How do you hide all of the new "Apps"?

[spd2demun ACE - Expert]

Yup, but I have a lot of catching up to do.

---

texasguy37 wrote:

Looks like someone else is going to have a new set of steak knives before Christmas.  

---

[oufanindallas]

---

razzzy wrote:

When going past those certain channels, there is a pause when going between stations (sometimes even lags).   It's just funny how nobody knows what is going on at U-verse.  I have HD and all these channels are showing up in the non-HD area.

---

So start the guide at 1000 and you won't have to look at them.

[oufanindallas]

---

MojoMan_1 wrote:

Apparenty AT&T knows these channels are crap, sure to be turned off by vast numbers of their customers as soon as they can figure out how, which is why AT&T disabled the ability to hide them.

In other words, AT&T has apparently disabled the ability to hide these channels because they know that everybody who knew how to hide them would do just that. But they want to impose this crap on us anyway, even against our express wishes.

If this is not a case-study example of bad customer service, I do not know what is.

Congratulations, AT&T! You have really distinguished yourselves here.

---

Since those channels pay to be placed on UVerse they help keep the cost down.  No one is forcing you to watch them.  It's not a case study in bad customer service.  Seriously people.  Getting upset over something so minor is truly amazing.

[oufanindallas]

---

razzzy wrote:

Mr. Texas,

How do you explain to customers that inquire about the ability not to hid these channels?  Responses I got:

1) I don't know what you are talking about

2) They are part of the free preview of Package 450

3) The apps will only last 10 days.

4) Thanks for the feedback , we don't have any info but we'll pass your request on to the U-verse team

5) We are just in technical support and do not know this answer you will have to call customer service

6) Well look at that...never seen that before.

I wish the rep would just say that we are no longer allowing you to hide channels and we know the situation.

---

Many of the customer service reps don't have UVerse therefore have no clue regarding programming.

[MojoMan_1]

---

skeeterintexas wrote:

---

MojoMan_1 wrote:

Oh really? Have you received a rebate or a reduction in your monthly rates in connection with this? Because I certainly haven't.

Once again we see one of the "community leaders" shilling for AT&T.

Hmmmm.

---

Maybe, just maybe, those annoying ads ARE keeping costs down.  Just because someone didn't inform you, me or anyone else doesn't mean it didn't make good business sense.

Annoying?  Perhaps but like spd says, just ignore the darn things.  They are not unlike those annoying popups on certain websites.

---

Adding new advertising does not reduce costs. It increases revenues - for AT&T. Are customers going to receive some share of these new revenues later? Of course not. This all goes straight to AT&T's bottom line

From AT&T's perspective, of course this makes business sense, at least in the very short term. But over the longer term, this is not going to be a feature that customers are going to appreciate or value. This is all for AT&T and AT&T only. These advertising "App" channels are pure unadulterated crap. They do not add value to very many customers at all, and if AT&T even cared about that, they would allow those who are offended by these channels to hide them. Over the longer term, it is unfortunate moves like this that will erode and undermine AT&T's reputation for a customer oriented focus.

And as far as the previous selling point that you can hide channels, that will need to be revised to something like this:

"On AT&T Uverse, you can customize and hide unwanted channels, allowing you to make your channel line more personally relevant and navigable. Except for certain channels that you will likely find the very most annoying, which AT&T will not allow you to hide, as these channels allow AT&T to deliver spam advertising right through your TV screen. AT&T even offers the convenience of automatically populating the spam advertising ordering screens with your personal information before you have even decided to initiate a purchase. Of course all of this is a great feature that customers should regard as a real benefit. Brought to you by AT&T."

And then the "community leaders" on the U-verse forums will line up to chime in offering their support for this rediculous proposition. Very nice.

[oufanindallas]

---

MojoMan_1 wrote:

---

skeeterintexas wrote:

---

MojoMan_1 wrote:

Oh really? Have you received a rebate or a reduction in your monthly rates in connection with this? Because I certainly haven't.

Once again we see one of the "community leaders" shilling for AT&T.

Hmmmm.

