1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Charter Has New Ad Saying AT&T Is Phasing Out UVerseTV

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by CraigerM, Jun 11, 2016.

  1. CraigerM

    CraigerM Well-Known Member

    1,160
    35
    Apr 15, 2014
    St. Louis
    I recorded that Charter commercial about phasing out UVerseTV to my laptop. Is it allowed to uploaded from it to forum? I wasn't sure about copyright restrictions. Or if anyone still wants to see it?
     
  2. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,947
    1,024
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Then Charter should stop using it to receive signals for their headends. Lets see how many channels are left when THEY don't use satellite. :)
     
    2 people like this.
  3. CraigerM

    CraigerM Well-Known Member

    1,160
    35
    Apr 15, 2014
    St. Louis
    Charter just put up that UVerseTV ad:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtvYRbBJk_0
     
  4. Bigg

    Bigg Godfather

    434
    23
    Feb 26, 2010
    Yeah, their advertising is extremely dishonest.

    The cable system thing is totally true. Comcast in CT has some systems upgraded, and some not. My system is a rickety, unreliable 625mhz system, while some others have been rebuilt to 860mhz, so they have 16 DOCSIS QAMs instead of 8, and they have 120HDs instead of our 70HDs. What's even more baffling is that my system is overbuilt, and the others aren't. It's like Comcast doesn't care about it because they have competition, although the overbuilder is so bad that they only have 1/3 market share or less, even though everyone complains about Comcast.
     
  5. CraigerM

    CraigerM Well-Known Member

    1,160
    35
    Apr 15, 2014
    St. Louis
  6. techguy88

    techguy88 Member

    81
    11
    Mar 19, 2015
    West Virginia
    I don't see AT&T getting rid of U-Verse TV completely for the simple fact it can go to places that DirecTV can't. Down the road I forsee the two platforms being merged into one with the hardware supporting either Satellite or IPTV but the default connection will be the Satellite with the IPTV connection as secondary.

    Charter however shouldn't be bashing AT&T for "outdated" technology. A lot of people that have Bright House/Time Warner have been complaining about Charter forcing them to switch from legacy TW packages to Spectrum packages and also removing TWC's Whole Home DVR setup and replacing them with old Scientific Atalanta (Cisco)/Motorola HD-DVRs for each room which is worse than an HR21-HR23 IMO.
     
  7. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    7,346
    735
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    They'll get rid of Uverse TV and replace it with Directv Now for people who can't/won't get satellite. They just need a bit more time to get all their ducks in a row as far as locals and have some sort of DVR option, but I'm sure they'll get there.
     
  8. jimmie57

    jimmie57 Hall Of Fame

    7,216
    388
    Jun 26, 2010
    Texas City, TX
    The articles that first came out by AT&T said they were working at doing away with the "Name, U-Verse".
    Not the service.
     
  9. inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    22,661
    1,103
    Nov 13, 2006
    Wait, they are killing whole home? why????? How bizarre!
     
  10. techguy88

    techguy88 Member

    81
    11
    Mar 19, 2015
    West Virginia
    Yeah when Charter started converting Time Warner areas to Spectrum several of the long term customers were posting on DSLReports if they moved to a Spectrum package they had to get different equipment which meant the 1 room DVR that Charter uses on its footprint and give back the whole home DVR. If they wanted DVR in multiple rooms they had to get an individual dvr per room and once the package was switched to a Spectrum package they could not go back to the old TWC setup at all.

    Some have also commented that Charter is pricing grandfathered TWC/BH customers higher just to get them to switch to a Spectrum package.
     
