Apps Directv Now App

[vestaviascott]

What we really need is streaming locals that are available to everyone who has an internet connection.

Check ustvnow.com, they have something like this but it screams "on the edge of legality", so buyer beware.

The issue with all of the current OTA apps available for ATV4 is that they exist only inside their respective apps. Where we need this to move, in addition to your request to have a provider offering of the Big 4 local channels OTT, is for a single app that can integrate everything (netflix, TVE apps and locals).

We now have that app - aka Apple's "TV app".

However, the wizards in Apple's executive offices have not yet secured the agreements they need to fully utilize the app. Word is Apple's Eddy Cue has been the guy who has killed the deals by taking too hard a negotiating position that the networks could not agree to.

However, as they say, the winds are changing.

Imagine, at an upcoming Apple event in the very near future, Tim Cook will walk onto the stage and announce that Apple has reached an agreement with ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX to sell local live TV packages in every market of the country. At an aggressive price of say $10 a month, it would be a compelling buy.

These live TV apps would then be integrated into the TV app and your last channel/app will always be shown playing in the background of the TV app (rather than the static screen you see there now) provided it was an app that has live TV (like ABC, NBC, Fox, Watch ESPN, etc). Otherwise, it will appear as they do today.

Along with this, you would also be able to purchase, direct from Apple, a skinny bundle of the most popular networks for a low monthly price competitive with Vue and DTVNow.

And we would finally have our integrated streaming TV service offering local live TV nationwide. Apple is one player who has the most pieces of this puzzle already in place.

The beauty for Apple is they already have everything else in place that they need to roll this out. Unlike the other streaming services, they don't have to build out a live TV streaming service, they just aggregate all of the existing apps that already do this, and sell you a single sign-on license to access them.

 

[nburwell]

I'm unimpressed. I signed up for DTVnow cuz I wanted to replace my ATV3 with a 4 so why not see what DTVnow is all about.... I guess in the time we've been cord cutters we've learned a different way to watch TV. I no longer have the patience to scroll through a guide looking for something to watch. I much prefer to have it all available to stream at my whim. I watch local news OTA. Granted, I just signed up last night so I have until the end of March to change my mind.... But now I'm just going to stream a program via Hulu....

My fiancée and I did the same thing to get the ATV4 to put in our bedroom. While I'm still on the fence about the service, my fiancée absolutely loves it. Granted it still has some bugs it needs to squash. Over the holiday weekend, we experienced a lot of freezing and having to restart the app when we got the black screen of death.

We're paid up until March, so we have a couple more months. But they need to add a lot more VOD content. Otherwise, I'm happy keeping the Amazon, Hulu, Netflix, HBO, Starz combination we currently have.

 

[lsutigerfan1976]

Just an FYI anyone who was wondering when the intro off term ends, it seems next month.

 

[Rigby]

View attachment 680822

Just an FYI anyone who was wondering when the intro off term ends, it seems next month.

Thanks for the heads up!

Honestly though, when looking at the channel lineup, I don't see any channels in the "go big" package that I'm interested in that aren't also in the regular $35 package, so this promotion will not necessarily lock me into DTV Now. They will need to actually implement the promised improvements to keep me long term ...

 

[2010mini]

So I went with this service because T-Mobile will reimburse me the cost for 1 year. I went with the Go Big package and free Apple TV. I think PS Vue is the best of all 3 services... but hey.... free is free!

 

[beachmusic]

So I went with this service because T-Mobile will reimburse me the cost for 1 year. I went with the Go Big package and free Apple TV. I think PS Vue is the best of all 3 services... but hey.... free is free!

PS Vue is better for me. I went ahead and resubed to Vue. DTN just had to many pauses and when i click on menu it goes to all channels instead of favorites. I will be cancelling DTN March 1st.

 

[iDave]

I haven't watched linear TV for several years but signed up for three months with DirecTV Now just to see what it's all about. I'd forgotten how many commercials there are on TV. It's not DirecTV's fault but the immense number of commercials really ruins television; so I'll be cancelling after my three months. Otherwise, I haven't had much trouble with the service or the Apple TV app.

It's hard to believe there has to be one minute of commercials for every two minutes of content. It makes watching TV a real drag. But this is off-topic. Sorry.

 

[mic j]

I haven't watched linear TV for several years but signed up for three months with DirecTV Now just to see what it's all about. I'd forgotten how many commercials there are on TV. It's not DirecTV's fault but the immense number of commercials really ruins television; so I'll be cancelling after my three months. Otherwise, I haven't had much trouble with the service or the Apple TV app.

It's hard to believe there has to be one minute of commercials for every two minutes of content. It makes watching TV a real drag. But this is off-topic. Sorry.

