Announcements
You Could WIN A Year Of Wireless Service – Learn More!

Tutor

 • 

4 Messages

Tue, Jun 5, 2018 4:04 PM

DirecTV Now Linux

Dear DirecTV,

 

I am very confused as to why you won't open up your service to Linux users, including Chromebook users. When launching DirecTV NOW there is a browser check that prevents anything but MacOS and WIndows from launching.

 

I should point out that Amazon Prime and Netflex both allow Linux users to easily stream.  Clearly there are no DRM concerns or those major players wouldn't allow this.  THIS IS A TINY CHANGE ON YOUR PART - just fix the browser check to allow Chrome on linux and you'll be good to go.  There is absolutely NO REASON for you not to address this.  NONE!!!!!!!

 

Is there an ETA for this fix???  Please put this on your list of to dos. 

 

Thank you!

 

-a concerned DirecTV Now customer

Responses

kevkrom

Guru

 • 

348 Messages

2 years ago

No offense, but given the amount of issues being reported existing supported platforms that need stabilization, I find a Linux port to be highly unlikely in the near term.

heynnema

Teacher

 • 

11 Messages

2 years ago

Google Chrome works fine with DTVN under Ubuntu.

Jrandomuser

ACE - Expert

 • 

7.5K Messages

2 years ago

Both Linux and Chromebooks have worked well, probably since the beginning.  As you note, they are looking at the User Agent string for a browser/system they want to work for.  So, unless and until they alter their code to look for what the (currently unsupported) systems generate, the workaround is for you to generate a string that matches what they want.  That is, set the User Agent string to match one from a supported system (I generally use Windows).  You can either do this manually or use one of the User Agent setter extensions from the Chrome store.

Award for Community Excellence 2019 Achiever*
*I am not an AT&T employee, and the views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Tutor

 • 

4 Messages

2 years ago

It doesn’t need to be ported or officially supported, it just ought to not
be blocked.

Right now they are blocking Chrome on Linux and on Chromebooks. That is
just silly. I’m just asking for them to remove the block, not make chrome
on Linux an ‘officially supported’ browser or whatever.

Most major streaming services work fine on Linux. Heck CBS’ service, which
was slammed for its bandwidth issues and constant buffering when it
launched earlier this year, always worked fine on Linux.

DirectTV NOW is the outlier.
Jrandomuser

ACE - Expert

 • 

7.5K Messages

2 years ago

They aren't blocking anything - they are effectively "white listing" only Windows and MacOS, which are the 2 systems they support.  I have told you how to (easily!) work around this.  When you say "most major streaming services work fine on Linux" - as far as I can tell, non of the live streaming services will work on Linux out of the box - to the extent they can be made to work at all, they require a workaround like I suggested.  It is unlikely they will change this anytime soon, so you can either use the workaround or do without.  Sorry...

Award for Community Excellence 2019 Achiever*
*I am not an AT&T employee, and the views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Tutor

 • 

4 Messages

2 years ago

Come on whether it's a 'whitelist' or 'blacklist' doesn't really matter to the end user.  What they should do is 'whitelist' the Chrome version and not the OS.   

 

Now, I finally got it to work using the following user-agent string:

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/66.0.3171.97 Safari/537.36

 

The problem, for me, was that the user agent strings suggested in these forms, as well as the ones built into the user-agent chrome extension, all referenced an earlier and no longer supported version of Chrome. It took me some time to figure that out.

 

So now that I have it working I will stick with DTVN.  However, I will say again that this could have been avoided if they'd just whitelist by chrome version and not by OS.  Might be a nice thing to do seeing as Chromebooks are getting more popular day by day . . . 

 

Thanks!

 

 

Tutor

 • 

4 Messages

2 years ago

Come on whether it's a 'whitelist' or 'blacklist' doesn't really matter to the end user.  What they should do is 'whitelist' the Chrome version and not the OS.   

 

Now, I finally got it to work using the following user-agent string:

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/66.0.3171.97 Safari/537.36

 

The problem, for me, was that the user agent strings suggested in these forms, as well as the ones built into the user-agent chrome extension, all referenced an earlier and no longer supported version of Chrome. It took me some time to figure that out.

 

So now that I have it working I will stick with DTVN.  However, I will say again that this could have been avoided if they'd just whitelist by chrome version and not by OS.  Might be a nice thing to do seeing as Chromebooks are getting more popular day by day . . . 

 

Thanks!