch ads.

Read our Hulu With Live TV review.

 

YouTube TV and Hulu Plus Live TV compared

YouTube TV Hulu Plus Live TV
Base price $65 per month $70 per month
Free trial Yes Yes
Number of popular channels (out of 100) 78 74
Local ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC channels Yes Yes
Local PBS channels Yes No
Simultaneous streams per account 3 ($20 for unlimited and 4K) 2 ($10 option for unlimited)
Family member/user profiles Yes Yes
Cloud DVR storage  Unlimited 50 hours ($10 option for 200 hours)
Fast-forward through or skip commercials with cloud DVR Yes No (Yes with $10 DVR option)

Read more: Best Free TV Streaming Services: Roku Channel, Pluto TV, Tubi TV, Sling TV and More

Channels: YouTube wins but Hulu is solid too

The biggest difference comes down to channels. Comparing the total channel counts from our big list of the top 100 channels on every service, YouTube TV comes out on top with 79 from that list, compared to 73 on Hulu. That total doesn’t include every channel the services carry, just the ones in the top 100 as determined by editors at CNET, but it still provides a good indication.

The two share most major national channels including Cartoon Network, Disney Channel, ESPN, Fox News, NFL, TBS, USA Network and more, but there are a few differences. 

Here’s a condensed version of that list showing the 15 of those 100 channels carried by one and not the other.

Major channel differences

Channel YouTube TV Hulu Plus Live TV
PBS Yes No
A&E No Yes
AMC Yes No
BBC America Yes No
BBC World News Yes No
Boomerang No Yes
History No Yes
IFC Yes No
Lifetime No Yes
NBA TV Yes No
Sundance TV Yes No
Tastemade Yes No
Vice No Yes
WE tv Yes No

Both services offer all four of the major local channels — ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC — in most areas of the country, and both also carry local affiliates from The CW and MyTV. Only YouTube TV carries PBS local stations; you can’t watch your local PBS affiliate live on Hulu.

Neither service offers many regional sports networks after both YouTube TV and Hulu dropped them in 2020. Beyond RSNs, however, YouTube TV has an advantage in national sports networks, with NBA TV available as part of its base package. Though YouTube TV used to have MLB Network as well, it dropped the channel earlier this year. You can pay another $11 to get the «Sports Plus» add-on that also includes Fox College Sports, GolTV, NFL RedZone and Fox Soccer Plus. Hulu users can sign up for a $10 package which includes NFL RedZone, Outdoor Channel, Sportsman Channel, MAVTV Motorsports Network, TVG and TVG2.

Premium channels like HBO, Starz and Showtime are also available for extra fees, and Hulu has two optional channel packages. One is an add-on for $8 per month with 17 channels including MTV Classic, CNBC World, the Cooking Channel and Science, and the other is a Spanish-language package with seven channels for $5. YouTube TV doesn’t have any additional channel packages, although you can add individual channels like Shudder and CuriosityStream for additional fees.

Read more: Best OTA DVR for Cord-Cutters: Amazon Fire TV Recast, TiVo, AirTV and Tablo

Usability: YouTube TV has simpler menus

05-sling-versus-youtube05-sling-versus-youtube

The YouTube TV interface on Roku.

Sarah Tew/CNET

The menus and interfaces on both are quite different from one another and from regular cable, and we like YouTube TV’s menus better overall. 

YouTube TV: In general the YouTube TV interface is easier to use, and not just to people used to using regular YouTube. If you’re using the desktop or app versions, Google’s streamer offers a streamlined structure — even if it’s not as pretty as Hulu. 

Hulu Plus Live TV: If it was all a matter of which interface is more fun, then Hulu would take it. Hulu’s look is brighter, and though it lacks YouTube’s comprehensive search it’s still relatively easy drill down into the kind of content you want to watch. 

The difference in the number of simultaneous streams is worth noting, especially for families and other households who watch a lot of TV. YouTube TV lets you stream to three different devices — say, the living room TV, a bedroom TV and a tablet — at the same time, while Hulu lets you stream to two. Pay Hulu a hefty $10 extra per month and it will upgrade your number of streams to unlimited. 

