[harsh]

DVR controls are deactivated on stream backup I’ve been told.

This makes sense as the fallback stream is bypassing the Genie altogether.

 

[harsh]

I am hoping this is an attempt to at least salvage and modernize the current satellite system and could be a gateway to some sort of hybrid system (hence the streaming backup option)

This would require fundamental software changes to the whole STB environment (especially for DVRs) since the current receiver software doesn't have the software flexibility to install apps for (and authenticate with) random streaming services. The processing and memory requirements go up quickly with apps and I don't see much middle ground between where they're at and a Google TV whole home model.

 

[harsh]

From the sounds of it thats what they were looking for.. It will be interesting because there is still such a disparity with there Sat and Streaming TV Contracts..

Don't you suppose that there must be given the differences between in-home and cloud DVR?

 

[harsh]

Perhaps they move into a cloud DVR model (that seems to be more and more common).

The cloud model won't work for those who don't have sufficient broadband (either speed or gigabytes of capacity). Those are the customers that are most likely to keep DIRECTV DBS alive in future.

 

[harsh]

How many customers would DTV Stream need to have in order to survive?

That's a question that DIRECTV and its two shareholders are asking themselves often. DIRECTV STREAM is priced considerably higher than all of its competitors so they have that in their favor but that typically doesn't bode well for positive net adds.

 

[harsh]

I don't think their goal is to keep Sat alive in the future but to transition as many people to streaming as possible.

They're going to have to make DIRECTV STREAM a lot more attractive (or DBS a lot less attractive) if they want to make that transition.

 

[harsh]

It makes no sense to try to transition people now, when the end of life for Directv satellite is a decade away. At least.

It makes no sense to wait until something dies before you start migrating from it.

Consider what is currently going on at Shaw Direct with the thruster failures on Anik F2. They're having to scramble to get everyone set up for a more recent compression scheme (AVC or maybe HEVC) so that they can run the whole system using only Anik G1. [this sounds a lot like DIRECTV's glacial transition away from MPEG2]

DIRECTV/T 10 is still in use and it has just passed its projected 15 year useful lifespan. DIRECTV/T 11 ages out next March and DIRECTV/T 12 reaches the forecast by the end of 2024. Those obviously aren't hard and fast expiration dates but you'll recall that both DIRECTV 10 and DIRECTV 12 had some serious operational issues along the way (the great amelioration).

There's also the issue that the customer premise equipment is getting pretty creaky and most of it won't still be viable in five years, much less a decade.

 

[harsh]

Fairly certain it costs a good penny for Directv to operate there Broadcast centers

That cost is fixed regardless of the size of the customer base. Streaming is traffic sensitive.

 

[harsh]

OK, it's a waste of my time arguing this. It costs nothing, sure, sending people to people's homes to install or fix (often in deal that make it at the company's expense costs nothing.

You speak as if there isn't going to be any need to replace DIRECTV STREAM devices.

Recycling old equipment costs nothing.

It isn't cost-free, but it beats the daylights out of designing and building new equipment.

Having banks and banks of CSRs available costs nothing.

What makes you think that supporting relatively large number of wildly different streaming boxes is going to require less manpower? When you put the hardware responsibility in the lap of the customer, it doesn't make supporting their choices any easier.

 

[harsh]

I'm wondering where is more info about new DTV hardware ?!

Since the "facts" of this discussion came uniquely from parsing the text of a third-party customer survey, you shouldn't hold your breath waiting for authoritative technical information.

 

[harsh]

People are shifting to lower cost, lower profit margin services, whether DTC streaming services like Netflix or vMVPDs like YouTube TV.

I submit that it is the content owners that are seeking to make more profit on their content by going DTC rather than spreading profits around through more costly multi-party distribution schemes.

 

[harsh]

One thing I was thinking about letting the C71-KW and A21-KW work with the HS-17 and HR-54 could those boxes be able to have the Satellite TV settings like view signal strength and whole home DVR, ect? Also View the HS-17 and HR-54's TV Apps?

I would expect that anything that replaces a Genie Mini would support whatever the Genie Mini does as well as being able to run Android TV apps. I would not expect that it would allow you to run Genie apps since Score Guide is the only TV App that isn't already available for Google TV.

 

[harsh]

So, that mentioned HS27 wouldn't materialize ?

The HS27 was reasoned to be a server (the "S" in HS -- Headless Server). We're talking about a possible Android client here and the survey makes no mention of an associated server.

 

[harsh]

Streaming devices are owned not leased. DirecTV and once the warranty is up, it's on us, the consumer to replace. DirecTV has little responsibility at that point.

Channel numbers aren't supported on other platforms (even if they do have keyboards). DIRECTV could add channel number support to the standard DIRECTV App for Android TV and iOS but they apparently havn't seen fit. As such, DIRECTV has a responsibility to provide a streamer that supports channel numbers along with keeping up with the requirements of the day that don't seem to be slowing their advance.

Not innovatiing is a death knell for any company.

Not innovating new hardware is clearly something DIRECTV has been engaging in for quite a few (3-4?) years now. It is a business decision that was made somewhere in time and one that they've been sticking with as evidenced by the non-release of the A21KW streaming box.

 

[harsh]

I thought when Dish introduced the receiver with what, 16 tuners, that was a pretty killer feature. I wish DIRECTV would do that.

I'm far from convinced that there is a use case for 16 tuners but I could very much see where DIRECTV could benefit from going to 10 (since stacking of the big LIL broadcast channels on a single tuner as DISH does isn't possible given SWiM constraints).

 

[harsh]

Overall 16 is a good number and provides the desired "conflict free" experience DISH wants to offer.

Of course with the quality of shows these days I may be able to do with fewer tuners than what I previously needed.

Yeah, I do the same with a 15 - 30 min buffer. Still can't imagine there being 14 shows on at the same time.

As an individual, I often have trouble finding more than two things on at the same time (and at least one of them will typically replay fairly soon). The most I've ever used (again, as an individual) is three tuners and I don't see that number increasing in the future as more shows move towards streaming.

I suppose if I were an avid sports follower, the number might be greater but probably not more than eight.

 

[harsh]

Innovation generally requires inventions.

Apple has an awful lot of patents (over 72,000 globally) for a company that you claim isn't innovating.

That said, Apple has made more of a mark by doing things differently (like those miserable early ATV remotes) as opposed to coming up with new hardware technologies. It is even worse today when we see Apple's competitors eating its technical advancement lunch both before and soon after their ho-hum events.

 

[harsh]

I said, they haven't innovated recently, since Steve Jobs did the majority of the innovating.

You must be one of those that believes that Bill Gates wrote most of Microsoft's software from scratch.

Steve Jobs led a rather innovative team to be sure but to suggest that he designed everything is nonsense.

 

[harsh]

Gates and Jobs were idea guys.

I'll buy that but I'd have to say that Jobs was more product oriented while Gates was more interested in market domination rather than innovation.

 

[harsh]

It's well documented that Gates bought the code for DOS for $50k, made a few minor changes and licensed it.

It's also well documented that Apple innovated when Steve Jobs was there and didn't when he wasn't.

You've done a great job of supporting my rebuttal but I'm wondering how that supports your thesis.