fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3
1 edit | reply to Fatal Vector
Re: WOW Do you not understand there is an issue with down-converting of the digital signals that will happen when the broadcast signals are cut from OTA transmission? This DOES affect cable. They will either have to get waivers or negotiate that ability from the local broadcasters.. it's not an easy argument.. but I'm glad you come here like you know it all.
What happens this July with boxes? Look it up..
Satellite charges $5 per month per box and the consumer usually owns them.. you want to talk about a rip off? ..take off your blinders. So please file your $3 rip-off argument for someone who cares.
People wanting to keep analog is like someone crying for their windows 95... really.
Ahhhhh.. The good old cable rants are still going.
My post was valid.. I used to post here and not have problem joining in until attacked. Now, I can agree with half or agree with the other and it doesn't matter.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-reitchous and lazy ... those who also never take the time to point out a good fortune when the opportunity presents itself. It says a lot about one's moral character." - Unknown |
|
RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
1 edit | When Comcast hands out free cable boxes (no install fees either) to allow all of the analog-only sets hooked up to basic cable to continue to receive, then I'll believe you.
Ending analog is entirely to the benefit of Comcast with no benefit to their customer base. It's a pure money grab. If it weren't they'd make this a zero-expense changeover for all customers.
Nice flames, by the way. Bad week at work?
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
| reply to fiberguy
Downconvert? What are you talking about? The 2009 cut-off doesn't end 480 resolution transmission. As far as muxing a 1080i/720p signal and dropping it down to 480i on the fly, it's not that hard. It's not like you'd need to do it for every customer.
And satellite charges 5$ per extra box. The initial one is part of the service charge.
Many people have good TVs with great responsive tuners and they don't want to deal with a slow digital box that doesn't work well with their universal remote control. |
|
|
|
| reply to RadioDoc
quote:
Ending analog is entirely to the benefit of Comcast with no benefit to their customer base. It's a pure money grab. If it weren't they'd make this a zero-expense changeover for all customers.
No benefit? What the hell are you on? Better picture quality, more spectrum for not only for future use but to relieve current digital compression. I honestly can't wait for the day when Time Warner tells analog cable subscribers to say pay up or leave. Analog only customers are leaches, using the precious bandwidth that could be used for crystal clear HD or improve SD. Satellite is 100% digital, they change extra for additional receivers, why can't the so called 'cable monopoly' do this? Every cable customer should be FORCED to have a digital set top terminal. It's called progress, in 2007 analog cable should not exist.
I have Digital Cable with every movie channel, the Sports Tier, the HD Tier, just ordered MLB Extra Innings, not one but two HD DVRs, Premium broadband service and would have phone service if I could get it, but yet Time Warner would rather cater to the wants of grannys and the poor who pay a measly $40 or whatever, then a high end subscriber like myself. ANALOG CABLE MUST GO!!! Kudos to Comcast for have the balls to do this, the backlash will be great for sure, but screw ‘em.
--
Time Warner Cable Subscriber
Digital Cable & Road Runner Premium
252 Channels, HD DVR & 15/1 Broadband |
|
Reviews:
 ·Bright House
| reply to RadioDoc
said by RadioDoc:When Comcast hands out free cable boxes (no install fees either) to allow all of the analog-only sets hooked up to basic cable to continue to receive, then I'll believe you. Ending analog is entirely to the benefit of Comcast with no benefit to their customer base. It's a pure money grab. If it weren't they'd make this a zero-expense changeover for all customers. Nice flames, by the way. Bad week at work? {A$$HOLE ON}
Well, just thank your local FCC office. I'm sure if enough people take their bill to them and complain, they will do something about it eventually.
{A$$HOLE OFF}
On a more realistic note, this is definately a decision that was made to "test out" how well this launch will benefit, and to find out the "quirks" involved. But the FCC's decision to force everyone to move to the new HD channel map for OTA (Over The Air) signals IS to blame for this "change of plans". Quite frankly, you will need a damn box for your "analog tv" even if it isn't from Comcast, and very likely the first few "basic cable" channels will come in with this HD downconverter. The downconverter is a Digital to Analog converter of course, and is the same converter the FCC is handing out $20 or $40 vouchers (I forget the exact amoung) for. So even if the cable company doesn't "screw you" for a cable box, the government will if you want that analog TV to keep on workin. It's bull, but you have other options, for which you'd still be paying a box fee/programming fee for each TV. I myself can see charging install fee's though, because it cost gas and labor to do, and that stuff isn't cheap. Those techs in the field get a company truck, gas, and good pay, so to spend 15 minutes at your house to hook up a box you can pick up at any payment center, really takes close to 45 minutes all together. 15 minutes to get to you, 15 to hook it up, 15 to politely explain how to use it, and have you sign his work order, call the dispatcher to close the order, and then move on. Thats 45 minutes that could be spent on fixing a real problem with service, so someone could be canceling service because you didn't want to pick it up. Oh well, I understand where you're coming from though. 
