dslreports logo
AT&T Set Top With Wi-Fi Clears FCC Tests
Cisco ISB7005 To Deliver IPTV Via 802.11N
AT&T appears to be testing a new Cisco set top box for their U-Verse IPTV service that comes with integrated Wi-Fi. According to a press release by IMS Research, the Cisco ISB7005 comes with all the usual bells and whistles found on AT&T U-Verse set tops -- including Ethernet and HomePNA wired networking interfaces, but it also comes with Wi-Fi for the delivery of video, something that IMS Research speculates can be used for the delivery of pay TV, given that their "extreme compression" makes such a practice a practical alternative to having to run hardlines to a new part of the home:
Click for full size
quote:
"AT&T appears to be using the extreme compression of their video as a competitive advantage. U-Verse's comparatively low HD video bitrates are allowing them to use a relatively inexpensive 2x2 dual-band 802.11n Wi-Fi radio based on the BRCM4717 for this application. Our preliminary analysis is that AT&T can use such a simple design because its HD video is encoded at approximately 5 Mbps compared to 5-8 Mbps for HDTV over satellite and 16 Mbps for HDTV over cable. This means that the satellite and especially the cable providers will need far more elaborate wireless solutions to enable them to stream video over a wireless network."
With so many homes loaded with coax or Ethernet, this may have limited implementation for some, but it's another tool in the installer's arsenal all the same.
view:
topics flat nest 
shoan
join:2006-02-27
Benton, AR

shoan

Member

works for me

This will be great in my house since when I had Uverse installed they only ran two rooms and did not hook up to the other two outlets in the house since i only needed two boxes at the time. But now its time to put TV's in my kids rooms and I was dreading having to pay to have those two rooms wired back into the system. Personally I had a really lazy installer that fought every step of the way to do anything.

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

1 edit

ITALIAN926

Member

Re: works for me

Way to go AT&T, you just lost 50% of your subsciber base with neighbors sharing accounts. LMAO. A+ rating for lack of foresight and common sense.
openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144

openbox9

Premium Member

Re: works for me

I truly doubt it will be that easy

julesism
join:2001-12-12
North Little Rock, AR
Ubiquiti Unifi Security Gateway
Ubiquiti Unifi UAP-AC-LITE

julesism

Member

Re: works for me

Yea, I'd be shocked if the customer could actually configure these settings themselves. However... I live in a 2 bedroom apt by myself. What would stop someone from signing up with 3 boxes (living room plus 2 bedrooms) and then giving a box to neighbor(s) who share walls with after the installer leaves? If WIFI signal is happy, you could split an account\bill. With that said, I'm in FIOS territory :P
stunod2002
join:2003-11-07
Carol Stream, IL

stunod2002 to ITALIAN926

Member

to ITALIAN926
How do you figure??? You think at&t is going to send someone a wifi STB if they do not have an account??

skuv
@rr.com

skuv to ITALIAN926

Anon

to ITALIAN926
These boxes are like any other cable box. They have to be on an account, and they have to register back with the server that allows them to come online when that account is verified.

No one is going to get free service. You can't buy these boxes in stores, and even if you could buy one, it still needs to talk back to the server that allows it to activate and get on the network.

MEohME
@wideopenwest.com

MEohME

Anon

Re: works for me

It is possible. The Customer just has to order an extra STB and give it to this neighbor and split the bill. Its called SHARING. That is what was stated. NOTHING about stealing the service. It would be like you running a cable line underground to your neighbors house and sharing services.

So yes ATT did shoot their own foot with this one.
openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144

openbox9

Premium Member

Re: works for me

Not any more than any existing pay service as you nicely paint a picture. Regulations are fairly straight forward regarding "sharing" of pay TV service.
BlueC
join:2009-11-26
Minneapolis, MN

BlueC to MEohME

Member

to MEohME
said by MEohME :

It is possible. The Customer just has to order an extra STB and give it to this neighbor and split the bill. Its called SHARING. That is what was stated. NOTHING about stealing the service. It would be like you running a cable line underground to your neighbors house and sharing services.

