AT&T Launching Mobile TV May 4th

Engadget is reporting that AT&T will be launching their Mobile TV service on May 4th. The article features a few details and a video of the tech in action. "You'll find Mobile TV running on LG's new $300 (2-year, after $100 rebate) Vu, one of just two Mobile TV compatible handsets launching on AT&T May 4th — the other being the $200 (2-year, after $100 rebate) Samsung Access. Performance looks reasonably snappy when scrolling through the channel guide although some of the exclusive PIX and CNN Mobile Live content is not yet available. S'ok, AT&T has three more days to throw the big blue switch on the broadcast TV service which includes a $15/month unlimited Mobile TV access plan."

Comments

Light on details

[jrumney]

TFA is a bit light on details. Is this a true broadcast system, or 3G bandwidth sucking streaming out to individual handsets like the UK networks have rolled out? If it's true broadcast, have they adopted DVB-T, Korea's T-DMB, Japan's 1-seg, or done the American thing and gone their own incompatible way?

Re:Light on details

[jrumney]

I meant DVB-H (H for handheld, T for terrestrial), but I see TFA mentions MediaFLO, which it turns out is a proprietary Qualcomm broadcast technology not just the name of the front end software as I'd assumed.

Re:Light on details

[deetsay]

I meant DVB-H (H for handheld, T for terrestrial), but I see TFA mentions MediaFLO, which it turns out is a proprietary Qualcomm broadcast technology not just the name of the front end software as I'd assumed.

S'ok.

Re:Light on details

[y00st]

Engadget article says it is mediaFLO. It is a broadcast technique developed by Qualcomm.

Re:Light on details

[Anonymous Coward]

You list three "standards", and then knock America for defining "their own incompatible way" as if 1) picking one of the three in your list wouldn't make it _incompatible_ with the other two, and 2) that there is no better way to do it.

Um, ok...

Re:Light on details

[Lumpy]

I've seen the 3g sucking systems. and I bought a Slingbox. It works better to my Blackjack than any of their services for "mobile" TV. plus I have control of it unlike their systems.

Honestly on my 2" screen 180X120 ad 15fps is more than enough resolution.

Re:Light on details

[jrumney]

Since the US is not leading the field, like Japan and Korea, I'd expect them to leverage the work done by the DVB consortium to develop a global handheld digital TV standard. At the very least as market followers, they could have gone with the existing Korean system (which has support from China) or maybe the Japanese system (the Japanese similarly take the "do own own thing" approach, but at least they have the excuse that they're deploying before the standards are ready). Going with a single vendor proprietary solution is shortsighted, which is exactly what I'd expect of the US mobile industry.

Hypocritical

[Anonymous Coward]

So for $15/mo. I can hog all the bandwidth I want over their data network, but they'll charge me $80/mo. to do the same via Internet usage. Thanks, no.

Curious

[Auckerman]

How often do you stare at your phone? As in look at your phone. I'm sure there's some market for this, but I'm not sure who. Web browsers (quick looking up movie times), email (crackberry, et al.),MP3 players (iPhone), I can understand putting those in a phone. TV? A phone is more of a passive attachment. One you are aware of, but don't have an absolute need to touch for an hour straight without using it as a phone. If you're going to send email or web browse for an hour, you're going to do it from a computer. Watching TV is something that takes more than a couple of minutes.

This is really a solution in search of a problem. I think, in reality, they are shooting for the "cool, I can watch TV" crowd who use it for a month, then stop using it, but never remove it from their plan.

Re:Curious

[ChinggisK]

they are shooting for the "cool, I can watch TV" crowd who use it for a month,

Well, that was my initial reaction, so I guess it works. You just had to go and spoil it... fiend!

Commuters.

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

1) Commuters drag their phone with them everywhere.

2) Commuters stuck on public transport for over three hours a day crave portable entertainment.

3) Sell Commuters entertainment they can watch on a device they're already carrying.

4) Who cares if we profit from this? We're a monopoly. We'll find another way to screw consumers if this fails.

Re:Commuters.

[DMoylan]

> 1) Commuters drag their phone with them everywhere.

damn right. i don't leave home without my nokia e61i.

> 2) Commuters stuck on public transport for over three hours a day crave portable entertainment.

