# Does Ma Bell want a DISH?



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

http://money.cnn.com/2005/12/29/news/fortune500/att_echostar/


> There are rumors that AT&T may bid for EchoStar. Speculation seems premature but a deal makes sense.


Interesing, considering that AT&T (at least the former AT&T) was one of the original investors in D*. The story is much more convoluted than that, but interesting anyway.


----------



## Ray_Clum (Apr 22, 2002)

I guess that's one way to save the $6 Billion AT&T (aka SBC) was planning to spend on Project Lightspeed...


----------



## finniganps (Jan 23, 2004)

It's interesting, they paid the same amount to buy AT&T that analysts figure it would take to buy Dish. I never thought Dish would be worth as much as AT&T which declined quickly with the drop in long distance rates.


----------



## wkomorow (Apr 22, 2002)

Am I the only one with visions of calling Dish support and getting Ernestine?


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

One _"ringy-dingy..."_


----------



## juan ellitinez (Jan 31, 2003)

I wonder if dish will try to offer VOIP thru their satellite internet venture


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

Satellite is not well suited to VOIP because of latency.


----------



## juan ellitinez (Jan 31, 2003)

How about "video" over IP instead?


----------



## SHS (Jan 8, 2003)

Some thing juan satellite is not well suited for that kind of stuff because of high latency.


----------



## greatwhitenorth (Jul 18, 2005)

Of course, AT&T only has to convince one person. Charlie controls about 93% of the voting stock, IIRC. Sounds like he's having too much fun to give up his company. I could be wrong though.


----------



## juan ellitinez (Jan 31, 2003)

SHS said:


> Some thing juan satellite is not well suited for that kind of stuff because of high latency.


Then how does satelite tv work??? I would think the could buffer the video


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

juan ellitinez said:


> Then how does satelite tv work??? I would think the could buffer the video


Satellite TV is slow. Can you watch a local channel OTA as well as through E*? If so watch for a minute live then flip to E* and you'll see how far behind the scanning-backhaul-encoding-uplink-downlink-decoding delays can make a channel.

Voice over IP has it's own issues which are generally not noticed. But while demonstrating it I've talked to someone in the same room and it's a wierd delay. (Similar to digital cellphone delays. Ever talk to someone on a digital cell phone when you are in the same room?)

The local radio stations encode over the internet (Windows Media) and the delay can be 30 seconds between what you hear 'live' on the air and what you hear via the net.

Yes, juan, there is latency.

JL


----------



## juan ellitinez (Jan 31, 2003)

James Long said:


> Satellite TV is slow. Can you watch a local channel OTA as well as through E*? If so watch for a minute live then flip to E* and you'll see how far behind the scanning-backhaul-encoding-uplink-downlink-decoding delays can make a channel.
> 
> Voice over IP has it's own issues which are generally not noticed. But while demonstrating it I've talked to someone in the same room and it's a wierd delay. (Similar to digital cellphone delays. Ever talk to someone on a digital cell phone when you are in the same room?)
> 
> ...


I agree Voice would never work with satellite internet..I was curious if they could develop some type of VOD useing IP technology..there would be a lag but wouldn't a buffer compensate for that?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

juan ellitinez said:


> I was curious if they could develop some type of VOD using IP technology..there would be a lag but wouldn't a buffer compensate for that?


As long as the lag was consistant. One would not want to PAY for a movie then have it pause and buffer every few minutes. (I wouldn't want it to pause once during playback!)

But even via IP the content is going to take bandwidth - space on the satellite. Over 8PSK one *might* get 30 streams at the same quality as the current PPV channels on a single transponder. With 12 million potential ordering points odds are that you will need more than one transponder or will need to reduce the quality. People won't want to pay for VOD at a lower quality than PPV.

Once E* gets their satellite internet product up and working I can see satellite IP VOD becoming available. E* will then have the bandwidth to offer such a service. And if they are getting into the over IP business the receivers might as well do VODoIP for people with 'traditional' high speed internet connections as well.

But that's not today - and not really this thread (although using AT&T's facilities for DSL is one of the paths E* can use to feed a receiver - regardless of who owns E*).

