or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › SlingPlayer for iPhone may be facing opposition from AT&T
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

SlingPlayer for iPhone may be facing opposition from AT&T - Page 2

post #41 of 87
Simplify Media already lets you stream the music portion of your iTunes library to an iPhone, iPod Touch or any other Mac or (Win-Linux pc). I have an iPod touch (with which it works perfectly), but I also loaded the Simplify Media Mac client on my work computer and then tethered my Windows Mobile phone (Samsung Blackjack II) and streamed my music from home perfectly. So whats the big difference with Sling. Is it just video vs audio?
post #42 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubert View Post

I seriously doubt AT&T has ANY say in this. Apple has them by the balls because all the other carriers would give their left one to have the iPhone on their network.

Balls or no, AT&T isn't going to agree to data usage that kills their network.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #43 of 87
With Sling running on the Blackberry... if ATT asks Apple to deny it for the iPhone.... that SHOULD anger Apple.

Apple is improving their devices for better Apps... and ATT is trying to cripple it... and ATT wants to extend the exclusive??? NO EXCLUSIVE WITH ATT!

Time Warner wants to cripple their internet connection caps because people use the internet for multi-media in competition with Time Warner's cable TV. ATT is into TV now with U-Verse and we can expect them to stifle competition there also.
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
post #44 of 87
My only take on this is that I don't want my voice and sms plan to subsidize others' video streaming.

I want each type of media to be priced based on its data usage. Fair's fair.

Many of the most important software concepts were invented in the 70s and forgotten in the 80s.

Reply

Many of the most important software concepts were invented in the 70s and forgotten in the 80s.

Reply
post #45 of 87
Quote:
=solipsism;1403742 Baby steps are often the best way to ensure long term success.

2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
post #46 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubert View Post

I seriously doubt AT&T has ANY say in this. Apple has them by the balls because all the other carriers would give their left one to have the iPhone on their network.

You got is ass backwards. AT&T has Apple by its seeds. Do you really think Apple is happy with this crappy network they're STUCK with EXCLUSIVELY?
post #47 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by PXT View Post

My only take on this is that I don't want my voice and sms plan to subsidize others' video streaming.

I want each type of media to be priced based on its data usage. Fair's fair.

Then you might want to consider a network provider that doesn't support the latest multi-media, convergence, digital assistants.

www.metropcs.com
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
post #48 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by DHKOsta View Post

Actually, Sprint changed their terms of service last year on your aircard or tethered phone to include a five gigabyte soft limit. It seems the unlimited access "somehow bogged down their network."

At least it got me out of my Sprint contract.

I use an average of 20GB on my AT&T 3G card. On my iPhone I have received 2.2GB and sent 156MB in the last 4 days 16 hours. I recall that I seem to average 10GB a month on average. I'll look it up later when I have time to access to AT&T's slow website. It was advertised unlimited when I signed the contract but the retail associate told me that there is a soft cap of 5GB but that he had never heard of them actually enforcing it. This coincided with my previous info and since i have multiple iPhones and this 3G card on my account, pay on time with automated payment, and have been back with them since the first iPhone I figure I won't get hassled about it before I read articles of AT&T enforcing their contract caps. So far so good.

Quote:
Originally Posted by phasornc View Post

Simplify Media already lets you stream the music portion of your iTunes library to an iPhone, iPod Touch or any other Mac or (Win-Linux pc). I have an iPod touch (with which it works perfectly), but I also loaded the Simplify Media Mac client on my work computer and then tethered my Windows Mobile phone (Samsung Blackjack II) and streamed my music from home perfectly. So whats the big difference with Sling. Is it just video vs audio?

I think it is a bandwidth issue and by extension a video issue, as you state.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #49 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by helmsb View Post

AT&T could beef up the 3G network since they know this stuff is coming rather than just wanting to block it all.

