Slashdot Mirror
AT&T CEO: DirecTV Now Streaming Service Will Cost $35 a Month (variety.com)
AT&T's upcoming DirecTV Now streaming service is going to cost $35 a month, AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson said during a panel at the Wall Street Journal's WSJD Live conference. The package wlll include over 100 channels, he added. From a Variety report: This price point is a significant departure from the company's previous stance, when it suggested that it would launch a premium product that wasn't looking to undercut existing pay TV services. Stephenson argued that it can afford this lower price point because DirecTV Now doesn't require operator-owned set-top boxes, satellite dishes, and customer service home visits. AT&T is set to launch DirecTV Now next month. The service will include channels from cablers like A+E Networks and Scripps, as well as broadcasters like Fox and NBCUniversal.
if not it's worthless
No sir I dont like it.
Are they going to spy on their customers through this service as well?
it's a limited live streaming service, not a replacement for cable or satellite television... especially cable + homerun or tivo....
and one that violates the very essence of net neutrality with at&t zero-rating this service's data on its own internet plans.
this is exactly why internet providers should ONLY BE internet providers.. not content providers, telephone companies, cable or streaming or satellite tv companies, etc etc etc.
if we agree to let AT&T spy on us ?
I don't know what they are talking about. Every TV services I've ever been with has required me to rent/buy the dish/set top box. And I've never had to have home service visit. Even if I did have 1 or 2, then I would have paid for it 15 times over with the inflated rates my cable providers charge me.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Hell, what about the cap on my U-Verse data service? It's the only hard line available, in city limits, yet it's too slow to even support U-Verse TV.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
can i pick the 100 channels otherwise, off to the obsolescence graveyard with you.
No on-demand programming? Has commercials? If so, not interested.
Again, if not it's worthless. I'm tired of paying for stations and content that I would never in a million years want to watch. If one penny of my money goes to Bravo, for instance, there is no amount of value you could add elsewhere which would persuade me to help pay for their "reality"-TV drivel.
People in the UK, who are way further north, manage to get satellite TV with no problems.
[Citation Needed] Plenty of people have satellite TV in Alaska where the dishes are practically pointed at the ground...
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
This is just silliness. The trend is very much toward being able to pick and choose what shows we want to watch, when we want to watch them. Preferably commercial-free. (I pay don't even mind paying for commercial-free content, I already pay Hulu the extra $4/mo.)
The idea of 'channels', 'stations', 'broadcasters', and someone else picking out the programming we might be interested in going the way of the floppy drive. Telling someone like me you're offering 100 channels is nonsense and useless information. I'm more interested in what programming/content there will be to choose from, and if I can't choose, not going to subscribe, end of story.
Bad business choice on AT&T's part. Will never make money. Will definitely not lure 'cable cutters.' We're a whole new breed of content consumer, unlike the cable-television junkie of old.
The problem isn't how far north you are (British Columbia gets satellite TV just fine). The problem is your city is at sea level and surrounded by very high mountains to the south and east. Move to the top of Mt. Rainer and you'll get beautiful reception.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
Particularly in my case, I want a service that will offer MASN and MASN2. Without those I can't see 90% of Orioles games. I was hoping Playstation Vue was going to have them because they said they'd have local sports channels, but they don't have those two key channels so it's a bust. I keep hoping there going to add them, but so far no dice.
--- What?
As an aside, is it just barely possible that the TimeWarnerAT&T corporate name might be TWATT(tm)? Pleeeez?
I would rather not have net neutrality and be given the option of buying from my provider "a la carte" channel packages which do NOT count against my data usage. You just want unlimited data for downloading warez.
Just hope you never plan on using any content provider outside of your ISP's sphere of control, in that case. Cuz they will make competing services unusable on their networks without net neutrality. You do know that, right? Can't see that hole you're digging? Get the hell out of it then.
Your tech support call would go something this:
Me: I'm having trouble getting netflix to work.
Them: Sorry sir, it must be a problem with netflix, we can't help you. We can however sell you a new subscription to our guaranteed to work streaming service that's not as good as netflix, but it'll stream very good for you, because we're throttling netflix into the dirt so everyone uses our services instead! You could try another internet provider, oh, sorry, we're the only one in this area cuz we bought all our competitors.
Welcome to the world of no net neutrality.
Well, maybe look into a Business ISP? I think Uverse offers it.
I dunno where you live....but in the New Orleans area I've had the basic Cox Cable Business Internet set up, good speeds for $69/mo, even has a low level SLA and really good reliability.
No caps, I can run servers all I want, etc......look for this option in your area.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
you can get hbo on it's own now.
It's the only solution, in the song of Fire and Ice!
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Corrupt anti-competitive behavior is "more" functionality on what planet?
You use salt & pepper while licking those corporate boots, or do you take them black?