JL


----------



## SHS (Jan 8, 2003)

Lag and buffer are two diff thing and if the buffer capacity is to big you it end up cuasing more of delay unlike lag which mean the time it take when it Leaving point A (Sat Upload your PC) to get Point B (Satellite it self) then on C (Satellite Home Rev base on to the Internet) which basely all boil down to Delay and Response Times aka lag, If associated signal processing time through baseband equipment is included, total path delay is close to 3-400ms with total travel for an avg 26,000 miles round trip but depend available bandwith and number of other user on it, but in real world it delay is much higher then that which one of the main reason why you can't play a lot of game over the Satellite Internet unlike landline Internet.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

Bottom of page:

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-predict1jan01,1,2277666.story?ctrack=1&cset=true



> AT&T hears an EchoStar
> 
> News Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch will continue to be at the forefront of the major media giants' push into new media. But his short attention span will begin to get the better of him as his last pet project - DirecTV Group Inc., the nation's leading satellite provider, which he purchased two years ago - begins to struggle in the face of cable's superior bundle of products. *Murdoch will consider taking a run at DirecTV's chief rival - EchoStar Communications Corp., operator of Dish Network - to increase his capacity for providing video enhancements such as high-definition TV.*
> But he will remain on the sidelines when phone giant AT&T Inc. (formerly SBC Communications) expresses interest. In a bid to provide television in addition to phone and high-speed Internet service, AT&T will abort its high-stakes gambit to wire the country and will buy EchoStar for $20 billion instead.


I think whoever wrote this has a short term memory loss. While Murdoch/Directv didn't (recently) try to buy Echostar, Echostar did try to buy Directv and got shot down by the FCC, as we all know.


----------



## tonyp56 (Apr 26, 2004)

So, AT&T and SBC were at one time 1 company, then they split, now they've merged again, and now it is AT&T. I knew they merged and I've got SBC for my phone, but didn't know that their new name is going to be AT&T, I guess that goes to show you how much I pay attention :

If Dish is bought out by anyone, I'd think SBC would be the one that would do it, they've already started selling Dish Network as a bundle, so why would it be such a stretch for them to merge with Echostar. The question that I ask, is rather or not, SBC buys Echostar, what does that mean for all of us Dish Network customers. Do we get better service? Better packages? ???? I guess we'll all find out, if and when SBC buys Echostar.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

juan ellitinez said:


> I agree Voice would never work with satellite internet..I was curious if they could develop some type of VOD useing IP technology..there would be a lag but wouldn't a buffer compensate for that?


A buffer can never compensate for inherent latency of real-time signals caused by the transmission distances involved in the uplink/downlink of geosynchronous satellite communications.


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

juan ellitinez said:


> How about "video" over IP instead?


Video over IP is fine. the stream takes a bit longer to start but is fine thereafter. Latency is more of an issue with phone calls (what VOIP usually refers to) or any other interactive application like gaming.


----------



## greatwhitenorth (Jul 18, 2005)

Richard King said:


> Bottom of page:
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-predict1jan01,1,2277666.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
> 
> I think whoever wrote this has a short term memory loss. While Murdoch/Directv didn't (recently) try to buy Echostar, Echostar did try to buy Directv and got shot down by the FCC, as we all know.


This leads me to think that all this is water-cooler gossip.."Hey, wouldn't it be great if....". No sources named, no evidence to back it up, just the attitude of "makes sense for AT&T, they should do it". OTOH, I wonder if AT&T has a better benefit package than E*:lol:


----------



## koji68 (Jun 21, 2004)

juan ellitinez said:


> I agree Voice would never work with satellite internet..I was curious if they could develop some type of VOD useing IP technology..there would be a lag but wouldn't a buffer compensate for that?


That's how movielink.com works. You download the movie you want to watch to your PC. You can start watching the movie after sufficient data has been buffered. They calculate how much data needs to be downloaded based on your connection speed before you can start watching. They don't guarantee that you won't have any pauses if you watch the movie while downloading. They say: "In rare cases, a brief pause in playback could occur if your connection speed fluctuates"


----------