Also if they are planning on releasing their own and force Apple to deny SlingPlayer they are treading on VERY dangerous ground. That has anti-trust suit written all over it. Surely some of the many lawyers in their employ would see this and advise against it.

How so?
post #50 of 87
I can understand ATT's preference for U-Verse, but what if U-Verse is not available in my area? I been waiting for over 6 months for word on the roll-out in my area and they have no word on the progress.
In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Reply
In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Reply
post #51 of 87
I realize this is the internet, and all, but does anyone really think it's worth going into fist pumping fits of indignation based on entirely speculative analysis of made up motivations behind a rumor?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #52 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by helmsb View Post

AT&T could beef up the 3G network since they know this stuff is coming rather than just wanting to block it all.

While I don't disagree that the internet service providers are not investing at the rate they should be, when you start to talk about RF based systems other issues come into play. For one thing for any given technology there is only so much bandwidth you can get out of a local.
Quote:

Also if they are planning on releasing their own and force Apple to deny SlingPlayer they are treading on VERY dangerous ground. That has anti-trust suit written all over it. Surely some of the many lawyers in their employ would see this and advise against it.

I doubt very much that they have a direct competitor to Sling Player in the works. A future TV service is possible but that isn't really what Sling offers up. The bigger issues in my mind is allocation of bandwidth. Honestly I'm not sure the carriers have this figured out yet as there are so many competing possibilities.

In the end though, if bandwidth demand continues to increase there will have to be restrictions on service or an expansion of allocated RF spectrum. It is not at all like having a pipe ran to your house where there are no physical reasons for not expanding capacity. In a nut shell it is a mistake to compare restrictions on spectrum usage to the failure of the carriers to expand their pipes to handle internet traffic. One has finite capacity and the other is rather unlimited.

Dave
post #53 of 87
Of course did you not know that only Apple and AT&T have unfair rules that rile righteous indignation. Every other carrier plays fair, everything they do is to the service of the consumer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I realize this is the internet, and all, but does anyone really think it's worth going into fist pumping fits of indignation based on entirely speculative analysis of made up motivations behind a rumor?
post #54 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Of course did you not know that only Apple and AT&T have unfair rules that rile righteous indignation. Every other carrier plays fair, everything they do is to the service of the consumer.

Yeah, I noticed that. Apparently, ATT&T charges you for unlimited data, which is much like rape.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #55 of 87
Almost 2 years in with the iPhone and Apple is still "scared" of its shitty network coming to a standstill because of basic services that are enjoyed in other countries. First it was "rogue" applications that could crash the network and many people (no names mentioned) on this site actually bought in and even tried to defend Apple and AT&T only to find that they were duped. Now it is the stress and strain of using normal applications like streaming which are supposed to be a key component of the newer network data speeds. AT&T is shitting on its customers again with another bogus reason (real aim is to figure a way to charge for the data) and people are actually defending them. Thank God, I do not have to use AT&T and have a real service provider that provides real value for money.
post #56 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I realize this is the internet, and all, but does anyone really think it's worth going into fist pumping fits of indignation based on entirely speculative analysis of made up motivations behind a rumor?

These are just "speculative" fist pumpings and fits of indignation.

the real stuff will come out if the rumor is true...
post #57 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeny View Post

These are just "speculative" fist pumpings and fits of indignation.

the real stuff will come out if the rumor is true...

I dunno, I think the problem with rumor based fury is that it doesn't really matter what the motivation is, fury is fury. And then if it turns out to be unfounded you're still left with a lingering sense of resentment.

After a while, people pile up resentment systems based on nothing, making their threshold for jumping at the next outrage that much lower.

For instance, I would guess that for a lot of the people posting in this thread, the rumor counts as just another reason why AT&T sucks, and that will be held against them regardless of what proves to be true. So when somebody says that AT&T is openly murdering babies, for such people it will be just that much easier to believe.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #58 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

During a media event to preview its iPhone 3.0 software last month, the iPhone maker touted its turnaround times on certifying applications for inclusion on the download service, saying it had approved 96% of apps submitted during the preceding two weeks, with 98% of those apps seeing approval in less than 7 days. So by the company's own standards, SlingPlayer's approval status has fallen below the curve..

