T-Mobile Is Becoming a Cable Company (engadget.com) 92
T-Mobile has revealed that it's launching a TV service in 2018, and that is has acquired Layer3 TV (a company that integrates TV, streaming and social networking) to make this happen. The company thinks people are ditching cable due to the providers, not TV itself. Engadget reports: It claims that it can "uncarrier" TV the way it did with wireless service, and has already targeted a few areas it thinks it can fix: it doesn't like the years-long contracts, bloated bundles, outdated tech and poor customer service that are staples of TV service in the U.S. T-Mobile hasn't gone into detail about the functionality of the service yet. How will it be delivered? How much will it cost? Where will it be available? And will this affect the company's free Netflix offer? This is more a declaration of intent than a concrete roadmap, so it's far from certain that the company will live up to its promises. Ultimately, the move represents a big bet on T-Mobile's part: that people like TV and are cutting the cord based on a disdain for the companies, not the service. There's a degree of truth to that when many Americans are all too familiar with paying ever-increasing rates to get hundreds of channels they don't watch. However, there's no guarantee that it'll work in an era when many people (particularly younger people) are more likely to use Netflix, YouTube or a streaming TV service like Sling TV.
Bad headline (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: Bad headline (Score:5, Funny)
Here's a hint. T-Mobile is one of those ISPs who aren't limited by the municipal franchise requirements for access to the poles and conduits. That's because they don't use __________
Re: (Score:2)
Layer3 push their service a lot in my area (as we have muni fiber), and they do seem like a cable company replacement.
They've got a high monthly cost, require that you use their boxes, and won't sell a plan that doesn't include a bunch of channels I dont want.
In short, they've taken everything we dislike about the cable model and brought it into the internet age. Still it seems unreasonably popular with people my parents age, gives them the trendy feeling of cord-cutting, getting their tv over fiber and not
Cable companies have worst customer service rating (Score:3)
>what companies like Cox, Charter, and Comcast do.
This is what Cox, Charter, and Comcast.do:
--
already targeted a few areas it thinks it can fix: it doesn't like the years-long contracts, bloated bundles, outdated tech and poor customer service that are staples of TV service in the U.S.
--
Of the eight companies with worst customer service ratings in America, two are major cable companies.
Their *goal* is to provide cable-like TV without becoming a "cable company" like Comcast and Time Warner, compan
Maybe... (Score:2)
If they will truly have the content reliably (the main reason I never started using Hulu et al - too many stories of episodes disappearing), and the streaming apps work better than any of the others I've seen so far, then maybe...
Re: (Score:2)
In fairness, that's because Hulu is trying to feel like TV. Episodes only live for like 5 weeks after being published and get published every week. Which makes sense because its owned by the major TV networks. Can you imagne what would happen if they
Re: (Score:1)
If they all of the coke?
Re: (Score:1)
If they Covfefe?
Re: (Score:2)
If they will truly have the content reliably (the main reason I never started using Hulu et al - too many stories of episodes disappearing)
Sorry, but T-Mobile's service won't be any different. They're just re-selling content that is owned and controlled by someone else.
Move along. Nothing to see here.
Re: (Score:2)
That is my expectation as well
I can see this working (Score:3, Informative)
They dedicate 40mbps*50 channels for 2gbps, that's what, 2-10% of a tower (I'm seeing LTE towers are built for 20-100gbps), assuming they can make devices that pick up broadcastlike.
So for a 2-10% reduction in mobile data speed for customers, they can offer 50 high quality (4k HDR) channels using H.265 (I assume, I don't actually know how efficient it is, I'm basically taking blue ray * 4 (pixels) / 2 (efficiency)).
If they can sell/rent a receiver for a reasonable price that can take their broadcast they can have super high quality live TV for minimal bandwidth reduction for their regular market. They can then lean on people having home Internet or much reduced resolution for on demand content (maybe 5 mbps as Netflix recommends for HD), this is in the realm of what I typically get at a minimum when checking my LTE speed (5-50 in my home city). They could maybe limit on demand content to SD speeds (1.5mbps), but allow you to subscribe to shows and have access the day after aired at 4k, downloading in off times (including allowing the downloading of Netflix downloadable shows).
This seems like a very doable and smart thing in an era of people hating cable.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but I've read that they're 4k isn't much better than upscaled bluray, and I don't think it's HDR (which is only a 25% increase at worst I think (8->10 bits, probably easier to compress though).