So yes ATT did shoot their own foot with this one.

I'm sure if you read the TOS it would state "sharing" is not acceptable.

I have a big problem with households sharing internet service with neighbors. It only further complicates the broadband issues we have this in country. If everyone started to share internet access, the ISPs would be forced to raise prices, because their customers would have consolidated services onto one address/account even though they're still using the service with as many users as previously.

Technically, the home not listed on the account that is using the service is "stealing" and not "sharing". It's all subject to the TOS, and I'm sure AT&T (like pretty much all other residential ISPs) have it clear that you cannot "share" your connection with other households.

DarkLogix
Texan and Proud
Premium Member
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX

DarkLogix

Premium Member

Re: works for me

that more of the shouldn't do it because you might get caught not the can't do it or even the need a hack to do

MEohME
@wideopenwest.com

MEohME to BlueC

Anon

to BlueC
TOS also state that ISPs have the right to limit what you use online as far as bandwidths too but we still have people that max over TBs per month. TOS/AUPs don't mean anything anymore to people. Especially on here. It's the fact that sharing happens and will always happen.

And no the home is NOT stealing. It is sharing. They are NOT illegally hooking into the system; they were GIVEN a device to obtain the service from the account holder- thus becomes sharing. The person obtaining the service for free or dirt cheap would not be bound to those TOS/AUP. Only the Account Holder is.

And actually; sharing of TV is NOT listed in TOS/AUPs. Only Internet. Sorry. But as long as its an open Wifi Network; too bad. It is NOT covered under sharing. But leaves the Account Holder to be accountable for anything that happens.
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX

iansltx to BlueC

Member

to BlueC
Depends on how you price your service. If the marginal cost of adding a user is high compared with the revenue of the user, and they're effectively building a little bit of last-mile infrastructure for you, what's not to like? Especially if they're upgrading speeds to compensate for more users...

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

ITALIAN926 to skuv

Member

to skuv
WHAT are you people talking about?. House A makes a deal with house B. House A orders extra wireless STB's and gives them to neighbor B. Some of you have as much common sense as AT&T.

This will be disastrous in high density areas and apartment buildings.

morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000

morbo to ITALIAN926

Member

to ITALIAN926
Over compressed HD feed? I'll pass.

fifty nine
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ

fifty nine

Member

Re: works for me

It's MPEG4 so it's not necessarily overcompressed, just compressed more.

Drex
Beer...The other white meat.
Premium Member
join:2000-02-24
Not There

Drex

Premium Member

Re: works for me

IMHO, it's overcompressed. The quality of HD with AT&T UVerse is no where near other competitors and I don't mean that in a good way...YMMV.

heat84
DSLR Influencer
join:2004-03-11
Delray Beach, FL

heat84 to shoan

Member

to shoan
said by shoan:

Personally I had a really lazy installer that fought every step of the way to do anything.

You should've layed down the law and told him you would cancel the installation and tell AT&T exactly why. Or you could've just told him to GTFO your house and maybe the guy they sent to finish the job would be more professional. But of course you were so anxious to get U-Verse you would've let the installer get away with anything short of molesting your kids.

MEohME
@wideopenwest.com

MEohME

Anon

Re: works for me

The installer wouldn't have cared if he toled ATT. It would be their OWN employee vs a customer. They've already showed they don't care about their customers. Their employees on the other hand are union and they MUST care about them. And one customer won't hurt ATT's check book.
shoan
join:2006-02-27
Benton, AR

shoan to heat84

Member

to heat84
Nah I did not want them that bad it was more a case of I knew shortcuts and shody work and I did not let him slide with unsecured wires and wall plates and cutting out wires that should not be cut to make their job easier. He wanted to do a quick and dirty hack job and leave cables just hanging down the side of the house to make the job go faster. So it's just a matter of refusing to sign off on the job till it was done properly.
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

patcat88

Member

thin ice

What if theres more than 1 cable box? what if its an urban high rise apartment building where 200 SSIDs are reported when you scan? with AP and client 2 feet apart you wont get more than 1/2 the speed ideal conditions real world speed (if 11G, ideal conditions is 23 mbps, so in 200 AP apartment building, that would be 10 mbps due to extreme noise).

now 5mbps on 50 mbps (real world speed with ideal conditions 11N link) wifi link, that should be enough reserve capacity, but what if you add other devices to the AP?