4 hours a day myself. i also drag my ipod 150gb. this is loaded with about 40 movies, umpteen hours of music and 3-4 tv series such as fr. ted, it crowd, drew carey.

> 3) Sell Commuters entertainment they can watch on a device they're already carrying.

good idea. however as a commuter you are moving traffic permitting. what will this do when you are using a high bandwidth device trying to suck down a tv show? along the motorways and railways here in ireland the phone companies have placed masts so as to allow mobile communications for those on the move. even allowing for these masts there are black spots were signal will drop to almost zero so that voice calls are dropped. you'll have to hope that your phone can switch perfectly between masts and not lose your tv show which is trying to suck down a huge amount of data.

i was recently in hospital for 3 weeks and it was my nokia that kept me entertained with web and email. even in a static location with a good 3g signal the line was dropped at regular intervals. usually at certain times when others would have been using it.

> 4) Who cares if we profit from this? We're a monopoly. We'll find another way to screw consumers if this fails.

they offered tv on mobiles here in ireland. don't know anybody who tried it myself. for most the small size of the screen makes it too akward to watch sports (were did the ball go?). the other channels offered were of little interest. i would have watched the discovery channel myself but the cost of data was too expensive. at the moment for somebody on prepay who can't get a contract i'm looking at 99c for 50mb.

Re:Commuters.

[ubrgeek]

5) Holding your wife's purse, waiting for her to finish shopping.

/me is so glad my wife doesn't read /. ;)

Re:Commuters.

[peragrin]

1) i do drag my phone everywhere
2)15 minutes in the middle of a snow storm to get to work.
3) I would rather watch the road with the other 70% of americans, as most of us live in area's with mediocore public transportation.
4) why can't they simply receive traditional TV broadcasts? I wouldn't mind listening to ABC morning news. You can pick the signals up in every city already. this just has the extra cable packages.

Re:Commuters.

[obarel]

For point 3, we're talking about broadcast (like television) so the bandwidth is of no concern to the user who will be charged per programme rather than per MB.

The differences are:
* A huge system to make sure that you pay for what you see (the exact opposite of Freeview)
* More resilient in terms of Doppler effect and general noise (a lot of error-corrections in software and hardware)
* Smaller size videos (probably 320x240 instead of 720x576 or more)
* Good quality (H.264 and AAC instead of MPEG-2)
* Ability to download files (annoying ringtones etc.)

I'm still not convinced about reception inside the London Underground or in places where TV reception is not the best.

Yawn

[Nursie]

This stuff has been out for a couple of years in the UK.

Nobody actually cares though. I have yet to see anyone bother to actually use it.

Re:Yawn

[*weasel]

This service strikes me as the networks and media companies desperately trying to stuff the genie back into the bottle.

Having enjoyed vidcasts, tivo recordings and dvd rips on my n800 for some months, I've seen the way forward.

And it certainly doesn't involve allowing broadcasters deciding the depth and breadth of available content, scheduling, monthly fees or further suffering proprietary transmission or encoding technologies.

I'll get whatever video I want, from wherever I care to find it and watch it when I want to watch it, thanks.

Re:Yawn

[jrumney]

The UK isn't getting mobile TV until 2012, when the bandwidth currently used for analogue TV becomes available nationwide. The networks have various video on demand services, but that isn't the same as broadcast mobile TV.

Is it really needed?

[fork_daemon]

Here in the UK we have this feature on our 3g handsets, but i wonder who really uses it?

I had the option of 1 month free TV, but i did not opt for it. I do not see a necessity to stare at a small Mobile Screen just to watch live tv or a live Football match. Would i even be able to read the scores on such a small display?

This feature is just a display of "We are putting this feature in, just because we can."

Re:Is it really needed?

[Zelos]

I watch a fair bit of video on mobile devices while travelling (trains/flying). My girlfriend watches a lot on her iPod touch, mostly TV comedy series (Flight of the Conchords, Gavin and Stacey etc.) Provided you have good eyesight, most video is perfectly watchable on a ~3" screen.

That's all ripped to MP4 from DVD though, I'm not sure about broadcast TV to mobiles.

Re:Is it really needed?

