AT&T rebrands DirecTV Now as 'AT&T TV Now,' plans separate 'AT&T TV'

Posted:
in General Discussion
DirecTV Now, AT&T's internet TV service, is officially rebranding as "AT&T TV Now" later this summer in what's promised to be a smooth transition.

AT&T TV Now


Subscribers will only need to accept terms of service, at which point streaming will continue automatically, AT&T said. A soon to be rebranded app supports iPhones, iPads, and the Apple TV, but the service also runs on Amazon, Roku, and Android devices, as well as Web browsers and Samsung Smart TVs.

Apple-based customers won't need to reauthenticate unless they actively sign out of compatible apps. At that point, they'll have to select "AT&T TV" as their new provider.

AT&T TV Now will co-exist along a separate AT&T TV, entering testing this summer and described as an "all-new connected TV experience with no satellite needed." The company is offering a mix of live and 55,000 on-demand titles, plus 500 hours of cloud DVR storage, and an included remote with Google Assistant. People who bundle with AT&T Internet will get any data caps lifted.

DirecTV Now was beset with technical problems at launch, but has recovered to the point that it recently raised monthly prices by $10. It was aided by an aggressive marketing campaign in which it gave away free Apple TV 4Ks for extended prepays.
applesnoranges

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 17
    tylersdadtylersdad Posts: 302member
    I hope they plan on fixing all the issues with the service as well. The video quality is outstanding, but Roku app is simply awful. The iPad app isn't the greatest either. 
  • Reply 2 of 17
    tomahawktomahawk Posts: 164member
    Until they start offering all of the channels again it's a neutered solution anyway.  We would have subscribed if we could have signed into network apps like TLC.  Rather than make that an option, AT&T simply dropped those channels for all new subscribers.
  • Reply 3 of 17
    davgregdavgreg Posts: 879member
    Tried the service and it was a train wreck with buffering on high speed networks. Beyond that, the billing and sign-in did not play well with existing AT&T accounts.

    At one point I was getting billed for the service and could not log in to the service and the online customer service was abysmal. Frustrated, I went to an AT&T retail store where I was told they could not help me, despite ads for DTVN all over the store.

    My guess is that the rebranding is an attempt to run away from the bad reputation they have developed
    applesnoranges
  • Reply 4 of 17
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,256member
    Just too many T's.  Get rid of the first two. And the 'A' in front of them.
  • Reply 5 of 17
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,408member
    Just call it “AT&TV” since I think their support for telegraphs may no longer apply.
    edited July 2019 mark fearingbulk001macseekerroundaboutnow
  • Reply 6 of 17
    tylersdadtylersdad Posts: 302member
    Just call it “AT&TV” since I think their support for telegraphs may no longer apply.
    I've heard that telegraphs are all the rage with hipsters. 
    SpamSandwichmacseeker
  • Reply 7 of 17
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,408member
    tylersdad said:
    Just call it “AT&TV” since I think their support for telegraphs may no longer apply.
    I've heard that telegraphs are all the rage with hipsters. 
    “Dude, I just heard this new way for us to communicate in secret. It’s called Morse Code. I think someone on 4chan invented it.”
    edited July 2019 tylersdadbeowulfschmidtmacseeker
  • Reply 8 of 17
    Terrible name for a mediocre service.  Sounds about par for AT&T.
    llama
  • Reply 9 of 17
    bulk001bulk001 Posts: 654member
    tylersdad said:
    Just call it “AT&TV” since I think their support for telegraphs may no longer apply.
    I've heard that telegraphs are all the rage with hipsters. 
    It is hard to replace the authentic hiss and crackle of analogue. 
  • Reply 10 of 17
    AT&T CEO promised a free TV streaming skinny bundle to all AT&T wireless customers and never delivered.
  • Reply 11 of 17
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,805unconfirmed, member
    Just call it “AT&TV” since I think their support for telegraphs may no longer apply.
    Beat me to it. I was thinking the same thing "Why not AT&TV?"
    It's easier to say and reminds you of who owns it.

    They paid someone to slap on this horrendous name?
    And I thought Apple TV+ was a mouthful. Let's hope Apple markets it as "TV+".
  • Reply 12 of 17
    Someone above called this a train wreck. Nope.

    Its a train wreck caused by a plane crash from an exploding nuclear bomb that happened when they turned this shite on.

    I tried as the 'free' app and it was the worst experience I've had with any service. I told them to stick to phones.
  • Reply 13 of 17
    rwx9901rwx9901 Posts: 100member
    I tried using DTVN a year ago and couldn't take all the hiccups that came along with it.  No doubt the video was better than satellite but it was painful to use.  And I was going over my usage of 1T a month by Comcast.  I ended up going back to DTV satellite.
  • Reply 14 of 17
    flydogflydog Posts: 1,005member
    Just call it “AT&TV” since I think their support for telegraphs may no longer apply.
    Beat me to it. I was thinking the same thing "Why not AT&TV?"
    It's easier to say and reminds you of who owns it.

    Because the name of the company is AT&T, so unless you're proposing AT&T AT&TV, that would make zero sense. 
  • Reply 15 of 17
    bigtdsbigtds Posts: 167member
    tylersdad said:
    I hope they plan on fixing all the issues with the service as well. The video quality is outstanding, but Roku app is simply awful. The iPad app isn't the greatest either. 
    I think the Roku app is OK. Buffering seems to be more of a problem again.
  • Reply 16 of 17
    ",,,what's promised to be a smooth transition." That is hilarious. Every time AT&T merges or acquires, it suffers massive indigestion for many months into years. Service snafus and billing nightmares await.
  • Reply 17 of 17
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 5,172member
    I had DirectTV Now....until they continued to raise prices every other month. Now the bottom package is more expensive (or very similar) to what Spectrum offers with over 200 channels and you can still watch on the app as well. Why spend $50-60/month for a limited amount of channels when you can get so much more for a similar price. AT&T priced themselves out of the market by getting less for more. Typical AT&T!
Sign In or Register to comment.