I would assume that those stats are heavily skewed by updates. Updates also need approval, and they would probably be quickest to turn around. I believe first-time app submissions would take quite a bit longer.
post #59 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by donlphi View Post

If the Slingplayer gets rejected for the iPhone and I will definitely be dropping my iPhone. I doubt anybody at AT&T or Apple would care if they lost my service, but it really ticks me off. I'm very excited about the upcoming iPhone hardware and software upgrades, but Slingbox owners have been waiting for this since the original iPhone came out - it just makes sense. All Windows Mobile phones, Palms, Symbian, and Blackberry devices can use it, and it doesn't cost extra. I don't get why the iPhone gets a different set of rules. It's B.S.

There has been no effort to create true streaming media for the iPhone by Apple or AT&T, so we're stuck in cell phone stone age?

How much longer are these companies going to continue to nickel and dime us for standard features?

Huh, what? Streaming live video is a "standard feature" on what carrier and handsets?

And, why do you assume these rumors are true? Why are you getting angry over a rumor?

Uhm, WinMo, Palm, Symbian and BB devices have had to pay $29 to buy the Slingplayer Mobile app. It does cost extra.

Now, it's quite possible there might be different rules for the iPhone due to its sheer popularity. If it weren't so damn popular, then AT&T wouldn't have to worry so damn much about the impact on the network it'll have. Perhaps, if you get rid of your iPhone, the bandwidth demands will drop so much, that they'll approve it, so I can use my Slingbox Solo with my iPhone!
post #60 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by donlphi View Post

It's not like AT&T and Apple are just winging it with their plans. They knew the direction this was going to go. I feel like you and some others on here are just making excuses. C'mon, we've all had our share of the Apple and now AT&T Kool-Aid, but you have to be blind if you can't see an ulterior motive. AT&T wants to charge iPhone users more than everybody else because we all pay a premium. They want to give you garbage media like Sprint did and offer CNN, WEATHER CHANNEL, and FASHION NETWORK and charge you $30 a month for it.

It has nothing to do with "baby steps", it's all about charging us for something that should be included.

Before the iPhone, do you KNOW how much UNLIMITED data plans cost? It was the iPhone that started the whole lower data plan cost cycle. Thank Apple for that. And, before you start assuming what AT&T will do, whether it's like Sprint, why can't you wait for some facts before going on like a loose cannon? The crying is so effing annoying.
post #61 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

We can't have it both ways. It's funny that the same people who yesterday were saying how much AT&T's network is crap, that it can't handle the users that it already has in x-city, that it isn't spending its billions upgrading their network fast enough are now saying that AT&T sould allow it and there network is fine.

I have owned a SlingBox (not the afore mentioned SlingBlade I referred to). It was great when I needed it but I would spend a great deal of continuous time on it compared to watching a video or two on YouTube. If you've owned one you'd know that it's just not a great fit to be thrown willy nilly onto an already saturated network. It's just too easy to abuse the data requirements. I have great throughput with my iPhone and my 3G card for my notebook, both on AT&T, most of the time, but large cities are still very much hampered at this time without SlingBox and the next iPhone due out shortly causing making things worse. I would prefer for Apple and AT&T to only sell iPhones when the network can handle it. While it would suck to be on a waiting list for a couple months I would rather have that happen than get a new iPhone and have network trouble with it like too many did last year. It's just not good for business. MobileMe has been working since 3 days after its launch and yet it still has a stigma of being shoddy because of a poor release plan.

That said, if a SlingPlayer for iPhone app were to be allowed I would buy the new device immediately so I could use it on my iPhone. It's up to AT&T to keep up with the devices they allow, not me.

