I think it will be interesting to see how this develops....overly aggressive timeline for sure...don't see it happening with 5G not even being offered...took forever just to get LTE implemented....let alone the next iteration of LTE. I think the takeaway here is a lot of hype for what 'could' be once 2020 rolls around. Certainly not what 'will' be. Just my 2 cents.
AT&T phasing out STB and Satellites by 2020?
- Thread starter nvguy38
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 57
- Views 10K
- Status
I found Vue to have very good PQ on PS4 and Fire TV. Roku is the platform the suffers the most with no guide.
As for content distribution in the future, obviously things are going to change. 2020 is a bit optimistic regardless of how optimistic you are about things but overall content delivery is in for a huge change over the next 20 years.
Good thing is we are about to have some legitimate competition in the home internet market. Something that has been lacking and it will be all thanks to wireless advances.
As for content distribution in the future, obviously things are going to change. 2020 is a bit optimistic regardless of how optimistic you are about things but overall content delivery is in for a huge change over the next 20 years.
Good thing is we are about to have some legitimate competition in the home internet market. Something that has been lacking and it will be all thanks to wireless advances.
I am neither old nor stogie but I do not want to stream TV. It doesn't look as good unless you have access to sufficient Internet. They claim to have 4K on streaming sites but I have never seen anything better than good SD. This is from my own experience and what I have seen in "cord cutter" homes around here. Not to mention that the "guide" system for things like Netflix is simply unusable.
This doesn't mean I will never use it - I just won't embrace it. There is already plenty of content on Directv's website that isn't on TV, and it's watchable, but not HD quality. And streaming needs to figure out something about sports. And I am beyond confused about watching TV with a Playstation, that is something I will NEVER do.
Fortunately you don't have to watch it on Playstation, despite the name.
As for quality, obviously if your internet sucks, so will your PQ. My experience with streaming HBO or Vue has been excellent. I'm still with D* because the situation we have with it works better for us for now but if that would change I would can D* in a heartbeat for Vue.
As for quality, obviously if your internet sucks, so will your PQ. My experience with streaming HBO or Vue has been excellent. I'm still with D* because the situation we have with it works better for us for now but if that would change I would can D* in a heartbeat for Vue.
Nope..not at all..just another Internet connection to a router via wifi
Sent from my SM-G920V using the SatelliteGuys app!
Don't get me wrong I still think it would be cool just to use your own devices with WIFI but one disadvantage to that is if you just have the do-it-all gateway with 5g with clients hooked up to it using 5g and that gateway goes down you are screwed. Unless AT&T would let you have a backup gateway?
You hit this right.
Go to remote areas where cell phone service is hit and miss. DSL good luck. Think about the large amounts of money to give people cell service in a 10 mile square area with 2 people.
Nope....AT&T has a an advantage over DIsh in that if a tech shows up and the install of satellite is for whatever reason is not possible, the tech at the request of the customer can with a call center make arrangements for the customer to be connected to the internet tv (formerly known as U-Verse) installed.
Of course this is predicated on the customer residing in an area served by AT&T's phone/internet system.
Bingo.....The Euros kick our ass on internet connection speeds and available bandwidth.
Of course the governments over there subsidize the ISP's as they do most other businesses. And that is why for example in Sweden a gallon of gas costs $10......For all the neat stuff the Euros can do on the internet and the near seamless availability of cell service and streaming, they pay a heavy price in the form of confiscatory taxation.
Quite frankly, I'll take what I have. I am not going to accept paying ridiculous taxes so someone else who lives on the side of a mountain in the Sierra Nevada can stream video on their TV, Phone or computer.
AT&T has very sketchy coverage in this area and I live in a major metro area.
I view streaming over the cell system as a pipe dream right now. Most cell companies have all but stopped erecting towers. And where these are planned, the attack of the NIMBY's is in full force.
For the providers to go with streaming wireless, they are going to have to figure out a way to deliver their product via another avenue. The towers aren't going to get it done.
Of course it is....However, the capacity to deliver is simply not there. Nor will it be for decades.
YOu must realize that in semi rural and rural areas where cell service is at best unreliable,the cell providers and ISPs are not going to make an investment in delivering their services to areas that are going to cost them tons of money....
This isn't going to happen, even if we had fiber in the ground to every home in the US.
Internet video: Linearly scaled delivery infrastructure. 100 viewers requires 100 times the compute/network capacity of 1 viewer.
Satellite video: Fixed scale infrastructure. You launch a satellite, it broadcasts to the engineered geographical coverage, your transmission infrastructure costs are the same whether you have 1 viewer or 100.
There's a crossover point where the infrastructure required to push simultaneous video feeds over the Internet eclipses the cost of operating a fleet of geostationary broadcast satellites and uplink facilities, and that's likely to remain in the single digit millions for the foreseeable future.
Internet video: Linearly scaled delivery infrastructure. 100 viewers requires 100 times the compute/network capacity of 1 viewer.
Satellite video: Fixed scale infrastructure. You launch a satellite, it broadcasts to the engineered geographical coverage, your transmission infrastructure costs are the same whether you have 1 viewer or 100.
There's a crossover point where the infrastructure required to push simultaneous video feeds over the Internet eclipses the cost of operating a fleet of geostationary broadcast satellites and uplink facilities, and that's likely to remain in the single digit millions for the foreseeable future.
- Status
