I wish the set-top boxes would buffer the next channel UP and the next channel DOWN, so at least changing up or down one channel is fast. Which reminds me, I really hate the slow channel changing times on satellite TV. This standard takes a very different technical approach than the strategy embodied in the Microsoft solution that AT&T has implemented, and addresses many of the inherent challenges with IPTV, including quality of service, scalability and fast channel change times. On top of all this, a new IPTV standard ( DVB-IPI) is about to be ratified (later this month) by the Digital Video Broadcasting (DVB) standards body.
In addition, the IPTV service uses proprietary set-top boxes from Microsoft, which had their own share of problems - mostly software related. Lawsuits were filed, including cable companies that want to classify U-verse service as a "cable service" to force AT&T to abide by the same build-out rules, which has drastically affected U-verse deployment. Many towns objected or wanted AT&T to sign video franchise agreements. The problem is getting towns to grant public right of ways for these massive 52B boxes, which hold DSLAMS, batteries, and cooling gear in rugged, weatherproof cases. This hybrid fiber/copper approach gives AT&T a 20Mbps+ link to customers, enough to offer high-speed Internet, VoIP, and the company's IPTV service. This hybrid approach is a bargain when compared to the $20 billion Verizon is spending to build-out fiber all the way to the home. AT&T's U-verse network is actually a fiber/copper hybrid, which pulls fibers to 3,000 to 5,000 feet from the homes they serve, where it then connects to mini-DSLAMs called "52B" boxes and then it runs copper the last mile to the home. Many have heard of the difficulties in implementing AT&T's U-verse IPTV service.
0 kommentar(er)
