I've been subscribing for a monthly subscription to camdserver who seems to be under the radar (not much mention) and had fairly good streams (quality seems to be decreasing lately though).
I thought that might be a good option on the long term as more users = more strain on bandwidth and servers. However there are several IPTV providers that are getting very good user feedback in terms of quality, support and content.
Is there a concern that they might be adding too many new users too quickly which would eventually start having an impact on channel experience?
What I guess my question should be - is it better to go for a provider that is less known (less new users) that could maintain good quality with little need for infrastructure upgrades or a provider with very good ratings (lots of new users) that would need constant new infrastructure upgrades?
The constraint is more about how much a provider is prepared to invest (and how much they retain as profit). Adding additional servers and bandwidth to cope with growth is a relatively simple task but obviously has an associated cost. There is the temptation for a provider to put off that cost as long as possible. Similarly with channels, there is a cost associated with sourcing quality feeds. There is also a cost associated with having backup feeds available. What you are looking for is a provider that is prepared to invest to ensure they have a quality server both now and for the longer term. This is obvious difficult for a customer to assess but one indication could be the quality of support the provider offers. If they respond with a canned response email after two days, they are probably minimising their spend. Ace IPTV is committed to investing in servers, channels and support in order to ensure a long term future. You are welcome to request a 24 hour trial at /r/AceTV or message me.