Just a comment on trying to watch "everything" that's being provided... NOT POSSIBLE, of course, at least not in real time. If there is any motivation to watch "live streaming" on the computer, that same event is either going to be (a) shown simulcast on one of the TV channels, and/or (b) shown tape delayed on one of the TV channels.
So I have just conceded that (a) I'm going to be "behind", and (b) I'm not going to be able to avoid knowing the results of events I have not actually watched yet.
I've got my HTPC (and 2TB recording drive) set to record (a) all of NBC broadcast, (b) all of MSNBC broadcast, and (c) all of NBCSN. This will avoid long-running team sports (basketball, soccer, etc.), and tournament events (tennis, boxing, etc.) that I have near-zero interest in, and should pick up all of the 2nd-tier sports that never normally make it to NBC network but that I've always wanted to see covered extensively (table tennis, archery, shooting, badminton, rowing, etc.).
What I wasn't prepared for is the result of watching the off-channels first, which may actually show the event live or delayed, and then maybe see it yet again on NBC network IF AN AMERICAN IS INVOLVED. Or, if I sampled the live stream to see a sport that otherwise would get no TV coverage at all, and then see it again (delayed) on one of the three channels (especially IF AN AMERICAN IS INVOLVED).
Haven't quite worked out the best way to deal with this overwhelming amount of simultaneous coverage. But what's definitely true is that if I "watch one channel's coverage for an entire day" before moving on to the next channel's coverage (e.g. watching all of NBCSN for Saturday before going to MSNBC's entire coverage, and finally watching NBC network's entire coverage), I'm going to be peppered with NBC's own "let's bring you up to date on what's happened today around the Olympics" spots which occur later in that day's coverage. These spots actually reveal results that have occurred earlier in that day (London time), but which I may not have seen yet because it was covered earlier on another channel that I haven't watched yet.
This is really annoying, because the overwhelming amount of coverage and results makes it very difficult to follow a specific sport in a sensible continuous fashion... and not know what's coming, or even whether I've already seen this same event earlier on some other channel. It's confusing.
It would appear that the only way to actually "go to a session" for a sport is to try and view it live streaming (with its own inherent limitations) so that you can jump from one table to another, or one court to another, etc. That's the only way you're not going to be presented with the US-centric editing on all of the NBC channels. If an American was not in the table tennis coverage I would never have seen anything on MSNBC or NBCSN, which theoretically was going to "cover table tennis". There's one match shown, and that's it (as it turns out, 2 of the 3 Americans were knocked out with only 1 moving on in that first round).
Now maybe it will change as the days move on, but for the moment I'm not "enjoying" all of this "feast of HD coverage". Even equestrian is very very limited, and just as in years past we see the performances of only those competitors who end up with the top scores in that preliminary or medal round. We're not shown the journeyman and less competent.
Also, I couldn't believe the selective coverage of the 400IM swimming event only showed heats 4 and 5 in the preliminaries earlier in the day (with Phelps and Lochte), instead of covering the whole session. And I think I've seen those two heats now on three different channels, so that by the time I saw it Saturday morning on NBC network I'd already seen it multiple times.
Anyway, it's going to take a while to work out exactly how I need to go about watching all of this, and enjoying it. I certainly was bothered by NBC network's delayed cycling road race coverage (which, granted, is 6 hours long) where coming back from a commercial break "we have a breakaway", but we didn't actually see it happen! We only were shown the six riders or so who'd broken away after the fact, but as Tour viewers know the real excitement is to watch a genuine "live" coverage for the last three hours of each day's stage, so that you see realtime action AS IT OCCURS... which is what makes watching "live" enjoyable.
I also hate the inserted "up close and personal" time-wasters (e.g. Tyler Farrar's story) during the race. Easy choice for FAST-FORWARD, since I only have limited time in each 24-hour period.