FCC Grants Approval of AT&T-DIRECTV Transaction - Acquisition Completed

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by APB101, Jul 24, 2015.

  1. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,768
    1,570
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    In what possible way does an HTML GUI call in question the value of RVU? The point of RVU is to allow devices without tuners to display programming. It doesn't matter how the GUI is implemented.
     
  2. JosephB

    JosephB Icon

    1,402
    48
    Nov 14, 2005
    Birmingham, AL
    Thinking this transition means anything one way or another for RVU is just making stuff up. A receiver running an HTML 5 based (or Flash based or custom written C++ or COBOL for that matter) can send a remote UI just as easily as a current DirecTV receiver running whatever they use.

    Personally, I would expect a new platform to emerge, with a new UI (not emulating the current UI), that is compatible with both U-Verse and DirecTV distribution methods. It'll roll out slowly, and the old platforms will still work (meaning they won't have to swap everyone out). If I were a betting man I'd say it would run on current DirecTV hardware (at least, the newest DirecTV hardware like the Genies and newer) to prevent as many box swaps as possible. Of course, a new hardware platform is probably on the horizon given BSS, 4K, and AT&T's wish to integrate LTE connectivity into the boxes.
     
  3. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,768
    1,570
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    Where do you get this idea? Building LTE in every box is going to waste money and wouldn't work well (i.e. if you don't have LTE reception in the basement) You'd build the equivalent of a wireless CCK that does LTE, or better yet put an antenna on the dish and use DECA to get it inside using the same coax.

    Or, as I've suggested before, include demodulators in the LNB and have all dish to receiver communication use DECA; no more SWM. By the time they have the common equipment in 24-36 months this would probably be the cheapest delivery method. No tuners are required for Uverse STBs, this way no tuners would be required in Directv STBs.
     
  4. damondlt

    damondlt New Member

    5,455
    233
    Feb 27, 2006
    Newfoundland...
    And you think you know everything just because you post it. So we'll leave it at that.

    Damon
     
  5. JosephB

    JosephB Icon

    1,402
    48
    Nov 14, 2005
    Birmingham, AL
    Whether it's in the box or in some receiver on the network is not that important. Either way their goal is to have two-way connectivity on every single set top for every single customer, regardless of how it's physically implemented.
     
  6. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,768
    1,570
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    I agree, I just think it is unlikely they'd add LTE to their STBs.
     
  7. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,768
    1,570
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    And you think you know more about business than the people running the NFL. So we'll leave it at that.
     
  8. Delroy E Walleye

    Delroy E Walleye AllStar

    1,221
    123
    Jun 9, 2012
    I'm ok with this, as long as it doesn't make things any worse than D* already has since messing it up before the HDGUI rollout. I'm not sure if you're referring to a whole or part difference in the way the UI "behaves," or just minor cosmetic changes. I'd fully expect the cosmetic (completely replacing the "cyclone" logo, for example).
     
  9. inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    24,857
    1,520
    Nov 13, 2006
    I expect a move to html 5 assuming they decide that it is something they can run on some or all of atts hardware as well. I expect it to be similar, although I think they will add a bit to it, maybe a few different ways to alter the guide look, like more hours. Better options for sorting searching your playlist... It's time they do this, no matter how much they want to believe in focus groups.

    It was said they had been working in it a year ago or so. I think they probably have kind of sat back on it because they wanted to wait till after the merger to make sure it'd fit seemlessly with both companies machines. No need to roll out multiple GUIs soon if needed. Plus then it can be branded as a new guy for the combined company, and not rebranded latter after its installed.

    And if anything, in disagreement with someone else, I think RVU will now be more important than ever... Because it could help att meet the cable companies requirements for all vid or whatever it's called these days.... I have wondered how that will play into all this, since I believe DIRECTV doesn't have the same requirements as uverse does for that whole ridiculousness...
     
  10. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,768
    1,570
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    If you look at the FCC's approval order, they mention in places that any regulations AT&T is subject to as a common carrier, Directv is also now subject to as a wholly owned subsidiary. So any AllVid type regulations that the FCC imposes on cable companies will apply to Directv as well.

    RVU probably won't meet those requirements as it stands today, but it is built from all the right building blocks so it would be simple to make the necessary changes to bring it into compliance with whatever the FCC orders.
     
  11. Shades228

    Shades228 DaBears

    6,081
    46
    Mar 18, 2008
    It would still be the case if Apple decided they would make more money that way. However Apple knew that they would get more money out of the other carriers offering the phone. When the iPhone started it was a big gamble on ATT. The debate on how good it turned out to be is very opinionated but from a money aspect it was a good one.

    With that said comparing the two aren't the same at all. If ATT was going to change the NFLST portion it wouldn't have been a clause in the merger for them to be able to back out if DIRECTV lost it.
     
  12. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,768
    1,570
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    Apple needed an exclusive partner at first for two reasons. It was the first phone where the carrier had zero control over the software, and made real use of data so Apple insisted it include unlimited data. They also needed AT&T to commit to building the carrier-side infrastructure for visual voicemail. The only way AT&T would agree to those conditions was if they got an exclusive. For AT&T there was no downside risk if the iPhone was a flop, and the potential for a lot of upside if it was popular and drove customers to them to get it, which as it turned out was the case. It wasn't just AT&T, Apple had similar exclusive deals in multiple countries at first for similar reasons.
     
  13. JoeTheDragon

    JoeTheDragon Hall Of Fame

    5,199
    108
    Jul 21, 2008
    cingular just before the merger gave in to apple demands verizon did not like apples terms. Now outside the USA the laws did not really let apple lock it down to one carrier. Also there where people even with out iphones who wanted to unlock phones just to get out high roaming fees / let them put in a local sim / pre paid sim.
     
  14. inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    24,857
    1,520
    Nov 13, 2006
    There is a big difference for apple vs DIRECTV. Apple new in the long run they could go to everyone after their system was formidable and other carriers would bend to their will. Also they don't mess with price. They don't compete with anyone on price for their phones. They mark then where they want.

    Nfl goes away from exclusive they lose all that stuff Apple didn't need to worry about because they still controlled it. And nfl wouldn't be able to control price. Heck they can't even control it with DIRECTV!

    And don't forget no matter what we suggest the broadcasters won't go for st being available to all carriers. They just won't do it. They are stuck in the past that way so it's not happening anytime soon.
     
  15. PA GIANTS FAN

    PA GIANTS FAN AllStar

    108
    4
    Mar 28, 2009
    Frackville PA
    This is just how i see the merger going !


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlawibQ_QKI&index=3&list=PLZbXA4lyCtqqs0VS5t-L6kECvlbR8Tim2
     
    1 person likes this.
  16. harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    21,192
    187
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    RVU describes sending server-generated bitmaps to the client. HTML can allow clients to generate their own displays based on collected data.
     
  17. harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    21,192
    187
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    With each network connected box, the network load increases. This is a bigger issue with RF protocols like DECA where everything is broadcast as there can be only one active broadcast at any instant.
     
  18. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,768
    1,570
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    If they didn't want Directv giving away NFLST as a freebie they could put it in the contract that this is not allowed. If they did that, Directv would offer less for it, because they couldn't use it as a teaser to help bring in new subscribers.
     
  19. CraigerM

    CraigerM Well-Known Member

    1,670
    104
    Apr 15, 2014
    St. Louis
    What if AT&T replaced RVU with an APP and let the user use the TV's. PC's or Game Console guide? The APP would also look like the HTML 5 guide?
     
  20. inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    24,857
    1,520
    Nov 13, 2006
    Only you see RVU as a problem. No one else does because it isn't.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall