Neyland
join:2003-02-04
USA
| reply to MarkyD
Re: Pair Bonding WHEN?
I don't get what all the hoopla is about. ATT is just now being able to get two HD feeds into a home which still puts them behind other offerings.
We're entering an age where in the next three years a whole lot of stuff is going to be moved into the HD area. Even with Pair Bonding they're still going to be bandwidth starved.
People are simply going to expect to be able to do as much with their HD channels as their SD channels. This means multiple TVs watching different channels while maybe a DVR is recording; Mom is uploading 100 pictures to Wally and talking to Aunt Sue on the phone.
I just don't get them... |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
 ·North State Commun..
| said by Neyland  :I don't get what all the hoopla is about. ATT is just now being able to get two HD feeds into a home which still puts them behind other offerings. We're entering an age where in the next three years a whole lot of stuff is going to be moved into the HD area. Even with Pair Bonding they're still going to be bandwidth starved. People are simply going to expect to be able to do as much with their HD channels as their SD channels. This means multiple TVs watching different channels while maybe a DVR is recording; Mom is uploading 100 pictures to Wally and talking to Aunt Sue on the phone. I just don't get them... Pair bonding will get them to 50Mbps. You can do a LOT with 50Mbps right now. 50Mbps should be enough for the next 5 years as well. If they can squeeze 2 HD streams, 2 SD streams and 10Mbps of internet into 25Mbps, 50Mbps will give them breathing room.
Although that means their internet product will likely not be competitive with cable. Not as if it currently is anyway. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | Ah you stepped in it. You said "50Mbps should be enough for the next 5 years as well" whe you should have added the caveat, "for most cosumers" otherwise you'll be tor limb from limb by a lot of people here. |
|
cornelius785
join:2006-10-26
Worcester, MA
| reply to Neyland
is 2 simultaneous HD feeds all that bad when it'll satisfy the vast majority of people out there? most people either have one tuner or 2 tuners (2 TVs or 1 tuner for live TV and the other to record). don't start with that some people have 7 TVs all with 4 tuner DVRs BS. Also not every channel is in HD, so until the typical consumer is actually hindered by 2 HD feed and 2 SD feeds, I'd say they are on par. |
|
rahlquist
Redeye
join:2001-10-30
Villa Rica, GA
| said by cornelius785 :is 2 simultaneous HD feeds all that bad when it'll satisfy the vast majority of people out there? I guess I am in the minority then with 3 DVRs all 2 channel capable in the house. So I guess Uverse just isnt a place for me. I can record 6 shows at once 2 of them HD and still currently surf at 6mbps, Uverse cant compete with that.
--
Fed Up With Stupidity?
Patentlystupid.com |
|
barqsdrinker
What Can I Photograph Today?
Premium
join:2001-02-26
Apo, AE
clubs:
1 edit | reply to cornelius785
said by cornelius785 :is 2 simultaneous HD feeds all that bad when it'll satisfy the vast majority of people out there? Count me in as a minority, too, then. I've got two HD DVR units - each capable of recording two HD streams for a total of 4 - plus a non-recording HD tuner. If every tuner was on HD - which occurs more often because the picture quality is so much better than SD - then U-Verse can't hold up and AT&T's service isn't for me. For now, I'll stick with the DBS for my television viewing pleasure.
Now, if they want to give me all that BW for data, I'd be almost all for that!
(edit: typo) |
|
Squeezing
@tds.net
| reply to Matt
said by Matt :said by Neyland :I just don't get them... Pair bonding will get them to 50Mbps. You can do a LOT with 50Mbps right now. 50Mbps should be enough for the next 5 years as well. If they can squeeze 2 HD streams, 2 SD streams and 10Mbps of internet into 25Mbps, 50Mbps will give them breathing room. Although that means their internet product will likely not be competitive with cable. Not as if it currently is anyway. The problem for me is that the HD streams better NOT be compressed like Comcrap. As I've said here before, I had DirecTV HD and then moved and now have Comcrap. The HD is soft and overly compressed on Comcrap compared to DirecTV. How will the 2 HD streams on U-Verse look? |
|
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| said by Squeezing :
The problem for me is that the HD streams better NOT be compressed like Comcrap. As I've said here before, I had DirecTV HD and then moved and now have Comcrap. The HD is soft and overly compressed on Comcrap compared to DirecTV. How will the 2 HD streams on U-Verse look?
