Directv to shift away from Satellite?
- Thread starter Scott Greczkowski
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 624
- Views 39K
-
WELCOME TO THE NEW SERVER!
If you are seeing this you are on our new server WELCOME HOME!
While the new server is online Scott is still working on the backend including the cachine. But the site is usable while the work is being completes!
Thank you for your patience and again WELCOME HOME!
CLICK THE X IN THE TOP RIGHT CORNER OF THE BOX TO DISMISS THIS MESSAGE
- Status
They can do that while they are tapping the underground phone cables for the the antenna on the telephone pole
Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!
What if AT&T didn't some of the popular TV shows on VOD and you would have to subscribe to their streaming service also?
Then you do..I am only speculating..not talking in facts
Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!
They were also claiming we'd see a gigabit with LTE and 100 Mbps with 3G. The point is though there is no use case for even a gigabit to the home, let alone 10 Gbps. Yeah, yeah, I'm sure someone who thinks they are clever will quote the apocryphal Bill Gates quote "640K is enough for everyone" or suggest that once we have that speed someone will come up with a need for it.
Here's the thing though, the increases in speed have gone hand in hand with richer sensory input for us meatbags. In the days of 2400 bps modems the internet was essentially text only, we got 56K modems and GIF, JPG and MP3 became popular. As we got more and more speed we got rudimentary video, then better quality video, and now you can stream 4K video and if you have gigabit to your home you can manage two to four dozen 4K streams - but you can still only watch one at a time...
The main impact 5G will have is reduced latency, so it is better for interactive stuff VOIP without the need for QOS. The only reason it will be faster is because it will be using a lot of high frequency spectrum - we've already pretty much reached the limit for bandwidth efficiency so the only way to get faster is to use bigger chunks of spectrum, and since all the lower frequencies are claimed the only way to do that was to go higher in frequency. The talk about higher speeds with 5G is just hot air - it doesn't matter. We already have enough speed with the latest LTE standards, we just don't see the advertised speeds in real life because there isn't enough spectrum to go around in denser areas.
I saw this in their 2018 Q1 slide presentation.
https://investors.att.com/~/media/F...1q-2018/ATT 1Q 2018 Earnings Presentation.pdf
Legacy services and video shift to OTT impact revenues and margins
https://investors.att.com/~/media/F...1q-2018/ATT 1Q 2018 Earnings Presentation.pdf
Legacy services and video shift to OTT impact revenues and margins
WRONG !Best case scenario: Directv spins off it's satellite biz, Dish buys it.
If in fact Satellite TV is a bad business model and that's a big if, how would Dish Net satellite business survives?
The only benefit from combining Dish and Directv (whoever owns who) is they could consolidate billing, and (after cross training) CSRs and installers. There would be no economies of scale for satellites, and it would take several years to start from scratch and develop hardware/software that works with both systems (made a little easier since Dish finally switched to the same technology as Directv's SWM)
It would suck for customers though, since people in rural areas who have no options besides satellite would have only one choice. Unregulated monopolies are always bad for consumers.
It would suck for customers though, since people in rural areas who have no options besides satellite would have only one choice. Unregulated monopolies are always bad for consumers.
Which makes no sense right?
Why would AT&T compete with themselves just baffles me, I suspect maybe it's really Directv Now offering a $15 tier and the desire of AT&T to lose the name Directv etc. Just a guess?
Oh Wait ...Come over to the dark side....
D* IS the Dark side from what I've always heard.
In most cases, under 6 you'll have buffering, thats what most use to complain about.
Anymore, its a numbers/status game ...
As long as I can stream without buffering and the picture looks sharp (HD/4k) I'm fine ....
I have 50 mg, because thats what they are selling (now they push 100, but theres no need in my instance.)
I could drop back down to 26 mg that I had for awhile and be fine BUT THEY WON'T OFFER THAT speed anymore.
Now its 8 or 50 .... stupid, but true.
A future problem would be going to 4K streaming and going over the 1000GB allowed by my ATT internet plan, I'm using 500Megs now with just HD streaming. It could get more expensive to stream than to have satellite service.
I hope people are listening to what you just posted .... as I have mentioned many times about prices of the internet going up would not surprise me at all.
Sounds like AT&T might be changing their mind about going all 5g.
AT&T CFO throws shade on Verizon’s fixed 5G plans | FierceWireless
AT&T CFO throws shade on Verizon’s fixed 5G plans | FierceWireless
And lets see the effects of Net-Neutrality which is just around the corner!
- Status
Similar threads
