[NashGuy]

I did manage to side load AT&T TV onto the Shield Tv Pro and it works very well and displays all channels in 4K according to my tv even though content may not be 4k.

Where did you find an APK (app install package) for an AT&T TV Android TV app? Did you somehow extract it from AT&T TV's own custom Android TV box? Or did you just use the app intended for Fire TV? Did you have to do anything special to sideload it?

 

[NashGuy]

When I had my AT&T TV Now account active this past month (just to access the damn settings of the Osprey box so I could clear my info out at the end of the month) I was able to side-load the AT&T TV app onto my Nvidia Shield TV (2019 cylinder model) and it worked purrfectly. Alternatively any Android TV device can use the AT&T TV app via Chromecast since they have Chromecast built-in. Reddit is amazing for finding good nuggets of info like this.

Nice. Do you still get the video preview thumbnails when you FF and rewind when using the app on a different Android TV device like the Shield TV?

 

[NashGuy]

But casting just isn't the same as having an actual app though it isn't horrible.

True. I see no good reason why AT&T doesn't officially release an AT&T TV app for Android TV on the Google Play app store. They obviously having a working relationship with Google. My guess is that they just think it's not a popular-enough streaming platform to worry about. Perhaps after Google releases their own new Android TV dongle this year, that will push AT&T to do so.

 

[NashGuy]

Frankly if the ATT box had Prime and Hulu available, I'd be using it as my go to box.

I wonder what the hold-up is on those? I can see the Prime app being delayed because of the larger dispute between AT&T and Amazon over HBO Max distribution. As for Hulu, perhaps AT&T is asking for an Android TV version of the app that doesn't support Hulu's live TV and premium add-ons. Hulu did make a version like that for Comcast/Cox X1.

Are you able to find and install the Peacock app for Android TV on the AT&T TV box?

I looked over my DVR list and schedule for the next few days and found exactly 3 shows that I'm recording.

I'm finding increasingly little reason to bother with my OTA DVR these days, especially after picking a Hulu subscription back up. I was mainly just using the DVR to record the evening newscasts from NBC and CBS, as well as a couple of Sunday morning news talk shows. But I see that Peacock streams NBC Nightly News every day, and Sunday's Meet the Press (although I don't know how long in either case you have to wait for the new episode to appear on Peacock). I can watch This Week on Hulu. There's one PBS show I began recording recently because it's not in the PBS app: Escape to the Chateau. But I was happily surprised to find that the entire series is available in Peacock.

So I guess I have an OTA DVR for those occasions when I want to watch 60 Minutes or CBS Evening News. (Both shows are available chopped up into out-of-order clips in the CBS News app but that's not how I prefer to watch them.)

I find these days that I'm mostly watching HBO Max, Peacock and Netflix, and some very few things on CBS:All Access, SundanceNow, Disney+ and Hulu. I watch Hulu so seldom now that I'm probably going to cancel or pause it.

I've never subbed to CBSAA or SundanceNow. I did the one-week free trial of Disney+ back around Christmas just to check it out and watch a movie with the family. As I don't have children and I'm not really into comics or Star Wars, there's just not much reason for me to keep it.

I do find Hulu to have a ton of content though and now that it's the streaming arm of FX, it also has a lot of quality stuff. Recently watched Devs and now watching Mrs. America.

 

[NashGuy]

I was thinking about this over the weekend. ATT TV's little box is just so nice to use with its service and with streaming in general. It would be even nicer if all these streaming services would play nicer!

ATT doesn't allow Amazon Prime or Hulu on their box and there doesn't seem to be any simple way to sideload them. And some postings indicate that even if you do the performance or usability of the apps is a bit hinky.

Yeah, all these business conflicts between the various media/tech giants can cause headaches for us consumers.

As for Hulu, I don't know why they're not on the AT&T TV box. First off, if anyone is using that box, it's because they have AT&T TV service, so I don't really see how Hulu with Live TV is competition. But even then, there's no reason why Hulu can't make an Android TV version of their app that only supports the core service, not any of their add-ons. That's what they've done for the Comcast/Cox X1 platform. And given that a growing number of US MVPDs are using Android TV on their STBs (either on their own or in conjunction with TiVo), it seems like it would be in Hulu's interest to create a similar "core" version of their app for distribution direct to those boxes.