Verizon has REFUSED to use wifi for FIOS STBs. For quality reasons. lol

djrobx
Premium Member
join:2000-05-31
Reno, NV

djrobx

Premium Member

Re: thin ice

Yeah, this is way too tempting for lazy installers. For TV, wifi should be used as a last resort only.

MEohME
@wideopenwest.com

MEohME to patcat88

Anon

to patcat88
as you should know T and VZ are WAAAAAY totally different companies and ATT does NOT care about anything but the $$$$ and a few customers leaving won't matter to them. Once you move to U-Verse that customer can NEVER get regular DSL anymore. So yes they always have a customer at that address if they want any sort of DSL. The customer may leave for Cable or Sat. TV and there is always ATT there to push that as well. They clearly know what they're doing and this will be a great way for them to start killing their TV product like they did with Americast back when Ameritech became SBC. Now its only time to count before ALL new installs are this way and TV is a thing of the past with them.
openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144

openbox9

Premium Member

Re: thin ice

said by MEohME :

Now its only time to count before ALL new installs are this way and TV is a thing of the past with them.

Because AT&T obviously wants to exit the lucrative pay TV market it fought diligently to enter in the first place

MEohME
@wideopenwest.com

MEohME

Anon

Re: thin ice

Yep! They'll exist without a problem. The same as they did before. It's not that hard. You don't seem to get that. Any provider can do it. Gas, Electric, Phone, Internet. It's all a matter of notifying the people at hand and being done.

ATT done it before and they'll do it again. WOW Cable WAS Ameritech's brian child and was THEIR cable company. Anyone in Ameritech area WILL tell you that when they first had service. SBC (ATT) Came along and SOLD the network to get out of the business. ATT did the same thing with Comcast. History repeats and you don't get that. This is why we have problems today is people don't seem to get that history does in fact repeat.
openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144

openbox9

Premium Member

Re: thin ice

said by MEohME :

It's not that hard. You don't seem to get that.

You don't seem to get it. Pay TV is a fairly strong revenue stream. Why exactly is AT&T, and Verizon for that matter, interested in exiting the market? The whole point of FTTH/FTTN investment was to compete on the pay TV front, not to deploy xx Mbps of access to the Internet.

quarkmachine
join:2003-02-12
Derby, KS

quarkmachine to MEohME

Member

to MEohME
said by MEohME :

Once you move to U-Verse that customer can NEVER get regular DSL anymore.

Well that's just bullshit... you just pullin' this stuff out of your ass? Who do you work for anyway? The dis-information bureau?
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX

iansltx to patcat88

Member

to patcat88
I had the same thought. From my room in a two-story apartment building with no apartments around other than mine, I can see 2-6 SSIDs, one of them mine...and the apartment building only has two SSIDs because people are sharing the provided connection (not mine or mine, their pick). If everyone's apartment had a wireless router speeds would be significantly lower.
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

patcat88

Member

Re: thin ice

said by iansltx:

I had the same thought. From my room in a two-story apartment building with no apartments around other than mine,

I said "urban", thats atleast 10 stories.

Thespis
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV.
Premium Member
join:2004-08-03
Keller, TX

Thespis

Premium Member

Re: thin ice

said by patcat88:

said by iansltx:

I had the same thought. From my room in a two-story apartment building with no apartments around other than mine,

I said "urban", thats atleast 10 stories.

WTF? Where do you get this stuff? There are no buildings less than 10 stories in urban areas? Nonsense...

