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

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

I imagine that it's just time to remove those 3 apps from the channel lineup.  The apps may not be removed from all markets at the same time.  I know that the new apps are usually not added to all markets at the same time.

[MojoMan_1]

Thank you to AT&T U-verse for removing these three channels from the lineup. I really appreciate this and I will remember this as a positive step in the right direction by the company.

That being said, I still have five "Apps" which are not hideable (here in Houston). These are channels 88, 98, 423, 621 and 4500.

These "Apps" are annoying and I do not want any of them in my channel lineup at all. Please make these hideable as well. If other people enjoy using these, then good for them. However, these channels should not be singled out to be unhideable, unless it is AT&T's objective to agravate and annoy quite a few of their customers. Hopefully, that is not the case.

Thanks again.  

[spd2demun ACE - Master]

OK, then it's not just me, it's a Houston thing?

Either it's not complete, or hasn't made it's way down here yet?

98 will drop off soon, and as I said before, I cannot remember if it was hideable in earlier years.  And I'm still seeing 88, too; forgot about those other 3.

---

MojoMan_1 wrote:

Thank you to AT&T U-verse for removing these three channels from the lineup. I really appreciate this and I will remember this as a positive step in the right direction by the company.

That being said, I still have five "Apps" which are not hideable (here in Houston). These are channels 88, 98, 423, 621 and 4500.

These "Apps" are annoying and I do not want any of them in my channel lineup at all. Please make these hideable as well. If other people enjoy using these, then good for them. However, these channels should not be singled out to be unhideable, unless it is AT&T's objective to agravate and annoy quite a few of their customers. Hopefully, that is not the case.

Thanks again.  

---

[MojoMan_1]

---

spd2demun wrote:

98 will drop off soon, and as I said before, I cannot remember if it was hideable in earlier years.  And I'm still seeing 88, too; forgot about those other 3.

---

All the channels were hideable, including all of the "Apps," except a few channels like the the DVR playback and Video on Demand channels, until this current issue with channels not being hidable came up.

[spd2demun ACE - Master]

OK, then Santa Channel could be hidden, that's what I couldn't remember.

[MojoMan_1]

U-verse has just now today added another shopping channel which cannot be hidden (channel 1423).

Does anyone want to try and suggest that this is another "technical glitch" in the programming?

It is becoming increasingly clear that this is an intentional policy change by AT&T U-verse, which the people in charge of this decsion are to cowardly to even come out and associate themselves with. If they were unaware of how problematic this new practice is, then surely they would not be afraid to come out and take responsibility for it.

More unwanted spam channels being inserted into the channel lineup by AT&T U-verse, with no option to opt out. How very disappointing.

Brought to you by the spammers at AT&T U-verse.

[SoramimiCake]

I've kept my comments to myself about this until now. My husband is in a very stressful, 12 hour a day profession. If when he comes home and wants to watch some television, he has the same routine when channel surfing. We have only the HD channels we watch selected and all the others hidden. He'll start at the bottom and flip until something is found that he likes. He very rarely watches TV, but when he does this is his preferred method. It drives me nuts, but he is a creature of habit. This usually means he's hitting the top with the Starz package and then rolling back around again to the locals from the bottom. (I Personally grid search my shows and pick what I want to watch ahead of time and DVR it.) Since the addition of the very first un-hideable apps, I've heard nothing but complaining from him about it. To me it was a minor annoyance since if I don't want to watch it I obviously won't click on it. For him however, it's a matter of he doesn't even want to see the channels he's not interested in. He feels since we already pay them $350 a month for our U-verse, internet, and iPhones, that we have at least earned the right to be able to block unwanted channels. That was a feature we were sold on when we made the switch from Comcast. I tried to set up favorites and let him flip that way but he just wants it to work as it used to, nothing more, nothing less. Tonight while making dinner he started in again saying this time they are now up in the HD channel range. I thought surely he was mistaken but no he wasn't. This led to an argument about the whole thing and he is now to the point where he wants us to explore other options for service. Again, I can pretty much live with it. What I can't live with is some AT and T accountant's idea to try and earn more advertising money by upsetting what had been until very recently, happy U-verse customers. I know this is a peer to peer forum and everything, but please excuse me when I say that this is getting to be the proverbial slippery slope. I understand that most of you long time community members aren't bothered yet, but as others have posted it's going to eventually get to the point where even those subscribers like myself who were initially indifferent are put into a position where we too are going to be upset with this change in practice by AT and T. It's like a child testing to see if you notice what they are doing is bad. If you don't speak up, they think they can get away with it and will continue to push their limits. As for me, in an effort to stop arguing over something so petty & trivial a matter as this with my husband; I'm reluctantly off to check out competitor pricing in our area. This, even though I would literally put up with just about anything instead of returning to Comcast. Sadly, I no longer have that luxury thanks to AT and T infuriating my husband to this point. I seriously wish AT and T would please just give their paying customers back the choice to disable these. If it would save me from having to return to Comcast I would gladly pay extra to have the option back to hide these apps.