[DiSKiLLeR]

Its been here in australia for years and years too.

I don't know anyone who uses it either.

Watching TV on your phone is just one of the stupidest things i've ever heard of...

Re:Is it really needed?

[tonsofpcs]

I have a 2" black and white rear-projection TV that runs on 4 AA cells. 3" color should be fine.

Not new

[DramaGeek]

MediaFlo, the company doing this or AT&T, has been doing this for Verizon since March last year. See here: http://news.vzw.com/news/2007/03/pr2007-03-27a.html I read somewhere that it uses TV spectrum, channel 55 if I remember correctly.

Re:Not new

[benjymous]

Something similar's been available for two or three years in the UK.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/31/vodafone_sky/

Nobody used it, though

Re:Not new

[fistfullast33l]

MediaFlo, the company doing this or AT&T, has been doing this for Verizon since March last year

True, however this is Slashdot and AT&T is the only provider with the iPhone, so obviously AT&T are the only ones allowed to innovate in the US.

Also, I have the LG Voyager from Verizon that is Mobile TV enabled - it's not worth the money. $15 a month for TV on the go? I don't even use the VCAST service to download videos on the go. Why would I want to watch TV? Plus it has this really stupid antenna that looks like you're watching one of those 80's portable televisions or watching a transistor radio. It's kind of dumb.

I did demo it in the Verizon store though. Pretty good reception.

Plus additional costs

[Scutter]

AT&T has three more days to throw the big blue switch on the broadcast TV service which includes a $15/month unlimited Mobile TV access plan."

They forgot to mention that you also need the $20/month unlimited data plan, and you'll have to pay $3/month per channel that you subscribe to or you can buy individual shows for $1 each. C'mon, this is AT&T. They will nickel and dime you to death at every opportunity.

Re:Plus additional costs

[ShadowsHawk]

Wow, this should really be modded up. Why would anyone spend that kind of cash?

Well that's just great

[spamking]

Great. The idiots I'm forced to follow who have a cell phone can barely talk and drive at the same time. I'm sure this idea of mobile TV on your phone is going to go over really well.

I mean seriously, do we need more distractions while we drive?

Re:Well that's just great

[NatasRevol]

Don't complain, there will be new ways to celebrate the Darwin awards!

Re:Well that's just great

[Anonymous Coward]

Nearly as distracting as that big banner advert at the top of the page advertising this item. Or AT&T. Or maybe Slashdot. Not sure, but it's advertising.....I think....

Old news in Korea, probably Japan too.

[Anonymous Coward]

Here in Korea, this is old news. They watch TV on phones and GPSs everywhere. It's very popular on the subway or the bus. And it's free. The service is called DMB, digital media broadcast. There are at least 5 channels everywhere. They are the same channels that are broadcast through analog.

Wow!! I can't wait!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow!! I can't wait to not need this!!

When are the Vu's supposed to be released, so I can hurry up and not buy one? (IDK, I didn't RTFA.)

Seriously, how many people really need/want access to TV 24 hours a day? Like my phone/shitty-camera/shitty-mp3 player/shitty-video recorder/shitty-internet access device, I get the impression this is yet another novelty for me to not use.

Granted, the camera aspect come in handy once every 3-4 months, but you can't take serious photos with it. And I have used the mp3 player on occasion, but not nearly as often as I anticipated.

The video recorder is completely worthless and I have never needed to access the internet with the damn thing. I mean, it's not like I need to watch you-tube videos on the go - come on, let's get serious.

So why does anyone think there is an unfilled market for having 24 hour access to television on a 3" screen?

It sort of reminds me of video-phones. Shit, they invented that decades ago. How many times have they reinvented it since? They never caught on. It doesn't seem like home-consumers even want one. I know I don't.

I'm sure there are some people that could put this to good use, but I hardly think there is a market for it. I'd rather tivo my favorite shows and watch them at my leisure on a normal tv screen with surround sound, than squinting at this shit.

Slingbox?

[acklenx]

$150 hardware cost
no subscriptions fees
watch anything you get at home

what am i missing?

Re:Slingbox?

[crunzh]

Maybe the unlimited dataplan for the cellphone+always on DSL at home.

Re:Verizon has been doing this...

