Slashdot Mirror
AT&T To Offer TV Over Phone Lines
ppadala writes "AT&T is upgrading their phone lines to offer video programmes over phone line. The service, called U-verse TV will be available in parts of Southern California communities initially. Channel lineups will be similar to traditional cable and dish offerings. AT&T is insisting that, 'This offering is on par with those of its cable rivals. But AT&T claims that it offers customers more for their money, including fast channel changing, video-on-demand, three set-top boxes, a digital video recorder, a picture-in-picture feature that allows viewers to surf channels without switching channels and an interactive program guide.'"
Wow, video (on demand and more) via the phone lines. I actually had a "moment" of anticipation, thinking I could maybe finally dump the miserable (Comcast) quality and service of our cable company. Then, the quote: "'This offering is on par with those of its cable rivals. "...
Sigh.
Gee, that sounds like what Europe and Japan seem to offer people at a fraction of the cost, except crappier and more expensive. Way to go AT&T! I love when telecoms are looking out for the consumer's best interest.
/sarcasm off
ADSL modem + private network + set-top box.
Must have taken them months to independantly discover this combination.
How we know is more important than what we know.
At least not in Hong Kong, where the local phone company has been offering this service for years:
http://www.nowbroadbandtv.com/eng/
This definitely isn't the first ILEC to offer TV over IP: I know Telus up in Canada is offering it already.
Having used it quite a bit myself, it's very similar to digital cable (isn't that what it is?). There's also the added bonus of choosing very customizable channel packages and individual channels to subscribe to, which I think is a good change from the limited Tiers from cable companies.
How is TV an upgrade over anything?
American Icon, Survivor, etc!
The ATT site is somewhat short on details, but it does mention that it delivers TV programming "using Internet Protocol via a broadband connection".
...
This raises some questions:
1) Is the bandwidth dedicated to television progamming separate from your other broadband use? Or does watching TV take up most of your bandwidth? Given that they offer a DVR, which means that TV programming will be continuously streamed to the device (think 1/2 hour buffers or whatever), I would expect the only reasonable way for this to work is for AT&T to dedicate bandwidth above and beyond your normal broadband connection to TV programming. But that's just a guess
2) Is the 4 "tuner" DVR capable of recording 4 programs at once *in real time* over a single "U-verse" connection? Or does each show stream in at 1/4 real time and you just have to wait 4x longer for all shows to complete?
3) Are they using multicast IP or peer-to-peer streaming? I would expect the latter since multicasting 190+ channels would seem infeasable.
4) Given that it's likely peer-to-peer, does AT&T really think they have the server capacity to support tens of thousands of customers all streaming different programming at different times?
5) Are there QOS guarantees in place that would prevent my TV programming from ever "hiccuping" due to traffic congestion?
It looks like a very interesting offering *if* the aspects of the service that AT&T "conveniently" left out in their documentation live up to the hype - i.e., if you really can record 4 channels (or even 2) at once in real time without disturbing your other broadband use.
So... question is, is this just some stopgap crapola that they can announce, but in reality will only be available to a few selected areas and that's it?
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The phone company where I work is a small outfit that only has about 6-8k customers, but we've had this for the last few years, to answer a few questions that have come up, 1.The tv bandwidth is seperate from the internet. 2.It's done through peer to peer streaming, I can run 3 tvs simultaneously over one phone line, but that's it unless you have a second line. 3. The quality of service is amazing, it never hiccups and they're going to start offering HD signal soon.
fast channel changing - What's slow about pushing the button and the next channel is there? I can't even blink that fast.
video-on-demand - Cable's got it and charges out the ass. Unless it's free and actually has content (the free stuff on cable is crap), no thanks.
three set-top boxes - Right, cuz 1 just wasn't enough.
a digital video recorder - Is that ANOTHER box? Anyhow, cable without DVR isn't worth it.
a picture-in-picture feature that allows viewers to surf channels without switching channels - TV, cable, satellite have all have this for years,
an interactive program guide - Again, they've all had it for years.
If they aren't going to offer anything special, and they aren't going to have significantly lower prices, they can go ahead and call this a failure.