[SoramimiCake]

Sorry for the giant wall of text. I tried to break it into paragraphs but for some reason it shows them in paragraphs on my iPad, but when I post it they are removed.

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

Thanks for your post.  Sounds like your husband is a creature of habit and wants things the way he wants them.

[SoramimiCake]

Unfortunately stubbornness and a short temper are traits I wish he didn't have. Fortunately though, I love everything else about him so I can overlook them usually.

[MojoMan_1]

---

SoramimiCake wrote:

He feels since we already pay them $350 a month for our U-verse, internet, and iPhones, that we have at least earned the right to be able to block unwanted channels.

If it would save me from having to return to Comcast I would gladly pay extra to have the option back to hide these apps.

---

At $350 dollars a month, it sounds like you already are paying "extra."

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

---

SoramimiCake wrote:

Unfortunately stubbornness and a short temper are traits I wish he didn't have. Fortunately though, I love everything else about him so I can overlook them usually.

---

Sounds like you have a lot of patience.  

[spd2demun ACE - Master]

And add 98 to that list--so 4 gone... 

---

texasguy37 wrote:

Just as an FYI, channels 87, 89 and 95 are no longer listed in the Guide.

---

[longleacove]

On behalf of several thousand U-verse subscribers (at least), I would like to thank AT&T for disrespecting each of us by making several of your channels unhidable.

Have all the apps & channels you want, including those who pay for the placement.  But when you deny (inconvenience) those of us who don't want to see and NEVER will use these channels, let alone make a purchase from them, you are spitting in the faces or your customers.

We have come top expect better from you.  Putting out several "paid for" advertising channels which cannot be hidden is the act of a classless executive mind.

[mixedupfiles]

Just to let everyone know, I defeated the unhideable app channels on my DVR last night and I'd like to share the knowledge with everyone. I don't know whether these steps can intentionally be repeated, but someone else may be able to build on the knowledge. In any case here is what I did:

• For unrelated reasons, late last night, I had powered down the power strip that my DVR and TV are plugged into for a few minutes.
• After turning the power strip back on, I tried to watch a little TV
• At this point, while it was finishing up the initialization, ALL of my channels were showing up as being locked by the parental locking system. (For what it's worth I've seen this behavior before when coming out of a reboot, but I don't think that it happens every time.)
• While the channels were still locked out, it immediately dawned on me that I should go to the "hide channels" interface to see what was up. When I got to that page, all of the channels names were listed as, "No info available" or something along those lines. While on this page, I quickly looked up the channel numbers for the HSN "shop by remote" channels, ESPN full court, My Enabled Devices, etc, and I was able to uncheck them successfully.
• As of today, almost a full day later, they're still hidden. However, I noticed that if I UNhide them, then the checkbox becomes checked and "grayed out" again so after testing that, I elected not to save changes and luckily everything remained hidden. I don't know what I'll try to make this work on my non-DVR STB. I'll have a go at it tonight to see if I can induce the same behavior.

[mixedupfiles]

Ugh... I had typed those steps as a plain text list. The forum software compressed it down to a big paragraph.

Edit: Nevermind this post.  After realizing that I'm able to edit posts, I reformatted my list above.

[marcindublin]

I'm not sure if all of that is really necessary. The previously non-hideable channels are, for the most part, hideable again. The exceptions seem to be labeled "Application on Demand".

Whether this is the result of a policy change or, as the thread would indicate, merely a bug fix will probably remain a state secret, but I thank AT*T for doing the right thing here.

[BeeBeeSA ACE - Wizard]

Looking thru the help menu on the STB I discovered instructions on how to hide the app channels using parental controls but did not attempt the procedure.  Not that big of a deal for me.

[MojoMan_1]

---

marcindublin wrote:

I'm not sure if all of that is really necessary. The previously non-hideable channels are, for the most part, hideable again. The exceptions seem to be labeled "Application on Demand".