Not as bad as Comcast, but not as good as DirecTV. |
|
Neyland
join:2003-02-04
USA
| reply to Matt
said by Matt :said by Neyland :I don't get what all the hoopla is about. ATT is just now being able to get two HD feeds into a home which still puts them behind other offerings. We're entering an age where in the next three years a whole lot of stuff is going to be moved into the HD area. Even with Pair Bonding they're still going to be bandwidth starved. People are simply going to expect to be able to do as much with their HD channels as their SD channels. This means multiple TVs watching different channels while maybe a DVR is recording; Mom is uploading 100 pictures to Wally and talking to Aunt Sue on the phone. I just don't get them... Pair bonding will get them to 50Mbps. You can do a LOT with 50Mbps right now. 50Mbps should be enough for the next 5 years as well. If they can squeeze 2 HD streams, 2 SD streams and 10Mbps of internet into 25Mbps, 50Mbps will give them breathing room. Although that means their internet product will likely not be competitive with cable. Not as if it currently is anyway. I'm not so sure. Everyone is pushing HD right now and expect to see even more upswing over the next two years.
We have three people in the house that all like to watch different things plus record different things we like as well.
I just don't see how 50MB is going to offer them enough to compete on product over the next 5 years. I have a feeling they'll keep doing what they're doing now. Being the Wal-Mart of the TV/Internet market. |
|
Enlightener
join:2006-01-28
Cedar Park, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to rahlquist
Count me in there also. :-(
We have DirecTV with an HR20-100 upstairs and another one downstairs. My wife tends to `own` the downstairs one and my sister in law owns the upstairs one. They both like to record HD content and watch on their own schedules.
That's not counting yet another HD receiver in the master bedroom and an SD receiver in the guest bedroom. |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to Neyland
said by Neyland :I'm not so sure. Everyone is pushing HD right now and expect to see even more upswing over the next two years. We have three people in the house that all like to watch different things plus record different things we like as well. I just don't see how 50MB is going to offer them enough to compete on product over the next 5 years. I have a feeling they'll keep doing what they're doing now. Being the Wal-Mart of the TV/Internet market. If they pair bond to 50Mbps using current technology, they can get 8 streams, 4 HD and 4 SD, or I'm sure some mix there about. Probably 6 HD streams. So that's 2 HD streams per TV in your house.
While I don't think the AT&T solution is by any stretch of the imagination high tech, I think they are just aiming for the widest target possible and to be honest, very few households have more than a TV or two. |
|
maartena
Stacked.
Premium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Matt
said by Matt :Pair bonding will get them to 50Mbps. And if you are 11000 Ft from the CO like me, All I will get is a whopping 6 or 7 Mbps out of that 50.
Distance is a problem for copper wires, and even if they place a DSLAM in my neighborhood (which they may have done anyways), you still need to be within 3000 feet to get anything above about 10 Mbps. |
|
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| said by maartena :said by Matt :Pair bonding will get them to 50Mbps. And if you are 11000 Ft from the CO like me, All I will get is a whopping 6 or 7 Mbps out of that 50. Distance is a problem for copper wires, and even if they place a DSLAM in my neighborhood (which they may have done anyways), you still need to be within 3000 feet to get anything above about 10 Mbps. With U-verse, they are using VRADs and running fiber to them, rather than DSLAMs. They are installing more VRADs because they sell video and voice, not just Internet connectivity. So hopefully you will get a VRAD closer to you and can take advantage of higher speeds. |
|
maartena
Stacked.
Premium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
1 edit | reply to Matt
said by Matt :While I don't think the AT&T solution is by any stretch of the imagination high tech, I think they are just aiming for the widest target possible and to be honest, very few households have more than a TV or two. I know two friends of mine who have 1 HDTV..... but TWO dual tuner HD-DVR's. It is not uncommon that they record two HD shows from the major networks, on one HD-DVR, and watch football on the other HD-DVR on ESPN-HD. That's three streams right there.
You don't have to have more TV's, just more DVR's. Another friend of mine has a "his" and "hers" HD-DVR from Time Warner - no kidding! We have 35 or so HD channels now in SoCal, (most areas, not all yet), and according to their customer service staff, we should be seeing 70 HD channels by the end of 1st quarter 2009.
My wife is already recording the heck out of Food Network HD and HGTV HD, often at the same time..... and since I hooked up my "analog" cable as well, sometimes I just watch the HD channels in QAM on the TV itself, which is 3 HD streams with just one DVR and one QAM tuner.