---

Maybe, just maybe, those annoying ads ARE keeping costs down.  Just because someone didn't inform you, me or anyone else doesn't mean it didn't make good business sense.

Annoying?  Perhaps but like spd says, just ignore the darn things.  They are not unlike those annoying popups on certain websites.

---

Adding new advertising does not reduce costs. It increases revenues - for AT&T. Are customers going to receive some share of these new revenues later? Of course not. This all goes straight to AT&T's bottom line

From AT&T's perspective, of course this makes business sense, at least in the very short term. But over the longer term, this is not going to be a feature that customers are going to appreciate or value. This is all for AT&T and AT&T only. These advertising "App" channels are pure unadulterated crap. They do not add value to very many customers at all, and if AT&T even cared about that, they would allow those who are offended by these channels to hide them. Over the longer term, it is unfortunate moves like this that will erode and undermine AT&T's reputation for a customer oriented focus.

And as far as the previous selling point that you can hide channels, that will need to be revised to something like this:

"On AT&T Uverse, you can customize and hide unwanted channels, allowing you to make your channel line more personally relevant and navigable. Except for certain channels that you will likely find the very most annoying, which AT&T will not allow you to hide, as these channels allow AT&T to deliver spam advertising right through your TV screen. AT&T even offers the convenience of automatically populating the spam advertising ordering screens with your personal information before you have even decided to initiate a purchase. Of course all of this is a great feature that customers should regard as a real benefit. Brought to you by AT&T."

And then the "community leaders" on the U-verse forums will line up to chime in offering their support for this rediculous proposition. Very nice.

---

Really, if it's that important to you then by all means, go to a different provider.  I'm sure they will gladly accept you.  Those apps and shopping channels to subsidize costs and keep prices from sky rocketing.  Unlike other services (Comcast) who will raise rates ever time the wind changes direction, AT&T has a one time rate increase in February.  This year it's less than $5 depending on which package you have.  Without the additional shopping channels and the apps it would probably be a greater than $10 increase.  So go ahead and complain all you want. I'd gladly have a few more added as long as rates stay lower.

[MojoMan_1]

---

oufanindallas wrote:

Really, if it's that important to you then by all means, go to a different provider.  I'm sure they will gladly accept you.  Those apps and shopping channels to subsidize costs and keep prices from sky rocketing.  Unlike other services (Comcast) who will raise rates ever time the wind changes direction, AT&T has a one time rate increase in February.  This year it's less than $5 depending on which package you have.  Without the additional shopping channels and the apps it would probably be a greater than $10 increase.  So go ahead and complain all you want. I'd gladly have a few more added as long as rates stay lower.

---

You go to another provider. This new strategy is unacceptable and I will not stand down. You go to another provider if you think this is a good idea.

This new strategy of using their network to deliver unwanted spam advertising directly through the TV screen, which they refuse to allow their customers to permanently and completely opt out of, is a bad idea. AT&T is making a big mistake here.

And the suggestion that customers should just get used to planning evasive manuevers to avoid these crap channels is simply astounding. It is bad enough with the regular advertising on the non-pay channels, but now the cable provider has decided they are going to get into the act by using their service for delivering unwanted spam advertising to their paying customers. With no permanent opt-out available. With the spammers you are at least supposed to have that option according to the law. But not with AT&T. Unbelievable.

I have supported AT&T's efforts to hold the line on actual costs (which the addition of these new "App" channels has nothing to do with) by cutting off channels when the media providers push to increase rates inappropriately. And in some cases, if the greed of certain channels becomes too excessive, these channels will need to be permanently eliminated from the line-up. That is what needs to be done.to control costs.There is just no way around that.

The ability to hide these unwanted channels needs to be restored right away.

[skeeterintexas]

To be totally honest, I didn't even know those channels were there until someone posted about it on these boards.  But then again, I'm not a "channel surfer".  I'm a "guide watcher".  I peruse the guide and if something catches my eye, I watch it.  If not, I move on.  DH is a channel surfer but he only surfs in the HD waters.

I don't get why some people have their knickers in such a twist.

[newgeek]

It's all about control.  I have the remote "control" and can't control my TV! LOL!