Whether this is the result of a policy change or, as the thread would indicate, merely a bug fix will probably remain a state secret, but I thank AT*T for doing the right thing here.

---

The "Application on Demand" channels are the focus of the controversy here. These channels are commonly referred to as "App" channels, or "Apps" for short. These are the only channels that have been at issue here in this thread. So the fact that they still cannot be hidden means that nothing has been fixed here at all.

And to the poster immediately previous, I just tried hiding these channels through the parental blocking features, but the subject "App" channels are specifically excluded from being hidden this way.

The management of AT&T U-verse appear to have done this intentionally. Of course the {word filter evasion} that are responsible for this will not even come out of hiding and take responsibility for their actions, even just to provide an explanation of what their intentions are here. If they felt comfortable and confident about their actions here, they would not feel the need to hide or be so evasive about this. But clearly they do not feel comfortable about their conduct here in that way. 

[Ferrofab]

Based on what "Mixedupfiles" wrote, I was successful in hiding the "app" channels. Here are the step-by-step instructions:

1. Scroll through your normal channels, and write down the numbers of the channels you wish to hide.
2. Disconnect the power cord at either the back of the Set-Top-Box (STB) or at the normal wall plug.
3. After waiting about 30 seconds, restore power to the unit.
4. Have the remote in your hand and be ready to push the menu button as soon as the picture and sound return following “boot up”.
5. After pushing “menu”, use the left-right buttons to scroll all the way to the right and highlight “Options”.
6. Press the "OK" button to bring up the sub-menu, where “Channel Options” will already be highlighted.
7. Press “OK” again and scroll down to the “Hide Channels” options and press “OK” again.
8. Use the appropriate buttons to scroll to the channels you wish to hide, and push the OK button to “uncheck” them. You will notice that “No Info Available” will be displayed by the channels during this process.
9. After deselecting all the channels you want hidden, use the left cursor button to move to the menu options and scroll up to highlight “Save”.
10. Press the “OK” button to save your selections.
11. Press the “Back” or “Exit To TV” button to return to normal viewing.
12. The “app channels” will remain hidden until u-Verse forces another round of channels and apps to your receiver.

[SomeJoe7777 ACE - Geek]

I tried this over the weekend myself, and while it seems to work on the DVR, I could never get it to work on a non-DVR unit. The guide seems to be already loaded with the channel information (and therefore the "hide channels" checkboxes are grayed-out) when the picture and audio come in.

[Ferrofab]

When I did this today, it was on a "non dvr" receiver. Specifically it was a Cisco IPN330HD. Perhaps you didn't leave it unplugged long enough to "lose" the channel guide information. I did unplug mine from the back of the receiver/STB.

[mixedupfiles]

Thanks for expanding on my findings, Ferrofab. I never had a chance to try it on my non-DVR STB, but I'll give it a shot on that one later this week.

[MojoMan_1]

I have tried this several times now and it does not work on my TV.

[SoramimiCake]

I sooo wanted this trick to work. My DVR re-boots to No info available at the bottom, but every single time by the time I get to the Hide Channels all the info is there. Tried seven times, not going to try it again for fear of causing issues with the DVR saves. Thanks again for giving a bit of hope though.

[MojoMan_1]

It appears that the two ESPN multiview "Apps" have been removed from the channel line up.

Now the only two unhideable "App" channels that I can see 423 and 1423, both related to the shopping network.

So, all that is left are the AT&T spam channels.

[spd2demun ACE - Master]

It's been stated before that the Shopping Channels help keep costs down for subscribers (they pay), so no complaints here.

Now, can we say that everyone is HAPPY again?  The channels are gone, which means ATT listened.

[MojoMan_1]

---

spd2demun wrote:

It's been stated before that the Shopping Channels help keep costs down for subscribers (they pay), so no complaints here.

Now, can we say that everyone is HAPPY again?  The channels are gone, which means ATT listened.

---

No.

First of all, all of the offending channels are not "gone". The two shopping channels remain.

However, as you know quite well, the issue has never been the removal of these channels from the line-up, only the ability to hide them using the "Hide Channels" feature. By all means, AT&T should have as many shopping channels as it wants. Just give those of us who want to hide them permission to do so.

Since these two channels still cannot be hidden, the point of offense and annoyance remains.

[RCSMG ACE - Master]

[spd2demun ACE - Master]

Alrighty, then!  Carry on.