Well now ("C71KW-400" Client)

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by compnurd, Oct 24, 2017.

  1. Nov 1, 2017 #41 of 237
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,099
    1,304
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    Yeah, it could be a gigabit PHY that's limited in software to 100 Mbit since there's no scenario where it would ever need more than that.
     
  2. Nov 1, 2017 #42 of 237
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    25,628
    474
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    seriously? - you cannot base such power consumption increase just counting TWISTED PAIRS !!!

    Nay, it's red herring posing here :(
     
  3. Nov 1, 2017 #43 of 237
    Rich

    Rich DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    33,193
    1,268
    Feb 22, 2007
    Piscataway, NJ
    I've measured the draw on the HRs and it's not enough to worry about, "on" or "off". They're never "off". More technobabble. Real world, they just don't draw enough to worry about.

    Rich
     
  4. Nov 1, 2017 #44 of 237
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,099
    1,304
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    I did some checking, you can get gigabit PHYs that require as little as a quarter watt at full bandwidth in both directions, and support 802.3az energy efficient ethernet which puts the port into low power state when not used and sets the power level depending on the cable distance to the receiver.

    That may be lower than any 100 Mbit PHY manages (excluding gigabit PHYs running at 100 Mbit) since newer gigabit PHYs would be fabbed in a smaller process.

    So not really much point in Directv worrying about this - I'm sure the port on this C71KW-400 uses more because they aren't going to pay more to save less than a watt.
     
  5. Nov 1, 2017 #45 of 237
    codespy

    codespy RIP Starr! DBSTalk Club

    1,625
    187
    Mar 29, 2006
    Seasonal
    Correct Rich- I put a WEMO smart device on one of my HR24’s for a couple months. It uses 30 watts continuously regardless of power light on or off, whether or not connected to internet.

    On the other hand, my Packer neon uses 104 watts continuously, and my Pepsi vending machine in the garage uses just under 400 watts when running.....
     
    Rich likes this.
  6. Nov 27, 2017 #46 of 237
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,099
    1,304
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    There's now also a Samsung manufactured version of it, the C71KW-200. No user manual for this one unfortunately so no further info other than what was already there for the WNC model. Still no indication why they have both 802.11ac and 10/100 ethernet other than adding the ethernet is very cheap - though if there is a C71K no "W" model it shouldn't need much FCC testing...

    FCC ID A3LC71KW-200 Set top box by Samsung Electronics Co Ltd
     
  7. Nov 28, 2017 #47 of 237
    CraigerM

    CraigerM Well-Known Member

    1,540
    90
    Apr 15, 2014
    St. Louis
  8. Nov 29, 2017 #48 of 237
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,099
    1,304
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    Well yes we know the C71KW will be running Android from the user manual that was posted with the WNC model. There might be a C71K and/or C71 model also, but without wireless transmission capability they may not end up on the FCC site.

    Using Android makes sense if you want to cut costs since it is free, someone else maintains the apps and there'd be a wider selection if they let you grab them from the play store. If I had to guess, I'd say it won't use the play store though - they probably want to strip out all the Google licensed software so Google isn't able to collect information on viewing habits that Directv/AT&T will want to keep for itself. But doing so means they can't use the play store, and Directv probably wants to exercise some control over what apps are available.

    Directv would only have to worry about maintaining the software above the base level OS - i.e. their own GUI, plus support for their own features like whole home etc.
     
  9. Nov 29, 2017 #49 of 237
    CraigerM

    CraigerM Well-Known Member

    1,540
    90
    Apr 15, 2014
    St. Louis
    Could the reason they are using Android TV is that they are replacing the RVU APP with a do-it-all DTV APP that will run DTV, DTV NOW and DTV Mobile?
     
  10. Nov 29, 2017 #50 of 237
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,099
    1,304
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    I don't think there will be an "app" for Directv on those Android based clients, any more than there is an RVU app on the current clients. The Directv GUI will be presented on startup and you'll go to apps for other stuff. No way will you be presented with a bunch of icons when you start up the client giving Netflix equal billing with Directv!

