[mtrovo]

> Disney has less content, but almost no low quality fluff.

I mean, if you count all the content they own and you already saw before on cinema or other medias then you're right.

But after paying 1.5 years for Disney+ I think I'm paying 120 dollars a year just to watch Baby Yoda. I cannot find any other content over there really worth the Disney+ membership price.

On the other hand it's really hard for me to decide what to watch on netflix because of the amount of content I'm interested.

[vlunkr]

> I mean, if you count all the content they own and you already saw before on cinema or other medias then you're right.

If you don't count that then Disney+ probably isn't for you. It's ideal for parents who want a bunch of good kids movies and shows. Mandalorian, although it was the "killer app" is an outlier. The rest of the original content I've watched on there is almost literally advertisements for Disneyland. Just buy a membership for a month and watch Mando.

[TheCondor]

The television content is mixed on Disney+ It’s for children so I may not have the best perspective but most of it is kind of weak. The marvel is star wars stuff is strong and they have the Disney movies, including the n-th straight to video sequels you never heard of.

[jrnichols]

I thought that too until one day I noticed that Disney has the National Geographic content as well. I've been watching a good amount of that recently.

I wouldn't pay for Disney+ on its own, but getting it as part of a bundle with Hulu (ad free) was ok. ESPN+ is worthless.