Major DIRECTV Rumor Alerts

[Drucifer]

Hmm, that second part is mighty interesting. Rain fade a thing of the past, if you have the internet to support it .

That's the first thing that popped into my mind. But with crappy Verizon DSL service, I could never view live action.

 

[cpalmer2k]

Here is some more...View attachment 111382

Note the terminology.. LIKE. Does that mean the current gen2 dswm lnb floating on eBay can do 22 tuners as well?

 

[goaliebob99]

Keep in mind that ATT is pushing their 1 Gig fiber roll out pretty aggressively and by this time next year you will be seeing alot of fiber to the home hookups in ATT Territories. Between all of the fiber providers (Verizon, ATT, Centurylink, and Google), you will see those caps go bye bye. As Cable company's go Docsis 3.1 with their Gigabit plus roll outs, the cap will get bigger, which will help out things. I know that there are alot of rural people on this board that cant get crap for the internet, unfortunately that's the way its going to be until those networks are upgraded versus an urban and suburban environment where we are seeing gigabit roll outs to meet the masses. Rural will eventually go gigabit, it will just take some time to get to you. They are testing 10 gig cell service now so you may end up getting a wireless gigabit connection say 5 years from now. Caps will be come less of a thing except for the comcasts of the world.

I like the idea of plug and play with satellite delivery. I can see them doing IP delivery of less watched local channels where they cant fit onto local spot beams.

 

[trparky]

I seriously doubt AT&T will be deploying FTTP/FTTH to their entire footprint, they will more than likely deploy it only in areas where they know darn sure that they will be getting a return on their investment. If you have read any of the articles written by Karl Bode over at DSLReports.com you would know that AT&T really has no interest in pushing fiber to every one of their customers. The well-to-do neighborhoods, yes most definitely will get FTTP but older areas will be puttering along at speeds far less than a Gigabit and more than likely be slaves to the cable companies.

Don't let AT&T fool you. This is nothing but what Karl refers to as a FTTPR or Fiber To The Press Release.

 

[peds48]

Don't let AT&T fool you. This is nothing but what Karl refers to as a FTTPR or Fiber To The Press Release.

Right on! Anyone who thinks differently are just being naïve....

 

[Jimbo]

How exactly would you guys in the know, go about pushing fiber to EVERY sub when that would mean deploying EVERYTHING new, going thru everyones yards, I'm sure plenty would oppose them doing so, so there you go, it's not something that will ever happen by any company unless your dealing with new neighborhoods.

 

[trparky]

How exactly would you guys in the know, go about pushing fiber to EVERY sub when that would mean deploying EVERYTHING new, going thru everyones yards, I'm sure plenty would oppose them doing so, so there you go, it's not something that will ever happen by any company unless your dealing with new neighborhoods.

Yep.

Not only that but AT&T's investors on Wall Street will not, I repeat, WILL NOT let AT&T do a full FTTP deployment. Any time AT&T even hints about a larger FTTP deployment their investors sell their AT&T stock so fast your head spins. AT&T investors absolutely DO NOT want AT&T to do FTTP. And because the CEO of AT&T, Randall Stephenson, is a complete and total wimp, he won't stand up to the investors. The investors are too worried about making their dividends and short term profit to worry about the future.

 

[trparky]

The one and only reason why AT&T bought DirecTV is because they need to free up the bandwidth on their at-capacity VDSL lines. 75% of their customer base are lucky to get 18 to 24 Mbps Internet which if you ask me is absolutely pathetic when compared to the cable companies that can push 300 Mbps without even breaking a sweat. It's only the very lucky few (about 10%) that have a VRAD as their next door neighbor that can get speeds as high 45 Mbps and less than 1% can get the latest 75 Mbps tier. Why AT&T even advertises that they have 45 and 75 Mbps plans when such a small minority of their customers can get those speeds, I have no idea.

More than likely AT&T will shut down the legacy uVerse TV system within the next couple of years. Probably within the next five years. I figure that over the next two years AT&T will be working to transition their existing uVerse TV customers over to DirecTV and as soon as they can they'll pull the plug on all of the uVerse TV encoder boxes and chuck them in the trash. It's already well known that AT&T's uVerse TV product is a joke (and a bad one at that) when compared to DirecTV's superior HDTV picture quality. Even the DirecTV receiver boxes are superior in every way when compared to uVerse TV.

 

[Jimbo]

The one and only reason why AT&T bought DirecTV is because they need to free up the bandwidth on their at-capacity VDSL lines. 75% of their customer base are lucky to get 18 to 24 Mbps Internet which if you ask me is absolutely pathetic when compared to the cable companies that can push 300 Mbps without even breaking a sweat. It's only the very lucky few (about 10%) that have a VRAD as their next door neighbor that can get speeds as high 45 Mbps and less than 1% can get the latest 75 Mbps tier. Why AT&T even advertises that they have 45 and 75 Mbps plans when such a small minority of their customers can get those speeds, I have no idea.

More than likely AT&T will shut down the legacy uVerse TV system within the next couple of years. Probably within the next five years. I figure that over the next two years AT&T will be working to transition their existing uVerse TV customers over to DirecTV and as soon as they can they'll pull the plug on all of the uVerse TV encoder boxes and chuck them in the trash. It's already well known that AT&T's uVerse TV product is a joke (and a bad one at that) when compared to DirecTV's superior HDTV picture quality. Even the DirecTV receiver boxes are superior in every way when compared to uVerse TV.

Wow ....

You have told us stuff that we have already been discussing for the last year (1st half).

The second half of your post was a direct slam to att ... thier U Verse TV is not nearly as bad as you make it out to be.
Thier product is Not a joke, it works.
The internet, speeds vary from area to area.

I have many people that are still running 3-6 mg, while the majority are running the uverse side of things at 18-32 ... and I have also worked with many that have the 45-75 ...
So Yes its out there and U Verse was way faster than the cable company had to offer when they started.
Since then the cable company (in my area) has passed them, they are claiming 100 and up ... then again the same majority that you mention that get the cable speed that are so much better, DON'T as they can't afford it.

 

[trparky]

Time Warner Cable in my area sells 50 Mbps for far less than what AT&T charges for their 75 Mbps tier.

I slam AT&T because they need to be slammed. They don't need our pity, what they need is a good swift kick to their collective rear ends. Both AT&T and Verizon are companies that have been ruined by people who care only about the bottom line.

 

[Jimbo]

Time Warner Cable in my area sells 50 Mbps for far less than what AT&T charges for their 75 Mbps tier.

I slam AT&T because they need to be slammed. They don't need our pity, what they need is a good swift kick to their collective rear ends. Both AT&T and Verizon are companies that have been ruined by people who care only about the bottom line.

Sorry to disappoint you but all your venting her will have NO effect ... they have NO Idea that you are slamming them.

There are plenty of people out there that dislike att, you may as well just hang out with them.

Afterall, D* was suppose to be shut down by now once att bought them according to many haters.

The att hater line is right around the corner .... one more won't bother me.

 

[trparky]

I figure it's the other way around. AT&T will keep DirecTV around and kill the uVerse TV side of the house. DirecTV is a sound product with a clear technological advantage over uVerse TV. The picture quality is like night and day compared to uVerse TV's over compressed mess and their receivers are light years ahead of MediaRoom on uVerse TV boxes.

Over all, it would be in AT&T's best interest to just cut their losses and ditch the uVerse TV side of the house and focus on DirecTV to deliver TV services. So far, the news about uVerse installers getting trained to install DirecTV point in that direction. Rumors has it that DirecTV will be the preferred method of delivering TV service from here on out.

 

[Drucifer]

I seriously doubt AT&T will be deploying FTTP/FTTH to their entire footprint, they will more than likely deploy it only in areas where they know darn sure that they will be getting a return on their investment. If you have read any of the articles written by Karl Bode over at DSLReports.com you would know that AT&T really has no interest in pushing fiber to every one of their customers. The well-to-do neighborhoods, yes most definitely will get FTTP but older areas will be puttering along at speeds far less than a Gigabit and more than likely be slaves to the cable companies.

Don't let AT&T fool you. This is nothing but what Karl refers to as a FTTPR or Fiber To The Press Release.

Here we go again with living in an area that is not sardine-like.

 

[tigerfan33]

Time Warner Cable in my area sells 50 Mbps for far less than what AT&T charges for their 75 Mbps tier.

I pay Charter (50 Mbps) the same AT&T charges for 6 Mbps.

 

[Jimbo]

I figure it's the other way around. AT&T will keep DirecTV around and kill the uVerse TV side of the house. DirecTV is a sound product with a clear technological advantage over uVerse TV. The picture quality is like night and day compared to uVerse TV's over compressed mess and their receivers are light years ahead of MediaRoom on uVerse TV boxes.

Over all, it would be in AT&T's best interest to just cut their losses and ditch the uVerse TV side of the house and focus on DirecTV to deliver TV services. So far, the news about uVerse installers getting trained to install DirecTV point in that direction. Rumors has it that DirecTV will be the preferred method of delivering TV service from here on out.

And where did you get such information ?

at&t IS focusing on D*, when someone calls in for TV services, they are offered D* first, U-verse is still offered when the Sub is in a U Verse area, if they want it.
at&t is still using thier U Verse set ups for those that don't want to change, don't want a dish, don't like potential rain/snow outages.
at&t is going to continue selling thier Internet so the U Verse footprint is not going away, however the TV isn't being pushed like it use to be.

As for your complaints about how bad the picture is .... Do you currently have U Verse TV ?

If not, how can you bash that as well without actually having the service .... a friend has it DOESN'T cut it.

 

[Jimbo]

I pay Charter (50 Mbps) the same AT&T charges for 6 Mbps.

My local Cable company offers 100 mbps for $140 and 300 for $250.