Your argument does not hold water. There are far more windows mobile phones out there on the market than iPhones sold total. Even now blackberrys are outselling iPhones and can also stream. There is an app called Orb on the app store which let's you stream live tv from a windows pc that is connected to your TV. Why is it suddenly that the slingbox for iPhone is different? The resolution is the same as on WM or blackberrys. Somehow I think when they release their U-Verse garbage, that it will not have any restrictions. There was also talk that at&t would be upgrading their networks just for the new iPhone this summer.

If AT&T does this, they are playing a dangerous game. They will not lose customers over the slingbox, but they will lose them by having too much control. A column today in appleinsider quoted an Apple official who said that Macs do the things you want it to do. Apple should be using that same idea with the iPhone.
post #62 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

An apparent delay in the approval of SlingPlayer's release on the App Store, coupled with unconfirmed reports that AT&T isn't keen on seeing the device make its way to the iPhone, has led to speculation that the wireless carrier is seeking to have the software rejected in its current form.

Formally announced at January's Macworld Expo with an expected release date of March, the SlingPlayer Mobile application promised to allow iPhone users to stream live television over WiFi or 3G by tapping into home TV setups equipped with a Slingbox.*A built-in remote control function would reportedly allow for channel surfing and DVR setup.

Sling Media announced on March 26th that it had submitted the highly-anticipated application to the App Store for Apple's approval. It's been three weeks since then and the app has yet to gain Apple's approval, suggesting something is holding up its release.

During a media event to preview its iPhone 3.0 software last month, the iPhone maker touted its turnaround times on certifying applications for inclusion on the download service, saying it had approved 96% of apps submitted during the preceding two weeks, with 98% of those apps seeing approval in less than 7 days. So by the company's own standards, SlingPlayer's approval status has fallen below the curve.

Now, a new -- albeit unconfirmed -- report is fueling speculation that something may have gone awry during the application's approval process. BGR is citing an unverified source who claims that Apple plans to deny the application in its current form because AT&T has expressed concerns about its potential to saturate its 3G network.

Assuming the claim is accurate, Sling Media may need to alter the application to function along the lines of Skype for iPhone, which will operate over a WiFi connection but not 3G wireless networks. Such a move would obviously curb the appeal of the Sling application, making it inoperable more often than not. The claim is dubious, however, given that a version of SlingPlayer runs on several other AT&T devices like the BlackBerry Bold.



For its part, Sling Media has said that is has received no official word from Apple on the status of its submission.

Meanwhile, industry watchers are taking advantage of the matter to speculate that AT&T may have ulterior motives for requesting that Apple deny the application, if it indeed has chosen to do so. In particular, it's theorized that the wireless carrier may be close to making good on a promise to launch a similar service that would allow iPhone users to steer video recorders for its U-verse digital TV offering from their handsets.

A little over two weeks ago AT&T abruptly altered its terms of service to prevent services like SlingPlayer from running on its network, explicitly prohibiting "customer initiated redirection of television or other video or audio signals via any technology from a fixed location to a mobile device."

The carrier later reverted the terms of service, saying the change was a mistake.

People need to call ATT and Apple to complain. That's it!
post #63 of 87
Maybe he means something like this:-

http://www.gsmarena.com/streaming_or...e-news-871.php

Those Europeans, so advanced!

Quote:
Originally Posted by KenC View Post

Huh, what? Streaming live video is a "standard feature" on what carrier and handsets?

And, why do you assume these rumors are true? Why are you getting angry over a rumor?

Uhm, WinMo, Palm, Symbian and BB devices have had to pay $29 to buy the Slingplayer Mobile app. It does cost extra.

Now, it's quite possible there might be different rules for the iPhone due to its sheer popularity. If it weren't so damn popular, then AT&T wouldn't have to worry so damn much about the impact on the network it'll have. Perhaps, if you get rid of your iPhone, the bandwidth demands will drop so much, that they'll approve it, so I can use my Slingbox Solo with my iPhone!
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #64 of 87
Video Streaming is not included in the Blackberry Internet Service so you need to add another data plan on top of your voice and Blackberry plan or use the walled garden your network provider sometimes supplies.