  11. NashGuy

    NashGuy New Member

    17
    4
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    Maybe. Or maybe when AT&T finally rolls out the Genie 2 with a refreshed UI, they'll make an IPTV version of the Genie 2 for customers who have AT&T Fiber or other future forms of sufficiently fast AT&T internet service (e.g. AirGig, 5G, etc.). While there's a growing number of consumers who are comfortable getting live pay TV service through streaming boxes like Roku, Apple TV, etc., the great majority of the pay TV market still wants to use a dedicated box and full-feature remote made specifically for use with their TV service. AT&T is already deprecating Uverse TV as a brand and obviously favors the stronger DirecTV brand. Why not roll out the same DirecTV service -- same UI, same channel packages, same bundle pricing -- via managed IPTV? There are lots of folks, for one reason or another, who don't want to have to use a roof-mounted satellite to access TV.
     
    sunfire9us likes this.
  12. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    7,346
    735
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    They could make an IPTV version of Directv, but that's basically what Directv Now is, minus the DVR service. But once they implement cloud DVR service as an option for Directv Now, and fill in the gaps with locals - say around 2020 or so - why create a separate IPTV version of Directv instead of just pointing them at Directv Now? How many want to pay a per TV fee just to get a "full featured remote"?
     
  13. NashGuy

    NashGuy New Member

    17
    4
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    Well, I wouldn't say that DirecTV Now, in its current iteration, is an IPTV version of satellite-based DirecTV. There's a different UI, different channel packages, different pricing, lack of NFL Sunday Ticket, lack of Showtime and CBS, etc. I see DirecTV Now aimed at a demographic that wants to pay less and is comfortable with app-based UIs and the hiccups that can come with OTT streaming. And, again, with DirecTV, you have AT&T supplying the dedicated boxes and remotes, doing the install, providing ongoing hardware support, and offering a user experience that's arguably more reliable than what you get with an OTT app like DirecTV Now (or Netflix, Hulu, etc.), where the signal may be traveling over non-AT&T-owned IP paths. It seems to me like AT&T wanted to roll out an OTT live streaming TV service to compete against the likes of Sony PS Vue, YouTube TV, etc. and they included the DirecTV name in the branding since, well, they could. But at this point, other than the brand names, I don't see much similarity between DirecTV and DirecTV Now.

    Now, it's rumored that AT&T is developing an Android TV-powered STB that they'll offer to DirecTV Now customers. I assume it will have a remote customized specifically for their service and it will probably automatically boot up inside of the DirecTV Now UI (perhaps even on the last live channel you were watching, like with a traditional TV box like the Genie).

    Meanwhile, AT&T announced today that they're rolling out a beta of their new cloud DVR platform, which will initially be used by the DirecTV Now app and the DirecTV (satellite) mobile companion app but will eventually become available to other AT&T video customers. Per today's article at MultiChannel News:

    The next-generation platform is supposed to eventually unify its user interface across all platforms, providing a “consistent look and feel across AT&T consumer video services throughout the United States.”

    So, yeah, eventually all of AT&T's video services will converge in terms of look and feel and under the DirecTV brand, I'd say. Right now they offer a managed IPTV service (U-verse TV) for their fiber and higher-speed DSL customers. Maybe they'll just replace that with DirecTV Now, with the option to either rent or buy the Android TV box and remote, and since the service would be confined to only AT&T's network, it could essentially be managed IPTV (with support for multicast video for linear channels) as opposed to unicast-only OTT. Or, as I initially proposed above, maybe AT&T will maintain some differences between DirecTV (more expensive, fuller channel packages, dedicated hardware provided as part of service cost) and DirecTV Now, and they'll offer a new managed IPTV service to replace Uverse TV that looks, feels, and is priced very much like satellite DirecTV rather than OTT DirecTV Now. We'll see. It really all comes down to marketing, not so much technology, decisions.
     
  14. Bigg

    Bigg Godfather

    434
    23
    Feb 26, 2010
    There are still a bunch of channels that aren't available on OTT streaming, so it's not a replacement for U-Verse yet. I don't see any reason to get rid of U-Verse, as presumably, it could share uplink/ingestion for local programming with DirecTV and DirecTV NOW, and the VDSL system is still going to be there for internet. They would lose a few million subs if they got rid of U-Verse, and those would end up mostly on cable, so that's not good for AT&T. With DirecTV, they have the scale to get the programming at a reasonable price, that's the problem they had before the DirecTV acquisition.
     

Share This Page