    Assuming they even want to use clients for a streaming product I would have to think the eventual goal would be the "Directv" UI you see when it boots up works the same regardless of whether your source is satellite or internet. But that might not be the case from day one, it could take them a little time to integrate both seamlessly.

    Not sure what you are talking about with "DTV mobile"...the clients don't/won't support that, that's a server function (either Directv's servers or your Genie)
     
  11. Nov 29, 2017 #51 of 237
    CraigerM

    CraigerM Well-Known Member

    1,540
    90
    Apr 15, 2014
    St. Louis
    Sorry, that's what I meant by DTV Mobile.
     
  12. Dec 5, 2017 #52 of 237
    NashGuy

    NashGuy Active Member

    537
    116
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    Eh, if you take away the Google Play Store, then it isn't Android TV. Android TV is a Google's own version of Android customized for TV screens that must conform to certain Google-specified UI guidelines, must include Google-powered search, and must include the Google Play Store. I believe it also requires the user to enter a Google account (e.g. Gmail address) and connect to the internet upon initial set-up; that's the case with every retail Android TV device I've seen. Perhaps that's not required for Android TV boxes deployed by pay TV partners (which are allowed a greater degree of UI flexibility). It's strange to think that DirecTV may be deploying Android TV boxes for use by satellite TV customers who may not have home internet service. How would they get past the set-up screen?

    If they wanted, AT&T could go the same route that Amazon did with their Fire TV OS, which is to take open-source Android and develop their own TV-centric UI for it, without licensing anything from Google. Of course, that would also mean having to maintain their own app store, which would probably defeat the whole purpose for AT&T.

    Bottom line is that it appears that this box uses Android TV from Google. It therefore must include an app for the Google Play Store, even if it has no other apps pre-installed. I don't think a hardware provider (AT&T) is able to block the installation of anything from the Play Store on their own device. I do fully expect that the box will boot up/wake up within the DirecTV UI by default, by that can be exited somehow to the regular Android TV UI where the user sees their installed apps, including the Play Store. The voice search button on the box's remote will invoke Google search, probably powered by the Google Assistant.
     
  13. Dec 5, 2017 #53 of 237
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,099
    1,304
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    Why would having to use their own app store "defeat the whole purpose for AT&T"? Assuming the purpose is to reduce their development/support costs to support apps like WatchESPN and so forth, cutting Google out of it and using their own app store sounds perfectly logical.

    As it is today they have to develop the apps or convince e.g. ESPN to develop apps for their proprietary platform. If they use Android, they just have to ask ESPN "hey, can we make your existing app available in our app store" which is far easier/cheaper for both sides.

    IMHO there is zero chance AT&T will deploy a platform where people need a Google account login, and Google collects all the viewing information that AT&T considers their own property. Why would they simply give away that valuable information, when the only thing they have to do to avoid it is to remove the Google linkage from Android TV? Then they have the best of both worlds - reduced development costs, a platform where the apps they want already exist, and they get to keep customer information proprietary to themselves.
     
  14. Dec 5, 2017 #54 of 237
    NashGuy

    NashGuy Active Member

    537
    116
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    Well, it doesn't entirely defeat the purpose but it does to an extent, since they wouldn't have access to an existing robust app platform on the Google Play Store. AT&T would have to get app authors to take their existing apps for either Android TV or Fire TV (which both use the same underlying AOSP Android code base) and then agree to specifically deploy them on their DirecTV hardware, which would likely require a slight bit of tweaking to work just right with the AT&T STB's own remote control. But it's more about the hassle of getting those app owners on board and the business negotiations involved. You may notice that there are a number of apps that are available for either Fire TV but not Android TV, or vice versa, despite the fact that it would take very, very little development time to make an app on one platform work on the other. It would be the same situation here if AT&T went with their own custom version of Android (like Amazon did with Fire TV).