--
SIPPhone/Gizmo # 17476200648 / PIMPNET Chatline / Ran by Asterisk & Slackware 10.1. |
|
 Toguro
join:2003-10-23
Ottawa, IL | reply to fiberguy
You are going to give your self a stroke if you keep getting so angry over every little post you don't like. |
|
RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | reply to Steve Mehs
You're certainly entitled to that opinion. The insults, however, blow your argument. The majority of cable customers just want to watch TV, not be a "high end subscriber" sending $150 or more each month to the cable company. If they weren't making money hand over fist (remember those obscene profit numbers from a couple months back?) from those low-cost analog customers they'd have pulled the plug years ago.
If they really want everyone off analog, cough up the box for free. It'll cost them less than the daily "triple play" flier I get in the mail, and they can write the whole thing off of their tax on that obscene profit, maybe even get a tax credit for keeping granny in touch with All My Children.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
| What argument? I'm just staing my opinion. I’ve seen many of your posts which can be summed up with the words 'Cable Sucks'. I’m not playing your game.
Why should Comcast provide a box for free? They don’t get the boxes for free from Motorola or Scientific Atlanta. Comcast is a company, they are supposed to make money, they’re not a charity. When I left cable in 1998 for Dish Network, it cost us over $700 for a two room set up, with the most basic receivers around. Should I’ve gotten that for free? No. Hardware costs money, the installers have to get paid, 1998 was still relatively early on in the satellite TV world so prices were higher. In 2004, when I left Dish Network for DirecTV, I believe we paid $200 for hardware and installation. Should I’ve gotten that for free? No. Both satellite providers FORCE you to buy hardware or now lease it and you pay extra for each additional receiver beyond the first. I don’t see why cable should be different.
For Triple Play Subscribers, Time Warner doesn’t charge extra for the first digital terminal.
BTW - There is no such thing as an 'obscene profit'. Captialism is a beautiful thing, and there is not one CEO in this country who doesn't deserve what they make.
--
Time Warner Cable Subscriber
Digital Cable & Road Runner Premium
252 Channels, HD DVR & 15/1 Broadband |
|
| reply to RadioDoc
said by RadioDoc:When Comcast hands out free cable boxes (no install fees either) to allow all of the analog-only sets hooked up to basic cable to continue to receive, then I'll believe you. Ending analog is entirely to the benefit of Comcast with no benefit to their customer base. It's a pure money grab. If it weren't they'd make this a zero-expense changeover for all customers. Nice flames, by the way. Bad week at work? They are doing it in my area now after going to an all digital broadcast a few months ago.
So......now what do you want to complain about?
--
I'm not really sure what I am doing, but I'm doing it anyway! |
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | reply to bogey780
Bogey.. now you just lost ANY credibility.. .
Down-convert... do you have ANY idea what that means? At this time, there is arguments going back and forth, because of yet ANOTHER fabulously written law where questions remain. Can a cable or video operator take a "digital signal" and "down-convert" it to an "analog" signal. If they do this, will they have to pay the broadcaster for the right to do this..? And, will this raise the customer's bill even more?
I said satellite charges $5 per extra box.. what's your point? Comcast includes 1 box per account on digital... so your point is.. what? The TOPIC was that cable is going to rip off customers with a $3 box fee per extra tv *to rent* something they don't have to box when SATELLITE has been doing this for YEARS since they started on equipment that the consumer PURCHASED! I believe they called this a MIRRORING FEE. I Know, because I was a satellite early adopter when MANY here were still in grade school.
The slow boxes are being phased out.. the 2500, 700 and other advanced boxes are in play now. The others are going... Motorola has one remote code and has for years. If the universal remotes don't operate a Motorola box I HARDLY find that the fault of Motorola. In YOUR logic, Motorola and all things cable should work with the makers of accessories.. maybe the accessories and TV makers should also try to work in return. Besides, you're just plain being wrong here. MANY universals work with Motorola and S/A! If you want some education here, far more satellite receivers don't work with universals than the two largest cable box makers in the country do. Next time, do your homework.
