06-06-2018 7:06 PM
Why is the nag screen still in the new release, and why isn’t there a toggle to turn it off? Last I checked, regular TV didn’t nag me to see if I was still there. I have seen dozens of posts about this, so obviously consumers HATE it. How can we band together to get AT&T to remove (or at least give us a choice to disable) this feature?
Or, if AT&T engineers were actually decent programmers, they could detect the type of device being watching on. Nag on mobile devices when on cellular ONLY, not on Wi-Fi. Or, just give us the option to turn it off, it is so annoying to be right in the middle of a show, and the nag screen pops up, and I have to sit up, get the remote, and hit no.
Solved by: Go to Solution.
- edited 06-07-2018 9:09 AM
The "nag" screen is in the new release for the same reasons it was in the old release. Streaming uses a lot of data. Lots of people just leave a TV on, whether anyone is watching or not. That wastes data bandwidth - it doesn't matter whether you are running on cell data or any other sort of data. (Broadcast TV - OTA - obviously doesn't use internet data. You are welcome to use an antenna to take advantage of that fact, if you wish.) From the customer's point of view, some data sources meter their data, some don't. As it happens, some mobile customers (those with ATT Wireless) have unmetered data for DTVN, while some ISP customers have data caps, so making this depend on the type of device really doesn't work. And even if the customer doesn't care (because they have unmetered/uncapped data), DTVN does. Their data isn't limited, but they do pay for their internet access based on the bandwidth they require - and lots of users leaving devices streaming unnecessarily means that DTVN would need to scale their bandwidth to support that. That adds costs, which need to be paid by someone - namely us (by them raising the subscription costs). I personally am not interested in paying more to allow people to just leave their streams running all the time. (People who insist on doing that are free to subscribe to cable or satellite services, most - but not all - of which don't have timeouts.) The cost to you is yes, you need to hit a button on the remote at least every 4 hours - this seems not that huge an imposition.
By the way, this isn't specific to DTVN - as far as I know, all the streaming services have a similar "nag" (I know for a fact that Netflix does, and theirs can't be disabled either). Some of them may allow the timer to be configured or maybe even disabled - I'm not sure - but I can see why they wouldn't, and in any case there are higher priority issues right now.
06-07-2018 3:09 AM
06-07-2018 5:22 AM
"Last I checked, regular TV didn’t nag me to see if I was still there."
"Regular TV" is viewed with an antenna, not streamed on the internet.
06-07-2018 7:48 AM
Sorry - if only you pay for the extra bandwidth you use, then that would be fine. As long as I have to help pay for the extra bandwidth (which I would), then it's not just "their" problem. They are letting you use the system all you want without any additional fee - all they ask is that you periodically confirm that you are actually using it. I don't see that as an unreasonable demand - press a button on a remote control at least once every 4 hours. If you can't manage that and still demand that you get unlimited usage, maybe you should go back to cable or satellite, because what you want isn't the service they are offering at this price level.
- edited 06-07-2018 9:43 AM
I concur, I end up paying for all data overruns. I think a happier solution would be if app allowed you to set specific hours for the monitoring (two, four, six, etc.) Or if you could just turn it off. That would satisfy both types of users, and unlike Netflix which only allows a four-hour window, you could make it exactly what you wanted it to be --Or not at all..
07-22-2018 4:31 PM
I'm getting more and more sick and tired of this "too much data" bull. THERE IS STILL DARK FIBER IN THE GROUND! Or, in other words, we've overbuilt the internet. We are not using too much data. Data is not now, or has ever been a problem (other than cellular, which is another problem altogether...) Land line data is not at a shortage. Period, end of story, don't even go there. The data limits we see today are there due to greed from the providers only. No other reason. There is and has been a data glut. We could never use too much in the current setup of the internet in America and all other first world countries. Do not give into this marketing ploy.
