bloodyeyeballs

I had this on a flight from GUM-HNL and it was actually quite good. However my flight was a "test" flight and there was an IT geek on the plane to make sure that everything worked well.

There was no power, but I've invested in a lot of lithium from hypershop.com to keep my electrons flowing even on long flights.

Once power is available at individual seats, probably by 2018, this would be better than having to rely on the crappy in seat monitors, etc.

tuolumne

What on gods green earth are you speaking about now...have no idea what you're saying/implying/even asking for. Could UAL have...wired the seats for headphone jacks? Yeah...I'm sure they could have....but what again does this have to do with anything? Again, as when it comes to speaking about UAL's revenues, you'd rather obfuscate.

You said "These aircraft were upgraded first because the existing product was so bad."

You have thus far been unwilling and/or unable to qualify that statement with any factual basis other than your own bias rant about how poor UAL's product was. End of story

WineCountryUA

I'm guessing both were needed to pencil out the desired ROI.

ama537621

I will welcome this for the 747's. My only 2 problem will be
1. battery issues. My external 4 AH battery is not going to cut it. Now all we will need it some sort of power connection.
2. I use Andriod tablet's and phones so until UA get's the app made I will be SOL.

I would settle for a 1/2 amp USB port and forgo the 110 volt outlet.

star_world

I agree.

mduell

They also use non-proprietary apps like the web a lot more.

uastarflyer

Pretty much.

I don't know of anyone that says the prior seats on the Airbii are worse than the new ones.

asphaltman

I am assuming installations have started for this streaming product. The last few Airbus birds have had inop drop down video systems, so manual demo's we performed. All of the aircraft still had old seating and working Ch9, nothing was "slimed" yet, and all had working wi-fi. When streaming was first discussed I assumed it was part of the wifi product, and since that doesn't work for a while after takeoff, I assumed ch9 was dead.....now hearing that streaming is a different system, there may be hope ch9 could be included from gate to gate....wishful thinking I know...I shouldn't expect things to work that way, but I guess never hurts to hope...lol

UA-NYC

I was just on one, a 4 hour flight. Malfunctioning wifi; no power; no entertainment of any kind; and of course the dreaded slimline seats.

I asked the FA "on what percentage of your flights do you actually see functioning wifi"? She apologized profusely, said "we don't like these changes either", and asked us to write in.

We received the new(ish?) "sorry for the inconvenience cards"...in the past, you'd get the miles/$/% option, now it's just "we'll follow up in 30 days!" Yeah right.

adambadam

I got an email about a flight this past weekend -- FAs could never actually get the wifi to work.

Kacee

I received no response to one of those cards I received for wifi problems SFO-HKG. Nothing. Nada. Not even a "we're sorry for the inconvenience" e-mail.

Why even bother giving them out?

N1120A

Its a huge downgrade from a comfort prospective, and doesn't have Channel 9. I realize that you might try to make the incorrect argument that there is not a high uptake of FTFD, but that clearly isn't true - given that Smisek himself felt the need to affirm that it was staying and being added to all mainline aircraft. All these years later, and fewer, not more, planes are flying around without FTFD. That IS a downgrade. They could have easily operated a WiFi system without changing anything else - they chose not to.

They are running a few 737s around with WiFi, but its shockingly few, given that they are fully equipped to do so.

Anyway, the reason WiFi was rolled out on the A320 Family aircraft before the 737s is because Continental had a major contract with Live TV and DirecTV to operate those planes with that product - despite its substantial weight and limitations. On the other hand, WiFi allowed them to rip out a heavier system that they didn't charge for on the Airbus, and still claim they are offering some sort of IFE (despite not keeping their promises about Channel 9)

Uh, part of the existing product is a single offering that they had special press releases to specifically state was sticking around, as it actually is a factor in loyalty decisions. Despite those promises, the number of planes is decreasing with that product.

Further, if management had its way, Live TV would be gone immediately. The product is exceptionally heavy - to the point that B6 had to reduce the number of seats in their aircraft twice in order to keep their range reliable - and the carrier doesn't get all that much of the revenue. On the other hand, for better or worse, United basically controls its WiFi offering and it uses systems on the aircraft that are already going to be there - adding minimal weight.

Make no mistake, Live TV will be gone as soon as the contract is up.

WiFi could have, and has, been added before putting in the awful slimline seats and without taking out the existing audio system - which incorporates Channel 9.

Which is pretty ridiculous

Not only is this , but it goes completely against the promises made after the merger, where the backlash against the threat of removing it was so strong, that they had to both reassure that it was staying and say that the whole mainline fleet would get it. So, where is it? Or was that a untrue?

They have everything to do with it.

1) The slimlines aren't equipped to support IFE wiring. As such, they couldn't keep what they were offering, so they had to go with WiFi.

2) They needed to keep some sort of IFE, and WiFi is actually quite easy to add on modern planes. The weight is also negligible.

3) The slimlines are part of a program to reduce weight and add seats anyway, while at least pretending not to reduce marginal comfort - at least as far as usable legroom is. Ripping out the wired IFE also does the same.

Its pretty clear that they couldn't, or wouldn't, keep the "1990s-style controls" at the seats with the slimlines.

To United's credit, when the WiFi works, it is faster than Southwest's offering. I don't find it as fast, or reliable, as GoGo at this point, but it does have the potential to be better. I really worry what will happen when the full content is offered and there is more substantial uptake.

Kacee

United is talking about catching up with Southwest.

Remember, the 744s were all supposed to be outfitted with power in Y by the end of 2013. Not a single one has it yet. Now it's supposed to happen in 2014. Any bets on whether they do any better living up to this promise?

goodeats21

Is there really a specific app you need to install to watch the content?

If so, "sponsored by the MileagePlus® Explorer Card" makes me VERY leery about what kind of personal data on my phone this app is going to have access to...

Am I wrong to wonder about this?

Fyd

Sounds like UA is continuing the race to the bottom.
I had streaming entertainment to your own device, working just fine on iOS and Android, on SCOOT, a Singapore budget carrier, last year!
Now, United is installing it. It's an improvement over the 80s TV under the ceiling, it's cheap to install and operate - but it's not as nice as having a big, working screen with lots of content in front of you - in addition to your own phone/tablet/computer!
UA keeps choosing the cheapest - but least convenient solution for the passenger... way to go, flyer friendly - right!