Hope they get your request but glad they are rolling out the commercial skip in March that more people will benefits.
1 Like
Four years seems like yesterday once you consider that Roku hasn’t had remote connect since day one.
In that time a number of consumer routers now come with a VPN server built in. That kind changes the importance of remote connect via TabloTV account.
Virtually every IoT and/or SmartDevice that you “control from your phone” - isn’t directly controlled from your phone, there’s a third party involved, for example tablotv.com. Although I’m not a technician or developer, it doesn’t seem too complex for someone who is to implement something allowing user to log into their devices… “Stay tuned!” seems to be a blow-off response… years later without any notice about giving up on it.
As for Roku’s deficiencies, I’ve noticed comments like this often. Yet on tablotv.com page Tablo Compatible Streaming Set-Top-Boxes & Sticks they claim:
Roku is the most popular streaming device cord cutters use with Tablo OTA DVRs.
If it’s so popular, why wouldln’t with have as much function as possible. They are practically recommending it… only to have user to find how it doesn’t work as expected?
1 Like
True, Roku is the most popular streaming device to use with the Tablo.
Actually, I believe it’s the most popular streaming device period.
Don’t think the percentage of users who want Remote Tablo viewing via Roku is very high, though.
And therein lies the problem.
Lots of users have always wanted Roku remote connect. The problem has always been the Roku SDK and BrightScript.
I just don’t see as a huge need; with the existing system there’s no need for Tablo to maintain a centralized database of Tablos, passwords, and IP addresses that could potentially be hacked. VPNs are not particularly challenging to setup with many routers, and it’s the potential remote user who takes on the trade off of opening ports and getting password security correct.
I can think of a LOT of other features that would effect a lot more Tablo users that I would like to see implemented before this, which I would never use.
Got you. It’s not something I’m interested in - and don’t plan on getting a Roku. Just an observation.
I believe what it comes down to: the overwhelming majority of users enjoying their products don’t bother going online and say how much they like it… they’re busy enjoying it. (or ignorance in bliss in some cases, so just don’t know and accept what they get)
1 Like
Yeah, I can see your perspective there. However, many folks, especially rural are using internet connections that have NAT or CGNAT which means you can’t port forward and have no way to setup external IPs for VPN access.They have to run an externally hosted VPN, VPS, or some other proxy to even get a VPN working. In the age of cloud and CGNAT based connectivity remote connected tied to just your Tablo credentials makes the most sense, IMHO.
1 Like
Unless I missed something, Roku and fire TV 4k ( at least when I try it) do not work out-of-home. Even after running it on the local network to sync. When I tried them they can not find my Tablo. I am currently limited to using my samsung tablet and chromecast to watch when on the road. I can watch on my iphone but can not get sound with casting or mirroring to the tv… Am I correct than once you connect and watch via any supported device on home network that they are then sync’ed?
“VPNs are not particularly challenging to setup with many routers…”
No one over 40 or 50 in my family would have even a remote idea of what you even said, let alone know how to set it up. Would love to be able to recommend the Tablo to my parents/grandparents/aunts/uncles as they would use the Connect feature for sure, but guess who would be setting it up and supporting it? Yep, me. I know some very tech savvy middle aged and older folks but let’s be honest here, that is not the majority of the population.
The VPN workaround also assumes your ISP allows any incoming access to your public IP. If you are not on a traditional cable/DSL setup and CGNAT is in play VPN setup will be more complex than simply using your router’s out-of-box solution. Again, not a technical hurdle for those who are tech savvy but I would still argue this is not the knowledge level of most people.
Speaking from experience with Fire TV Stick 4K, once I set it up on the LAN I was able to change the WiFi to connect to my iPhone’s hotspot and Tablo Connect worked so this may be a localized issue to your setup. I haven’t owned a Roku in years so I cannot say whether Tablo Connect is working well on those devices or not.
You may want to check the settings in the Tablo app to see if remote connect shows any errors. If so, you may still need to setup proper port forwarding on your router.
Remote streaming doesn’t work on Roku and on your phone try to turn off surround sound off see if that works on my android phone when I turn the surround sound off everything works good.
The OG Tablo app on the Fire TV supports Tablo Connect.
The new Tablo PREVIEW app on the Fire TV does not support Tablo Connect. The PREVIEW app is built on the same API as the Roku app, hence why it doesn’t get support remote viewing.
Which app are you using on the Fire TV?
Yes, they will be synced, but not all devices work out of the box with Tablo Connect (remote access).
However, there is a workaround using VPN.
I am using stable (non-preview) releases of the application on my Fire TV Stick.
I think you’ve made my point; remote access is not simple to setup based on a number of things, such as whether the ISP supports it, but the existing mechanism makes it as simple as possible. Making a more complex but flexible mechanism won’t solve problems, it’ll just create a larger support load for Tablo, hardly a selling point for a small company looking to get bigger.
The only case in which having a Tablo online service to register your remote access configuration with would add capability is if every Tablo was setup to be automatically registered with this service just in case someone remote from their box might want to configure access to the box while outside the home.
If such a capability were enabled, I can imagine someone selling remote access to OTA signals ala Aereo, which could create all sorts of issues with the Tablo service, something the Tablo folks would be smart to continue to not easily enable.
1 Like
Maybe for you. I don’t find it complicated to copy/clone/duplicate files to a new drives, yet others find it daunting.
Kind of like, “your mileage may vary” or what you believe to be common sense, isn’t so common to someone else.
1 Like
If before a user buys the tablo product, they know they need to use the remote connect feature there are a number of WEB pages under How-It_Works describing not only what devices and OS’s work but also what needs to be done to make it functional.
If these instructions are overwhelming and VPN setup seems to complex and the user still requires remote connect maybe they should go with another product. When a company is selling a low cost consumer product it’s probably not going to supply a product that not only works for everyone but also makes common sense to everyone.
I don’t think I’ve made your point at all, IMHO. This suggested feature would make it more complex for who, Tablo or the customer? I strongly disagree that Tablo’s existing mechanism makes remote access “as simple as possible” from the customer perspective. You are absolutely correct in that remote access isn’t technically simple, but that is for the company to take care of and make transparent for their customers. The most successful companies in tech share a commonality in the K.I.S.S. principle when applied to their customer experience and really I don’t think this feature would add a ton of additional technical complexity depending on how you implemented it.
Any friction to setup a device’s desired functionality for streaming outside the home (such as the need to sync on a LAN first or setting up a VPN) is going to frustrate the end user experience and create more support tickets for Tablo as well. There can be no reasonable argument that the current Tablo Connect setup doesn’t create support tickets (hell, I’m sure port forwarding throws some people for a loop). Nuvyyo isn’t a huge company by any means, and I understand that (Plex isn’t massive either, btw.). However, they have been around almost 10 years now and received approx. $4 million USD in their last round of funding alone. I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that this requested feature would be a great step forward for their existing base and allow stronger competition in the OTA DVR space as a whole which would bring great potential for company growth (gotta spend some money to make it, as the old saying goes).
From the perspective of device and user info registration, I’m fairly confident Tablo is already keeping some sort of centralized database with connection info as the app must know about the Tablo box public IP in order for Tablo Connect to work (the cookie it uses in Chrome has a CUID which appears to reference something on the backend of tablotv.com) and this info is likely used by their tech support reps as well for troubleshooting. If they already have a table that maps a given app install to a public IP that the Tablo is broadcasting on, it’s not a stretch to think they could then also associate this info with a customer’s login credentials or specific device.
Your Aereo parallels/concerns are really unfounded for a number of reasons. Primarily, any legal issue could be avoided with simple additions to the ToS stating that a user will not resell the streams or risk a ban (if this clause doesn’t exist already). Aereo’s business model was resale of OTA streams as a service using data-center infrastructure; they weren’t looking to hardware sales for their revenue so it’s much less likely that Nuvyyo could be litigated against from the same perspective. Additionally, Tablo could utilize any or all of the following to mitigate mass stream resales from even happening:
- Limit the number of concurrent streams coming from a single public IP.
- Use IP blacklisting service (i.e. MaxMind, etc.) to ensure only residential IP blocks are allowed to broadcast.
- Set a maximum number of Tablo unit registrations per guide subscription.
- Tokenize client device registration to the MAC and tuner number of the Tablo unit.
etc. etc.
If after evaluating all of the above and finding they still don’t have the cash on hand to roll out an improved Tablo Connect they could respond in one of two ways: either offer “premium” Tablo subscription (monthly/yearly/lifetime) which includes “Easy Remote Connect” (bonus points if they partnered with a commercial VPN to offer a seamless port-forwarding-free solution for ISP NAT’ed users) or they could reply to this thread and tell us they aren’t adding the feature after all 
Because again, my primary frustration in posting here has to do with the attitude that “yes, the feature is coming” when in reality they appear to have no intention of adding it.
1 Like
Fair points. In that case then, all I would ask from them is a reply to this thread stating a reversal from their previous position saying that this feature was essentially “in the pipe”. Ex.: “After 4 years of further review and user feedback we have found this feature request not feasible for Tablo to offer. Here is a KBA to workarounds some users have found to work…” The transparency would be quite admirable, IMHO.