As for Prime Video, they're on a number of different Android TV devices and MVPD boxes. Only reason I can think why they're not on the AT&T TV box yet is because of the larger standoff over HBO Max distribution by Amazon. Which is a shame.

 

[NashGuy]

It needs more RAM and more storage IMO.

No doubt that would help. Although I don't read complaints at all about the snappiness of newer Android TV streamers like the TiVo Stream 4K, the AirTV Mini, or the Verizon Stream TV. They all have only 2 GB of RAM too, same as the AT&T TV box (and only 8 GB of storage, half as much as AT&T TV). Although they're all running on a newer chipset (the Amlogic S905X2 or -Y2) with Android TV 9. (The upcoming device for TVision, as well as Google's own forthcoming Android TV dongle, will also use that same proven design.)

The AT&T TV box is on Android TV 8. That thing was designed like three years ago and then AT&T took forever to get AT&T TV launched. So the hardware and software were both a bit dated by this year.

 

[NashGuy]

I've seen both the Tivo Stream 4K and the AirTV Mini and while they are quicker than the AT&T device it isn't nearly as much a difference as between any of those compared to current FireTV products or even the current Roku Ultra.

Funny, because I've read multiple reports from folks who own both a TiVo Stream 4K and either a Fire TV Stick 4K or a Roku Ultra, and they report that the TiVo Stream 4K is faster than the Fire TV or Roku device. (Now, that said, the TiVo device is also buggy. But widespread reports are that it's very snappy.)

 

[NashGuy]

I guess I should have specified FireTV Cube 2nd Gen. Switching apps and virtually anything I do on it is quicker than anything else by some margin. Even ATT's TV app gets channel changes quicker and that makes no sense.

Ah, well, as techguy88's chart above shows, the Cube has a beefier chipset than the TS4K (or the similar AirTV Mini and Verizon Stream TV). But it may come down to better software that's specifically tuned for that hardware; the Cube is running a more modern version of Fire OS than the Fire TV Stick 4K, based on Android 9.0.

I'll be curious to see how well Google has been able to tune Android TV for their upcoming dongle that will use basically the same internals as the TS4K. It might be the first device to hit the market running Android TV 11, which was just made available as a developer preview back in June for Google's ADT-3 developer dongle (which has, you guessed it, the same internals as the TS4K and AirTV Mini). There's yet to even be any device in the US running Android TV 10, which was only finished and released last Dec. So it's possible that the "Google Nest TV" or whatever it's called releases on Android TV 10 and then updates by end of year to 11. We'll see...

Android Developers Blog: Android 11 Developer Preview on Android TV

 

[NashGuy]

Yes I'm doing OK, or at least as well as can be expected given the current world circumstances! I pray you are doing OK as well!

Are you HarperVision, the guy out in Hawaii who used to be a regular over at TCF?!

 

[NashGuy]

The one and only! [emoji4] What's up, NashGuy. Long time no talk!

Ha! Hey man, good to see you're still kickin' around on the forums! I'm doing well. Sold my Roamio OTA a few years ago. Still following the TV and tech industries, reading and posting here and there...

 

[NashGuy]

'm using Channels DVR full time. Considering AT&T TV box but only because the wife just can't grasp the whole streaming app for normal TV thing. She's an old school "I'm bored killing time" type channel surfer and to be honest I am too. Kind of hard to kick the habit after all these years.

I use the Channels app for live OTA TV on my Apple TV 4K. (Use MythTV for OTA DVR, but not much.)

Yeah, of all the streaming cable TV services out there, sounds like AT&T TV with their provided box and remote would work best for your wife. I've had my eye on it as a potential replacement for DISH for my parents too, given that AT&T TV mimics the user experience of traditional cable TV.

Another one on the horizon to keep an eye on is TVision from T-Mobile. They're reconfiguring it into an OTT service with its own custom Android TV device and remote, much like AT&T TV. It's reportedly ready to launch from a tech perspective. Might roll out this fall, or maybe they wait until the pandemic is over.