YouTube TV has an excellent cloud DVR but Hulu closed the gap with an upgrade in 2022. Both now have unlimited storage and let you fast-forward through commercials in recorded content, so while we still consider YouTube TV’s DVR the gold standard, Hulu’s is very good too.

Read more: Best TV Antenna for 2023

On-demand and originals: Hulu with the runaway win

bzjskfqkwb2c4azdwypkuebzjskfqkwb2c4azdwypkue

Only Murders in the Building is an Hulu exclusive

Hulu

YouTube TV includes on-demand TV shows and movies from participating networks and shows, much like your cable service, and also offers YouTube Originals commercial-free. But it pales in comparison to Hulu. 

As we mentioned above, a Hulu Plus Live TV subscription unlocks all of the on-demand TV shows and movies available on the standard Hulu service, including thousands of episodes of network TV shows, as well as originals like The Bear, The Handmaid’s Tale, Only Murders in the Building, Pam & Tommy and the movie Palm Springs. It also includes a Disney Plus and ESPN Plus subscription, with their massive on-demand libraries.

Read more: Hulu: The 42 Best TV Shows to Watch Now

Which service is best for you?

Both services represent the peak of what live TV streaming has to offer, and both are better overall than the other two major premium options, FuboTV and DirecTV Stream. Your choice between the two comes down to cost, channel selection, usability and content, and in our book YouTube TV bests Hulu Plus Live TV in most of those areas. Hulu enables you to integrate a wide channel selection with its exemplary on-demand library which may be worth it for some. In the end though it’s all about having access to your favorite channels, so choose the service which gives you the channels you want.

Channel comparison

Below you’ll find a chart that’s a smaller version of this massive channel comparison. It contains the top 100 channels from each service. Some notes:

  • Yes = The channel is available on the cheapest pricing tier. That price is listed next to the service’s name.
  • No = The channel isn’t available at all on that service. 
  • $ = The channel is available for an extra fee.
  • Not every channel a service carries is listed, just the «top 100» as determined by CNET’s editors. Minor channels like AXS TV, CNBC World, Discovery Life, GSN, POP and Universal Kids didn’t make the cut.
  • Regional sports networks — channels devoted to showing regular-season games of particular pro baseball, basketball and hockey teams — are not listed. To find out if your local RSN is available you can search YouTube TV by ZIP code here and search Hulu Plus Live TV by ZIP code here.

Read more: Best live TV streaming service for cord-cutters: YouTube TV, Sling TV, Hulu and more compared

Top 100 Channels

Channel YouTube TV ($65) Hulu with Live TV ($70)
Total channels: 78 74
ABC Yes Yes
CBS Yes Yes
Fox Yes Yes
NBC Yes Yes
PBS Yes No
CW Yes Yes
MyNetworkTV Yes Yes
Channel YouTube TV ($65) Hulu with Live TV ($70)
A&E No Yes
ACC Network Yes Yes
Accuweather No No
AMC Yes No
Animal Planet Yes Yes
BBC America Yes No
BBC World News Yes No
BET Yes Yes
Big Ten Network Yes Yes
Bloomberg TV No Yes
Boomerang No Yes
Bravo Yes Yes
Channel YouTube TV ($65) Hulu with Live TV ($70)
Cartoon Network Yes Yes
CBS Sports Network Yes Yes
Cheddar Yes Yes
Cinemax $ $
CMT Yes Yes
CNBC Yes Yes
CNN Yes Yes
Comedy Central Yes Yes
Cooking Channel No $
Destination America No $
Discovery Channel Yes Yes
Disney Channel Yes Yes
Disney Junior Yes Yes
Disney XD Yes Yes
E! Yes Yes
EPIX $ No
ESPN Yes Yes
ESPN 2 Yes Yes
ESPNEWS Yes Yes
ESPNU Yes Yes
Food Network Yes Yes
Channel YouTube TV ($65) Hulu with Live TV ($70)
Fox Business Yes Yes
Fox News Yes Yes
Fox Sports 1 Yes Yes
Fox Sports 2 Yes Yes
Freeform Yes Yes
FX Yes Yes
FX Movies Yes Yes
FXX Yes Yes
FYI No Yes
Golf Channel Yes Yes
Hallmark Yes Yes
HBO/HBO Max $ $
HGTV Yes Yes
History No Yes
HLN Yes Yes
IFC Yes No
Investigation Discovery Yes Yes
Lifetime No Yes
Lifetime Movie Network No Yes
Magnolia No $
Channel YouTube TV ($65) Hulu with Live TV ($70)
MLB Network No No
Motor Trend Yes Yes
MSNBC Yes Yes
MTV Yes Yes
MTV2 Yes $
National Geographic Yes Yes
Nat Geo Wild Yes Yes
NBA TV Yes No
NBC Sports Network Yes Yes
NFL Network Yes Yes
NFL Red Zone $ $
NHL Network No No
Nickelodeon Yes Yes
Nick Jr. Yes Yes
Nicktoons Yes $
OWN Yes Yes
Oxygen Yes Yes
Paramount Network Yes Yes
Science No $
Channel YouTube TV ($65) Hulu with Live TV ($70)
SEC Network Yes Yes
Showtime $ $
Smithsonian Yes Yes
Starz $ $
Sundance TV Yes No
Syfy Yes Yes
Tastemade Yes No
TBS Yes Yes
TCM Yes Yes
TeenNick Yes $
Telemundo Yes Yes
Tennis Channel No No
TLC Yes Yes
TNT Yes Yes
Travel Channel Yes Yes
TruTV Yes Yes
TV Land Yes Yes
USA Network Yes Yes
VH1 Yes Yes
Vice No Yes
WE tv Yes No
Channel YouTube TV ($65) Hulu with Live TV ($70)

Technologies

Today’s NYT Mini Crossword Answers for Monday, May 19

Here are the answers for The New York Times Mini Crossword for May 19.

Looking for the most recent Mini Crossword answer? Click here for today’s Mini Crossword hints, as well as our daily answers and hints for The New York Times Wordle, Strands, Connections and Connections: Sports Edition puzzles.


Today’s NYT Mini Crossword is pretty easy. 5-Across, «one for whom every day is Boxing Day,» stumped me because I really wanted the answer to have something to do with cats. (Spoiler: It did not.) Need some help with today’s Mini Crossword? Read on. And if you could use some hints and guidance for daily solving, check out our Mini Crossword tips.

The Mini Crossword is just one of many games in the Times’ games collection. If you’re looking for today’s Wordle, Connections, Connections: Sports Edition and Strands answers, you can visit CNET’s NYT puzzle hints page.

Read more: Tips and Tricks for Solving The New York Times Mini Crossword

Let’s get at those Mini Crossword clues and answers.

Mini across clues and answers

1A clue: Network satirized on «30 Rock,» for short
Answer: NBC

4A clue: Sport played on horseback
Answer: POLO

5A clue: One for whom every day is Boxing Day?
Answer: MOVED

6A clue: Like correct letters in Wordle
Answer: GREEN

7A clue: Blend together
Answer: MELD

Mini down clues and answers

1D clue: «Invisible Man» or «Little Women»
Answer: NOVEL

2D clue: Run in the wash
Answer: BLEED

3D clue: What bourbon whiskey is primarily made from
Answer: CORN

4D clue: Tiny hole in the skin
Answer: PORE

5D clue: Longtime movie studio acquired by Amazon in 2022
Answer: MGM

How to play more Mini Crosswords

The New York Times Games section offers a large number of online games, but only some of them are free for all to play. You can play the current day’s Mini Crossword for free, but you’ll need a subscription to the Times Games section to play older puzzles from the archives.

Continue Reading

Technologies

Today’s NYT Connections: Sports Edition Hints and Answers for May 19, #238

Hints and answers for the NYT Connections: Sports Edition puzzle, No. 238, for May 19.

Looking for the most recent regular Connections answers? Click here for today’s Connections hints, as well as our daily answers and hints for The New York Times Mini Crossword, Wordle and Strands puzzles.


Connections: Sports Edition might be tough today if, like me, you don’t know what «loge» means. Read on for hints and the answers.

Connections: Sports Edition is out of beta now, making its debut on Super Bowl Sunday, Feb. 9. That’s a sign that the game has earned enough loyal players that The Athletic, the subscription-based sports journalism site owned by the Times, will continue to publish it. It doesn’t show up in the NYT Games app but now appears in The Athletic’s own app. Or you can continue to play it free online.  

Read more: NYT Connections: Sports Edition Puzzle Comes Out of Beta

Hints for today’s Connections: Sports Edition groups

Here are four hints for the groupings in today’s Connections: Sports Edition puzzle, ranked from the easiest yellow group to the tough (and sometimes bizarre) purple group.

Yellow group hint: Brag.

Green group hint: Where’s my seat?

Blue group hint: City that never sleeps.

Purple group hint: Opposite of go.

Answers for today’s Connections: Sports Edition groups

Yellow group: Boast

Green group: Stadium seating sections

Blue group: New York Knicks

Purple group: ____ stop

Read more: Wordle Cheat Sheet: Here Are the Most Popular Letters Used in English Words

What are today’s Connections: Sports Edition answers?

The yellow words in today’s Connections

The theme is boast. The four answers are crow, gloat, grandstand and showboat.

The green words in today’s Connections

The theme is stadium seating sections. The four answers are bleacher, loge, suites and upper deck.

The blue words in today’s Connections

The theme is New York Knicks. The four answers are Bridges, Hart, McBride and Towns.

The purple words in today’s Connections

The theme is ____ stop. The four answers are back, jump, pit and short.

Continue Reading

Technologies

Blade Runner: 18-Rotor «Volocopter» Moving from Concept to Prototype

It may look "nutty" and like a "blender," but the designers say the craft could challenge helicopters

Inventor and physicist Thomas Senkel created an Internet sensation with the October 2011 video of his maiden—and only—test flight of a spidery proof-of-concept 16-rotor helicopter dubbed Multicopter 1. Now the maker of the experimental personal aviation craft, the European start-up e-volo, is back with a revised «volocopter» design that adds two more rotors, a serial hybrid drive and long-term plans for going to 100 percent battery power.

The new design calls for 1.8-meter, 0.5-kilogram carbon-fiber blades, each paired with a motor. They are arrayed around a hub in two concentric circles over a boxy one- or two-person cockpit.

After awarding the volocopter concept a Lindbergh Prize for Innovation in April, Yolanka Wulff, executive director of The Charles A. and Anne Morrow Lindbergh Foundation, admitted the idea of the multi-blade chopper at first seems «nutty.» Looking beyond the novel appearance, however, she says, e-volo’s concept excels in safety, energy efficiency and simplicity, which were the bases of the prize.

All three attributes arrive thanks largely to evolo’s removal of classic helicopter elements. First, the energy-robbing high-mass main rotor, transmission, tail boom and tail rotor are gone. The enormous blades over a normal chopper’s cabin create lift, but their mass creates a high degree of stress and wear on the craft. And the small tail rotor, perched vertically out on a boom behind the cabin, keeps the helicopter’s body from spinning in the opposite direction as the main blades, but it also eats up about 30 percent of a helicopter’s power.

The volocopter’s multiple rotor blades individually would not create the torque that a single large rotor produces, and they offer redundancy for safety. Hypothetically, the volocopter could fly with a few as 12 functioning rotors, as long as those rotors were not all clustered together on one side, says Senkel, the aircraft’s co-inventor and e-volo’s lead construction engineer.