I think you'll find that a lot of WinMo and Blackberry users don't use those functions, particularly those who had them given to them by their employers, using your employers bandwidth to stream live video does not really sound like a good idea.

I guess if you're happy to foot the bill for government employees to kick back and watch streaming video on their government issued smartphone's, just remember it's your taxes that will pay for it.

The thing is iPhone users use their phone's for Internet a lot, enough to show up just under Linux in DESKTOP browsers used, it's the only mobile platform that does so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by str1f3 View Post

Your argument does not hold water. There are far more windows mobile phones out there on the market than iPhones sold total. Even now blackberrys are outselling iPhones and can also stream. There is an app called Orb on the app store which let's you stream live tv from a windows pc that is connected to your TV. Why is it suddenly that the slingbox for iPhone is different? The resolution is the same as on WM or blackberrys. Somehow I think when they release their U-Verse garbage, that it will not have any restrictions. There was also talk that at&t would be upgrading their networks just for the new iPhone this summer.
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #65 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Maybe he means something like this:-

http://www.gsmarena.com/streaming_or...e-news-871.php

Those Europeans, so advanced!

Fair enough, but what does that have to do with AT&T and the American market? Given the vast differences between the American cell market and the rest of the world, it seems reasonable to measure AT&T against other domestic carriers, does it not?

Unless you just want to rail against American cell service in general, which I realize some of Europe's brave new xenophobes probably do.....
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #66 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by lemonsaab View Post

People need to call ATT and Apple to complain. That's it!

Is there an APP for that?
post #67 of 87
Hey that sound's like a good idea, I might call it iWhine!

Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Is there an APP for that?
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #68 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenC View Post

Huh, what? Streaming live video is a "standard feature" on what carrier and handsets?

As I said, WinMo, Palm, Symbian, and BB devices. When I pay for unlimited internet, I get it. I can use whatever app I want.

I don't have a WinMo Pocket PC anymore, but I had one running Slingplayer over EVDO and it is the only thing I miss.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KenC View Post

And, why do you assume these rumors are true? Why are you getting angry over a rumor?

Not really angry, just disappointed to hear there is such a delay.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KenC View Post

Uhm, WinMo, Palm, Symbian and BB devices have had to pay $29 to buy the Slingplayer Mobile app. It does cost extra.

The iPhone app will cost money too, but there is NO MONTHLY FEE. It's a one time purchase + free updates.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KenC View Post

Now, it's quite possible there might be different rules for the iPhone due to its sheer popularity.

So since a phone is popular, we should pay a premium for the phone and the service. That sounds like a fair deal. I don't mind paying for the iPhone technology. We all remember paying for the original iPhone ($499? Can't remember). The service fee should not change from phone to phone. Like I said in a previous post, they use the same ones and zeros.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KenC View Post

If it weren't so damn popular, then AT&T wouldn't have to worry so damn much about the impact on the network it'll have. Perhaps, if you get rid of your iPhone, the bandwidth demands will drop so much, that they'll approve it, so I can use my Slingbox Solo with my iPhone!

So we agree?

I just hope you are correct about it being a rumor. Quite frankly I don't care if it is available over the 3G network or the future 4G network. I just want the option of getting online via WiFi while waiting at the airport gate. On the other hand, internet is internet. If I can go online and watch 1000 Youtube videos in a row without hearing complaints from AT&T why shouldn't I be able to watch a couple of hours of TV on my phone with a video streaming app like Slingplayer.
post #69 of 87
Appears simple to me.. They already have the terms in place to limit users to 5GB per month, so how in the world can they possibly justify limiting what users can do with that 5GB ??