 

[NashGuy]

Yep, those are the two I'm watching.

After the Channels DVR update to their clients with the Channels Button Detector feature I am finding that it works amazingly well on the TiVo Stream 4K. Once you strip off and disable the TiVo stuff, you can enable that feature and then when you push the TiVo guy button it goes directly to the Channels DVR app, Guide button works then for Channels guide, Live TV, Skip, direct channel number with number buttons, CH up/down, etc. so it's almost like the TS4K was designed to run Channels. It's making me think we won't need the expensive AT&T or T-Mobile offerings.

Yeah, I've read about how you can customize the TS4K to run Channels like that. Pretty nice. I assume you're using Channels with cable TV? An HDHomeRun Prime with CableCARD?

 

[NashGuy]

I really think AT&T needs to revise the pricing for AT&T TV personally. I do think $93/mo for Entertainment is a bit high but until 1 streaming service offers the most popular entertainment channels from all major groups (with a decent Cloud DVR) that is the only place to get them from 1 service. You be surprised at how many people will pay that price for the convenience factor. YouTube TV isn't far off tho they just need A&E.

YTTV needs the Hallmark channels too. The Hallmark Channel ranked #11 is popularity among all broadcast and cable nets in 2019 while Hallmark Movies & Mysteries ranked #36. So they're obviously important to a lot of households.

And I agree, AT&T aren't dummies. They know what the competition over at Comcast and Charter are charging and they know what you get for the money from YTTV and Hulu Live. With AT&T TV -- just like DirecTV before it -- they're not going after the folks who want to save every penny possible. They're going for the folks who still want a premium traditional cable TV experience, with all the channels they care about unified into one UI/UX. (But they do need to get those PBS locals added!) For what it is, they've got AT&T TV priced OK, especially when you factor in the first year discounts and Visa gift cards.

As you say, YTTV is getting close but they still have the problem (in the eyes of many traditional cable viewers) of not having a dedicated/customized device for the service, nor do they offer quite all of the popular mainstream channels. But I imagine those issues will eventually get rectified if Google wants to grow the service.

 

[NashGuy]

But we'll know sometime next year just how many are going to stick around and pay those 2nd year prices, especially considering that paying the ETF after taking in the consideration the rebate, it still ends up being a pretty good deal for the 1st year. And it has to be said that AT&T TV is still the only service with nearly every channel available though oddly missing the NFL Channel.

Who knows, by early next year, there may be a deal in place for AT&T to sell all or part of DTV. Not sure what that might do to the channel packages and pricing at AT&T TV, given that the two services are built on the same set of carriage contracts and have pretty much the same channel packages.

As for NFL Network, DTV has that as part of their overall deal with the NFL that also includes NFL Sunday Ticket. AT&T doesn't have a regular deal in place for just NFL Network (as YTTV just inked). They used to, which allowed Uverse TV to carry it, but that lapsed some time ago.

 

[NashGuy]

Not convinced that the people running AT&T aren't "dummies"...LOL. But, they are certainly targeting a very different demographic than streaming services like YTTV. They are after folks looking for the same type of experience as cable/sat.

I've done the math on average monthly cost for cable TV service for a new subscriber from both Comcast and AT&T TV, including all fees and net of all promotional discounts and gift cards. And it's no coincidence that, when comparing comparable channel packages, the two services price out to within just a few bucks of each other on average monthly price. (AT&T TV, however, gives a steeper discount up-front, as well as gift cards, while Comcast spreads the cost out more equally throughout the contract term.) So that's what I mean when I say that AT&T aren't a bunch of dummies. They understand the value of the product they're selling and they know how much their main competitors are charging for something similar. And as you state, they don't see YTTV as a main competitor to AT&T TV.

Now, that said, yes, AT&T has made some *really* dumb moves (buying DTV) and their marketing/branding strategy seems to be constantly in flux and confusing to lots of folks. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[NashGuy]

In all honestly as long as AT&T retains a minority stake in DirecTV after a sale they can still use a single contract to cover D*, U-Verse TV, AT&T TV/TV Now & WatchTV.

Yeah, maybe. I'd think AT&T would strive to make that happen but without knowing the intricacies of the contracts and parties involved, it's all just speculation on our part...

