1. Welcome to The Audio Annex! If you have any trouble logging in or signing up, please contact 'admin - at - theaudioannex.com'. Enjoy!
    Dismiss Notice
  2. HTTPS (secure web browser connection) has been enabled - just add "https://" to the start of the URL in your address bar, e.g. "https://theaudioannex.com/forum/"
    Dismiss Notice

AT&T/DirecTV- the coming end of the satellite side of things

Discussion in 'Television Providers' started by Akula, Dec 3, 2018.

  1. Akula

    Akula Well-Known Member

    The AT&T head honcho has said they won't be launching any more satellites for the DirecTV service- the existing setup will continue for now, but they plan to transition to a pure streaming service over time.

    http://relatednews.net/75409/att-just-declared-the-end-of-the-satellite-tv-era-in-the-us-quartz/

    My analysis: This is an understandable move for them- satellites and orbital launches to GEO are rather expensive. Most US homes are watching via streaming services now anyway. However, for a lot of consumers this is not really a good thing. I personally like satellite TV because our local cable company is missing some important features on the TV side (no whole home DVR for some reason). Also, if our home internet goes out (say, a major failure on the cable trunk) we can still watch TV at least. This will bring that to an end. Furthermore, extremely rural locations can ONLY depend on satellite services for such things- telcos have shown zero interest in trying to cover rural areas with high speed internet or even regular cable TV. Yes, last mile service is expensive, but this is going to leave exactly ONE satellite provider (assuming Dish doesn't fold or reinvent themselves too) to choose from.

    I hadn't planned to cut the TV cord, but it looks like it's going to be cut for us, like it or not.
     
  2. Towen7

    Towen7 Well-Known Member Staff Member Moderator

    There is a LOT of unused satellite capacity. Not launching any new ones doesnt mean that the service shuts down any time soon.
     
  3. Akula

    Akula Well-Known Member

    I hope so... I can't imagine there's a timetable of a year or even three on this.
     
  4. Huey

    Huey Well-Known Member Famous

    I truly don't know how the internet works, or at least distributed, but don't they use satellite's for that as well?
     
  5. Flint

    Flint "Do you know who I am?" Superstar

    No, the latency is far too high to put the internet on satellite. The only time the internet is put on satellite is for the last mile for very remote locations who cannot get fiber. And even then it kinda sucks.
     
  6. Huey

    Huey Well-Known Member Famous

    Gotcha. For some reason I thought at least parts of the internet were handled by satelites.
     
  7. Flint

    Flint "Do you know who I am?" Superstar

    No, not really. Take a look at this map of all the submarine fiber cables crossing our oceans:
    [​IMG]
    That's not even a current map, there have been a few dozen massive new fiber bundles dropped across our oceans since then.

    Satellite is inconsistent, is more regulated by international governments, is stunningly expensive, almost impossible to repair, and limited in bandwidth. If I have almost the entire microwave spectrum already being used for a downlink in, say, Bethesda, Maryland, I cannot add more signal - the available bandwidth is used up. With fiber I can just run a few more fibers into the building.
     
    Huey likes this.

Share This Page