FYI, I've worked for backbone internet carriers. Every year they wonder if there will ever been a problem with data, and every year they figure out ways to push more data through the same lines. So, there is no issue with the amount of data we can use.
- edited 08-03-2018 10:41 AM by cathy2981
Pluto is a free streaming service and it doesn't do that. DTVN is too bloody cheap to invest in a decent infrastructure to service the customers it has (which I'd about to become fewer) and that is the cause of the "buffering" and the 4 hour nag prompt. Either invest in your service or pull the plug!!
[Inappropriate content removed]
08-03-2018 10:09 AM
Horse s#$t. Pluto is a free streaming service and it doesn't do that.
Of course not. They're paid by advertising. As long as they can claim they're streaming, they can charge the advertisers. While DTVN does carry channels that have commercials this is not the primary way they make any money (but it's the only way Pluto makes money).
DTVN also only allows two streams (or three, for a fee), timing them out frees them up, which reduces conflicts and increases customer satisfaction.
08-03-2018 10:50 AM
It can also save a user with restricted data from a huge overage bill. I'm sure some subscribers appreciate that.
08-03-2018 3:04 PM
beww357, do you know why there are data limits on land lines? Greed. The ISPs are also TV content providers. When they figured out they might lose TV customers from streaming services, they put in data limits to keep you tied to their services. Very anti-competitive. I'd love to see a FTC action on this anti-competitive ploy by the providers. There is no reason for data limits on land lines.
08-03-2018 3:42 PM
Data limits were around long before anyone was streaming video (hard to do at 300 baud). The situation is vastly more complex than you describe.
I agree data caps are often bad for the consumer. The biggest problem I see is that people with caps do not seem to be paying significantly less than flat-rate customers. If you could save a really substantial amount for capped service, and you had no need for more, it could be a good thing for some consumers.
Look back to flat-rate vs. "metered" local phone service, and later per-minute vs. unlimited long-distance. Both have evolved to the point where almost everyone has flat-rate LD one way or another today. Many kids do not know what a "Long Distance" call is, or they think you mean "overseas". Things change.
Certainly be nice if they changed faster, and I certainly agree the major cable operators have a huge conflict of interest which will only get worse. First thing i did when I decided to get rid of cable was to move my internet service to DSL. Spectrum had the means, the motive and the opportunity to mess with my data. I was not going to give them the chance.
- edited 08-03-2018 6:19 PM
beww357, Thanks for the agreement on the issue at it's current state. YouTube was introduced in 2005, at that time no "broad band" connection had any data limits. None. Broadband data limits started less than 10 years ago, and went pretty much across all providers, sans rare few, only 5 years ago. Some earlier, but not much. I had an AT&T DSL Connection 18 years ago, no limits. And 10 years ago when I moved to cable internet, still had no limits. My cable operator only introduced limits 3 years ago. Like most other broad band operators, they did so quietly. Overages were a surprise to only a few users. But since most folks are used to Cellular limits, and thought it normal which I believe it is not. For Cellular there are limits for a very very good reason, as there ARE limits to the amount of data that can be used in the air right now (that may change in the future, but for now it makes sense), there is no reason, and never has been a reason for "broad band" connectivity. Previous connection types, sure there were limits, and for physical reasons beyond business reasons. Today's limits are pure greed. I think we agree on that.
P.S. I've been on the internet since 1200 baud was the fast way to connect, and it wasn't commercial yet. Worked for an educational institute at that time. Also used AOL dial up, and was a beta tester for MSN dial up service (when it was actually an Apple dial up service... That's some interesting history...)
P.S.S did you know that if you have AT&T DSL _and_ DirecTV Now, the stream does not take away from your data limit? Just another proof that their data limit simply not needed.
08-05-2018 7:56 AM
If it were in any way meant to save a consumer overage charges, I'm sure that AT&T would carry that love over to their mobile users. How? By not killing them with "roaming" charges.
AT&T being compassionate to its' users finances? You haven't been with them long, have you?