Slashdot Mirror


It's the Beginning of the End of Satellite TV in the US (qz.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: "We've launched our last satellite," John Donovan, CEO of AT&T Communications, said in a meeting with analysts on Nov. 29. The AT&T executive effectively declared the end of the satellite-TV era with that statement. AT&T owns DirecTV, the US's largest satellite company -- and second largest TV provider overall, behind Comcast. DirecTV will continue offering satellite-TV service -- it had nearly 20 million satellite video subscribers as of September, per company filings. But the company will focus on growing its online video business instead, Donovan said.

It has a new set-top box, where people can get the same TV service they'd get with satellite, through an internet-connected box they can install themselves. It expects that box to become a greater share of its new premium-TV service installations in the first half of 2019. It also sells cheaper, TV packages with fewer channels through its DirecTV Now and WatchTV streaming services, which work with many smart TVs and streaming media players like Roku and Amazon Fire TV devices. The practice of getting TV through satellite dishes propped up in backyards and perched on rooftops first took hold in the US in the last 1970s and early 1980s, after TV networks like HBO and Turner Broadcasting System started sending TV signals to cable providers via satellites. People in areas without cable or broadcast TV began putting up their own dishes to receive the TV signals, and that grew into a TV business of its own.

7 of 254 comments (clear)

  1. We're fucked by DewDude · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yup. With the ISP's effectively winning the war to do whatever they want...you'll soon be forced to subscribe to TV from your monopoly or suffer consequences.

    I really miss when there were consumer protection laws and things in place to prevent bullshit like this from happening. I'd rather pay taxes than pay unregulated extortion rates to a private corporation.

    1. Re:We're fucked by omnichad · · Score: 4, Informative

      What makes you think it's a signal issue? If you're surrounded by people whose only broadband is cellular and a rural tower is covering dozens of square miles, your share may not be much.

  2. Re:Satellite/cell Internet will replace that as we by KixWooder · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Traditional TV requires a tuner and an antenna and const nothing other than the equipment.

    I used to have satellite tv. Now I have an antenna, Netflix and Prime. I'm thinking about dropping the streaming services as I've more or less stoped using them. It will cost nothing to keep my antenna on the roof.

    --
    I hate fat people.
  3. Satellite Internet caps by tepples · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Rural users tend to have satellite TV in part because no cable or fiber-to-the-home provider serves their address. Streaming video over satellite Internet at $5 per GB is unlikely to prove economic as a substitute.

  4. Re: To me, AT&T seems out of control. by DaHat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sounds great... if you have a wide enough pipe with which to receive.

  5. Re:Satellite/cell Internet will replace that as we by omnichad · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Pair it with a DVR if you want something other than soaps in the daytime. Broadcast TV still has some good stuff in the primetime hours.

  6. Stream SD over DSL by tepples · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Single digit megabits per second is all you need for standard-definition video streaming, so long as the monthly cap isn't also oppressive. A decade and a half ago, the warez scene was using DivX (MPEG-4 Part 2 + MP3 in AVI) to transcode a 97-minute movie to fill one 700 MB CD at an average rate of 1 Mbps. Nowadays, WebM (VP9 + Opus in MKV) achieves comparable picture quality at an even lower rate.

    On the other hand, you probably won't see acceptable streaming performance with 768 kbps DSL, or 1.5 Mbps DSL with multiple TVs.