The only thing I see that's even halfway special is that the entire thing is going to be 'on-demand'. That's why the need to state fast channel switching, etc. They aren't going to play all channels all the time... They are only going to play the 2 channels (pic in pic) that you are currently watching, streamed from their CO. (Central Office, the local telephone switch in each city.) If they also made it so that the 'DVR' wasn't at my house, but was instead stored at the CO (it's not really a DVR, just a way to play back whenever I want) then I could see an advantage.
DVR Advantage: I missed Survivor this week because A) I forgot or B) The president had a fit and decided to tell the world, making every show in existance run later than normal. With CO-based DVR, I could just say 'I want to watch ep 785 of Survivor' and it plays it. No worries about storage space or recording mishaps. I'd even pay -extra- for this service. Take it a step further and let me watch Thursday's shows -any time- on Thursday, even before they 'air', and I'd be even happier.
But no, they'll totally miss the coolest aspects of this and instead try to merely match what everyone else already has.
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
This sounds like vdsl (which allows about 80mb/sec bandwidth, with most of the bandwidth going to the video stream). My apartment building recently got vdsl, the advantages are that there is no need for every apartment wanting satellite TV to have to setup a satellite dish (it's not allowed here anyway). Also, we can get full speed dsl service without having to worry about line quality or being close to a Central Office. All the data is piped into the building through fiber optic cable, while using the existing cable infrastructure of the building to carry the signals to the individual apartment units.
This has been available in parts of Houston for about 4 months.
"The mind works quicker than you think!"
Our house signed up for U-Verse a few weeks ago. We've got about 350 channels. It's actually delivered by fiber to a node down the block, then a specialized DSL connection that's 6 Mb/s connection. The service is extremely location specific. Our next door neighbors can't get it, so we're right on the edge.
The TV is H.264 encoded and streamed over IP to the DVR box. You can record up to 4 standard definition channels, or a single HD channel, while watching another. The standard def television looks better than regular standard def. More like 480p. The 'Hi def' channels look similar to 720p but with noticeable compression, and the occasional dropped frame. If someone were really looking for full 1080i HD, highest possible quality, I'd have some reservations recommending it. But the SD looks good enough that we're pretty happy with it. A lot of what we watch is still only on the SD channels.
Since everything is streaming, it always buffers about 90 minutes worth of footage of whatever you're watching (a la tivo). It also has some neat features like being able to show thumbnail previews of channels while you're surfing around, along with a representation of how far into the show it is.
Overall, the DVR functions are quite primitive. Its can be difficult to make the recordings you want. There doesn't seem to be any way to make only recordings of new episodes of Stargate SG1 (This is slighly less of a problem since there's only like 4 episodes left in the series. This was the only show we record that had problems.
For TV + broadband for under $100, its well worth it for us.
This is where I get my recommended daily allowance of "Foot in Mouth."
It's also being offered in some Texas communities, including Houston.
C'mon, baby, kiss The King.
AT&T is using Microsoft's trouble-laden IPTV software.
you might not, depends on how much content you want your myth tv setup to record
will be available in parts of Southern California communities initially.
It is also available in San Antonio, TX, Dallas, TX, Austin, TX, Milwaukee, WI, and Indianapolis, IN. Source
Why does TV over IP have to come from the Internet provider? I'm really getting annoyed by all of this bundling of services. Here's what I'd like... a good, fast internet connection. Period. Let me worry about what I'm getting over that connection. Phone/TV/Music/Email. For once I'd love to see a company boast: We give you a rock solid, fast connection to the Internet and that's it. Enjoy.
I currently have Comcast (previously Adelphia). Back in the Adelphia days I had the internet only package. Life was good. Since the buyout, I have Comcast Internet plus a $15.00 you forgot to sign up for cable tv fee. I also have Vonage and use iTunes to purchase shows of interest. I'd love to subscribe to a few IPTV channels from say... the networks that air them. Does that make any sense? Or, is this the kind of thing that actually requires dedicated telco hardware to implement?