Besides, if it was such a major issue than wouldn't Apple just (temporarily at least) limit the use to WiFI only?
post #70 of 87
ATT has hit new lows. I have hated them from the day I moved over. There service sucks and I live in a major metropolitan area where when I was using Verizon, never ONCE lost a call. WIth ATT it is a common occurrence. ALl the time and it actually reminds me of the early days of cellular service.

I left them because I wanted an iphone, I wanted a device that would roll into one all the devices I carried around and it succeeded in that.

There are now other devices out there that would accomplish the same things and now with the possibility of Verizon becoming the official carrier in 2010, I would not hesitate to jump back to the network that actually delivers a steady cellular service and is not afraid of bandwith usage of its customers.

And Apple is starting ot piss me off a little too. They approve without a problem hundreds of thousands of useless programs for that apps store, meaningless, thoughtless, idiotic programs that people pay a buck for and use a couple of times for the novelty of it and then throw them away shortly there after.. Its a frivolous shocking display of greed on their part.

And because they throw their hands up in the air and look the other way should there be a problem with any of the apps purchased on their site a total lack of intelligent direction with regard to maintaining a consistent brand identity.

And now to let ATT push them around regarding an App that people have been waiting for since the introduction of the iphone, to let Sling develop the program without giving them a heads up on the possibility of ATT's disproval and which is totally available and works beautifully on all of ATT's other smart phones, is just another example of their ignorance of what the real corporate world is all about and how they deal with the smaller fish that are beholden to them.

I also think this is a reflection of Steve Jobs not being on the scene, and the companies true lack of backbone without him. He would never have let this situation develop and would have told ATT to piss off and would have released the program for the device as is and designed for his hardware product. Someone should make him aware of this controversy so it can get resolved promptly!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SHAME ON ATT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SHAME ON APPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
post #71 of 87
Looks like Slingmedia is calling out the rumor sights about their app being rejected.

Slingplayer for iPhone still wating for approval

It was also posted here on Macrumors...

Macrumors Slingplayer Mobile Submitted to App Store - Page 11

Don't get me wrong... it still looks like there may be some issues, but at least I didn't waste any time yesterday writing a bunch of replies on here.
post #72 of 87
So does this mean AT&T is not really conspiring to block this app to then launch their own media service?

Quote:
Originally Posted by donlphi View Post

Don't get me wrong... it still looks like there may be some issues, but at least I didn't waste any time yesterday writing a bunch of replies on here.
post #73 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

So does this mean AT&T is not really conspiring to block this app to then launch their own media service?

I hope not as I wouldn't all those village idiots will have to return all those torches and pitchforks they bought.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #74 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

So does this mean AT&T is not really conspiring to block this app to then launch their own media service?

I hope not as I wouldn't want all those village idiots will have to return all those torches and pitchforks they just bought.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #75 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by donlphi View Post

If the Slingplayer gets rejected for the iPhone and I will definitely be dropping my iPhone. I doubt anybody at AT&T or Apple would care if they lost my service, but it really ticks me off. I'm very excited about the upcoming iPhone hardware and software upgrades, but Slingbox owners have been waiting for this since the original iPhone came out - it just makes sense. All Windows Mobile phones, Palms, Symbian, and Blackberry devices can use it, and it doesn't cost extra. I don't get why the iPhone gets a different set of rules. It's B.S.

There has been no effort to create true streaming media for the iPhone by Apple or AT&T, so we're stuck in cell phone stone age?

How much longer are these companies going to continue to nickel and dime us for standard features?


Very well said. I've been holding off buying an iphone until it has all the standard features that smart phones have had for years. The 3rd release is finally what should have been the first iphone. Sling Player is very important to me and if they don't give me 3g use, i'm not buying an iphone. I'm sick and tired of AT&T acting as wardens. Can't believe a company like Apple would ever deal with Big Blue, what am i saying they are Big Blue. I guess i need to do some reading up on the Palm Pre. I wish that group that is trying to get the FCC to investigate AT&T succeeds, it will be a huge victory for consumers. I can understand about skype but that also should have 3G access.If i have to choose, i would pick sling.
post #76 of 87
If it does turn out that AT&T is behind the move to better position an app for U-Verse then I'll be dropping my iPhone as well. It'll be Blackberry time...