    The idea of AT&T deploying an Android TV box that requires a Google login doesn't seem crazy to me if it's for DirecTV OTT streaming service but it does seem a bit odd in a box that's primarily meant to be used with satellite service. Which is why I think the C71 will be used with DirecTV OTT, or possibly with both OTT and satellite. I don't know that just because a box uses Android TV means that everything done on it is tracked by Google. That may be something that is negotiable when Android TV is deployed by a pay TV partner. (Lots of European pay TV providers have already deployed Android TV STBs.) Is Google able to track everything you watch in the Netflix app on an Android TV box? Is Apple able to track everything you watch in Hulu on an Apple TV box? I don't think so. So I don't know why Google would be able to track what you watch from DirecTV, unless that viewing started as a result of a Google search.

    I realize that the C71 user manual that AT&T submitted to the FCC in October is an early, incomplete version but check out Step 4 in the manual: "Sign-in your Google account".
     
  15. Dec 5, 2017 #55 of 237
    MrWindows

    MrWindows New Member

    82
    6
    Oct 12, 2010
    Phoenix,...
    I think you may have hit the nail on the head - perhaps some models of the C71 will utilize PoE, to eliminate the external powerbrick, especially for commercial venues.
     
  16. Dec 6, 2017 #56 of 237
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,099
    1,304
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    They're already negotiating with them today to either write apps for Directv's current platform or get access to APIs, logos and so forth for Directv to write it themselves. Quite a bit easier to say "hey, can we get your app on our app store?" And they don't need them all, they only need a few dozen apps from providers like ESPN and HBO, and those providers have every incentive to do the work so they can get access to Directv's millions of customers.

    Pretty much the entire Chinese Android phone market is running Android with all the Google stuff removed, and they get along just fine. Just because Amazon Fire has failed in the marketplace doesn't mean the concept is wrong, just that circumstances matter. Amazon wants ALL the apps, not just a small number, and compete in a much wider field than Directv does.
     
  17. Dec 6, 2017 #57 of 237
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,099
    1,304
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    That would make sense, but still doesn't explain why a wireless model would include ethernet, let alone support PoE?
     
  18. Dec 6, 2017 #58 of 237
    NashGuy

    NashGuy Active Member

    537
    116
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    I disagree but this back-and-forth is really moot. The info that AT&T submitted to the FCC makes it clear that the C71 uses Google's "Android TV" OS (which necessarily includes the Google Play Store), not some AT&T homebrew version of open-source Android. In fact, I'd venture that the reason that there is no DirecTV Now app available for Android TV is because they don't want there to be retail devices on the market (such as the Nvidia Shield TV or Sony smart TVs) that can more-or-less replicate the experience that AT&T will provide with the C71.
     
  19. Dec 6, 2017 #59 of 237
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,099
    1,304
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    There wouldn't be any need for AT&T to create a "homebrew" version, Google separates the open source part of Android from the proprietary Google parts (Google apps like search, data collection, branding, etc.) It would still be "Android TV" just not Google's version.

    If it does make you login with a Google ID/password then you're right it would support the play store, but it just seems like it would be a really poor business decision to link their products so closely with Google, and hurt AT&T's/Directv's branding.

    I guess we'll see what it is when it comes out, with so little information to go on there's a lot of unknowns.
     
  20. Dec 6, 2017 #60 of 237
    NashGuy

    NashGuy Active Member

    537
    116
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    I don't think you understand what "Android TV" is. It's a Google trademarked and licensed version of Android with a Google-mandated UI that includes Google search and/or Google Assistant and the Google Play Store. Currently, it is licensed for use as the smart OS for TVs from Sony and Philips, as well as the Nvidia Shield TV and Mi Box streaming boxes. It's also licensed for use in various pay TV STBs, such as the TIMVISION box in Italy (among several others around the world).

    It's not open-source Android with a custom TV UI, like Amazon Fire TV. And it's not the mobile version of Android slapped into a box with an HDMI port, even if it includes Google apps and services, including the Play Store. There are a lot of Chinese "Kodi boxes" which are that. So no, if the C71 doesn't include the proprietary Google parts, IT. IS. NOT. ANDROID TV.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall