This was likely the culprit for what you encountered. Obviously it’s specific to the TV model you have but in our case we have a TCL TV running the Google TV OS. However, because of the speed and updates we have a Google TV Streamer (4K) using the HDMI 1 input and in the Google TV OS of the TV itself we just have it configured in the Power On Behavior to use the last used input.
@wilmywood - as @Nilex says, save yourself more headaches by using a cheap, easily replaceable, fully compatible streaming device to handle the Tablo and other services. You won’t regret it by avoiding the hassle of trying to maintain a TV OS compatibility.
Avoid specific Roku devices and VegaOS by Amazon.
Tablo-Compatible Apps and Devices
1 Like
Interesting; I did not know that it was possible to configure what input would be used upon powering on.
Another aspect I am pondering is that, in my prior configuration (using the old TV that I am getting rid of), that old TV did not have an ethernet input port, so, the ethernet hardwire from the router went to the 2024 external Roku Ultra device, and from there an HDMI went to the TV. Now, with my new 2025 Samsung TV, I have the ethernet hardwire from the router going directly into the TV. If I utilize my 2024 Roku external device in order to be able to use the “legacy” Tablo, I guess I would have to go back to a similar pathway, with the ethernet wire no longer going straight to the TV. I am wondering if that will degrade the picture quality and speed to some extent.
Thanks!
From that list, I can’t clearly tell if my 2024 Roku Ultra is good or not.
Wouldn’t it be simpler to just get a new Gen4 Tablo?
How does Gen4 compare to the older versions?
Like I said, it’s going to depend on your specific TV, but lots of newer models have that functionality.
As far as your other questions, my unprofessional opinion would be the picture quality and speed should not be affected, because those are mostly related to your available bandwidth which isn’t going to differ per device, it’s going to be the same because it’s at the network level not the device level.
If anything, a separate/external device is in most cases going to be more powerful than your TV so if you have Ethernet port limitations (i.e. can’t wire both the TV and external device) I would actually wire the external TV and NOT the TV.
Open your Roku and see if the OG Tablo app is still available. If so, the OG Tablo should be supported by your device.
As an OG user, you may not like the UI/UX and features of the Gen4 Tablo.
The Gen4 Tablo is klugey and has problems on a regular basis, whereas the OG Legacy Tablo does not.
My thought is, unless you want to go from the 2-tuner to the 4-tuner model, that if you have the OG Legacy lifetime guide or don’t mind paying for the guide, AND you have a device that supports the OG Table app, then keep what you have for now. You can always change later.
Did you mean that you would wire the external device, and not the TV?
My router does have an additional unused ethernet port. But if I ran one ethernet cable from router to external Roku device, and another ethernet cable from router to TV, then how could the TV get the platform of the external Roku device? The external Roku device has one ethernet port and one HDMI port. If the signal between the Roku external device and the TV is via HDMI, isn’t that more limited than getting the signal via an ethernet cable?
This is very helpful; thank you.
Yes, I know my 2024 Roku Ultra device works with the “legacy” Tablo, as I just had it doing that until I installed my new TV.
Yes, I have been paying for the guide. And as an aside, when I hooked my antenna directly into the new TV, it generated a similar guide, for free.
Doesn’t sound like I would want a Gen4.
Did Roku just shoot itself in the foot, or what?
Yep, sorry, typo, I meant the external device.
As far as the ports, I was just saying you could have both wired if you have enough ports unless you decide to move to the external device for all your viewing (which is what I do). Nothing to do with signal path, just how both devices could have Internet access. The HDMI is just for connecting it to your TV.
Yeah, but if I send two ethernet cables from the router, one to the TV and one to the external Roku device, then it would seem to me that the Roku device would not be passing on any signal, through its platform, to the TV.
On the other hand, if I send one ethernet cable from the router to the Roku device, and then send that signal from the device on to the TV, then the TV gets the signal from an HDMI, rather than from an ethernet cable. I am assuming that an HDMI cable is less capable than an ethernet cable. I think I have appropriate fast versions of each of them.
FWIW, I no longer connect my TV to my network due to screen capturing. I think the streaming devices do it too, but I try to be selective on who does this.
What capability(ies) would you miss using an HDMI-connected vs. ethernet-connected TV?
EDIT: What a coinky-dink. https://youtu.be/dehzLA4kFqM?si=92N7NeLm1jqsziBP
I think you are confusing the network connectivity and the TV connectivity. The Roku would still provide the video signal to your TV via the HDMI connection regardless.
I don’t know that I would miss anything in terms of the HDMI connection vs the ethernet. I don’t understand this aspect very well. I figured that if the source internet from the street comes out of the wall on ethernet, then as long as one has an ethernet cable at the appropriately high Cat designation, then there would be no loss of speed or bandwidth in connecting directly with an ethernet cable. Depending on the version of HDMI used, then might lose some capability using that. But I don’t know these things.
In terms of not connecting your TV to the network, how would that be possible? A dedicated router, hardwired, with no wifi, to plug in to your TV and any additional TV? Then a second router to do your in-house WiFi for mobile devices, etc?
Amazing news story on the spying being done by those major companies. Hard to imagine what useful / valuable info they could get from screen capture. But since a bunch of them are doing it, it must be of non-trivial value. It is disgusting that they can do this kind of crap. Certainly makes me lose respect for them.
Yep, I don’t understand the difference, really. I have read the definitions and the described differences, but it doesn’t make sense. All the audio and video is contained within the internet feed that comes out of the wall, and that comes out on an ethernet cable. So one would think that, while an HDMI can’t handle data well, the ethernet cable would seem to be able to do it all. ??
The AppleTV, FireTV, Roku, or Onn/Google streaming device would take the place of your television’s smart features. You do this by connecting the network (using either wifi or Ethernet) to the streaming device of your choice, then connecting that streaming device to the television using an HDMI cable.
You shouldn’t lose any features but you’ll use the remote of the streaming device instead of the television remote.
I think it’s best to connect the Tablo with Ethernet if possible, then you can use wifi for the streaming device(s). The Ethernet cable is recommended because it’s more reliable and less susceptible than wifi to interference or saturation.
@wysiwyggin has already explained some of this but basically you are comparing your built in TV OS, which can run the apps and connects directly to the Internet if you choose, to another external device that also can run apps and connects directly to the Internet, but since it’s not an OS running directly on your TV, you have the additional step of needing to connect it to your TV.
So both for example use your Internet connectivity to start a Netflix movie, but the external device simply needs to pass the video and audio through the HDMI cable to get it to your TV.