My point was they could offer a significant number of channels better than any video most of us have ever seen (I've personally never seen a 4k HDR video that I'm aware of, maybe most people have and I'm wrong).
Bluray quality, but 4k and HDR would be a pretty killer feature I think, and based on my experience
Re: (Score:2)
Why doesn't it scale? Is their any fundamental reason they couldn't use an LTE like technology to broadcast using similar (RF) bandwidth as LTE (I'm using broadcast to mean 1 sender many receivers)?
The broadcast part is pretty much scaled by definition.
for mealtime streaming they'd likely use 5mbps (Netflix HD), that gives a tower 200 homes at a 10-50% reduction in overall network bandwidth (20-100gbps tower), there are probably places that would work too (sparser suburbs, not universally).
There's potential
Re: (Score:2)
Why doesn't it scale? Is their any fundamental reason they couldn't use an LTE like technology to broadcast using similar (RF) bandwidth as LTE (I'm using broadcast to mean 1 sender many receivers)?
Most companies are moving to video over IP, which is a 1-to-1 transmission. This allows viewing on demand, which is generally a desirable feature and often profitable.
Technically, IP does support multicasting, so they could do broadcasts. However, no new services are doing this, and even traditional cable companies are starting to offer IPTV services. What you are describing is possible, but no one expects it because the industry is moving away from it.
I would be thrilled if they did this and offered channe
Re: I can see this working (Score:1)
Channels a la carte and multicast are somewhat mutually exclusive (or there's a big base and then a per channel fee).
The benefit of multicast is that the marginal cost of a person approaches 0. So it makes sense to bundle a bunch of live offerings together and give them to everybody.
Providing us each 5 different channels costs very little extra (infrastructure wise) than providing us both all 10. Similarly, providing us both 20 adds very little. The idea of bundling a core group of channels that offers a co
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on the content. If it is sports or a heavy action movie then it would be shitty quality. If it is a sitcom then 15 mbps works fine.
Re: (Score:2)
The only way to know for sure is to compress it further and find out.
Some content is adversely affected by lowering the bitrate. Some is not. Also, the encoder and decoder play a role, so you may get different results simply by viewing the content from a different machine/player. It's not purely a black-and-white issue.
Most cable companies are broadcasting content at a significantly lower quality resolution and/or bitrate than you can get on Blu-ray. It partly depends on what each channel sends to them, but
Cable is dead (Score:2)
Most under 20 are getting their entertainment from Youtube, Hulu, Netflix, etc. -- and I'd bet many kids under 10 are growing up without the classic TV experience that most adults remember. Hell, I know a kid who'd rather watch Youtube or Twitch than any TV show... and he tells me most of his class is the same way.
There's definitely room for a new internet provider, but I think cable is firmly and deservedly dying.
Re: (Score:2)
Most under 20 are getting their entertainment from Youtube, Hulu, Netflix, etc. -- and I'd bet many kids under 10 are growing up without the classic TV experience that most adults remember. Hell, I know a kid who'd rather watch Youtube or Twitch than any TV show... and he tells me most of his class is the same way.
There's definitely room for a new internet provider, but I think cable is firmly and deservedly dying.
Not anymore. Starting tomorrow net neutrality is going to be voted down. Portugal's national ISP as an example forces you to pay for extra things they firewall or throttle down by default forcing to to a tiered la carte system. Want to watch Netflix? That will be $35 extra a month. Amazon video? ANother $25 a month etc.
Of course it will just be cheaper to buy cable you know. Tmobile will use the l3 background to blackmail you and your ISPs so they can quad drip after your ISP triple dips by charging you, cl
Re: (Score:3)
Guess what? Old school and believers in the original ideals of the internet will consider that damage and route around it. Or find alternate ways of streaming it.
Apparently you have no understanding of how things work.
A very large percentage of people (in the U.S.) only have one choice for a broadband Internet connection and its one of the companies who have spent a lot of time and money lobbying against net neutrality.
Re: (Score:1)
Why wouldn't Tmobile use their own capacity?
I assume that's the goal, to offer you TV service that is 100% independent from Comcast, AT&T etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Starting tomorrow net neutrality is going to be voted down. Portugal's national ISP as an example
I've seen an internal Comcast memo that says that as soon as the FCC rescinds their regulations they're going to start hiring customer service reps who speak only Portuguese so they can better replicate the kind of service the national ISP of Portugal offers.