Hmm... video on demand, over a phone line, using "internet technology"... you're talking about bittorrent.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
A good friend of mine has Tivo and the shitty proprietary cable signal he got combined with a proprietary Tivo compression looked horrible. I hated watching saved shows and would very much prefer to watch shows live because they only had half the amount of artifacts. You're acting like we asked for the streaming compression they put on the signal. In fact, I have heard many complaints (to which I agree) that the amount of compression they put on cable lines are unacceptable. It's just sad when over the air signal is crisper than the one provided by a dedicated cable for the same TV stations!
You are also talking about are two completely different problems. I'm okay with AAC because it was
I also don't see how using a Myth-tv box is an OSS-only mindset. Sounds like we want the choice of OSS or something proprietary (like Tivo)--we just want the interfacing to be open enough that we have a choice.
Nice joke, but there is more going on here. You are getting video feeds over your fancy new xDSL connection, exactly how many feeds you can get at once (think different rooms) is a huge deal for the service provider. For cable it's different. You have all channels on the wire at the same time, you just need to tune each box into the right frequency/channel. With IPTV, you are not getting 500 multicast streams pushed down your connection at all times, you actually have to subscribe to the channel you want to watch. Can 5 people in your house all connect to your wireless AP and get decent performance from YouTube or other online video sites? Can they get consistent, reliable performance from it? I would doubt it, but that is what faces IPTV.
Notice they mention instant channel changes. These are all problems to overcome with IPTV that cable doesn't have to deal with, and they are setting up their defense for the cable company's media blitz on why you don't want TV from AT&T (american telephone and television?). When you click a button on your remote to change channels in an IPTV system, a ton more things have to happen to before you see fluid video. Think of it as the difference between tuning a station on your FM dial versus clicking a link in iTunes to change radio stations. If the system isn't right and can't switch off the old channel fast enough, it still streams in and clogs your pipe. Add about 5 of those and you have no decent bandwidth for the next channel, not to mention your internet access or your new VOIP phone.
The big deal here is two-fold. AT&T finally has the back end server mess for all this ready. They are using Microsoft IPTV, you would not believe how many servers and disk space this takes up. MSIPTV uses multicast only for the small PIP preview feed, when you select a channel it is a (hold on to your hat) unicast stream from one of those servers over your DSL link to your set top box. AT&T must also feel they are reaching critical mass with their rollout of ADSL2, which can give up to 24Mbps to a home close to the DSLAM (which is ending up in those curbside pedestals now, being fed by fiber from the Central Office - baby stepping that last mile problem). That gives them the bandwidth to offer compressed HDTV streams to the three set top boxes, with a smidge of room left over for internet and VoIP. Oh yeah, if you want more bandwidth for your torrent downloads to avoid Video-on-Demand fees, turn off your television!
The big beige boxes been springing up all around my area. One very large one was put in about a block away over a year ago. Late last year they ran fiber from it & put up another big beige box right to my condo complex. I was quite excited. Went so far as to bring beverages out to the workers. When?!...I would ask, WHEN!?
You see, I've been stuck with Comcrap, Wide Open West is too expensive, no dish allowed, & DSL was not available. When Comcrap took over Mediaone, service went from barely tolerable to worse. After a few years Comcrap worked out most problems but still has very slow uploads & bittorrent's are way slow. In the last year speeds slow to a crawl during prime time. They re-wired old high-rise apartment buildings nearby & added 1000s of customers. Complaint after complaint & no fix.
Now AT&T is offering this U-Verse thing. Yep, all the same stuff Comcraps been trying to get me to subscribe to for years. Nothing new here everyone says. What's the difference? Up front, what makes this huge for me, is cost. If I switch, I can get the 3 set-top boxes (with DVR), all that stuff that comes with it (like HDTV), all for slightly more than I pay now. Plus 6 down/1 up DSL that might even be somewhere near advertised speeds.
DUMP COMCRAP! Years of problems, more than I care to list but one more "I'm sorry sir, but you need to understand the nature of the Internet, we can't guarantee speeds" & I am going to pull the phone out of the wall.
SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT
Lots of info and pictures to look at
http://www.s4biturbo.com/