As for slow tuners... let me clue you into something else... you know those televisions that have built in digital cable tuners in them? Have YOU ever tried to channel surf with one? You'd be surprised at how slow some of those change channels. I've seen some TV's that make the DCT 2000 look like a dream come true. And how about the RCA 310 satellite boxes that you could buy for $200 a piece. There are plenty of slow tuning boxes out there. The fact is that digital signals are still rather slow to tune. It's nice that you want to spin things to blame an industry when you don't have your facts straight.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-reitchous and lazy ... those who also never take the time to point out a good fortune when the opportunity presents itself. It says a lot about one's moral character." - Unknown |
|
| "Downconvert" is where hyou take a signal and induce bitloss intentionally either by resizing the frame or changing the compression to a higher level. What you're talking about is a straight DAC. Did cable companies find a way to not already pay local broadcasters to rebradcast their signal?
I can buy several licensed boxes for DirecTv straight from retailers. If I should break the box then I'm out of whatever I paid and don't have to pay a bill that I don't get to negotiate. Ownership trumps rental every time because of that.
I was a satellite adopter back when you had a huge dish and it was free for the wildfeeds. I was a DTV adopter when the euipment was 800$ with a self-install in a single location.
Nothing changes the fact that this move is not consumer friendly in that it forces a higher bill upon them forfeatures they don't want. |
|
tlcbob
join:2001-07-11
Harrisburg, PA | reply to RadioDoc
Actually, the people benefiting from the death of analog is everyone. Opening that spectrum to new digital devices will greatly boost our technology options.
In fact, guess who is footing the bill for converting many of the analog TV stations to digital - not Comcast or Verizon (go fios!). It's Nextel. Apparently they are getting prime space in the new spectrum for doing these conversions. |
|
RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | Nextel is subsidizing some displacement expenses for stations in the affected channel range to speed up their relocation to below 700 MHz. That's entirely up to them (and the stations) but doesn't get either any sort of special treatment. This is to help resolve some longstanding interference issues.
The great majority of people don't care about "technology options". All they see are cell phones which barely work to make calls and all sorts of other things which amount to little more than ego bling. I'm all for technological progress but don't kid yourself.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
| reply to Steve Mehs
Actually, since there are supposed to be converter boxes subsidized by the government for people with analog TV's so they can continue to use them to recieve DTV (apparently, such conversion "on the fly" is not all that difficult), why cany comcast allow their use on their system? Or, allow the use of TV's that have the appropriate tuners?
This is the same problem that prompted the FCC to mandate a standard channel scheme (which comcast, here at least, STILL evades by using "HRC" for their channels) and that tuners in TV's/VCRs all be capable of receiving. This was done to prevent the cablecos requiring people to rent boxes unless they wanted HBO, etc.
Comcast is the ultimate money comb. They will do anything for a dollar and they want everyone on digital so you have to rent a box. It is easy to see the profit: if you have 100,00 subscribers paying $3 a month, that is $300,00 in profit every single month before any costs for programming. Why do you think they have ALLWAYS rented the boxes as opposed to selling them?
There is no benefit to consumers unless they are forced to allow customer provided equipment like they are now with analog. Better picture quality my foot. The channels are digital now, as shown by how they freeze from time to time and koose sound or pixellate.
The only difference is that they have to be converted to analog. And any freed up spectrum will only benefit the cable company, not customers. For every channel they add, their price goes up eventually.
"I have Digital Cable with every movie channel, the Sports Tier, the HD Tier, just ordered MLB Extra Innings, not one but two HD DVRs, Premium broadband service and would have phone service if I could get it, but yet Time Warner would rather cater to the wants of grannys and the poor who pay a measly $40 or whatever, then a high end subscriber like myself. ANALOG CABLE MUST GO!!! Kudos to Comcast for have the balls to do this, the backlash will be great for sure, but screw ‘em."
--
It's nice to know that you have more money, apparently, than sense. However, people like you who spend all this money are in the distinct minority and they DO care about such things as a box rental. |
|
tlcbob
join:2001-07-11
Harrisburg, PA | reply to RadioDoc
They are actually paying contractors to do the tranmitter swaps - My friend is one of the contractors. They will benefit by getting the spectrum they have already requested. |
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | reply to bogey780
Down-convert has more than one meaning.. |
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3
1 edit | reply to Fatal Vector
FV.. wait a second... $3 per month per box for 100,000 is $300,000 in profit? Really?? Damn! I need to take your business school so I can turn my own business around then! 
