Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AT&T Will Offer a Lower-Quality Video Option But Without a Discount (fortune.com)

Posted by msmash on from the dvd-quality-in-2016 dept.

After T-Mobile and Sprint introduced lower-cost wireless plans in return for customers accepting lower quality video streaming, AT&T is following suit. An anonymous reader shares a Fortune report:The second-largest wireless carrier said it would introduce a feature starting next year called "Stream Saver" to let customers voluntarily downgrade streaming video from any service -- including YouTube and Netflix -- to DVD quality. But AT&T will not lower prices or give a discount to customers activating the lower-quality stream, which would use much less data than watching a typical high-definition video stream. The data used will also still count against a customer's monthly data allowance. AT&T emphasized that the optional feature was intended to help customers use less data, essentially stretching their monthly allowance to go further. "Stream saver lets them enjoy more of what they love," David Christopher, chief marketing officer in AT&T's entertainment group, said in a statement. "And, they are in control -- it's their choice on how to use this innovative feature."

48 comments

  1. I'd just set it to DVD all the time then. by kalpol · · Score: 1

    Watching Netflix on a phone - maybe my eyes aren't good but I can't tell much of a difference between DVD quality and 1080p or whatever anyway. DVD is juuust fine. But can't you downgrade that quality on Netflix settings anyway?

    --
    12:50 - press return.
  2. Wat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't you already manually lower the quality of nearly every streaming services out there, to 480p or lower? What's the point of this trash?

    1. Re:Wat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I can only guess that maybe it's a global setting, so you don't have to remember or worry about what quality a video is playing at when you're watching on your phone. Still, doesn't seem like much of a big deal.

    2. Re: Wat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      totally funny how they used the word inovative like its game changing or something. still not a bad feature and like others said on a small screen it videos do not need to be super high res. it might matter if you have a 6-7 inch phone or pad with data.

    3. Re: Wat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll argue you don't need a super high res either on some bigger screens : CRT, 1280x1024 LCD, some laptops.
      I wonder if the feature works if you're using a small laptop with 4G/LTE modem.

    4. Re:Wat? by hawguy · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I can only guess that maybe it's a global setting, so you don't have to remember or worry about what quality a video is playing at when you're watching on your phone. Still, doesn't seem like much of a big deal.

      The Netflix app (at least on Android) has settings in the Mobile app:

      • Wifi only
      • Low (4 hours/GB)
      • Medium (2 hours/GB)
      • High (1 hour/GB)
      • Unlmited (not recommended without unlimited data plan)
    5. Re:Wat? by bondsbw · · Score: 1

      A global setting could also help mom/dad keep kids from going over the data cap.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    6. Re: Wat? by tattood · · Score: 0

      Who watches video on their phone when they are not at home? Usually if I am not at home, I'm working or driving, or at a store where I can't watch video anyway.

      If I'm at home, I'm on my home wireless, so no data used there. If I'm at home, I might as well watch it on the big TV.

      --
      WTB [sig], PST!!!
  3. Big "win" for crappy-service areas by davidwr · · Score: 2

    When I'm in an area with low-bandwidth, I'd rather have lower-resolution with smooth video than high-resolution choppy video.

    Ditto if I'm in an area with high-speed-but-crappy/dropout-prone service, as I can buffer enough to not notice if I'm watching at low-resolution.

    I put "win" in quotes because while this seems like a win for the customer, it's really a way for AT&T to not have to spend money as fast improving their network. So it's a real win for them and a "win" for customers.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  4. I don't know how innovative it is if you're late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Regardless, I tend to use one of those third-party apps that let you access youtube. I keep the one I use for three reasons: 1) no pre-roll ads, 2) pulls my subscriptions, and 3) I can tell it to stream at 360 when I'm on wireless.

  5. Innovative by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Informative

    You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re: Innovative by davidwr · · Score: 1

      From The Marketer's Dictionary and Book of Phrases:

      Innovative: Adj., used to describe a thing worth reading about.

      Worth reading about: see: worth buying

      Worth buying: something marketed to gullible people with money

      Translation from maketspeak:

      Innovative: something marketed to gullible people with money.

      --
      Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    2. Re:Innovative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Innovation can refer to "the introduction of something new".

