It's just a matter of time before everyone will be streaming video 

https://www.multichannel.com/.amp/blog/at-t-needs-to-kill-directv-to-save-it

Too many places in this country where there is not broadband Internet and the dreams of low earth orbit satellites have been around for a long time and still are dreams. 

I remember seeing an advertisement back in the 1900s that said don't give up your ice pick these refrigerators we'll never make it.

  On 6/16/2019 at 7:09 PM, Mark and Dale Bruss said:

Too many places in this country where there is not broadband Internet and the dreams of low earth orbit satellites have been around for a long time and still are dreams. 

Does this look like a "dream" to you?

"SpaceX has created a brand new website dedicated to its Starlink satellite constellation, a prelude to offering Internet service to consumers after as few as six launches."

"Additionally, Starlink.com reiterated CEO Elon Musk’s estimate that SpaceX will conduct 2-6 dedicated Starlink launches – carrying at least 60 satellites each – in 2019 alone. In other words, a best-case satellite deployment scenario could mean that SpaceX will be able to start offering Starlink service to consumers 'in the Northern U.S. and Canadian latitudes' as early as this year..."

SpaceX wants to offer Starlink internet to consumers after just six launches

  On 6/16/2019 at 7:51 PM, Dutch_12078 said:

Does this look like a "dream" to you?

"SpaceX has created a brand new website dedicated to its Starlink satellite constellation, a prelude to offering Internet service to consumers after as few as six launches."

In my opinion, until such time as there are sufficient satellites in space to cover all parts of the country and the price for the service is affordable, then, yes, it is still a dream. I'll hang on to my Dish and unlimited cell phone plan until then.

For the past couple of weeks we had a minor problem with our Winegard Trav'ler which resulted in us using YouTube TV as an alternative source.  It worked well and our Verizon and AT&T hotspots were easily able to keep up with its data needs.  However, now that we have the Trav'ler up and running again, I can honestly say that the User Interface (UI) with DirecTV is a lot simpler and more reliable than is the one on YouTube TV but it's not "bad" at all. 

Could we live with just streaming video?  Probably, but the final decision will depend on whether or not our cellular service at our TX home base is strong enough to support full-time streaming and whether or not DirecTV's Retention Department is willing to offer me a continuation of the discount I'm operating off of at present.  I'm willing to pay <$100 for DirecTV but would balk at paying any more than that.

One thing worth thinking about is that going to "streaming only" does provide some options for TV placement.  I've occasionally wanted an outdoor TV at our winter location but didn't have an easy way of getting the DirecTV signal to it and really didn't want to pay an additional fee for yet another receiver.  Using a streaming service that casts from my phone to the TV (or the Roku stick attached to it) means that the TV doesn't have to have a connection to anything other than AC power.  That opens up new possibilities.  With HDTVs now in the <$200 range, the cost of adding a TV is pretty trivial as long as you don't have to pay monthly fees to have it.  JMO

You should have seen the hype with Motorola's low earth world-wide cell phone service many years ago.  The only way it survived was the CIA writing a huge check.

True, low earth satellites will have lower latency than the geosynchronous satellites but that is assuming you will be transversing one satellite but is all probably you will bounce around a few between you and the website you want.

And streaming video uses about the double the number of bits compared the one-way satellite feed after packeting, and required reverse response.

Rural America might not have good internet service but this is exactly the region that DISH/DTV legacy satellite TV is losing money. There are simply too few subscribers to carry the infrastructure of satellite service. Cost would need to go up substantially to carry this region into the future. And as thousands of subscribers a month switch to streaming the cost gets spread over fewer and fewer subscribers.

The only solution is 600mz cellular (extreme long range performance from a cell tower) and low orbit satellite.....Period!

There is no other option.....

 
Quote

You should have seen the hype with Motorola's low earth world-wide cell phone service many years ago. 

You should have seen early automobiles....Terrible. Didn't even have roofs!?

We have a guy on the 'other board' who keeps posting this all the time.

  On 6/17/2019 at 1:37 AM, rbertalotto said:

Rural America might not have good internet service but this is exactly the region that DISH/DTV legacy satellite TV is losing money. There are simply too few subscribers to carry the infrastructure of satellite service.

I find this to be confusing. How can DISH/DTV be losing money in rural areas? What kind of infrastructure is needed for satellite TV aside from a dish on the house and the box inside to go with it.

The infrastructure constantly needs bucket trucks, ladders and installers. None needed with streaming services. Dishes constantly go out of alignment. This is even more of an issue with cable companies. Unsustainable at today's wages and lack of quality employees.

  On 6/17/2019 at 3:50 AM, rbertalotto said:

The infrastructure constantly needs bucket trucks, ladders and installers. None needed with streaming services. Dishes constantly go out of alignment. This is even more of an issue with cable companies. Unsustainable at today's wages and lack of quality employees.

I'm sorry but I am not buying this. Bucket trucks for a satellite dish? Not seeing it in a rural area, big city maybe. Ladders and installers? OK, but most installers in rural areas are contractors, not direct satellite provider employees. We had a cabin in the mountains, pretty darned remote, and never had to have a dish realigned in over 12 years. My current home has had a dish installed on it for over 10 years with no alignment needed, nor have I ever seen the need at one of my neighbors. I think your argument is thin at best unless you can provide some hard evidence to back it up.

Edited June 17 by Chalkie

"robertalloto":

You posted a similar thread (with spelling error, "goodby"): on March 21,

"GOODBY direct tv satellites.."

Ahhhh - OK, you've made your point! -  Now it's time to say:   "goodbye",  "GOOD BYE",  "GOODBY".....

or is it time for.....

"ADIOS direct tv satellite service" ??...?

.

Edited June 17 by Pappy Yokum

  On 6/17/2019 at 1:37 AM, rbertalotto said:

Rural America might not have good internet service but this is exactly the region that DISH/DTV legacy satellite TV is losing money. There are simply too few subscribers to carry the infrastructure of satellite service. Cost would need to go up substantially to carry this region into the future. And as thousands of subscribers a month switch to streaming the cost gets spread over fewer and fewer subscribers.

Dish and DTV are both currently profitable thanks to the satellite subscribers, and conversely, both of their streaming services are currently losing money. As streaming continues to gain subscribers and satellite TV loses them, that will reverse at some point, but that point is likely at least a few years away. The bulk of sat tv cost is the amount paid to program providers, and that cost goes down with each subscriber lost, but delivery costs remain the same. With streaming, the programming costs go up with each added subscriber as well as the costs for the content delivery network.