I'm assuming you forget to factor in the cost of that box to purchase? Then, did you factor in the labor, insurance, vehicle and gas, telephone operator time, warehouse, and all the other related expenses in with that? How about the cost to maintain the boxes in the field , valid truck roll or courtesy.. ? For the record, an installation fee of $29.99 or "free" for that matter with no guarantee the customer will retain, HARDLY covers much of that cost.
It's amazing how much that so-called profit disappears so quickly.
Let's see now if another certain user comes back and tells me how I'm wrong now.
Also, you mentioned about consumers being able to have their own equipment... already in the pipe.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-reitchous and lazy ... those who also never take the time to point out a good fortune when the opportunity presents itself. It says a lot about one's moral character." - Unknown |
|
|
Cost of the box to purchase? Most boxes they give out here are not new. They have just checked them and reset them. Labor, insurance, vehicles, gas, operator time, warehousing (such as it is) are all ongoing costs that are written off before they state their profits. They dont maintain boxes in the field. They just replace the defective one with another used unit. An "installation fee" is nothing but another ripoff. Really, how hard or complicated is it to "install" a cable box? Even the most stupid customer can do it nowadays.
"I's amazing how much that so-called profit disappears so quickly."
Since Comcast is VERY profitable, I hardly think they are suffering much at all.
|
|
| reply to Fatal Vector
quote:
They will do anything for a dollar
Show me any business that doesn’t, and I’ll show you a bankruptcy case waiting to happen. It's called business.
quote:
There is no benefit to consumers unless they are forced to allow customer provided equipment like they are now with analog. Better picture quality my foot. The channels are digital now, as shown by how they freeze from time to time and koose sound or pixellate.
If signal levels get low, you’ll get a brief pause or moment of heavy pixilation, similar to a rain fade experience with satellite. But I’d rather put up with a 2 or 3 second pause a couple times a year, then fuzzy, grainy, noisy analog cable forever. If digital simulcast didn’t happen it my area I would have never went back to cable. Analog cable is garbage. I used to have a recoding of The Shield on my DVR from when FX was analog and when it went digital. If someone said the analog recording was better, I’d laugh and then give you a phone book to look up an optometrist. For normal compression artifacts it’s simple, remove analog channels, free up spectrum and there’s more bandwidth.
quote:
The only difference is that they have to be converted to analog. And any freed up spectrum will only benefit the cable company, not customers. For every channel they add, their price goes up eventually.
What does having a bunch of bandwidth unused do for anyone? Consumers will benefit with more HD content. And of course price goes up. Next year when Disney Channel launches their HD service, do you think it will cost Disney nothing to go HD, do you think they will eat the costs? Not going to happen. Do you think Disney will provide the channel to cable companies for free?
quote:
It's nice to know that you have more money, apparently, than sense. However, people like you who spend all this money are in the distinct minority and they DO care about such things as a box rental.
No I don’t have much money, I wish I did, I just happen to chose to spend my money on home theater, home entrainment and computer related items. Instead of spending over $200 a month at bars and strip clubs or on cigarettes, I chose to have a higher cable bill. I know people who drink and smoke and could triple my cable bill, I never touch the stuff. After my promo is up, and provided I can get Digital phone, approx $214 a month, not including Sports Season Packages.
quote:
Why do you think they have ALLWAYS rented the boxes as opposed to selling them?
I prefer renting in this case. Last year when I got my HDTV, the HD DirecTiVo from DirecTV would have cost me $800 upfront and I would have had to extend my contract. From TW the HD DVR has no up front costs, no contracts, and costs $12.95 a month extra including both the box rental and DVR Fee. Not to mention if it dies, I don’t have an $800 paperweight. I unhook the box, take a drive to the cable office and exchange it. In under an hour I’m as good as new. I fial to see any negatives here.
Again, why is okay for Dish Network and DirecTV to be digital, require additional hardware and purchases and all that, and yet for cable you guys don't like it?
--
Time Warner Cable Subscriber
Digital Cable & Road Runner Premium
252 Channels, HD DVR & 15/1 Broadband |
|
RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | reply to Fatal Vector
Ironically, they could easily give out older-technology boxes for "free" which don't support their latest, greatest gimmick features instead of sending them to a landfill.
I liked the profit comment too. Seems to be enough there to support this one-time expense, especially since it allows them to recycle a lot of bandwidth to unregulated "do you want fries with that?" add-on, high-profit product.
The only part of cable even marginally regulated these days is basic service. Comcast is trying to wiggle out of even that, and on the backs of those who can least afford it too.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