      The feature may be trivial or not new at all, but if it wasn't readily available before, or if it's way more widely and easily available it's a bit innovative.
      It purportedly works on all or almost all video, and all devices. Some are saying they can set their youtube or netflix and so they don't see the need, but I find that funny. The web isn't meant to be that centralized, there's also news site video, TV channel site video, Vimeo, others, porn, ads and illegal streaming.
      If you also set the rate manually everytime, it's a chore and you'll buffer megs of useless 720p video before you've scrambled to click in the right places. (Or you won't able to with e.g. ads)

      The one thing wrong if if AT&T intercepts your video (but somehow, an ISP knows everything you've done anyway). Let's say it becomes a new standard instead where the browser itself requests a max of 360p or 480p, then that'll be another small data point to track. But, what a waste it is to download a higher bitrate when it hurts you or you don't give a crap.

    3. Re:Innovative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You keep using that word, "Jabroni", and it's awesome!

  6. Why would AT&T offer a discount? by JoeyRox · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not sure why the mention of no discount is even relevant. You're still using AT&T's data, at the same rate you agreed to in your contract. You'd just be using less of it while watching video, meaning you'd have more data available for other usage.

    1. Re:Why would AT&T offer a discount? by Guybrush_T · · Score: 1

      That fact that you use less data is some kind of discount : you don't have to pay for extra data usage for the rest of your needs.

    2. Re:Why would AT&T offer a discount? by MightyYar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Agreed - it seems like an unfair criticism of a useful feature.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    3. Re:Why would AT&T offer a discount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the point is they aren't offering enough bandwidth in the first place, in relation to speeds they advertise. This tactic is just obfuscating the fact that their service isn't really good enough for normal usage.

    4. Re:Why would AT&T offer a discount? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Because the other cellphone companies that provide similar features do provide a discount. T-Mobile's "Binge-On" is free, for example, as long as it's streaming from content providers who've agreed to stream the way T-Mobile wants them to.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    5. Re:Why would AT&T offer a discount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure why the mention of no discount is even relevant. You're still using AT&T's data, at the same rate you agreed to in your contract. You'd just be using less of it while watching video, meaning you'd have more data available for other usage.

      It's going to be the default. You'll need to change it to get HD video. More than few people may go over on data but most don't. Fewer still will know how to change the defaults. Translate that to a net gain for AT&T, a net lost for average users and all with no reduction in price. Does it seem relevant now?

    6. Re:Why would AT&T offer a discount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Incentivising people to use less data *in a world where data is growing exponentially* is only beneficial to the service provider, and their need to not upgrade the entire infrastructure yet.

      This isn't for the customer. This is a workaround to solving the issue: People need more bandwidth today than they did 10 years ago.

  7. I'd want it on residential internet too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Much often I have a video (auto) playing at 720p and it's a waste of CPU and bandwith.
    I wouldn't care on a phone/tablet actually, but on desktop I'm a luddite with software decoding of video on linux and I'm not buying the latest graphics card (with no low end version!) to try out the "VDPAU" feature or flavor of the day.

    It is a small issue, otherwise.
    Also, most often it's talking heads video, and the sound is important. Often the sound is badly encoded or it's amateur microphone intake and/or mixing, so please video producers / publishers consider it, it's more important than 720p or 1080p wrinkles. You can point and shoot with a random camera and get broadcast TV quality but audio seems harder.

    1. Re:I'd want it on residential internet too by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      On the desktop, you can use the free "Spotify" application or web interface. You can also simply download the tracks, legally or otherwise. I'm not sure there's a problem that needs to be solved here. Many of those YouTube videos have no real video data anyway - they are either a static picture or a bit of text for lyrics and compress to almost nothing.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    2. Re:I'd want it on residential internet too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was referring more to political, news comment etc. videos for instance. There's some value in seeing the people talk.
      If the video is more unimportant, it's not a big deal if the CPU lags and the video is slow. Yes you can use youtube-dl -x to dump youtube audio for instance, or dump the whole video + audio if you like a perfectly smooth running copy where you can seek at will in your VLC or player of choice.

  8. Stop The Presses... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stop The Presses! AT&T invents user controlled self throttling of application network usage. Cue the Nobel.

  9. T-Mobile by Frederic54 · · Score: 1

    AFAIK 480p quality is "free" on T-Mobile data network, meaning it does not count on your data, same for music.