Of course it will just be cheaper to buy cable you know.
Huh? If cable is tacking on $60 a month for Netflix and Amazon, then it would seem to be a lot cheaper to go with T-Mobile and a $20/month internet service from them.
Tmobile will use the l3 background to blackmail you and your ISPs
What the hell is an "l3 background"? And how does a small cable company that is availa
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Cable is dead (Score:2)
Portugal's national ISP as an example forces you to pay for extra things they firewall or throttle down by default forcing to to a tiered la carte system. Want to watch Netflix? That will be $35 extra a month. Amazon video? ANother $25 a month etc.
That's just complete and utter horseshit. Portugal is in the EU and actually does have net neutrality laws in line with EU mandates. Claiming that they charge more for certain services is just a complete lie based on a tweet by some idiot politician who had no clue what he was talking about.
I can understand the talking heads on TV news saying such ludicrous things, but I'm truly surprised to see someone on Slashdot parroting their nonsense.
Re: (Score:2)
Portugal's national ISP as an example forces you to pay for extra things they firewall or throttle down by default forcing to to a tiered la carte system. Want to watch Netflix? That will be $35 extra a month. Amazon video? ANother $25 a month etc.
That's just complete and utter horseshit. Portugal is in the EU and actually does have net neutrality laws in line with EU mandates. Claiming that they charge more for certain services is just a complete lie based on a tweet by some idiot politician who had no clue what he was talking about.
I can understand the talking heads on TV news saying such ludicrous things, but I'm truly surprised to see someone on Slashdot parroting their nonsense.
Then you tell me [twitter.com]?
Re: Cable is dead (Score:2)
I'm familiar with that model because I was actually looking for a Mexican SIM card, and Mexico has a similar setup for many of their carriers. Short version: mobile carriers sell data bundles by the gigabyte, as they do everywhere in the world, but they also sell "packages" on top of the data plans which can be applied to specific services. So, say you buy 3 gigabytes of data, plus pay an extra $5 for the "social media" package; you now have 3 gigabytes to use for whatever you want, plus you can use socia
In other future news (Score:2)
Comcast and Spectrum citing the revocation of network neutrality, throttle Tmobile video services to 2.1Kb/s
Re: (Score:2)
Comcast and Spectrum citing the revocation of network neutrality, throttle Tmobile video services to 2.1Kb/s
What a fantastic universe you live in, where Comcast can reach out to the local T-Mobile tower and throttle the LTE data it sends, or would even bother trying. Is the sky blue on your planet, like it is on Earth here?
Re: (Score:2)
You need to read the article. This is not wireless.
You need to read the article. Layer 3 is a small cable company that uses fiber to deliver video efficiently using internet protocols. They're buying Layer 3 for the streaming technology, not for the existing fiber plant. They're not going to start trying to lay fiber everywhere to compete with the cable companies, they're going to be the same wireless that they've always been.
Yeah, they will probably maintain what Layer 3 already has, but even then Comcast will have nothing to do with the service and none
Very low bar (Score:2)
As near as I can tell the bar in this industry is set so low...well, let's just say that T-Mobile should easily exceed whatever laughably passes for customer service in the Cable industry. Cable providers are routinely ranked at the very bottom - right down there with airlines and government. Yeah, it's that bad.
All they really have to do is:
1) NOT treat their customers like shit
2) Be price competitive with other streaming services
3) And....don't treat your customers like shit
The cables companies don't seem
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah I've had the same experience. Former AT&T customer here who was basically driven to leave them and right into the waiting arms of T-Mobile. Customer service has been excellent so far and the signal is just as good as AT&T if not better. And it's far cheaper. AT&T can go pound sand. I've never going back to those clowns.
I think it's the Richard Branson model - find some industry with crappy service and make it better. He started out in the record industry and moved to the airline industry. H
Throttle DOWN (Score:2)
Boy as Americans be prepaired to pay. Pay more now for your own TV streaming services as of tomorrow will be voted off by the appeal of net neutrality. SInce L3 owns the backbone for hte internet tmobile can now blackmail comcast to for tripple dipping which comcast will then charge you again for both ends and now the backbone for mega profits. Can't wait for my $200 a month internet bill and lacarte with VPN being firewalled out. VPN will come as an additional charge to unblock of course etc.
This has got t
Re: (Score:2)
SInce L3 owns the backbone for hte internet tmobile can now blackmail comcast
Are you deliberately confusing "Layer 3" with "Level 3" just so you can spread FUD and make stuff up?
cell phones before 2007 where you had to pay a monthly fee for each service such as adding a ringtone or a map program.