I think that's why everyone is listing the lack of a cloud DVR as one of the major components missing from the system. I have U-Verse with a DVR and I time shift everything and never watch a commercial.

 

[normanfox]

Thanks for the heads up!

Honestly though, when looking at the channel lineup, I don't see any channels in the "go big" package that I'm interested in that aren't also in the regular $35 package, so this promotion will not necessarily lock me into DTV Now. They will need to actually implement the promised improvements to keep me long term ...

my thought was the same. Go Big package has nothing. Is this some kind of gimmick that tricks consumers into thinking that they got a good deal so that they won't cancel?
[doublepost=1483320390][/doublepost]

I haven't watched linear TV for several years but signed up for three months with DirecTV Now just to see what it's all about. I'd forgotten how many commercials there are on TV. It's not DirecTV's fault but the immense number of commercials really ruins television; so I'll be cancelling after my three months. Otherwise, I haven't had much trouble with the service or the Apple TV app.

It's hard to believe there has to be one minute of commercials for every two minutes of content. It makes watching TV a real drag. But this is off-topic. Sorry.

same here. I cut cord long ago due to amount of ads. now coming back, it is worse. before they only had small logo in the program/show in the corner. now logo surrounded by letters and banner running across bottom overlaid on the actual program/show.

content is disruptive and polluted with dirty paid ads and own network/channel ads. sometime I ask myself, "why am I paying $35 a month so that I can watch annoying ads?" what is wrong with this picture?

 

[2010mini]

my thought was the same. Go Big package has nothing. Is this some kind of gimmick that tricks consumers into thinking that they got a good deal so that they won't cancel?
[doublepost=1483320390][/doublepost]

same here. I cut cord long ago due to amount of ads. now coming back, it is worse. before they only had small logo in the program/show in the corner. now logo surrounded by letters and banner running across bottom overlaid on the actual program/show.

content is disruptive and polluted with dirty paid ads and own network/channel ads. sometime I ask myself, "why am I paying $35 a month so that I can watch annoying ads?" what is wrong with this picture?

I understand you don't like ads. But making content you desire costs a lot of money. And it is a huge undertaking... location scouting, equipment rental, hiring of companies to fulfill menial but necessary duties... and on and on. If you ever get a chance, you should stop and watch just how much work goes into making just one scene that most times lasts a few minutes of an entire show/movie. So no ads..... less content. And way less QUALITY content.

 

[Rigby]

my thought was the same. Go Big package has nothing. Is this some kind of gimmick that tricks consumers into thinking that they got a good deal so that they won't cancel?

It's probably not so much to keep them from canceling, but to create some urgency for new subscribers to sign up ("subscribe now now now while you can still get in"). Oldest marketing trick in the book. Besides, while you and I may have no use for the additional channels in the "go big" package, for others it might be different.

As long as you can freely cancel at any time, I don't see anything nefarious going on and still think DTVN is a good offer compared to the crappy methods the cable companies are using.
[doublepost=1483368928][/doublepost]

So no ads..... less content. And way less QUALITY content.

Options like the commercial-free Hulu tier show that there is another way, at least for recorded content. Of course this model cannot be readily applied to live content such as sports, news etc., since the commercial breaks are baked into the broadcast.

Generally, I agree with the previous poster. DTVNow just reminded me of how crappy the ads on live TV are. Even for shows where VOD or replay work, I don't use it but rather wait until the show becomes available on Hulu or Netflix where I can watch it without the constant interruptions. I'm also happy to pay for iTunes season passes for shows I really like.

 

[2010mini]

It's probably not so much to keep them from canceling, but to create some urgency for new subscribers to sign up ("subscribe now now now while you can still get in"). Oldest marketing trick in the book. Besides, while you and I may have no use for the additional channels in the "go big" package, for others it might be different.

As long as you can freely cancel at any time, I don't see anything nefarious going on and still think DTVN is a good offer compared to the crappy methods the cable companies are using.
[doublepost=1483368928][/doublepost]Options like the commercial-free Hulu tier show that there is another way, at least for recorded content. Of course this model cannot be readily applied to live content such as sports, news etc., since the commercial breaks are baked into the broadcast.

Generally, I agree with the previous poster. DTVNow just reminded me of how crappy the ads on live TV are. Even for shows where VOD or replay work, I don't use it but rather wait until the show becomes available on Hulu or Netflix where I can watch it without the constant interruptions. I'm also happy to pay for iTunes season passes for shows I really like.

Commercial free Hulu/Netflix/Amazon is not the same. You are paying to remove the ads for previously broadcast content.
Same as you would if you bought a digital copy or DVD. But to have live broadcast without the ads, would cost more.