Boricua
Premium Member
join:2002-01-26
Sacramuerto

Boricua

Premium Member

I'm game

I'd love to have this STB as I work on PCs on the side. My work station is near the kitchen, while all the programs I need is located at my desktop in my bedroom. Working wirelessly at 150 Mbps or 300 Mpbs would quickly allow me to access the extra programs from my desktop.
beavercable
Premium Member
join:2008-05-11
Beaverton, OR

1 recommendation

beavercable

Premium Member

This will be so awesome.

Man this will be so...."buffering buffering"....awesome!

G0d
@rr.com

G0d

Anon

5 mbps encoded HD video....

I guess nobody cares about quality anymore. Encoded HD video at 5mbps that is not even close to being acceptable. I cant imagine what the SD channels run at if there hd is 5. AT&T could have been awesome but sticking to the twisted pair was there demise. Garbage is all I can say.

•••••

compugeek0
Premium Member
join:2002-07-30
localhost

compugeek0

Premium Member

Local Streaming

I don't think they want to use it for wireless box to box, which I guess they could do. My guess would be to put one in a house to replace the wireless router and have everything go through one box. Or it could be to stream either live video or VOD type services to a PC or iPad kind of like a Netflix or Slingbox solution.

Geek

OSUGoose
join:2007-12-27
Columbus, OH

OSUGoose

Member

Re: Local Streaming

Actualy with the rollout of iNIDs this could take the place of the router/gateway.
34764170 (banned)
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

34764170 (banned) to compugeek0

Member

to compugeek0
said by compugeek0:

I don't think they want to use it for wireless box to box

That is exactly what it is for.

bittymagic
@comcast.net

bittymagic

Anon

You are all wrong

This box will be used in conjunction with a new 82.11n gateway in situations where the existing coax is substandard, and it would be either too difficult or time consuming to do a new run. The Uverse installation techs will be the ones determining which models are used. there are also non-dvr wi-fi set top that just hasn't been announced yet.

Metatron2008
You're it
Premium Member
join:2008-09-02
united state

Metatron2008

Premium Member

VHS quality YouTube in every bedroom!

Now your kids can watch today's shit as it should look like!

Smith6612
MVM
join:2008-02-01
North Tonawanda, NY
·Charter
Ubee EU2251
Ubiquiti UAP-IW-HD
Ubiquiti UniFi AP-AC-HD

Smith6612

MVM

I'm hoping...

That the Wireless setups will be limited to those "No other way!" setups. AT&T doesn't serve my area, which I'm happy for though with the mess of Wireless routers out there now, and just knowing how Wireless connections tend to be, it's not the most reliable of things to be sending data, especially real-time video through it.

joako
Premium Member
join:2000-09-07
/dev/null

joako

Premium Member

Coming soon...

Maybe by the year 2025? At AT&T's pace it wouldn't surprise me. Just a few months ago AT&T released a system to watch TV on your xbox... They charge you $100 for a $20 Xbox remote and $55 for the tech to come put the disc in your Xbox! Rumor also has it AT&T is going to start doing mail-in exchanges for defective boxes, right now the holy AT&T tech is the only one qualified to unplug the power & ethernet from your broken DVR and plug in a new one. AT&T, we must deliver or else you can't use it...
NHTracker
join:2002-05-12
Phoenix, AZ

NHTracker

Member

I was hoping for better HD

I too had hopes they would improve their HD quality but now it looks like they have no interest in that. 5.7MB is just too low for a truly good 1080i HD stream. Even at that bitrate I occasionally get brief blurriness on still scenes and it's frustrating. I bought an HD TV because I want HD, not a substandard HD product. I really miss Directv, but I can't get it because the apt I moved into faces North/Northwest.

XBL2009
------
join:2001-01-03
Chicago, IL

XBL2009

Member

BluRay is barely acceptable!

BluRay is barely acceptable with 54mbps, so 5mbps is NOT very good.