Without the iconic two-prop configuration, the craft would be lighter, making it more fuel efficient and reducing the physical complexity of delivering power to the top and rear blades from a single engine. Nor would the volocopter need an energy-hungry transmission. In fact, «there will be no mechanical connection between the gas engine and the blades,» Senkel says. That means fewer points of energy loss and more redundancy for safety.

E-volo’s design eliminates the dependence on a single source of power to the blades. As a serial-hybrid vehicle, the volocopter would have a gas-fueled engine, in this case an engine capable of generating 50- to 75 kilowatts, typical of ultralight aircraft. Rather than mechanically drive the rotors, the engine would generate power for electric motors as well as charge onboard lithium batteries. Should it fail, the batteries are expected to provide enough backup power so the craft could make a controlled landing.

Whereas helicopters navigate by changing the pitch of the main and tail rotor blades, the volocopter’s maneuverability will depend on changing the speed of individual rotors. Although more complex, it is more precise in principle to control a craft using three to six redundant microcontrollers (in case one or more fails) interpreting instructions from a pilot using a game console–like joystick—instead of rudder pedals, a control stick and a throttle.

Wulff’s first impression about the volocopter’s design is not uncommon. E-volo’s computer-animated promotional videos of a gleaming white, carbon-fiber and fiberglass craft beneath a thatch of blades recall the many-winged would-be flying machines of the late 19th century. This point is not lost on Senkel.

«I understand these skeptical opinions,» he says. «The design concept looks like a blender. But we really are making a safe flying machine.»

That would be progress in itself. Multicopter 1 looked like something from an especially iffy episode of MacGyver, complete with landing gear that involved a silver yoga ball. Senkel rode seated amid all those rotors powered only by lithium batteries. Multicopter 1 generated an average of 20 kilowatts for hovering and was aloft for just a few minutes.

There’s a reason why the experimental craft flew briefly and only once.Senkel describes that first craft as «glued and screwed together.» Seated on the same platform as the spinning blades, he says, «I was aware of the fact that I will be dead, maybe. Besides, we showed that the concept works. What do we win if we fly it twice?» he asks rhetorically.

Other than putting the pilot safely below the blades, the revised volocopter design would operate largely the same as the initial prototype. The design calls for three to six redundant accelerometers and gyroscopes to measure the volocopter’s position and orientation, creating a feedback loop that gives the craft stability and makes it easier to fly, Senkel says.

The volocopter’s revised prototype under construction could debut as soon as next spring. The first production models, available in perhaps three years, are expected to fly for at least an hour at speeds exceeding 100 kilometers per hour and a minimum altitude of about 2,000 meters, still far shy of standard helicopter’s normal operating altitude of about 3,000 meters. «This could change our lives, but I don’t expect anything like that for 10 years,» Senkel adds.

Given that most of the technology needed to build the volocopter is already available, «this idea is fairly easy to realize,» says Carl Kühn, managing director of e-volo partner Smoto GmbH, a company that integrates electric drive systems and related components.

Like Senkel, Kühn has modest short-term expectations despite his repeated emphasis on the standard nature of the technology involved. «I guess that e-volo will have [a prototype] aircraft in three years that can do the job—that it will lift one or two persons from one point to another,» he says.

The biggest immediate limitations appear to be regulatory. For instance, European aviation regulators consider any electrical system greater than 60 volts to be high voltage and regulate such systems more aggressively, Kühn says. As a result, the volocopter will operate below that threshold. The craft will also need to weigh no more than 450 kilograms to remain in the ultralight category, which is likewise subject to fewer government aviation regulations, according to Senkel.

The Lindbergh Foundation’s Wulff says the organization’s judges felt e-volo had «a greater than 50 percent chance of succeeding, or they wouldn’t have given them the innovation award.» Asked if she would line up to fly one someday, she says, «I sure would. It looks very compelling to me.»

Follow Scientific American on Twitter @SciAm and @SciamBlogs.Visit ScientificAmerican.com for the latest in science, health and technology news.
© 2012 ScientificAmerican.com. All rights reserved.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media