 

[d21mike]

I understand you don't like ads. But making content you desire costs a lot of money. And it is a huge undertaking... location scouting, equipment rental, hiring of companies to fulfill menial but necessary duties... and on and on. If you ever get a chance, you should stop and watch just how much work goes into making just one scene that most times lasts a few minutes of an entire show/movie. So no ads..... less content. And way less QUALITY content.

Netflix, HBO, Showtime, Hulu (no commercial tier), CBS All Access (no commercial tier) are just some of the networks that would say your comments are outdated. The CW decided to leave Hulu with a FREE Ad Supported only tier and sell to Netflix which will air immediately after the show ends. They lost me as a weekly viewer until they hit Netflix. But I would have paid a fair price for a no commercial tier. I have all of the No Commercial Options above and use a DVR for a few shows to skip commercials (but no my viewing choice). I will not watch shows with commercials except for LIVE News and the Super Bowl. My opinion is the Networks should give in to this trend and simply offer BOTH a commercial supported tier and a no commercial tier. Everyone is happy and "they" then will have more money for a lot of quality content.
[doublepost=1483376888][/doublepost]

Commercial free Hulu/Netflix/Amazon is not the same. You are paying to remove the ads for previously broadcast content.
Same as you would if you bought a digital copy or DVD. But to have live broadcast without the ads, would cost more.

No one is asking for FREE High Quality TV. But some like me feel that Ads take away from the enjoyment so much that we will just not watch the show because of it. Most will use a DVR to simply DELAY starting a show and will FF thru commercials. Wouldn't it be better to simply offer the No Commercial Tier like CBS All Access and Hulu?

 

[Rigby]

Commercial free Hulu/Netflix/Amazon is not the same. You are paying to remove the ads for previously broadcast content.

Exactly. Your statement sounded like financing content is impossible without ads. I think these popular services (as well as companies like HBO) prove the contrary. A certain percentage of people are willing to pay reasonable prices for ad-free content. Hulu was (to my knowledge) the first service to give people the option to either sit through ads or pay a bit more to get rid of them. All modern content distribution services should offer this choice IMO, including the VOD parts of offerings like DTVN, Sling or even Comcast.

 

[d21mike]

Exactly. Your statement sounded like financing content is impossible without ads. I think these popular services (as well as companies like HBO) prove the contrary. A certain percentage of people are willing to pay reasonable prices for ad-free content. Hulu was (to my knowledge) the first service to give people the option to either sit through ads or pay a bit more to get rid of them. All modern content distribution services should offer this choice IMO, including the VOD parts of offerings like DTVN, Sling or even Comcast.

Exactly.

 

[2010mini]

Exactly. Your statement sounded like financing content is impossible without ads. I think these popular services (as well as companies like HBO) prove the contrary. A certain percentage of people are willing to pay reasonable prices for ad-free content. Hulu was (to my knowledge) the first service to give people the option to either sit through ads or pay a bit more to get rid of them. All modern content distribution services should offer this choice IMO, including the VOD parts of offerings like DTVN, Sling or even Comcast.

The difference between pay tv providers and VOD providers like Hulu is how content is sold to them. Hulu and others like them negotiate for libraries of content. So that's either individual shows or an entire studio's collection. Pay tv providers though get sold bundles of channels. They really have little to no control in what those individual channels offer. Sometimes they are even locked out of content on individual channels. Or an entire channel due to rights. Pay TV providers make a lot of their money from getting you to bundle services and renting you equipment and other services. They also negotiate with Networks on how high/low in their guide the channel will fall. Too high and you risk lower viewership which = less ad dollars for that network.

Wanting pay tv providers to model VOD services would mean an entire change in the current lucrative model. Unless you can guarantee your model will make more money for all involved...... it will remain a pipe dream.

 

[Rigby]

The difference between pay tv providers and VOD providers like Hulu is how content is sold to them. Hulu and others like them negotiate for libraries of content. So that's either individual shows or an entire studio's collection. Pay tv providers though get sold bundles of channels.

Or they produce their own content like all the major pay TV providers today. And, amazingly, they manage to finance it without bombarding their customers with ads.

They really have little to no control in what those individual channels offer. Sometimes they are even locked out of content on individual channels. Or an entire channel due to rights. Pay TV providers make a lot of their money from getting you to bundle services and renting you equipment and other services. They also negotiate with Networks on how high/low in their guide the channel will fall. Too high and you risk lower viewership which = less ad dollars for that network.

Wanting pay tv providers to model VOD services would mean an entire change in the current lucrative model. Unless you can guarantee your model will make more money for all involved...... it will remain a pipe dream.

I don't really give a damn about these outdated business models. The TV providers have to adapt (and some, like HBO, are already doing that with offerings such as HBO Now). The bottom line is that ads generate a few dollars per month per viewer. The providers should offer the choice to pay that directly instead and spare us the crappy commercials.