 

[NashGuy]

The proof will be in the pudding in about 7-8 months when the 1st year anniversary rolls around and the price skyrockets.

I'm predicting yet another round of huge subscriber losses.

Most folks don't like the idea of paying $180 and getting nothing in return, and that's what will happen if they're hit with the $15/mo ETF for breaking their two-year contract one year early. Some folks will still walk away regardless but I don't think it'll be the portion of the AT&T TV subscriber base that you imagine.

 

[NashGuy]

If they look at it that way, sure it will scare some away, but if they do proper math they will find that after you take out the rebate it is cheaper to cancel and pay the ETF, cheaper than many other live streaming services.

They can cancel and pay the ETF and have had a real bargain too. Or they can stay and pay way more, remember the HBO Max freebie expires too.

Most folks don't think through all the math like you and I do and then make an informed decision, weighing the relative costs and benefits of all the different options available to them.

Anyhoo, hopefully AT&T throws you a bone and knocks a few bucks off your bill in the second year. Probably will come down to whatever numbers they're trying to hit for their quarterly results at the time, ha.

 

[NashGuy]

We would not be talking (much) about AT&T if they had not purchased DIRECTV and grown their business. AT&T was struggling to launch an OTT service and bought DIRECTV specifically to have the larger customer base needed to negotiate contracts that would make an OTT service profitable. I believe that things didn't quite go as planned ... renegotiating contracts was not easy and satellite subscriber losses over the past few years have weakened their negotiating position - but I believe that AT&T is in a much better position to have a successful OTT service after the DIRECTV purchase than they were before the DIRECTV purchase.

I really don't see how owning DTV helped much with the development of AT&T TV -- they leaned on a combo of Google (Android TV Operator Tier) and, presumably, their own IP network/cloud tech (likely based in part on their 2016 acquisition of Quickplay. And, of course, AT&T Wireless, along with AT&T Fiber/Internet/Uverse TV, gave them a big pool of customer relationships that they could market AT&T TV and AT&T TV Now to. (And I would argue that Uverse TV subscribers numbers would have grown higher than they did had AT&T not purchased DTV, which it then sold instead of Uverse TV to a portion of their home internet customers.)

So I really don't see how buying DTV did much to set them up for any future success with AT&T TV/Now (much less HBO Max), despite that being the repeated rationale trotted out by former CEO Stephenson. Yes, as you say, it did allow them to negotiate better channel carriage rates, due to a much larger overall TV subscriber base, and thereby sell AT&T TV/Now at rates a bit lower than they otherwise could have (and/or with better profit margins). That's not nothing, but I doubt it's a big enough deal to justify the loss they'll ultimately take on DTV when they sell it.

Watch what T-Mobile will do with their OTT-revamped TVision. The first generation of TVision has fewer subs than Uverse TV ever did. And T-Mobile owns no cable nets, as AT&T does. There's no reason to think that AT&T couldn't have built an OTT service -- AT&T TV -- just as well as T-Mobile can.

Again, the big picture is that AT&T bought a business, DTV, right at its peak due to a secular shift in video consumption away from the cable channel bundle. So all that business would ever do under AT&T was decline.

 

[NashGuy]

Also for the tech used for AT&T TV, AT&T TV Now & AT&T WatchTV I wouldn't be surprised if it was something D* was already working on prior to the AT&T-DirecTV purchase. There would have been no other way AT&T could have gotten that technology off the ground in less than 2 years after purchasing D* unless D* was already working on an OTT service of its own.

Yep. The platform they are using now is based on the one DIRECTV developed. While they were late to launch (not launching DTV now until a year after the merger closed) DIRECTV deserves the credit for AT&T having a product to sell now.

Sorry guys, you're wrong. The OTT tech used as the basis for DirecTV Now/AT&T TV is from Quickplay, which they acquired in 2016, separate from DTV.

AT&T Completes Acquisition of Quickplay | AT&T

The only useful things that AT&T got out of the DTV acquisition, with regard to their future OTT services, were the DTV customer base (i.e. potential future customers of the OTT services) and the negotiating power for future carriage contracts spanning all AT&T cable TV services.