Who in their right mind wants to pay those type of prices for internet ?

 

[bobvick]

My local Cable company offers 100 mbps for $140 and 300 for $250.

Who in their right mind wants to pay those type of prices for internet ?

I have to pay close to that for CenturyLink 4 Mbps and Exede. I have both because I use the Internet a lot, and CenturyLink is under a bandwidth exhaust here and won't sell me a second DSL line. I would GLADLY pay $150 per month for 100 Mbps.

 

[tigerfan33]

My local Cable company offers 100 mbps for $140 and 300 for $250.

Who in their right mind wants to pay those type of prices for internet ?

It's funny. I had DSL from AT&T for years and never paid full price for 6 Mbps. Always half. I would need to call every 6 months to get the discount. Last year I call and tell AT&T I got better deal with Charter but will stay with the same discount I had always gotten in the past.
They told me they couldn't give me the discount. Disconnected then and went with Charter. With streaming 4K now it's a no brainier.

 

[trparky]

And where did you get such information ?

AT&T IS focusing on DirecTV, when someone calls in for TV services, they are offered DirecTV first, uVerse is still offered when the subscriber is in a uVerse area, if they want it.
AT&T is still using their uVerse setups for those that don't want to change, don't want a dish, or don't like potential rain/snow outages.
AT&T is going to continue selling their Internet so the uVerse footprint is not going away, however the TV isn't being pushed like it use to be.

As for your complaints about how bad the picture is .... Do you currently have uVerse TV ?

If not, how can you bash that as well without actually having the service .... a friend has it DOESN'T cut it.

Yes, I actually had uVerse TV. Just a short while ago I had it. I dropped them about three weeks ago. And yes, the TV picture quality was really that bad.

Let's face facts here. Most video encoding experts say that a properly encoded HDTV feed requires at the very least 8 Mbps using MPEG4 h.264 to maintain decent picture quality; preferably 9 to 10 Mbps to deliver superb picture quality. And here's AT&T encoding at 5.7 Mbps for their uVerse TV product. Absolutely pathetic. It's no wonder why AT&T uVerse TV picture quality looks like absolute crap. They pretty much have to encode at such a low (and pathetic) rate because of the bandwidth constraints of their copper VDSL lines.

I was watching Marvel's Agents of Shield and that new Gotham show (both of which have dark scenes in them especially Gotham in when they're in the police station) and I was blown away when I saw it for the first time on DirecTV. Why? Because I could, for the first time, see details in the dark backgrounds that I never saw on uVerse TV. I saw various shades of gray and blacks that I never saw before. On uVerse TV all of the background scenes in which there were dark colors were a complete muddy mess. It was like the encoder ran out of bits to represent the background colors that required complex shades of color. And then there's my local news broadcasts in which when the weather report comes on with the radar picture. On uVerse TV you could see major macroblocking when the radar picture moved. And then there's the national ABC News broadcast in which on DirecTV I could see the pinstripe detail of David Muir's suit; never saw that on uVerse TV in which it just shows it as a detail-less gray.

So yes, DirecTV is in fact superior to uVerse TV! I have compared the two, side by side, and DirecTV wins. It's no contest!

There's another forum I hang out in over at DSLReports.com where there's a number of uVerse Premise Technicians that hang out. They help out where they can and give advice to people who have line and service issues. A number of them have been talking about the fact that they will be getting DirecTV installation training in the very near future. Some of them have already had said training.

It's been said elsewhere that uVerse TV is losing money for AT&T and that that's another reason why AT&T bought DirecTV, to help bring in more subscribers (and the clout that comes with it) to be able to tell the network providers where to shove their rate increases.

As for the state of the uVerse copper plant, it's horrible. I have heard enough horror stories from people who have tried to get uVerse service (any service, even just Internet service) to be able to write a book on the subject. I'm sure that the Premise Technicians that hang out over at DSLReports.com could expand that book to a trilogy. The issue is that in a lot of places the copper plant is in such complete and total disrepair that uVerse hardly works in those areas. Everything from bad splices to bad grounds to water in the lines to animal activity that's turned the cables to junk. And let's not forget that as you add more uVerse subscribers to an area you introduce more noise to the F2 cable bundle (that's that line on the pole or buried in the ground) so your SNR numbers take a crap. Yes, I know, there's rumors that AT&T will be turning up something called VDSL Vectoring some time in the future that promises to help increase SNR numbers on marginal lines and where there's lots of uVerse subscribers but like many Premise Technicians have said, I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[trparky]

In the end I believe that AT&T will have to make one of two choices...

1. Deploy FTTH/FTTP to their entire footprint and face the wrath of the investors on Wall Street that couldn't find their ass with both hands tied behind their back.
   
2. Face a future in which they're not going to be relevant in the wireline market as the cable TV companies continue to devour the home wireline Internet market and become the defacto Internet monopoly in 95% of the US market.

It's bad enough that scenario number 2 is well on the way to becoming what we're going to see in the future.