We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 2.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 2.0, updated 2025-02-19.
What the analysis found
One source only — shown, not confirmed 6
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
What reviewers said
Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.
Aggressive ad load
Less than mediocre — The remote doesn’t work and has so many adds it feels useless. I’d rather use my physical remote instead of this app. I’m not saying no adds for free I’m just saying less adds and more useful would be nice. I don’t…
ADS — Way too many ads, you can hardly use the remote without a AD popping up every 2 seconds. You practically have to pay to use the app.
To much ads — I hate this app it force you to buy a subscription it’s annoying
Paywall with no way past it
Horrible — Can’t even use the app without paying
Evil app — I can not use the app for 5 seconds without an ad, I couldn’t even use the remote after a bit without buying premium I wwasn’t even able to pick a show, evil.
SO BAD!!! NEVER GET THIS APP!! — Can’t even use the remote without paying them 19.99 PER MONTH FOR A REMOTE!! This is robbery at its finest!!
Hard to cancel
You can’t unsubscribe. It’s a scam. — Scam.
Unable to cancel subscription — Unable to cancel free subscription. Cancel subscription tab takes you to an error page. 🙁
Cant cancel — I tried to cancel but the feature won’t allow it. Trying to contact them but no response.
Paywall blocks the basics
ADS — Way too many ads, you can hardly use the remote without a AD popping up every 2 seconds. You practically have to pay to use the app.
Blocks functions — I get the ads being required if you’re not paying for it. But to not allow the keyword function after a while keeping it behind the paywall after you’ve already viewed adds is weak
Misleading - don’t bother — The app lets you use it for a couple minutes but then locks it down behind a paywall. Ridiculous that you need to pay to control a tv you already paid for. Not worth the download.
Upgrade prompts use guilt-trip wording
Won’t let me do anything… — Any button I click just leads to a pop up telling me to upgrade to premium to unlock all features… literally can’t even press the power button without this happening. Completely useless.
Ineffective and confusing — This app allowed me to cast a video to my tv one time and then no longer allows me to use it. It keeps giving me a pop up saying I need to subscribe to premium without describing what premium does or why it…
Don’t bother……. — I tried the app and at every turn I’m being asked to buy the premium version or having to put up with useless ads. Trying to tune to OTA channel 48.4 only gets me to a list of the the six sub channels on 48 then I have…
What this app sells
From the store listing. Billing terms are read from each purchase’s name — the stores don’t publish them — so treat them as a strong hint, not a disclosure.
How the automated analysis works
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.
Hands-on inspections are not yet open.