And I'm not sweating the pitchfork thing... I can always save it for the rat $&%@# at TiVo for continuing to find new and exciting ways to shove their ads in my face.
post #77 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

So does this mean AT&T is not really conspiring to block this app to then launch their own media service?

Being conspiring or not, AT&T have openly said, they launch their media service for iPhone this summer.

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #78 of 87
Something to ponder, I've read that in order to get the iPhone, AT&T had to give Apple a cut of the revenue from the data plans. Does any other provider of cell phones get this and if not, perhaps that is the hiccup in the negotiations.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #79 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Something to ponder, I've read that in order to get the iPhone, AT&T had to give Apple a cut of the revenue from the data plans. Does any other provider of cell phones get this and if not, perhaps that is the hiccup in the negotiations.

This is well know and documented right after the original iPhone was announced. The $400 price for the original iPhone wasn't the full retail price had AT&T not been "revenue sharing" each month for each account for the iPhone. Apple had a had time getting this model to work with the rest of the world and so for the iPhone 3G they ended it. To do so in the states, it is reported that AT&T wanted to extend their exclusivity with Apple. AT&T liked this model as they weren't paying out a few hundred bucks to Apple for the sale of each iPhone before that revenue was made back over the next two years. For Apple it gave them more control over the handset, which is why Verizon would never have gone for it.

This was good for the consumer and you can see that the cellphone industry has already changed because of it. One of the benefits to the consumer is that if you maintained your account Apple was still getting paid so it behooved Apple to keep supplying rich updates to your phone, something that is just now becoming common because of the iPhone. I think that Apple's continued update for the original iPhone after 2 years is more to undermine the rest of the industry than anything else at this point. I'm not sure if they still get revenue sharing on those handsets after the 2 year contract is up. Personally, I would have wanted such a contract written that way I could still get paid for making a device that last more than 2 years on the same account without alterations.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #80 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

This is well know and documented right after the original iPhone was announced. The $400 price for the original iPhone wasn't the full retail price had AT&T not been "revenue sharing" each month for each account for the iPhone. Apple had a had time getting this model to work with the rest of the world and so for the iPhone 3G they ended it. To do so in the states, it is reported that AT&T wanted to extend their exclusivity with Apple. AT&T liked this model as they weren't paying out a few hundred bucks to Apple for the sale of each iPhone before that revenue was made back over the next two years. For Apple it gave them more control over the handset, which is why Verizon would never have gone for it.

This was good for the consumer and you can see that the cellphone industry has already changed because of it. One of the benefits to the consumer is that if you maintained your account Apple was still getting paid so it behooved Apple to keep supplying rich updates to your phone, something that is just now becoming common because of the iPhone. I think that Apple's continued update for the original iPhone after 2 years is more to undermine the rest of the industry than anything else at this point. I'm not sure if they still get revenue sharing on those handsets after the 2 year contract is up. Personally, I would have wanted such a contract written that way I could still get paid for making a device that last more than 2 years on the same account without alterations.


Thanks for adding the details. What I was getting at is that perhaps since it is unlikely that this model is in place for other providers, AT&T might be seeking to alter or end it before agreeing to allow SlingPlayer on their network. It is very likely that the data agreements don't stop paying Apple that subsidy at the two year mark. I would bet that AT&T wants to end this revenue sharing before absorbing the cost of providing network services for apps such as this. I can't prove it. I'm pretty much playing a game of "one of these things is not like the other," and I'm trying to figure out why it wouldn't belong.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › SlingPlayer for iPhone may be facing opposition from AT&T