AT&T incicated that I could customize the Guide and set it up so that I could "control" what channels I saw, now I can't.  It's just frustrating to have control that you once had, taken away.  People don't like that.

I'm not really too upset about it, (I have other TV issues).  But I can understand how some people might be, and I do think it's an underhanded move on the part of the service. 

[texasguy37 ACE - Expert]

---

newgeek wrote:

It's all about control.  I have the remote "control" and can't control my TV! LOL!

AT&T incicated that I could customize the Guide and set it up so that I could "control" what channels I saw, now I can't.  It's just frustrating to have control that you once had, taken away.  People don't like that.

I'm not really too upset about it, (I have other TV issues).  But I can understand how some people might be, and I do think it's an underhanded move on the part of the service. 

---

You do?  In what way would that be?  You can't watch those apps unless you make a very deliberate effort to do so.  It's not like a commercial about something that you have no interest in being inserted into a program that you are watching.

[MojoMan_1]

---

texasguy37 wrote:

---

newgeek wrote:

It's all about control.  I have the remote "control" and can't control my TV! LOL!

AT&T incicated that I could customize the Guide and set it up so that I could "control" what channels I saw, now I can't.  It's just frustrating to have control that you once had, taken away.  People don't like that.

I'm not really too upset about it, (I have other TV issues).  But I can understand how some people might be, and I do think it's an underhanded move on the part of the service. 

---

You do?  In what way would that be?  You can't watch those apps unless you make a very deliberate effort to do so.  It's not like a commercial about something that you have no interest in being inserted into a program that you are watching.

---

You can't look at unwanted spam email messages sent to you unless you make a deliberate effort to do so either. Are you now going to make the case that spam should not be regarded as offensive because you can always just take evasive manuevers to avoid it?

This new strategy by AT&T of not allowing its paying customers to permanently opt out of channels that are purely purposed to provide (unwanted) advertising is not the same thing as encountering an advertisement on show broadcast by a non-premium TV channel. 

The problem here is not the insertion of these channels into the line-up. It is the disabling of the hide function which provides paying customers the option of opting out of this offensive crap.

The ability to hide these unwanted channels needs to be restored right away.

[oufanindallas]

---

MojoMan_1 wrote:

---

oufanindallas wrote:

Really, if it's that important to you then by all means, go to a different provider.  I'm sure they will gladly accept you.  Those apps and shopping channels to subsidize costs and keep prices from sky rocketing.  Unlike other services (Comcast) who will raise rates ever time the wind changes direction, AT&T has a one time rate increase in February.  This year it's less than $5 depending on which package you have.  Without the additional shopping channels and the apps it would probably be a greater than $10 increase.  So go ahead and complain all you want. I'd gladly have a few more added as long as rates stay lower.

---

You go to another provider. This new strategy is unacceptable and I will not stand down. You go to another provider if you think this is a good idea.

This new strategy of using their network to deliver unwanted spam advertising directly through the TV screen, which they refuse to allow their customers to permanently and completely opt out of, is a bad idea. AT&T is making a big mistake here.

And the suggestion that customers should just get used to planning evasive manuevers to avoid these crap channels is simply astounding. It is bad enough with the regular advertising on the non-pay channels, but now the cable provider has decided they are going to get into the act by using their service for delivering unwanted spam advertising to their paying customers. With no permanent opt-out available. With the spammers you are at least supposed to have that option according to the law. But not with AT&T. Unbelievable.

I have supported AT&T's efforts to hold the line on actual costs (which the addition of these new "App" channels has nothing to do with) by cutting off channels when the media providers push to increase rates inappropriately. And in some cases, if the greed of certain channels becomes too excessive, these channels will need to be permanently eliminated from the line-up. That is what needs to be done.to control costs.There is just no way around that.

The ability to hide these unwanted channels needs to be restored right away.

---

I'm not the one bothered by it so why would I change providers. I happen to love my UVerse and if there are a few "apps" that I can't hide, SO WHAT?  I don't go below 1000 anyway so I don't even see them.

[oufanindallas]

---

newgeek wrote:

It's all about control.  I have the remote "control" and can't control my TV! LOL!

AT&T incicated that I could customize the Guide and set it up so that I could "control" what channels I saw, now I can't.  It's just frustrating to have control that you once had, taken away.  People don't like that.

I'm not really too upset about it, (I have other TV issues).  But I can understand how some people might be, and I do think it's an underhanded move on the part of the service. 

---

Yes you can. You can create a guide with just your favorite channels in it.

[texasguy37 ACE - Expert]

---

MojoMan_1 wrote:

You can't look at unwanted spam email messages sent to you unless you make a deliberate effort to do so either. Are you now going to make the case that spam should not be regarded as offensive because you can always just take evasive maneuvers to avoid it?

This new strategy by AT&T of not allowing its paying customers to permanently opt out of channels that are purely purposed to provide (unwanted) advertising is not the same thing as encountering an advertisement on show broadcast by a non-premium TV channel. 

The problem here is not the insertion of these channels into the line-up. It is the disabling of the hide function which provides paying customers the option of opting out of this offensive crap.

The ability to hide these unwanted channels needs to be restored right away.

---

Spam email does not bother me.  It goes into my spam folders and I never read it!  That's the reason "evasive maneuvers" exist.  There also comes a time where a little common sense needs to be used.

I'm not sure why you seem to have such an issue with this, and I would bet that those who would also like the ability to hide those channel are wondering the same thing.  It seems like an unhealthy obsession.  You have wasted more time posting about this on this forum than it would take for you to ignore those channels and go on about your business.

[spd2demun ACE - Expert]

Amen, Bro CL! Life is TOO short to worry about the small stuff!

[SomeJoe7777 ACE - Expert]

I think we may need to take a step back here.

Right now, the assumption is that these new application channels cannot be hidden because they are advertising for AT&T, and AT&T has specifically disabled hiding them for this purpose.

That is actually pure speculation on our part. We don't know that to be true at all. AT&T has made many mistakes in the system before, we could just as easily speculate that they can't be hidden because they have been added to the system in an incorrect fashion.

I for one would like David, Alex, or someone else with some pull at AT&T to go up the chain and get an official answer. Later today, I may send both of them a PM on this issue and have them investigate.

[MojoMan_1]

---

SomeJoe7777 wrote:
I think we may need to take a step back here.

Right now, the assumption is that these new application channels cannot be hidden because they are advertising for AT&T, and AT&T has specifically disabled hiding them for this purpose.

That is actually pure speculation on our part. We don't know that to be true at all. AT&T has made many mistakes in the system before, we could just as easily speculate that they can't be hidden because they have been added to the system in an incorrect fashion.

I for one would like David, Alex, or someone else with some pull at AT&T to go up the chain and get an official answer. Later today, I may send both of them a PM on this issue and have them investigate.

---

That would be great. Thank you for thinking of that. And thank you for being willing to take the initiative to obtain a clarification from AT&T about this.

I would love to find out this has all been some sort of technical error or something like that. If it is, let's get it fixed ASAP. No harm, no foul. However, it will be a real black mark on their reputation if it turns out it is not.

[windfall_prophet]

I'm writing to add a few comments to this stream, since it appears there is no way to directly communicate them to ATT. We probably belong to a relatively small community of viewers, but don't think we're alone in voicing these concerns.  We have one television. We just want to watch certain programs, movies, news and weather with minimal advertising.  We are not interested in recording programs, displaying caller ID, buying videos, tele-shopping, playing games, or paying for live events. I routinely hide all postings for new stations we don't subscribe to, att apps, video sales stations, sports stations, religious stations, children's stations, and MSNBC. Over time, we've gone from a premium plan to a basic plan, and now most of that is turned off because the bundled content is dreck. We're increasingly using an interface box to view content streamed from the internet. This includes pay-per-view movies, which can be had sooner, for less, from other sources. The interface box cost less than one month of uverse tv service. Using it requires juggling two remotes and the interface is a clunker, but at least we can pay for and view only what we want. We've been considering dropping uverse TV entirely. Being unable to hide apps is a deciding factor. In our opinion, we shouldn't have to pay for ANY programming we don't want to view. We definitely WILL NOT pay for bumf we can't at least hide. We would continue using uverse tv if we could get local HD stations for a small flat fee, get a decent selection of movies at competitive prices,  and select our own bundle of HD stations.

[spd2demun ACE - Expert]

I already sent a PM to Alex days before Thanksgiving, when all of this first started.  He IS working on finding out why these Apps cannot be hidden, while the others (old Ad Partners) can be hidden.  I asked what is the difference?

---

SomeJoe7777 wrote:
I think we may need to take a step back here.

Right now, the assumption is that these new application channels cannot be hidden because they are advertising for AT&T, and AT&T has specifically disabled hiding them for this purpose.

That is actually pure speculation on our part. We don't know that to be true at all. AT&T has made many mistakes in the system before, we could just as easily speculate that they can't be hidden because they have been added to the system in an incorrect fashion.

I for one would like David, Alex, or someone else with some pull at AT&T to go up the chain and get an official answer. Later today, I may send both of them a PM on this issue and have them investigate.

---

[happyharry]

I not as violant about this as others but it really bothers me that AT&T is starting in with channels you can't hide.  This is just another example of AT&T not understanding usability and customer "friendly" experience.  Hide, which is much too hard to do, is really the only option for keeping your guide cleen.  Favorites doesn't work for me because you have to select favorite everytime you turn on.  What is to keep AT&T for putting more and more of these, like every few channels so you are stuck and starting with 1000 won't work.  What is keeping AT&T from not letting me hide channels that I find objectionable.  Many don't celebrate Christmas and Santa Claus and yet they have to have a Santa is coming channel.

I've been an Uverse customer for only 18 months and have seen no real improvements in their product.  Yes the last upgrade added pausing to all tv but at the expense of exceptionally slow DVR and having a significant number of remote presses be totally ignored by the boxes.

Yes Uverse is cheap but more and more you aren't getting what you pay for.

This lack of ability to hide more and more channels is more and more a big problem.

[spd2demun ACE - Expert]

As stated earlier, this has been reported to Alex (one of the ATT Community Managers), so he's working on finding out what's going on.

I cannot recall if the Santa Tracker could be hidden in the past.  It is a seasonal item, so it will drop off a few weeks after Christmas.

For all we know, this is an error in programming?  Other Ad Partner channels from the past can still be hidden (like the Barbie Channel).

I've had the product for going on 4.5 years now and have seen TONS of improvements.  When I signed up, it was 1HD stream, no whole-home DVR...just to name a few.

Re Favorites, have you tried the newest shortcut using the Zoom button on your remote?

Yes, Hide is a pain and in great need of improvement!

[texasguy37 ACE - Expert]

I can think of quite a few improvements over the past 18 months.  Here are just a few that come to mind:

1. 4 HD stream profile

2. Record 3 HD channels at the same time

3. Ability to prioritize series recordings

4. Ability to indicate how many episodes to store of a series recording

5. THDVR Phase 3 Update

6.  Available recording space graph

7. For sports fans:  NBA TV, NBA League Pass, MLB Network, Fox Soccer Plus, Fox Soccer HD, Gol TV HD, Out of market RSN's in HD

8. AMC and msnbc available in all markets

9. For Mad Men fans:  AMC HD

10. On Demand content for ABC, NBC and Fox

11. DVR's with 500 GB hard drives

12 Wireless STB's

There are many other improvements that I could mention including many new channels additions.  Anyone who feels that there have been no improvements with U-verse over the last 18 months has not been paying attention.  Is U-verse perfect?  No, but it continues to improve.

[starsong2001]

I came on here specifically looking for a way to contact AT&T to complain about not being able to hide these new apps.  But since they don't provide a way to actually contact them other than by phone, I wandered into here.  At least it is somewhat comforting to find other people are annoyed by this too. 

I was already unhappy that they add dozens of special sports & foreign language channels at a time, requiring me to trudge thru the long list to hide them all.  But when they started in with apps/informercials for cold sores (!!) that can't be hidden, that was the last straw.

Yes, I know all about Favorites.  No, I don't use it because it isn't as convenient -- if it was a 1-click to bring up your favorites I would, but it takes 3.

No, this isn't the end of the world, but I am still very annoyed to have extra garbage to scroll thru.  I have even started shopping for an alternative, but the only one with internet is TWC - been there, done that.    It is just really frustrating.

[spd2demun ACE - Expert]

Favorties can be accessed with a click of the Zoom button on your remote.

[bubba58]

I never thought I would miss Comcast, Time Warner, Xfinity, etc.

[marcindublin]

Wow. This is really intriguing.

Apparently, some long time U-Verse supporters are willing to accept a small amount of annoyance (not being able to hide channels)  if it helps keep prices down ("only" a $5 increase in 2012 for less programming than we got in 2011).

I wonder how far we can take this. For example, if you can have "free" U-300 but you have to watch a 30 minute infomercial once a week before U-Verse would show you anything else, would you do it?  What about a 30 second commercial before any playback on your DVR if it kept the 2013 price increase to "only" $5.

Seriously, I'm trying to make a point here. How much annoyance will be tolerated before consumers will bolt. I can read my local newspaper online but it is painfully slow because each page comes with a dozen ads that have to load. I can watch "Fringe" on-demand from fox.com but I have sit through commercials and can't fast forward.

My response is that customers must take a zero-tolerance policy to this kind of thing or we will soon be innundated by it. If customers don't complain about 10 channels that can't be hidden, what about 20? 50? Where is your personal breaking point that will cause you to pick up the phone.

[marcindublin]

TG - no argument with the above, however, objectively, U-Verse is not "improving" at the same rate as Time Warner. TWC in Columbus has gone from not being competitive to being very competitive in a relatively short period of time.

[oufanindallas]

---

marcindublin wrote:

Wow. This is really intriguing.

Apparently, some long time U-Verse supporters are willing to accept a small amount of annoyance (not being able to hide channels)  if it helps keep prices down ("only" a $5 increase in 2012 for less programming than we got in 2011).

I wonder how far we can take this. For example, if you can have "free" U-300 but you have to watch a 30 minute infomercial once a week before U-Verse would show you anything else, would you do it?  What about a 30 second commercial before any playback on your DVR if it kept the 2013 price increase to "only" $5.

Seriously, I'm trying to make a point here. How much annoyance will be tolerated before consumers will bolt. I can read my local newspaper online but it is painfully slow because each page comes with a dozen ads that have to load. I can watch "Fringe" on-demand from fox.com but I have sit through commercials and can't fast forward.

My response is that customers must take a zero-tolerance policy to this kind of thing or we will soon be innundated by it. If customers don't complain about 10 channels that can't be hidden, what about 20? 50? Where is your personal breaking point that will cause you to pick up the phone.

---

To me it's not an annoyance at all. I've had Dish, Direct and TWC and their  rate increases each year were much more than UVerse.  Who cares if you can't hide a channel?  You can't on any other provider.  The point is no one is making you watch those channels so what is the big deal.  Set up a favorites guide and you don't have to worry about it.  If you are watching HD you don't have to worry about it since the apps are all in the SD portion of the guide.

[starsong2001]

I don't know how to quote someone here....  In response to the suggestion to "just use the zoom button"...

Zoom takes you to the menu, then you gotta click the down arrows to get to the Favorites guide. If it just opened it right up I'd be happy with that.  So it isn't the same thing.   Unless you know a trick to make it go straight to the Favorites lineup?

[mibrnsurg ACE - Master]

---

starsong2001 wrote:

I don't know how to quote someone here....  In response to the suggestion to "just use the zoom button"...

Zoom takes you to the menu, then you gotta click the down arrows to get to the Favorites guide. If it just opened it right up I'd be happy with that.  So it isn't the same thing.   Unless you know a trick to make it go straight to the Favorites lineup?

---

Just click on their Reply button and when the reply box comes up, just push Quote, next to Spell Check.

Chris

---

Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-288-2020, After he gets acct info, press # a bunch of times, get a menu from Mr. Voice recognition
Your Results May Vary, In My Humble Opinion
I Call It Like I See It, Simply a U-verse user, nothing more