I just think Dish Network's and DTV Stream's GUI looks sleeker than DTV's. DTV's looks dated.You got this weird thing with the GUIs
Dish’s GUI looks like a 1980’s Nintendo game.I just think Dish Network's and DTV Stream's GUI looks sleeker than DTV's. DTV's looks dated.
You mean the Hopper 3? Or the 922? I think the 922 is different from the Hopper 3. The Joey 4 combines the Hopper 3's GUI and Google TV. I think having the Network Logo's in DTV's Guide slowed it down.Dish’s GUI looks like a 1980’s Nintendo game.
DIRECTV tried the better gui and even though I thought it handled it fine. Everything complained about the speed and they changed it again Until DIRECTV upgraded hardware don’t expect anything different
Yes I mean the Hopper 3You mean the Hopper 3? Or the 922? I think the 922 is different from the Hopper 3. The Joey 4 combines the Hopper 3's GUI and Google TV. I think having the Network Logo's in DTV's Guide slowed it down.
t wasn't built specifically for dish or directv...
Spot beams were...but dish can reuse thos same satellites or any other dbs company that has licenses for the same frequencies...most spot beams were steerable..meaning they can be re-aimed...dish and directv do lease satellites from other companies too..This is where you are wrong. DirecTVs satellites were made specific for DirecTV’s needs. It was designed to be part of their satellite constellation. I’be not followed Dish’s satellites, but I’d assume the same.
Sure, they were built on a more or less standard bus/base model. Sort of like the platform that Ford uses for its Escape has been used by Mazda and Mercury, etc. But, each satellite has a unique set of transponders designed and aimed to fill the owner’s needs. The antennas and receivers are also designed for purpose.
Yeah, they'll definitely keep both existing systems running but only as long as they can. No point in switching out existing hardware or doing rooftop dish re-installations until it's absolutely necessary.Who knows, has it happened yet. I’m just assuming they will keep both systems active. They can’t just shut down one without changing out everything.
They are going to need to if they plan on staying in business, while some Satellites may keep operating past their planned end date, not all will, as it goes longer, who knows when they can fail, but the possibility grows as they age.Spot beams were...but dish can reuse thos same satellites or any other dbs company that has licenses for the same frequencies...most spot beams were steerable..meaning they can be re-aimed...dish and directv do lease satellites from other companies too..
This is where you are wrong. DirecTVs satellites were made specific for DirecTV’s needs. It was designed to be part of their satellite constellation. I’be not followed Dish’s satellites, but I’d assume the same.
Sure, they were built on a more or less standard bus/base model. Sort of like the platform that Ford uses for its Escape has been used by Mazda and Mercury, etc. But, each satellite has a unique set of transponders designed and aimed to fill the owner’s needs. The antennas and receivers are also designed for purpose.
when its a matter of survival..some of those other matters seem trivialA merger both doesn't seem possible and it almost seems inevitable. There are a number of issues with such a merger, including the underlying philosophies vary greatly between the companies. It'd take a while for contracts with networks to run out, so I think there would need to be Directv and Dish standalone, even if merged for a while. Then there is the philosophy of RSNs and sports which are not reconcilable with each other. Dish is owned by a guy with a vision outside of Sat TV and has gone to great expense to see to that plan. Directv exists almost through the mere force of inertia and there appears to be no plan.
Directv appears to be the only viable option for the rural subscriber where internet and OTA provides no option to local sports. But Directv also seems to be the least likely to have a pulse in the near future as they continue to bleed subscribers. Dish has 5G and Sling, Directv has... their online version which will be competing with all the other streaming services.
While true for sports, the vast majority of rural Homes do not subscribe to Sat. TVDirectv appears to be the only viable option for the rural subscriber where internet and OTA provides no option to local sports.
That is fine. The issue remains that millions likely need access to it... unless a space based Internet can an alternative work. I wonder if the Feds could assist with the cost of access to that by taxing the telecoms that won't invest in that area.While true for sports, the vast majority of rural Homes do not subscribe to Sat. TV
24 million Households are in Rural areas ( out of 128 Million in the United States).
DirecTV and Dish has a total of 18-19 Million Subscribers.
If you did a 70% Urban / 30% Rural split of how many sub to Sat Service, out of 19 million Sat Subs, that is only 5.7 Million, that means 18.3 Million Rural Homes do not subscribe to Sat TV.
Even if you increased it to a 50/50 split, then means 9.5 million subscribe, 14.5 rural homes do not.
Just pointing out there are just not many rural subs and it should not make or break the deal.That is fine. The issue remains that millions likely need access to it... unless a space based Internet can an alternative work. I wonder if the Feds could assist with the cost of access to that by taxing the telecoms that won't invest in that area.
Seems like a lot of words to say "Yeah, that makes sense."Of course, define “rural”. I don’t live in a city limit, so am I “rural”. That is ONE of the dozen definitions of that that term.
Of course, if you actually understand this industry, you understand that there remain millions of homes un reachable by the internet and with either no cable, or cable run by a cable bandit which is nearly unwatchable. That is reality.
I googled how many Rural households in the US and the answer came from the US Census.Of course, define “rural”. I don’t live in a city limit, so am I “rural”. That is ONE of the dozen definitions of that that term.
Of course, if you actually understand this industry, you understand that there remain millions of homes un reachable by the internet and with either no cable, or cable run by a cable bandit which is nearly unwatchable. That is reality.
Umm..then howcome they have satellite dishes on the roof?While true for sports, the vast majority of rural Homes do not subscribe to Sat. TV
24 million Households are in Rural areas ( out of 128 Million in the United States).
DirecTV and Dish has a total of 18-19 Million Subscribers.
If you did a 70% Urban / 30% Rural split of how many sub to Sat Service, out of 19 million Sat Subs, that is only 5.7 Million, that means 18.3 Million Rural Homes do not subscribe to Sat TV.
Even if you increased it to a 50/50 split, then means 9.5 million subscribe, 14.5 rural homes do not.
While Comcast's TV-customer losses accelerated this year, they're still only about half as large as the customer losses reported by DirecTV owner AT&T. Comcast is down to 20.4 million TV customers, which is higher than any other cable or satellite TV provider.Jul 30, 2020I googled how many Rural households in the US and the answer came from the US Census.
If you have a better way or know the answer, go for it.
But no matter what you post, the vast majority do not subscribe to Satellite TV, in Urban or Rural areas, heck, Comcast is only 3 million shy of both companies sub number combined and they definitely do not reach 99% of the country as you are so fond of saying.