Seems like a solution using a problem.
No real sysadmin is going to use a $20 a year account just to (maybe) rely on onedrive. You're either rolling your own exchange server or renting email from google or office 365.
It's 1 domain, $20/year, 5 users. It's not for sysadmins at a small company. It's for a family. Or a small time single consultant. Or a tiny non-profit.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think either Google or Amazon is providing their digital assistant to be installed on any device.
Google Assistant can be accessed on any device via their Allo app. I think my original comment already mentioned the numerous third party apps providing Alexa to an Android or iOS device. Cortana can be downloaded. Samsung provides S-Voice on their devices. My point was, and still is, you can replace the voice recognition assistant that came with your phone.
Video work for one. Compiling a modern Linux desktop environment another. Yes, there are legitimate reasons to do both.
I'm sure they looked at the market for laptop 4K video editing at the highest end where 16 GB of RAM isn't enough, but inexplicably, a mobile oriented video card was, and then added in the potential market from Linux source code compilers and moved on fairly quickly from there with disinterest. Incidentally, I know of a company that's still buying brand new Mac Pro's for their editing. Because $15K workstations weren't doing the job as well. I switched from a Mac to a PC recently, but man, for video guys, it's just got to be about the software, right?
How much can they be paying broadcasters who...broadcast their content for free? The cable co is giving them more eyeballs to sell to their advertisers, the broadcasters need their access as much as the cable cos need their content. I doubt they're jacking up their fees...would be interesting to see some real data.
Quite a bit. The theory being if U-Verse offered CBS, NBC, FOX and ABC, but Comcast offered CBS, NBC and ABC, most people would switch to U-Verse. So therefore, there's a value to the retransmission. Especially since some people can't receive it OTA easily, and most people don't want to deal with antenna, and most people don't want a two input solution.
It's the same thing that limits the number of potential customers to Vue, DirecTV NOW, Sling, etc. Lack of locals in many markets. Lack of interest in antennas and input switching.
It will change, rapidly, but for now, that's the lay of the land.
I think it has more to do with the iPhone 6 generation being a very popular upgrade, mostly due to the larger screen sizes.
Am I the only one who remembers the pre-iPhone6 fanbois sneering at the Samsung phone large screen and insisting that the iPhone was "right-sized"?
That goes to show the level of iPhonyness of the Apple zealots.
The millions of iPhone SE sales probably mean that some of those small screen fans really were fans of small screens, and still buy small screened iPhones.
This sounds a lot like Comcast's XFinity, where you sign in to a website to watch cable TV. Good job guys, you've finally done what Comcast did 3 years ago... And you managed to limit it to only your channels. Now I can get less than 1/5th of the total channels for 1/3 of the price. What a bargain.
Yup. Their channels. Plus tons of others from other companies. Also the merger was just announced, and not approved yet. They don't really own those channels yet.
This is just silliness. The trend is very much toward being able to pick and choose what shows we want to watch, when we want to watch them. Preferably commercial-free. (I pay don't even mind paying for commercial-free content, I already pay Hulu the extra $4/mo.)
The idea of 'channels', 'stations', 'broadcasters', and someone else picking out the programming we might be interested in going the way of the floppy drive. Telling someone like me you're offering 100 channels is nonsense and useless information. I'm more interested in what programming/content there will be to choose from, and if I can't choose, not going to subscribe, end of story.
Bad business choice on AT&T's part. Will never make money. Will definitely not lure 'cable cutters.' We're a whole new breed of content consumer, unlike the cable-television junkie of old.
I'm a cable cutter. Playstation Vue subscriber. And depending on the particulars (locals, cloud DVR, specific channels in the 100 package, etc), I might even switch. In my market, Vue has locals (CBS, FOX, NBC + On Demand only ABC). They have all the local sports regionals, plus all the major cable sports (BeIn, NBCSN, FS1, FS2, all the ESPNs, SEC, etc). That alone is easily worth half the $45 I pay. Cable News, plus eight other cable channels I watch at least one show on easily pays for the other half. My kids watch Nick, Disney, etc on top of that. My wife watches TLC and others on top of THAT. There is no scenario I see where it'd be cheaper to ala carte things, go see how much CBS All Access charges to figure it out...
Honesty is for the most part less profitable than dishonesty. -- Plato