Hell, what about the cap on my U-Verse data service? It's the only hard line available, in city limits, yet it's too slow to even support U-Verse TV.
AT&T owns DirecTV and already said DirecTV Now viewing will be zero rated. Regarding the above AC post about Comcast cable cap, you just pay them extra for unlimited. It's going up to a $50 option, which stinks, but for me, $100 total (Comcast 90mb down, 15 up, unlimited bandwidth) isn't the worst deal. I subscribe to PS Vue for another $45, and I'm still paying less than I used to for "traditional TV", plus I don't have "traditional cable boxes" littering my house.
They need to lower their pricing again, $35 ain't low enough for the so-called quality of popular entertainment these days.
AT&T is slowly removing data caps...
I have GigaFiber and was just notified the cap is being removed, not that they ever enforced it anyway.
And you're paying a lot, I get gigabit up and down for $80 a month, no cap, from AT&T.
Over 100 channels of reruns, infomercials, and old Simpsons and South Park episodes! Over 100 channels of rehashed drivel and propaganda masquerading as news! A hundred channels of stupid people slapping each-other and cursing! A hundred channels of the same AP story described with the same talking points in the exact same phrasing by people hired by one of three media conglomerates! One. Hundred. Channels. If no one would buy it they would give it away for free. You are the product.
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
Well why the hell do you live there then?
I would rather not have net neutrality and be given the option of buying from my provider "a la carte" channel packages which do NOT count against my data usage. You just want unlimited data for downloading warez.
Just hope you never plan on using any content provider outside of your ISP's sphere of control, in that case. Cuz they will make competing services unusable on their networks without net neutrality. You do know that, right? Can't see that hole you're digging? Get the hell out of it then.
Your tech support call would go something this: Me: I'm having trouble getting netflix to work. Them: Sorry sir, it must be a problem with netflix, we can't help you. We can however sell you a new subscription to our guaranteed to work streaming service that's not as good as netflix, but it'll stream very good for you, because we're throttling netflix into the dirt so everyone uses our services instead! You could try another internet provider, oh, sorry, we're the only one in this area cuz we bought all our competitors.
Welcome to the world of no net neutrality.
That is what data caps are for. Or, you can pay an extra fee for unlimited data like I did. I pay 15 bucks extra for unlimited data at 25 (26) Mbits/s. That is fast enough for UHD Netflix.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
Corrupt anti-competitive behavior is "more" functionality on what planet?
You use salt & pepper while licking those corporate boots, or do you take them black?
If you want unlimited data then you should pay extra for it. Is that not fair?
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
> You just want unlimited data for downloading warez.
God, you're dumb.
Right, sorry, I mean torrents of movies and TV shows.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
Nope, the problem is that substandard U-Verse data is literally the only offering by anyone. I live too far from the node for better speed, and Charter only offers service to the other part of my neighborhood.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
Last time I used SlingTV on Dish, every "skip" button press took about 3 seconds to process. Each commercial break is about 10 "skips" (6 to 8 forward-30-seconds and 2 to 4 backward-10-seconds). On the local Dish DVR, each skip takes about a quarter second to process. (And slower skips make me less likely to go back to see a commercial I'm interested in!)
I subscribe to Sling TV to get ESPN (only during football season). That's $20 per month, and comes with about 25 channels that I never watch. If DirecTV came down to $20 a month, I might consider switching!
That is what data caps are for. Or, you can pay an extra fee for unlimited data like I did. I pay 15 bucks extra for unlimited data at 25 (26) Mbits/s. That is fast enough for UHD Netflix.
You can't vote with your wallet if there is no other provider in your area.
If your ISP can degrade competing services to theirs without compunction they will do so - either they get your additional streaming service subscription dollars or you go without high-speed internet.
IMO content and service providers should be separated as completely as possible.
That is what data caps are for. Or, you can pay an extra fee for unlimited data like I did. I pay 15 bucks extra for unlimited data at 25 (26) Mbits/s. That is fast enough for UHD Netflix.
It's people like you that really frighten me, cuz you have no idea how clueless you are. You just don't see the long view on net neutrality and its dangerous dude.
Right now it's just big guys testing the waters, offering 'free rides' on select services.
Later, they'll take away unlimited data, period. They'll promote their own services more heavily.
Later they'll start charging you for data on outside networks, outright. While continuing to promote their own services, which may or may not continue to be 'unlimited.'
And the show just gets worse. It's not a pretty road and I don't particularly want to see where to leads.
Too late for me. I am saying goodbye to AT&T's price gouging cell service. I have already booted directTV as well. I am tired of paying top dollar for shit.
Already am. I'm also paying for Netflix. I don't want my cable company f****** with Netflix packets until Netflix pays them a blackmail fee, which they naturally have to pass on to me, despite my paying the cable company a pretty penny to be my isp. This is net neutrality 101....any more dumb questions?