I've never paid to add a ringtone or a "map program".
Re: (Score:2)
My old slider phone had mapping software built-in... that would only work if you paid a (presumably one-time) fee to activate it. Presumably the money went to the app developer rather than the carrier.
Re:Throttle DOWN (Score:4, Informative)
This has got to be intentional as these companies are salivating at the thought of making our internet like cell phones before 2007 where you had to pay a monthly fee for each service such as adding a ringtone or a map program. Net Neutrality now is the only force holding them back.
Yeah, because that's exactly what we all had to do between 2007 and 2015. I'd suggest decaf.
will you own the Layer3 TV boxes now? or be forced (Score:2)
will you own the Layer3 TV boxes now? or be forced to rent them like it is now?
They don't force you to rent phones!
They did what? (Score:2)
>> claims that it can "uncarrier" TV the way it did with wireless service
It already did what now? Wireless still seems like a giant tripartate monopoly to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Wireless still seems like a giant tripartate monopoly to me.
How do you have a "tripartate monopoly"?
You mean like AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint, Verizon, Metro PCS, and the 26 other wireless services that this [whistleout.com] website allows you to compare? Is "tripartate" a latin word for "31"?
Yeah, not all carriers cover all places, but there's a lot more than 3 in most of the US, and "three" is hardly a monopoly.
Re: (Score:1)
MetroPCS was a real cell company before Tmobile purchased them.
Now they're basically Tmobile with a different price structure ($30 less/month, prepaid (I think), no international, and always throttled like a tmobile unlimited user that broke 35GB (Tmobile customers get priority over metroPCS)
Re: (Score:2)
Really AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon
Sprint are on their own standard.
Stupid Move T-Mobile (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
There will always be a place for live TV, if they got a good enough deal on the purchase they may be able to make money.
If the tech really does more efficiently stream live TV over IP, they could be the ideal choice for things like HBO (GoT finale was hard to watch on HBO go), Sports, Special events, idle background with no need to make a decision (I'm pretty sure this is HGTVs entire market).
Sure, the live TV market isn't going to be as big as all of cable, but that doesn't mean they are overpaying for the
Re: (Score:1)
IPtv also makes it much easier to do viewership statistics, and thus gather better data on viewership of both tv shows and ads. Thes
Addendum (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Where do you live that has local channels streaming for free with no commercials. Everywhere I know local channels don't stream at all and they all have commercials except for public TV(which has fundraising messages instead).
If you can get by with Netflix streaming (content shrinking every day) then good for you. Other people would like the option of getting some TV channels. It all comes down to services and price point and that is yet to be determined.
Result of Net Neutrality repeal (Score:2)
This is the new investment that the FCC was talking about that would happen as a result of repealing Network Neutrality.
T-Mobile will build a 5G network that can provide high speed internet access sufficient to stream video to all its customers. Video streamed from their service will be exempt from data caps which will allow them to recover the investment necessary to build out the network.
Nobody will be required to subscribe to the video service but this allows people the option of replacing their home int
No. They're apparently not. (Score:2)
Watch the video. They are clearly primarily aiming at watching TV on mobile devices, ie. phones. Doing anything with or over cable seems at best likely to be secondary to their main strategy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently you're not a T-Mobile customer, or you wouldn't be posting about "india based call centers."
Not entirely. T-Mobile farms out to India during low volume times (and presumably high volume times to handle overflow and limit hold times). 2:30AM on Thanksgiving, you're getting what is arguably the best call center in India - the handful of times I've been routed to them, they've been far and away the best experience I've had with offshore tech support; good English, friendly demeanor, genuinely listened to what I said, and they weren't completely beholden to scripts. Still, you're not getting Stephanie
Sports (Score:2)
Interesting... (Score:2)
2. Will their service run entirely as an on-demand service?
If either of those is NO, it's not worth my time.
How is "Cable Company" defined? (Score:2)
Is it still a Cable Company if it delivers video streams over fiber instead of coax? Is it about the physical cable line running to your home, or the content? I wouldn't consider a company that provides DSL a cable company, but obviously they still use a cable, and one can receive IPTV over that connection. The terminology is extremely poor here.
I could never imagine going back to programmed video streams like TV, let alone one that had commercials. Apparently T-Mobile has identified a market for it. P