This year will see more HD channel launches (we are waiting till BBC America HD gets launched later this year), and within the next 5 years we WILL have 150 or so HD channels. (we are closing in on 100 already).
Two streams just won't cut it. Four will do just fine I think with pair bonding, but they would have to bond by default for every new install. |
|
Neyland
join:2003-02-04
USA
| reply to Matt
I think you might be surprised. Especially family households. Yea I can see two person homes only having two TVs, but not families with children... especially children over the age of 8.
Uncompressed HD runs roughly 1.5Gbps (Based on a Wiki article). ATT believes their HD channels take 8-10Mbps, just how much compression to they plan on using?
Old '06 IPTV article, but talks to 3.1 TVs per house and 8-16Mbps for HD at MPEG-2. (»www.iptvarticles.com/IPTVMagazin···HDTV.htm). |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
1 edit | said by Neyland :I think you might be surprised. Especially family households. Yea I can see two person homes only having two TVs, but not families with children... especially children over the age of 8. Uncompressed HD runs roughly 1.5Gbps (Based on a Wiki article). ATT believes their HD channels take 8-10Mbps, just how much compression to they plan on using? Old '06 IPTV article, but talks to 3.1 TVs per house and 8-16Mbps for HD at MPEG-2. (» www.iptvarticles.com/IPTVMagazin···HDTV.htm). Yes, but that's not 3.1 HD televisions.
MPEG-2 is ooooooold. AT&T is using an MPEG-4 standard to compress their HD to 8.5Mbps. That has to be a worst case scenario at 8.5Mbps, because they can get 2 HD and 2 SD into 15Mbps right now.
So, w/ 10Mbps of internet allocated out of 50Mbps, that's about 5 simultaneous HD streams. In 5 years they'll have improved upon that I bet with better technology.
Is U-Verse the answer for everyone? Nope. But neither is DirecTV nor Cable. The main thing, is you now have 3 choices. |
|
David
No,there is another.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
clubs:
 ·DIRECTV
 ·magicjack.com
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to Matt
said by Matt :While I don't think the AT&T solution is by any stretch of the imagination high tech, I think they are just aiming for the widest target possible and to be honest, very few households have more than a TV or two. I will concurr with you because I only have 2 tv's attached to the DTV recievers currently. I have 4 tv's total but the other two have game consoles attached to them or the one in the back bedroom plays DVD movies and doubles as an internet machine. I watch Geek.tv on that one now and then.
I don't have any flatscreen TV's or even an HDTV.
--
If you have a topic in the direct forum please reply to it or a post of mine, I get a notification when you do this.
Koetting Ford, Granite City, illinois... YOU'RE FIRED!!
|
|
Neyland
join:2003-02-04
USA
| reply to Matt
Yea that's why I said it was an old article...
We have three people in our family. I watch my set of shows, my wife watches hers and our daughter has her own needs. In one of the articles I've recently read, HD sets have almost doubled in the last year. The more you move into 09, the more sets you'll see as the average consumer believes the 09 cutoff to digital means a cut over to HD. And salesmen sure like to feed that myth.
We currently have Dish with two dual HD tuners and an off air tuner. It simply isn't all that uncommon with the offerings today that we're not each watching something different with two of us recording 2 other shows on different networks. That's easily 5 programs right there, today. As more and more content comes on...
The DVR really has spoiled us to how we watch TV. The more people adopt the technology, the more demand you'll see for content.
I guess to me when you really stack the hardships DSL brings to upload speeds,distance, line quality, bandwidth,and overhead vs the adoption rate in the next 3-5 years I feel ATT has really set them up for a fall. I mean look at how long it's taken them just to deploy UVerse on their existing plant. Where's ATT going to be sitting when cable goes 3.0 and Verizon areas are almost all fiber? Exactly where they are now, behind..
I want ATT to do more. I'm in a ATT area and want a real competitor to cable, but to me a real compitor has the ability to offer the about the same level of service... |
|
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
·PHONE POWER
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T CallVantage
·Time Warner VOIP
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Matt
I've read that AT&T is using 5.5mbps compression for HDTV streams. That's how they fit 2HD2SD+10 internet.
What they ought to consider is a "powerboost" feature - allow mixed use of the the bandwidth. "Boost" to 20mbps that might slow to 10 when I max my TV capacity.
They also can be competitive on the upload. I thought VDSL2 offered symmetrical speeds? And 1.5 is the best they can do with max?
--
Laser eye surgery rocks! I love frickin' laser beams. |
|
