What will happen to Directv going forward (1 Viewer)

Juan

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Sep 14, 2003
25,870
5,600
Moscow Russia
last i read it was @ 25% for fiber
Fiber to the home...and fiber are 2 different things....most cable companies have a fiber backbone with coax to customers....all 5g cell sites are connected by fiber as well as 4g
 

comp9

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jan 24, 2017
676
232
PA
Fiber to the home...and fiber are 2 different things....most cable companies have a fiber backbone with coax to customers....all 5g cell sites are connected by fiber as well as 4g
Not all 4G Sites are connected via Fiber. I know of several in my area that are not yet
 

bobvick

Pub Member / Supporter
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 20, 2006
4,458
2,151
Northwest Alabama
The populated parts

I live in a county, 743 sq miles, 30,000, entire county is or will be covered. Approximately 75% as of now. And, nothing was automated regarding the installation, all manual labor, trucks, ATVs, even mules where the land is rough. It’s an exception to the rule for sure, but, it’s not ‘just’ in populated places. Also, it is FTTH, 1Gbps/1Gbps.
 

Juan

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Sep 14, 2003
25,870
5,600
Moscow Russia
Not all 4G Sites are connected via Fiber. I know of several in my area that are not yet
What speeds do they offer?....anything above a t3 connection is fiber...t3 is only 28 t1s...not a whole lot of streaming video at those sites
 

comp9

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jan 24, 2017
676
232
PA
What speeds do they offer?....anything above a t3 connection is fiber...t3 is only 28 t1s...not a whole lot of streaming video at those sites
The ones here are on my cable companies coax network... So about 20-30 down and 10 up usually
 

krynn

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 2, 2020
431
123
woodland hills ca
I'm guessing you have the newer version of Verizon's '5G' home solution, not the one they launched in October 2018 and discontinued in December 2018. Seems kinda hokey to have something stuck to a window that's facing the same direction of the macrocell and run a cord under said window. Plus it looks like you are forced into using their hardware which is a no go for me, along with CG-NAT. The speed is irrelevant if I can't configure my network the way I want it.

My favorite video so far on this joke of a technology is from Linus Tech Tips, where Linus is in NYC near VZW macrocell does a speed test and it's 800 Mbps, then he puts the phone to his chest, uses himself as a shield and gets 600 Mbps.
yea i do have the newest version of verizons 5G home soultion. yes you are forced into using there modem and router!!! but there's no charge for it and you don't own it so if you cancel the service then you must send it back to them or you'll be charged for it!! with the way things are changing i don't think that i would want to own any hardware in todays world... the antenna thing is not a big deal to me and you can configure your network to how you want it set up.. i seen the linus video of verizons 5G i thought it was funny to. but it's true you have to near a micro cell to get the full speeds since millimeter waves can't travel far let alone though walls or windows!!! my fav vid is. i forgot who posted it. but t mobles 5G only hit 69 MBPS :coco because it's low band spectrum. why don't they just say it's not real 5G service and were just reselling you the sh*t that you allready have :(
 

slice1900

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 14, 2015
1,387
596
IA
yea i do have the newest version of verizons 5G home soultion. yes you are forced into using there modem and router!!! but there's no charge for it and you don't own it so if you cancel the service then you must send it back to them or you'll be charged for it!! with the way things are changing i don't think that i would want to own any hardware in todays world... the antenna thing is not a big deal to me and you can configure your network to how you want it set up.. i seen the linus video of verizons 5G i thought it was funny to. but it's true you have to near a micro cell to get the full speeds since millimeter waves can't travel far let alone though walls or windows!!! my fav vid is. i forgot who posted it. but t mobles 5G only hit 69 MBPS :coco because it's low band spectrum. why don't they just say it's not real 5G service and were just reselling you the sh*t that you allready have :(

Being low band or slow doesn't mean it "isn't real 5G service". 5G is a protocol, not a guarantee of a certain speed. 5G doesn't use spectrum any more efficiently than LTE does, so given the same amount of spectrum (i.e. number of MHz) to operate in it can't really go any faster than LTE (though while it doesn't improve bandwidth, it does improve latency significantly)
 
  • Like
Reactions: krynn

evenout

Well-Known SatelliteGuys Member
Aug 22, 2014
31
6
I'm wondering if AT&T shouldn't just focus on the streaming box, try to compete with Roku.

With more and more streaming options, I think there's definitely some improvements that could be had with a streaming box. A remote with numbers may start becoming more beneficial with more streaming apps. Instead of scrolling down, down, down, down, down, down to find the right app you are wanting, being able to more quickly get to it with numbers might be beneficial.

Being able to stream multiple apps at the same time, like the Sports Mix or News Mix channels DirecTV has - might also become beneficial. Or even being able to stream multiple channels at the same time inside the AT&T TV app.

I'm not sure if Roku really want to move to this type of system because they have a lot of Roku players out there. For example, if they start using numbers on their remote, how is that going to affect legacy Roku devices?

I do think the market is ripe for a slightly better streaming device with all the streaming options becoming available. I don't know who that might be, but there might be potential with the AT&T streaming device (although, as I understand it, the current device is underwhelming).
 

lparsons21

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 17, 2009
9,601
7,577
Herrin, IL 62948
think of it this way
how much competition is there in streaming?
how much in satellite?

ATT’s public position is that their current streaming offerings are not really competing with the other streaming services that offer essentially the same thing. Unfortunately for them, most people I’ve seen posting about it find that position to be utter hogwash!

They are currently stuck in the cable/sat mode of business operation and can’t see the writing on the wall that others can plainly see. I’d love to see a breakout of how many subs they actually have suckered in to their offerings.
 

Bilbo1

SatelliteGuys Family
Jan 31, 2020
66
23
Somewhere
I'm wondering if AT&T shouldn't just focus on the streaming box, try to compete with Roku.

I wouldn't. I think streaming boxes are a transitional technology like the digital tuner boxes sold during the digital changeover. They exist today because TVs didn't have the compute capability built in that they do today.

Right now, things have converged to five basic platforms... Roku, LG, Samsung, Android, and Apple. This is essentially four different Linux Distros and Apple. Aside from Apple, the external box is going away. Apple may not because, well, Apple.


Most of the TVs have the same basic ARM processor that the non-Apple streaming boxes use.

Of the platforms, Samsung and LG seem to have equal market share, and I would bet they continue in some form. Sharp, Sony and Toshiba are moving to Android TV. Insignia (Best Buy house brand) and a couple of others to Roku.

At this point, I really don't see much growth in the streaming box market. People will buy them for older TVs maybe over three years old that don't have the capability. Newer TVs don't need external streamers. So, I don't see where an AT&T box fits in.
 

lparsons21

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 17, 2009
9,601
7,577
Herrin, IL 62948
While it is nice that the Smart TVs exist, the problem with them is the same problem we’ve had with tablets and phones not made by Apple. And that is that soon after the new models come out they quit doing updates/upgrades to their software. Until that changes the streaming boxes will always be the best choice.
 

mdram

SatelliteGuys Pro
Aug 24, 2005
4,025
770
Md
I wouldn't. I think streaming boxes are a transitional technology like the digital tuner boxes sold during the digital changeover. They exist today because TVs didn't have the compute capability built in that they do today.

Right now, things have converged to five basic platforms... Roku, LG, Samsung, Android, and Apple. This is essentially four different Linux Distros and Apple. Aside from Apple, the external box is going away. Apple may not because, well, Apple.

you forgot firetv, and android tv
 

evenout

Well-Known SatelliteGuys Member
Aug 22, 2014
31
6
I wouldn't. I think streaming boxes are a transitional technology like the digital tuner boxes sold during the digital changeover. They exist today because TVs didn't have the compute capability built in that they do today.
I would disagree with this... although that doesn't mean that I'm right.

I have a Smart TV ... everyone does ... the only time I used any of the apps on the TV itself was when I first turned the TV on and wanted to see what "cool" apps were on the TV. But never really used any of them, and now I've got a Roku, I use the Roku all the time.

It's impossible (or unlikely) for app developers to write their apps for every single variation of "smart" TV that's out there. But since Roku has a huge market share of the streaming box market, that's what developers will focus on.

I mean... say Roku decides to change their interface and remote to be more complex with a number pad and more advanced buttons. Those that bought a $1000 or $2000 Roku Smart TV are going to be pissed. But those of us that bought a $30 or $40 Roku streaming device... just buy another $30 or $40 new Roku streaming device.

I like the Roku for it's simplicity. But if all TV is going to go through some form of streaming... then it might be time to think of a more advanced streaming device and that's where I think AT&T could potentially make gains. I wouldn't market it as solely an AT&T TV now streaming device. I'd market it as a Roku replacement... give it the ability to have other apps, like Hulu, NetFlix, etc. I'd even consider opening it for Sling.

Regardless... I do think the market could stand to have a more advanced all-encompasing streaming device. Maybe Roku wants to tackle that.



I rarely use my DirecTV any more. But it'd be nice if I could be watching a show on Hulu and if I want to switch over to CBS News to catch election results, if I could do that without having to exit out Hulu, start CBS News, then exit CBS News, and go back to Hulu, find the show, and restart. This functionality is rather easy to do with DirecTV or other linear TV... getting this aspect into the streaming devices could be a game changer.

At least that's my opinion.
 

msmith198025

Member of the Year
Staff member
HERE TO HELP YOU!
Aug 28, 2007
30,219
10,234
mississippi
It has gotten better now that some tv makers are putting Roku and Android TV software as their smart function platform, but generally speaking, those with proprietary streaming platforms built in dont have very long support life for the built in apps. Which is why I dont see streaming boxes/dongles going anywhere anytime soon.

Even for the ones that use roku, you run into the issue a few years down the road of the built in hardware not being as capable as what might be in a new $50ish box/dongle. When that happens, and as more and more features are left out when the apps are updated, it makes more sense to add an external device than replace the whole set.
 
  • Like
Reactions: harshness

Users who are viewing this thread

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 2)

Latest posts

Top