 

[normanfox]

I understand you don't like ads. But making content you desire costs a lot of money. And it is a huge undertaking... location scouting, equipment rental, hiring of companies to fulfill menial but necessary duties... and on and on. If you ever get a chance, you should stop and watch just how much work goes into making just one scene that most times lasts a few minutes of an entire show/movie. So no ads..... less content. And way less QUALITY content.

fair enough... then enlighten me on how Netflix can charge much less and has no ads?

 

[2010mini]

fair enough... then enlighten me on how Netflix can charge much less and has no ads?

Netflix is running a very thin profit margin.

 

[normanfox]

Netflix is running a very thin profit margin.

so as a consumer, I should care for AT&T fat profit margin? by having them shove ads down my throats?

this is the beginning of the end of network business model with fat profit margin. AT&T will have to compete with many competitors, and more coming, since now internet is the delivery platform.

 

[2010mini]

so as a consumer, I should care for AT&T fat profit margin? by having them shove ads down my throats?

If you want quality content from Networks and studios, then it will cost you in ads or money. Since a lot of us believe content should be given to us for pennies, you will continue to get ads.

Or if you can convince the consumers of this market to pay $20-$30 or more per channel for content......Then you will get a la carte you desire.

 

[normanfox]

If you want quality content from Networks and studios, then it will cost you in ads or money. Since a lot of us believe content should be given to us for pennies, you will continue to get ads.

Or if you can convince the consumers of this market to pay $20-$30 or more per channel for content......Then you will get a la carte you desire.

AT&T $35 vs Netflix $11. $35 is not penny comparing to Netflix $11.

you keep coming back to QUALITY content. I would keep using Netflix as my example. Netflix offers QUALITY content for MUCH less and more:
1) 4K content
2) watch when you want and what you want. DVR is history
3) stream 4 devices

 

[d21mike]

If you want quality content from Networks and studios, then it will cost you in ads or money. Since a lot of us believe content should be given to us for pennies, you will continue to get ads.

Or if you can convince the consumers of this market to pay $20-$30 or more per channel for content......Then you will get a la carte you desire.

Where do you get these numbers? Have you looked at CBS All Access (with no commercials). They seem to be doing well and one of the major networks. And, NBC, ABC ad FOX are on Hulu (with no commercials). Take a look at that. They would be the most expensive.

Of course you will have to pay more for NO Commercials. We are just saying that a number of networks are offering it NOW. This is not some pipe dream. Of course the others like Netflix (with more and more original content) and HBO with original content.

 

[normanfox]

If you want quality content from Networks and studios, then it will cost you in ads or money. Since a lot of us believe content should be given to us for pennies, you will continue to get ads.

Or if you can convince the consumers of this market to pay $20-$30 or more per channel for content......Then you will get a la carte you desire.

you are still living in the 80's and 90's business model when telecom and cables monopolized using their pipe.

with today internet, competition is opened up to everyone on the same level playing field. AT&T will face alot of competition from big player like Netflix to small player like Sling and more coming, possible Apple. plus consumers have many other entertainments today beside watching TV.

the day of 100's of mostly useless channels mixing with tortured ads is over. As a consumer, I don't want to pay so that I can watch ads. that picture is so wrong.
[doublepost=1483459541][/doublepost]the idea of 100's channel with content playing with a fixed schedule is so 80's and old.

some channels like live sport and news make sense to play at fixed time slots but 90% content is recorded. it makes no sense to play this recorded content on a fixed schedule.

if it is a recorded content, consumers should be able to choose what and when to watch. it is pointless to play this content through a "channel" streaming all day at fixed time slot. it is so wrong. DVR exists to fix this "problem" and ads.

without channels and ads, there is no need for DVR. why do you need DVR on Netflix?

 

[Rigby]

If you want quality content from Networks and studios, then it will cost you in ads or money. Since a lot of us believe content should be given to us for pennies, you will continue to get ads.

This made sense when there was only broadcast, i.e. everybody had to use the same video stream. But with IP-based on-demand delivery, every customer now receives their own individual stream which can be personalized. One customer can watch with commercials and save a few pennies, another can choose a "premium" ad-free version. The popularity of DVRs proves that there is a significant market. I believe providers that do not offer an ad-free option will suffer.

And since you seem to like the advertising industry so much: They also get some interesting opportunities out of it: They can insert targeted ads into the individual customer's stream, which are much more effective than today's bland "spray and pray" TV commercials. Ad insertion is already part of all major IP-based distribution platforms. Just give people options, and everyone will be happy.
[doublepost=1483462002][/doublepost]

so as a consumer, I should care for AT&T fat profit margin? by having them shove ads down my throats?

To be fair, AT&T are not the ones cashing in a fat profit margin on DTVNow. On the contrary, they are currently probably losing money on the service.