    --
    "Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
    1. Re:T-Mobile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      480p music?

    2. Re:T-Mobile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, don't you get all your music from youtube, like everybody else?

  10. As far as AT&T is concerned ... by PPH · · Score: 2

    ... it's raw data. If I want to reduce the resolution, I'll do so via my client settings. AT&T has no business inspecting those packets.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:As far as AT&T is concerned ... by srg33 · · Score: 1

      It seems to be voluntary. Do you use a separate client for each and every video streaming service?
      When I'm using my phone for streaming, it is usually in browser.

    2. Re:As far as AT&T is concerned ... by PPH · · Score: 1

      When I'm using my phone for streaming, it is usually in browser.

      Also none of AT&T's business. I'll use whatever browser I feel like. The video quality negotiations happens between that client and the content server. The result is I use some bandwidth. Whatever that ends up being, charge me for it.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  11. As an AT&T shareholder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I approve of this revenue neutral policy change. Indeed, it should help lower costs and improve the dividend payout.

  12. Doomed to fail? by Dishwasha · · Score: 1

    I'm still stung by AT&T dropping support for Picturephone

  13. Is it a convenience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... activating the lower-quality stream ...

    Youtube already has a means for choosing a low-quality stream if one has a low-resolution or low data-cap device. I notice the 'DVD' option is disappearing from Netflix but if it's so popular, Netflix should continue to offer it. Is ISP-enforced streaming quality such a convenience?

    If one can't afford the data charges from downloading a movie, maybe downloading movies is a dumb idea. On my data plan, I 'pay' for 12 monthly allotments of data per year but really get 15. If I want to download more data than usual I can use a second (or third) allotment of data in one month.

  14. Just don't have monthly limits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If so many users have a problem adhering to monthly limits, maybe these limits are the problem. No real reason to have them anyway.

  15. Less for More! by pubwvj · · Score: 1

    I farm. I raise pigs on pasture and sell the pork to our customers weekly. As a special feature starting in 2017 to help you reduce your calorie consumption I will be selling you 2 oz when you buy 1 pound of meat. The 2 oz of meat will be packaged with 14 oz of water. This way you can enjoy eating three pounds a day and still stay within your caloric budget.

    Wait a minute. If I did that I would be arrested, quite rightfully, and thrown in jail for cheating my customers. What AT&T is offering is just as absurd.

    1. Re:Less for More! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apples and oranges...

    2. Re:Less for More! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not really since att is watering down the data

    3. Re:Less for More! by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Nonsense - AT&T is renting you bandwidth by the second (marketed as selling you data access by the MB), and nothing about this is changing anything about the amount of total amount of data you can download for your money.

      All they're doing is offering an extra feature that gives you the option of automatically using lower quality video streams so that you you're consuming that data more slowly when watching video on a tiny screen where you'll probably barely notice the quality difference anyway.

      Now, if it's true this is going to be the default behavior... that could be a bit annoying if there's no obvious way to disable it. But for the vast majority who rarely even look at even the most obvious settings it's probably a net win.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    4. Re:Less for More! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait a minute. If I did that I would be arrested, quite rightfully, and thrown in jail for cheating my customers. What AT&T is offering is just as absurd.

      You clearly haven't been to Walmart recently. Much of their fresh meat is diluted with water to the maximum legal limit. I tried to pan fry some chicken and all it did was boil. You can't brown it. Sure you exaggerated the ratio, but yes, it is legal to do.

  16. For fucks sake. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Optional feature now, content filter later.

  17. Memba when lack of quality control was an argument by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    against pirating?

  18. TLS by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    How can they degrade a Youtube video flowing through a TLS session?

    1. Re:TLS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure on legality, even if you were to waiver in their eula, but they could easily act as a "completely" transparent ssl proxy to man in the middle your connections.
      It is possible to use a vpn to secure your connection better, but even that might be mitm'd if not done correctly.

    2. Re:TLS by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Youtube normally offers lots of degraded options built in, seems like it shouldn't be terribly difficult to modify which one is requested. Might require going through a proxy though.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    3. Re:TLS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They just have to throttle the traffic coming from the Youtube servers. Then Youtube will automatically adapt and stream a lower resolution version. No SSL hacking required.