[Anonymous Coward]

Verizon has been offering mobile TV for almost three months now. I've used theirs with my LG Voyager and the picture is very clear. I just didn't use it enough to justify paying for the service.

Wow! What a new concept

[jcrousedotcom]

I was watching a news clip this morning on CNN Mobile on my SprintTV enabled Treo about this great new concept - getting live feed TV on my mobile phone. Oh, wait, I can already do that. How is this news?

Why is this such big news?

[bturcotte]

Maybe i'm missing something here but this certainly is not ground breaking news? Rogers in Canada has had mobile tv for a couple years as far as I know?. It works on most of their phones now, even $0 ones. Same pricing scheme, $15/mnth for unlimited access. I bought it just to try it out and ended up canceling the same week.

Re:Why is this such big news?

[Max4400]

in this video, he said that its 100 times better then mobile tv. the quality of broadcasting is amazing. It will be useful for the people on the way, specially for one travelling through mas transport system, they can watch tv news, stock news or their favorite tv series while traveling. Its very good if you travel for 30+ minutes through public transport.

VZWireless

[Anonymous Coward]

Verizon has had Mobile TV for awhile, accessible in the larger markets. $15 for 10 channels.

http://products.vzw.com/index.aspx?id=mobileTV

Already in the US

[teknopurge]

Sprint has had this via MobiTV for at least 3 years.

Wrong country

[Anonymous Coward]

Mobile TV is pretty nice, but it has no real place in the US.

If you're living somewhere like say, Japan, this is actually pretty nice. If you're staring down a long commute by train and/or bus, something passive like this is perfect-- you can catch up on the news or whatever else and just veg out a little and let the time fly by.

Problem is, how many of us in the US have considerable patches of time like that? A friend of mine has a nasty hour long commute, but of course, it's by car. If he had a train ride, I'm sure he'd love the chance to watch the morning news-- but since he's driving, he has no real use for this, just like many other Americans.

Re:Wrong country

[cashman73]

The problem with the train ride thing, is that if it's a subway, you won't have service, more than likely,...

ATT is a bad corporate citizen - and they suck too

[gregopad39]

I've had my fill of poor ATT service, inept customer service reps and nazi contracts.
I cannot wait for my contract to end.

Everyone with ATT needs to give them the boot, the finger and their old phones.

I think any cellular company is better than this whore.

Why even bother?

[EEGeek]

Bell Canada has offered something similar for about a year and a half now. Its actually quite useless, and hard to watch TV on a little 1 inch screen... waste of money if you ask me... if you need TV that badly, you have problems.

Hear, hear!

[professorguy]

Funny AND so so true. Someone with mod points please start lavishing.

"I can't wait to not need this!" is my new favorite quotation. Let's make t-shirts (another thing no one is waiting for)....

AT&T's big mistake

[Orig_Club_Soda]

Why would they ignore the iPhone? Also, how can their crappy data network handle this when it takes 5 minutes to download a web page?

iPhone

[barbam]

Great -- so now the FanBoys can have TV on the iPhone. Too bad it runs on such a slow network. What a waste. That thing is as revolutionary as Barrack Obama.

just what we need....

[Anonymous Coward]

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORING

Re:ATT is a bad corporate citizen - and they suck

[Douglas Goodall]

I recently tried out an AT&T/Cingular 3G adapter (usb) for my father at the hospital and couldn't get enough signal to do email, much less moving video. If they can't get their 3G data network running well enough for the normal wireless customers, how do they expect to satisfy loads of video watchers. Aren't they selling out there business customers who have been suffering and waiting for things to get better. Aren't they also selling out Apple who will have to suffer also due to their exclusive iPhone / AT&T contract.

I knew in my heart AT&T would do something to mess this up.

ReWhat kind of TV?

[Douglas Goodall]

Would that be color, or black and white?

So late?

[LinuxLuver]

Vodafone in New Zealand has had mobile TV for most of a year for NZ$2.50 / week (US$1.90). OK, it's all sports, celeb gossip, cartoons, reality shows (MTV) and soft porn (Playboy). They dropped CNN - the only news channel - becasue no (but me, I guess) was watching. I dropped the service. Nothing of interest there for me. But it's been around for a while now.